Hon. Anthony M. Pugliese See Rating Details
Superior Court Judge
Superior Court
Camden County
Vicinage 4
See Comments

Attorney Average Rating:   2.0 - 4 rating(s)
Non-Attorney Average Rating:   - 0 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. Anthony M. Pugliese


Comments


Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: NJ2098
Rating:1.0
Comments:
I appeared before this judge on a motion day where he required all attorneys and litigants to appear at 9:00 a.m. He listed our case, an Order to Show Cause on an Action in Lieu of Prerogative Writs, last on his "motion" list.(Our Order to Show Cause was reached among the last on the motion list that day). We were reached 2.5 hours later. This was a minor inconvenience compared to the way in which I was treated. This Judge repeated, over and over, "Not in MY court room" as though it was his fiefdom. This comment was made in an arrogant and condescending manner in response to courteous answers to questions he posed to me designed to embarrass.I have been challenged on legal arguments by many a judge, but have welcomed the opportunity as a Socratic method of a search for the truth. Most judges want to understand and reach the right result. Not this judge. He was mean spirited and discourteous and not at all open to hearing from me or my client's position.This Judge made numerous inappropriate comments about his personal beliefs on topics such as social media, the way in which a jury would react to certain evidence and even suggested ways in which cases could be tried to some of the attorneys that presented their motions before me. Unprofessional and cronyism-Camden County style-to the fullest extent.
In the 2.5 hours of waiting in the courtroom to be reached (instead of staggering the arguments), I had the ability to observe his treatment of the litigants and counsel. As for the male attorneys, Pugliese, was jovial and polite. Not the case for the females appearing before him. An African American female pro se litigant was treated so rudely when Pugliese told her that she had no business showing up in his court room since he did not grant oral argument on her motion. She advised that she had previously called the court and was told to appear. Pugliese interrupted her to say that no one in HIS chambers told her that. The poor woman tried to explain that she was advised by a clerk in the civil division to ppear to which Pugliese told her that any further motions she filed would be denied and that she would be going to trial. It was the way in which he made the statements to this woman that was so offensive. It was so apparent that this judge did not like this woman nor her case. Again, unprofessional and unnecessarily rude and demeaning.
Another female attorney who had a case listed ready hold for 10 a.m., was curtly told to wait until after my case was heard- we were reached at 11:30 a.m. In my 28 yrs of practice, I have never complained formally about a judge before. I do not have a memory of being treated so poorly and interrupted mid-sentence by a judge so that the judge could make snarky comments in an attempt to embarrass and provoke. I have never been treated so unprofessionally by a judge-be it Federal Court, Administrative, Municipal or State Court judge. The Order to Show Cause was on behalf of a State Court employee against the State Judiciary-the case was transferred from the County of venue to Camden County. It is painfully obvious that my client will be prejudiced if we remain before this judge. He is not at all familiar with employment law nor civil service administrative regulations and his demeanor towards me and this case was appalling. We will be considering federal court options (exhaustion of EEOC remedies may present a problem for federal filing however). In any event, I will be filing a formal complaint with the New Jersey Supreme Court-the first time in my career.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: NJ116
Rating:3.6
Comments:
Weak mind. Unable to apply facts to law and make a ruling on a motion. Knee jerk denial of MSJ is the best he can do.