"The Robing Room: NJ State Judges

Hon. Peter J. Tober	See Rating Details
Superior Court Judge Superior Court
Somerset County Vicinage 13	See Comments

Attorney Average Rating: 9.3 - 1 rating(s) Non-Attorney Average Rating: 1.0 - 2 rating(s)	Please send me alerts on this judge E-mail Address:

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. Peter J. Tober

Comments

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: NJ4599
Rating:9.3

Comments:
Prepared with a great temperament. Respectful to all.

Other

Comment #: NJ3072
Rating:1.0

Comments:
Bias that is evident from the bench, favors the women every time from what I have seen. Pays no attention to evidence, interrupts counsel during orals because he does not want to hear from them as he ruled before you entered the court room.

His decision is evident that he did not read the papers before him, and obviously oral arguments were disregarded. His decision was so poorly written that more time (and money) is spent after his ruling to just try and figure out what he means.

He has no clue what “child’s best interest” means.

He does not follow the law, or the rules of the court.

Not only does he accept the perjured statements from opposing counsel (yes it was evidenced), he will also provide defense from the bench, and argued in the defendants behalf. As I opened, judicial bias was more than evident from the bench, as well as with his decisions.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: NJ2480
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
He's an excellent judge and a fine human being.

Other

Comment #: NJ2354
Rating:1.0

Comments:
For somebody who majored in economics, he falls far short in fairness. As somebody who is making 1/8th of what his wife, (the plaintiff) makes, at age 63, he expects me to pay approximately the same I was making while working full time.

His reasoning; my ex-wife couldn't live on what he originally suggested in his preliminary judgment $52 per week. Instead he increases the amount to $125 per week, retroactive to almost two years before the judgment. More money for the court and more money from the feds, while this defendant collects food stamps.
[Redacted by Ed.]