"The Robing Room: NJ State Judges

Hon. James R. Swift	See Rating Details
Superior Court Judge Superior Court
Cumberland County Vicinage 15	See Comments

Attorney Average Rating: 5.5 - 2 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

Please type what you see below:

Not an even number!

What others have said about Hon. James R. Swift

Comments

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: NJ3855
Rating:10.0

Comments:
This judge actually reads all the papers (sometimes twice!) before oral argument, which is, unfortunately, rare. He'll quote from a page of a brief to ask a question, so you know he's not only read it, he's marked it up and taken notes. He maintained an even temperment when an attorney behaved abominably while he was rendering his opinion following an oral argument. He is very fair, and he gets it right.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: NJ3702
Rating:1.0

Comments:
He doesn’t know his job and needs to be replaced immediately. He’s just wrong and can’t do right. He’s disgraceful, disgusting and has no problem expressing hate. He cannot run a courtroom. I hope and pray he is taken off the bench effective immediately. He needs a full physical and mental medical examination. His mind is gone!

Other

Comment #: NJ3701
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
0 Swift has forgotten what it means to perform the duties of a judge. He voices his opinion and is extremely angry which is very disturbing. He does not need to be on any judges bench because he’s filled with pure hate against people he doesn’t know. He believes anything anyone tells him just you get him to do what they want and he gets personally involved. That’s not his job. He needs a log of medical attention and could be suffering from the onset of dementia. He has lost the ability to manage the courtroom and let others tell him what to do especially Thots. He’s forgotten: RULE 1:18. Duty Of Judges
It shall be the duty of every judge to abide by and to enforce the provisions of the Rules of Professional Conduct, the Code of Judicial Conduct and the provisions of R. 1:15 and R. 1:17.

Other

Comment #: NJ3424
Rating:1.0

Comments:
As declared in K. Potter, et al. v. D. Newkirk, et al., Case No. 19-1728 James R. Swift has significant pending legal culpability stemming from his involvement in a pending legal proceeding now before the Third Circuit Court of Appeals. As plead, the aforementioned case involves a per se Automatic Stay Violation proceeding arising under Title 11 U.S.C. § 362(k), from his participation in a “barbaric armed home invasion and seizure of a multifamily/mixed-use realty, and its contents against plaintiffs’ rights.” Upon the conclusion of this case he should be removed from the bench pursuant to the the Code Judicial Conduct.