Hon. Marguerite L. Wageling See Rating Details
Superior Court Judge
County Court
Belknap County
See Comments

Attorney Average Rating:   1.6 - 2 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




What others have said about Hon. Marguerite L. Wageling


Comments


Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: NH97
Rating:1.5
Comments:
Avoid at all cost in Civil Litigation. Her case log shows she has never ruled in favor of a plaintiff against an insurance company! And she seems to get a lot of them.
She refuses to look at evidence as well as accept supporting evidence in court. Then makes decisions based upon the lack of evidence that she refused to accept. Her intolerance and preferential treatment is apparent in court as well as in her notice of decisions.
People who do not do their job get fired. I will give her the benefit of the doubt, and say maybe she has a specialty in criminal cases, but not in Civil Litigation. She will treat you like you are wasting her time. Because she has yet to rule in favor of the plaintiffs side in any of the cases she has ruled on. In my opinion she is either being black mailed, bought off or both.

Other

Comment #: NH95
Rating:1.0
Comments:
My wife and I were involved in a non-compete case against us by my former employer. My wife did not have a non-compete and did work for one of their former clients in Hawaii that stated they were not engaged with my former company. I could not make the trial date because I was out of state for a new job orientation. This judge ruled in favor of the plaintiff that both my wife and I would have to move west of the Mississippi to work in our professions of last 20 years - way over reaching for a non-compete. Most states don't hold these valid any longer. She has no concern for fairness and reading the actual details of the issue.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: NH80
Rating:1.8
Comments:
Avoid at all costs. She has dropped anchor at Rockingham and is wreaking havoc. Her career was exclusively in criminal prosecution and she has made no effort to learn civil causes since her confirmation. She also missed the memo that she is no longer the prosecutor. Terribly lazy, ill-tempered, and innately ill-suited for the position. This is yet another judge who simply cannot add. Math is not a requirement , but it is a good skill for a judge to have mastered. She is bothered by civil cases. She thinks that they should all just go away. She will neither read the memos, nor do research of her own. Misapplies the law routinely, and is foolish enough to put her bias in disgraceful language in her decisions.