Hon. Christopher J. Muse See Rating Details
Superior Court Judge
Superior Court
Middlesex County
Woburn
See Comments

Attorney Average Rating:   3.8 - 6 rating(s)
Non-Attorney Average Rating:   1.0 - 1 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. Christopher J. Muse


Comments


Litigant

Comment #: MA681
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
He should not teach law to even high school students.Muse has a personal agenda he follows to prove himself right.My brother an I were in front of Judge Muse after we filed a complaint against a bank who claimed we signed a mortgage note with them that we claimed and testified that we did not. All judge Muse cared about was, "was that our signature" which we argued was not and if it was as we are not experts on signatures, our signature was not to have been affixed to the last page of a fraudulent note we did not authorize.He then ordered the defendants who filed summary judgment motion to have the notary at next hearing and then continued the hearing, telling my brother and I he would then charge us with perjury. Defendants called the notary to the stand at the next hearing. He testified after being shown a note that he witnessed we signed. You could see the gleam on judge muse's face. My turn to cross-examen. I had him admit he could not remember us by sight and had him admit again that the note the defendants showed him was the note he witnessed us sign and he agreed. I then showed the witness a note I placed into evidence weeks earlier as a fraudulent note and asked if he notarized that note, which he then agreed, I then asked which one was it. The witness looked dumbfounded.You see Muse getting upset. I then asked him to view both side by side, since he just testified under oath that he witnessed us sign both.The witness then admitted both were different fron one another. Admitting that he committed perjury to at least one of the notes, he became an unbelievable witness. I asked him which note did he commit perjury on? Judge Muse then stop the hearing having my brother and I sent to jail for possible perjury and allowed summary judgment for the defendants.Judge Muse should have had the witness sent to jail. Muse the next day, after we spent the night at the jail, Muse ordered the D.A.'s office to hold a Grand Jury for our possible perjury.Months later the D.A. refused to even go to the Grand Jury. We appealed Muse summary judgment but it was prior to the D.A.'s findings and the Appeals Court upheld Muse's discretionary ruling. My brother an I lost close to one Million dollars. Muse does not deserve to teach law.

Prosecutor

Comment #: MA480
Rating:1.4
Comments:
He lacks professionalism as well as a good courtroom temperament. He is also extremely rude, abrasive, and hostile. Not an ideal judge to have to try a case in front of - constantly interjecting and interrupting all parties in the courtroom. This judge only interested in hearing himself speak - no interest in what others have to say. To the judge's credit he was equally uninterested in both parties - so in that aspect one could argue he was "evenhanded." His desire to speak continued into the victim's impact statement - he continued to talk for her (16 year old female victim) transforming the victim impact statement into the judge's impact statement.

Other

Comment #: MA478
Rating:1.0
Comments:
Terrible!
I attended court proceedings in Plymouth County where this judge sat back an allowed the defense attorney to repeatedly call a witness / victims mother a liar and manipulator. Isn't that illegal?? He appeared to be biased in favor of the defense. I would like to see the state supreme court review the transcripts and this perhaps all of his cases.

Civil Litigation - Govt.

Comment #: MA407
Rating:10.0
Comments:
I watched two other proceedings on my day in his Plymouth courtroom, I found him to be very knowledgeable and had tremendous insight. He did his homework on the cases.

I have nothing but praise and admiration for Judge Muse. I had to sue a Mass Licensing Board for their overreach and underhanded proceedings. He realized that after 5 years of their abuse that I was being screwed by the board from day one. He had them vacate any and all charges against me and then read them the riot act.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: MA392
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
I tried a contract case in front of him, jury-waived. At issue was a basic principle of law that I would expect a law student who has taken contract law to understand. As the last writer indicated, 'aggressive ignorance'. The Judge took a view not supported by the contract or by the law on the first day of trial and could not be shaken from it. So, my client and I had a several day trial which seemed doomed to appeal from the very first day. Having made careful requests for findings of fact and requested rulings of law, the Judge ignored all of this and instead issued 'oral findings' right at the close of evidence which ignored whole aspects of the case, not even giving us an opportunity to make closing statements. In addition, the Judge was personally hostile to the lawyer - calling him 'disingenuous' five or six times - and also to the client. Having tried cases for nearly forty years, I have never seen anything remotely like this.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: MA390
Rating:2.4
Comments:
The worst judge I have ever appeared before. I have never seen such aggressive ignorance.

Litigant

Comment #: MA357
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
We had the unfortunate opportunity of appearing before Judge Muse on several occasions. You can add a bias against pro se litigants to the list of complaints. Here is what's unique: we won our appeal against him, and it contained bias as part of the appeal, complete with quotes right from the transcripts. He had to have had some ego to make them on the record. We could repeat, but will instead second, what attorneys on this site have said about him. All of the documents of our case are at http://plaintiffs.jetiii.com (we won our First Amendment motion). Also, I was interviewed by uswatchdogs.net, who have numerous stories about this judge. He is getting bad enough to conjure up memories (that you older attorneys will remember) of the impeachment of Judge Shirley R. Lewis.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: MA321
Rating:1.8
Comments:
The worst judge that I have ever been in front of. He lacks professionalism as well as a good temperament. He is also extremely rude, abrasive, and hostile. He is unfair and biased, and does not wish to be challenged.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: MA196
Rating:2.9
Comments:
I don't understand why he is on the bench - every ruling in which I have been involved is a head scratcher.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: MA112
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
If you have a dog of a case, pray for this judge. He seems ignorant of the law, but decides upon his own strange criteria.
The WORST judge I have had the misfortune to come before.

Litigant

Comment #: MA93
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
Careful of this Judge. He shoots from the hip and couldn't be bothered by the facts/law when decided.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: MA67
Rating:4.5
Comments:
Absolutely the worst judge I have been in front of. Asks a question and cuts you off after one sentence of answering. Would rather hear himself speak than hear an explanation. Is condescending, favors older attorneys at the expense of younger ones, quotes nonsensical passages of gibberish to make himself sound smarter.