"The Robing Room: NJ State Judges

Hon. Rachel N. Davidson	See Rating Details
Superior Court Judge Superior Court
Essex County Vicinage 5	See Comments

Attorney Average Rating: 2.7 - 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 ()

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

What others have said about Hon. Rachel N. Davidson

Comments

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: NJ934
Rating:1.5

Comments:
An obvious political appointment with no right to sit as a judge in NJ. Openly hostile to litigants and counsel who argue their positions. Have observed her on many occassions and it gets worse each time. No wonder she did not receive tenure, and should be removed. No knowledge of evidence rules nor civil procedure. A disgrace.

Litigant

Comment #: NJ871
Rating:1.0

Comments:
Does not listen-- is rude and unprofessional

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: NJ703
Rating:8.7

Comments:
Judge Davidson is courteous, respectful and patient with attorneys, court staff and litigants. It is obvious on motion days that she has read all the parties papers, researched the law and given due consideration to oral argument.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: NJ695
Rating:1.8

Comments:
I once heard someone describe a restaurant in Washington, D.C. as having Northern hospitality and Southern efficiency. I think that describes Judge Davidson pretty well. She is not overly bright but what hampers her most is her uncivil demeanor, impatience and insecurity. She tries to show she is in control but she has no clue. Lack of intellectual curiosity.

In sum, not a fan.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: NJ327
Rating:1.1

Comments:
When I first heard the laughing and cackling coming from the chambers (it reminded me of a sorority house), I knew I was in trouble. Unfit to sit on the bench. Temperamental, unprepared, disorganized, and far too eager to impose her will (apparently at random). Knows little if anything about the law. Her not-so-well-thought-out orders create far more issues and difficulties than they solve. Add to that a palpable arrogance, and you've got Judge Davidson, a real winner.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: NJ315
Rating:1.3

Comments:
A scary combination of dumb, incapable, self-absorbed, and evil. Overtly takes sides. Totally inflexible and obsessive about enforcing rules with no respect for anyone schedules, financial condition, etc. Utterly lacks common sense. Obsesses about trivial issues while overlooking the real issues. Hope to never appear before her again.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: NJ120
Rating:1.6

Comments:
Very arbitrary and confrontational. Not respectful of attorneys. Insistent on strict application of the court rules, but doesn't know them. Has no understanding of the evidence rules. Totally inflexible.