Hon. James F. Rigali See Rating Details
Judge
Superior Court
Santa Barbara County
See Comments

Attorney Average Rating:   4.1 - 1 rating(s)
Non-Attorney Average Rating:   1.0 - 3 rating(s)
Please send me alerts on this judge
E-mail Address:




Add your own rating

E-Mail Address (will not be displayed)
   
Confirm E-mail Address      
Zip
Occupation

Only items marked with (*) are averaged into the displayed overall rating.


General Rating Criteria

* Temperament (1=Awful,10=Excellent)
* Scholarship (1=Awful,10=Excellent)
* Industriousness (1=Not at all industrious,10=Highly industrious)
* Ability to Handle Complex Litigation (1=Awful,10=Excellent)
* Punctuality (1=Chronically Late,10=Always on Time)
* General Ability to Handle Pre-Trial Matters (1=Not all Able, 10=Extremely Able)
* General Ability as a Trial Judge (1=Not all Able, 10=Extremely Able)
Flexibility In Scheduling (1=Completely Inflexible,10=Very Flexible)


Criminal Rating Criteria (if applicable)

* Evenhandedness in Criminal Litigation (1=Demonstrates Bias,10=Entirely Evenhanded)
General Inclination Regarding Bail (1=Pro-Defense,10=Pro-Government)
Involvement in Plea Discussions (1=Not at all Involved, 10=Very Involved)
General Inclination in Criminal Cases Pretrial Stage (1=Pro-prosecution,10=Pro-defense)
General Inclination in Criminal Cases Trial Stage (1=Pro-prosecution,10=Pro-defense)
General Inclination in Criminal Cases Sentencing Stage (1=Pro-prosecution,10=Pro-defense)


Civil Rating Criteria (if applicable)

* Evenhandedness in Civil Litigation (1=Not at all Evenhanded,10=Entirely Evenhanded)
Involvement in Settlement Discussions (1=Not at all Involved,10=Very Involved)
General Inclination (1=Pro-defendant, 10=Pro-plaintiff)
Comments


Please type what you see below:

    

What others have said about Hon. James F. Rigali


Comments


Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA22359
Rating:4.1
Comments:
Thoughts on judicial temperament and scholarship - On his good days, Rigali would get an 8 or 9. On his bad days, a 2 or 3. He literally seems to have a split personality. Some days, he's involved and engaged. Other days, he seems like he can hardly be bothered to take the bench - face resting on palms looking dispassionately at attorneys and litigants. He seems to enjoy finding his own legal grounds for deciding cases, even if they're wrong. Even if you win, try defending a legally unsound trial court decision on appeal.

Other

Comment #: CA22351
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
Directly from the transcripts, "you're an experienced litigator and a trial lawyer, and a wonderful member of the state bar" while completely prejudicing the other party, and refusing to obey subject matter and personal jurisdiction. This judge is a former Knight of Columbus, so naturally hates women, hates minorities, and shows a clear "good old boy" preference for older white male litigators.

He should be disrobed.

Litigant

Comment #: CA18846
Rating:1.0
Comments:
he says to me asking me to tell my dad is it worth it for your son to pay $50.00 now for the next ? $1000.00 let see 10% of $1000.00 that's comes out to $8.49 per month so if i pay $20.00 a month for the next 50 months that"s $1000.00 but because of the 10% add $424.50 for the 10% i still owe $424.50 thats for the next 58months that right under 5 yr and used family code 4251 (d) as why child support then when i wen't back to court he kick's me out says im in the wrong court room to top that off they said i was not in court.after being in court all day

Litigant

Comment #: CA11206
Rating:1.0
Comments:
Named non-relative conservator for elderly woman against the wishes of that woman and objector (myself, blood descendent) despite a massive amount of evidence showing undue influence, isolation, abuse of process, among other unethical behavior by party. Didn't even bother to address the trust which conservatee had revoked, and was generally disinterested in finding the "least restrictive" situation for the conservatee, despite being obligated to seek out such a situation pursuant to probate code.

Litigant

Comment #: CA8307
Rating:1.0
Comments:
biased, does not remove himself when needed, does not read briefs, no prep work and does piece meal trials.