Hon. Rebecca S. Riley See Rating Details
Superior Court
Ventura County
See Comments

Attorney Average Rating:   2.2 - 5 rating(s)
Non-Attorney Average Rating:   - 0 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      

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)

Please type what you see below:


What others have said about Hon. Rebecca S. Riley


Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA6141
Judge Riley is an extremely pleasant individual whose courtroom is a very friendly place, at least until you start getting into the merits of the case. She, in my view, probably reads and understands everything, but everything is infected with her gross and obvious pro-defense bias. She does allow extraordinarily long arguments which, if she weren't so biased, would be a major positive. At trial, she will make up completely different standards for the defense and the plaintiff and do everything possible to ensure a defense verdict. If she weren't so patently biased, this would be one of the more pleasant places to try a case.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA4401
I'm not sure who writes her tentatives, but they are horrible. She publishes tentatives, takes things under submission (to review cases cited in my papers which directly contradicted her tentatives), and then issued a minute order that very same morning adopting her tentatives. No discussion whatsoever. She takes everything under submission, but it's just a waste of time. The last five times, her tentatives became the exact ruling. She does not belong in unlimited civil court -- send her to small claims!

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA2387
I have to agree with the others who have commented. I sat through her law and motion calendar recently and she agreed to take the three consecutive motions that were called prior to my case, back under submission. I've never tried a case in front of her but if this is any indication of her decision-making ability, I'll have my 170.6 ready the next time her name pops up.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA2364
Make a decision and stick with it! Sheesh.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA2344
This judge does not like making decisions and her tentatives are not worth the paper they are written on. She habitually takes matters back under submission or goes back on her tentatives as I have witnessed her do in numerous cases. She does not have the brain power to make good decisions. Maybe she was good on the criminal side, but in civil matters, not so much. Bad, bad, bad.