Hon. Estela M. De La Cruz See Rating Details
Superior Court Judge
Superior Court
Bergen County
Vicinage 2
See Comments

Attorney Average Rating:   3.6 - 7 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. Estela M. De La Cruz


Comments


Other

Comment #: NJ2261
Rating:1.0
Comments:
This judge is not only incompetent, but has not respect for constitutional law nor the common law which is the law of the land. Today in act of outrageous violation and what i expect in collusion with plaintiff's attorney, this judge has denied and violated my rights to due process under the law and equal protection under the law. The arguments and case law that was put forth before her, demanding to state under which presumed and under which assumed jurisdiction did she ignore the the constitutional law, the supreme law of united state. No answer was given on and for the record and my paperwork denied without any legal grounds.

This judge is a disgrace to the office she holds. She is extremely rude and has no regard for the law. Supreme Court rulings stated in a legal citations in my paperwork, along with constitutional law, was completely ignored without grounds. Actually illegal grounds she used is that i do not have an attorney, and therefore i am not entitled to be heard. She ignored my constitutional right as a sovereign man of full life that is entitled to mount and organize his own defense.

This is a civil court case, yet she ordered an armed deputy, with fully loaded firearm to stand by my bench for purposes of intimidation. This is an outrageous and flagrant violation of due judicial process under the law through the use of intimidation and force.

Any and all rulings made by her and the court with complete lack of subject matter jurisdiction, i am considering null and void. I am planning to pursue through all and any legal means available to me and means for relief for violation of my rights and violation of the supreme case rulings which were stating clearly that the court cannot act without establishing jurisdiction to be able to make any rulings or judgements on an event that happened outside of the country.

She is a disgrace to her office. I have never been so offended and treated with such disrespect as she has treated me and my paperwork.

Shame on her.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: NJ2198
Rating:10.0
Comments:
For the first time in my life I experienced the power of justice. Competent, smart,hard working professional and treats people with respect. I wish this country had more judges like she is.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: NJ562
Rating:1.4
Comments:
Complete incompetent. Should not be on the bench. She is lazy, arrogant, simple minded and nasty. Most dangerous part about her is that she thinks she's smart. One of the worst judges I've encountered in 18 years.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: NJ560
Rating:1.7
Comments:
Poor judicial temperment. She is short tempered with counsel and is not overly courteous. At many times, she was outright nasty and there was no basis for such conduct by a Judge. She jumps to conclusions without giving the parties a fair opportunity to be heard. She stalls off issuing rulings or doing any work to narrow the scope of the litigation. This is the wrong Judge for any sophisticated commerical litigation.

Civil Litigation - Govt.

Comment #: NJ398
Rating:1.0
Comments:
TELL ME THE ATTORNEYS AND I WILL TELL YOU WHO WILL WIN. This woman is a disgrace to the bench. She and her brother have been public servants since day one of their careers. If it weren't for affirmative action and the kissing up she does to the politically connected, she would be nowhere. She wanted to be a Federal Judge, but they didn't want her. SHE WILL DO ANYTHING TO MAKE SURE THE RIGHT SIDE WINS. AND SAD PART IS, SHE THINKS SHE'S BRILLIANT. If you appear before her, make sure you have one of "her bubby bubby lawyer friends" or you will be doomed from the start. NASTY and UNPROFESSIONAL and always wrong. Is her reversal rate still one of the highest in the State?

Other

Comment #: NJ350
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
As a trial lawyer I have had very good experiences before Judge de la Cruz. She lets the attorneys make their arguments, is smart, and treats people with respect. On those rare occasions when I have not prevailed, at least I know she treated me fairly.

Civil Litigation - Govt.

Comment #: NJ332
Rating:1.4
Comments:
Disgrace to the bench. Motivated by politics and who can better her career. I am in the process of investigating her ties and connections based on how she decides her cases. Ex parte communication. Disgrace.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: NJ233
Rating:1.3
Comments:
A career public "servant" who serves only herself. A disgrace to the bench.