Hon. Ronnie Jo Siegal See Rating Details
Superior Court Judge
Superior Court
Bergen County
Vicinage 2
See Comments

Attorney Average Rating:   2.3 - 4 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      
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. Ronnie Jo Siegal


Comments


Other

Comment #: NJ2795
Rating:1.0
Comments:
My son has had a restraining order now for six years against him. Has never contacted the woman; lives almost six hours from her in a different state. Wants nothing to do with her at all. Tried to get it removed. Judge Siegal even admitted that he has never contacted the woman as well as the woman saying he has never contacted her. But she fears him - why? He has moved on, she hasn't. She came to court with the same color hair that she colored for him six years ago? He can't get a job because of this order and provide for his family and she also threatened him six years ago and admitted it court. "If he ever breaks up with me, he'll be sorry. I'll make his life miserable. That's all I'll say, he'll be sorry." She has and she continues to do this. Judge Siegal kept going back to the case six years ago and not looking since then. She even said, "I remember this case." That's amazing that she can remember a case six years ago with all the other cases she has had and six years in between now and then. Supposedly the woman is moving closer to here (Virginia)...so what! That means she is moving closer to him; is he supposed to move now? Judge Siegal would not consider anything in his favor, very biased. Look at the picture Judge Siegal...he wants nothing to do with her; has not contacted her and wants to be able to provide for his family but can't get a job because of this order but it's ok for her to continue on her threat which nothing was said to her about. It's been six years..it's time to move on and the woman is not. This was a very biased and unfair judgement call when he tried to have the order removed.

Litigant

Comment #: NJ2762
Rating:1.0
Comments:
The WORST judge I ever came before. Impatient, does not read motions before she comes to hearing, very biased, treats pro se litigants miserably. Extremely disrespectful, does not allow the litigant to talk and explain. Should be disbarred as she cannot make decisions. Her decisions are always wrong and need to be appealed and even after the appeal, she refuses to fix her errors. Horrible judge...

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: NJ2346
Rating:1.0
Comments:
The worst judge. She can't make even the simplest decision. She costs people thousands of dollars in running late and her incompetence. What should take a few months takes years. She is biased and predjudice against all men. Lives vicariously through her own divorce and out to destroy all men. She should be removed from the bench. Apathetic to the cost of her indecisive and poor decision making. Never seen such incompetence. Doesn't believe women should help support the children and will agree with whatever the woman wants no matter how unfair it is to the man.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: NJ2313
Rating:1.6
Comments:
THIS JUDGE ONLY SIDES WITH WOMEN AND HAS IT OUT FOR ALL MEN. EVEN LISTENING TO OTHER CASES IN HER COURTROOM YOU CAN SEE IT. SHE ALSO SEEMS TO ONLY ASK THE MEN TO BORROW MONEY FROM FAMILY OR FRIENDS AND NEVER THE WOMEN IN CASES. OVERALL VERY BIAS JUDGE WHO SEEMS TO PRE JUDGE ALL MEN AS BAD!!

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: NJ2131
Rating:4.3
Comments:
just filling out more ratings from my post a few minutes ago

Other

Comment #: NJ2130
Rating:1.0
Comments:
I was before this judge on a child support matter. I received very unfair treatment and I think the judge skirted the laws and overinterpretted on various matters. Generally speaking, she was punishing me for other fathers who are very much behind in their child support.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: NJ1929
Rating:2.5
Comments:
This Judge lacks logical judgement, makes illogical decisions and appears to decide her cases, not on the facts or the law, but rather on who she likes or doesn't like, whether that be parties or the attorneys who come before her. In the long run, time and again her decisions appear to lead to poor results and she is proven wrong. She has stereotypical view of the world even when the evidence shows otherwise. She is more concerned with her ego than with getting the outcome right. She picks a side or a lawyer in the beginning and does everything in favor of that one side no matter what as demonstrates the exact opposite of evenhandedness.