"The Robing Room: NY State Judges

Hon. Peter M. Wendt	See Rating Details
Housing Court
New York County	See Comments

Attorney Average Rating: 3.1 - 13 rating(s) Non-Attorney Average Rating: 7.0 - 2 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. Peter M. Wendt

Comments

Litigant

Comment #: NY4196
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
The bar should be embarrassed that this man is a lawyer, much less a judge in any form. The term "honorable" is as far from defining this man as using "intelligent" to define a rock.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: NY3868
Rating:1.7

Comments:
Judge Wendt is arrogant, and laughably pretentious. There can be no hope that this man will change his ways. He needs to be retired ASAP.

Other

Comment #: NY3767
Rating:10.0

Comments:
I liked him. He cares about the issues, is intelligent and is fair.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: NY3146
Rating:1.0

Comments:
The following is based upon information and belief:

Judge Wendt is an ornery man who seems like he hates what he does and hates those with whom he deals.

He has a short fuse, horrible temper, and does not listen to argument, let alone reason and logic.

He disregards ironclad contracts and threatens tenants to not go to trial or else he'll see that they lose. He makes unprofessional ultimatums and is an embarrassment to the Bar, both New York and in general. Further, he is just a plain embarrassment to everyone and should not be in a position of power.

Other

Comment #: NY2933
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
HE'S VERY MUCH PRO LANDLORD. IF YOU MAKE THE MISTAKE OF GOING IN FRONT OF HIM PRO-SE, YOU BETTER BE PREPARE, SPECIALLY IF YOU ARE A MINORITY.

Other

Comment #: NY2919
Rating:4.0

Comments:
this judge is very arrogant, temperamental, does not allow you speak (unless you are white). going to court and facing this judge makes a very frustrating experience. Love to ask for respect for his court, does not believe in giving it to the other person. make a mockery out the judicial system

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: NY2728
Rating:5.5

Comments:
Smart, but not nearly as smart as he thinks he is. Wastes attorneys time by refusing to let them leave the court room-- "don't leave. Your case is next". Tow hours later you are still waiting. Talks too much and listens too little. Takes over your argument on motions, flies the argument to somewhere only he can imagine, and then rules against you because his argument is wrong!

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: NY2523
Rating:2.1

Comments:
What others have said is on-target, confirming my own perceptions. He flatters himself with his ability to recite cases with every period & comma in place, but when it comes to understanding, interpreting & applying the law, he fails. He is notorious around the Courthouse for his quirks, and needs to retire where he can do no more harm.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: NY1924
Rating:3.0

Comments:
He has an awful attitude and is not a nice person. While knowledgeable about the law, his absolutely terrible demeanor makes it a true nightmare to appear before him. If there is a God, he will make this man retire soon.

Civil Litigation - Govt.

Comment #: NY1054
Rating:8.6

Comments:
There need to be more judges like him who actually care about the law.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: NY1053
Rating:2.6

Comments:
J. Wendt has been on the bench too long, and he thiinks he's above the law and facts. He's mercurial and unreliable.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: NY620
Rating:1.5

Comments:
Judge Wendt raves while on the bench and seems overwhelmed by his job. He is just awful.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: NY616
Rating:1.3

Comments:
A smart, arrogant lunatic. This guy apparently has been driven nuts by sitting for too many years in landlord-tenant court. Time for retirement.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: NY584
Rating:1.0

Comments:
This judge has a bizarre temperament that overshadows all else. He appears overwhelmed by his case load and cannot get his arms around all his cases. He is an awful judge.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: NY548
Rating:1.4

Comments:
This quasi-Dickensian lunatic acts as though he is either the king or the court jester in his courtroom: he yells at and threatens lawyers and litigants, and his demeanor is truly bizarre. He needs to be involuntarily retired.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: NY516
Rating:1.0

Comments:
Is not punctual. Lacks industry. Is inefficient. Constantly interrupts counsel and witnesses. Seems to lack self-control. Regales himself by citing his own published opinions. Is rude and condescending to litigants and lawyers. Some higher judicial officer nees to sit in his court once to figure out what the problem is.