"The Robing Room: CT State Judges

Add your own rating

E-Mail Address ()

* *

Confirm E-mail Address

* * *

Zip

Occupation

Add a comment only

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:

Not an even number!

What others have said about Hon. Grant Miller

Comments

Litigant

Comment #: CT369
Rating:1.0

Comments:
As a Self represented defendant male in a dissolution. In a post dissolution hearing I found him to be extremely unpleasant and nasty towards me from the start; allowing the opposing atty to do whatever he wanted. None of the issues were legitimately tried. Perhaps it is because he is so obese & in obvious poor health. He made every effort to coverup criminal fraud and perjury as motioned on the part of opposing party and judge. So much more negativity to add.

Litigant

Comment #: CT238
Rating:1.0

Comments:
This judge took so long to resolve our case (5yrs) that he forgot the defendants lied to him, based his decision on briefs that were filed rather than rereading the trial , had so many ailments and reasons to postpone the trial (including back issues making drugs necessary)and based his ruling on his incorrect opinions! Horrible injustice was done to us and because we are completely broke, an appeal is not possible!