Hon. Thomas J. Shusted, Jr. See Rating Details
Superior Court Judge
Superior Court
Camden County
Vicinage 4
See Comments

Attorney Average Rating:   - 0 rating(s)
Non-Attorney Average Rating:   1.0 - 3 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      

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)

What others have said about Hon. Thomas J. Shusted, Jr.



Comment #: NJ2247
Forgetful and careless. Does not believe in eyewitness accounts by state agency's, and unless forced to will not review their reports. Did I say forgetful? He often does not remember any events that occurred days before.


Comment #: NJ2105
The judge's decision in the case of the 21 year old Caitlyn Ricci vs her parents over paying her college tuition oversteps the legal system's jurisdiction and impose legal responsibility for adult children. The legal age of adulthood is 18 years old. At that point, if the new adult chooses to leave the home or if the parents choose to invite the departure, at that point, the legal responsibility ends. For the court system to say otherwise is a gross miscarriage of justice and opens up the legal system and families to unnecessary and frivolous lawsuits. Shame on you Judge Shusted and shame on the State of New Jersey for allowing this.


Comment #: NJ2103
Obviously not what parents of the state need on the bench?!!? If that Ricci girl MOVED OUT.. per tax code she has emancipated herself and any expectation or benefits of "dependency" null!! Support instead: http://mcgarvey24.wordpress.com/2014/11/16/new-legislation-proposed-to-help-end-the-age-of-entitlement/