Hon. Mary Fitzgerald See Rating Details
District Judge
Court
Tulsa County
See Comments

Attorney Average Rating:   4.4 - 13 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. Mary Fitzgerald


Comments


Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: OK1179
Rating:1.6
Comments:
The perfect example of someone who is elected because of who she knows, and not what she knows. A very poor judge.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: OK1079
Rating:1.0
Comments:
This judge need to go back to TU for addl. education or work at Walmart as a greater. Her rulings are nuts

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: OK924
Rating:1.0
Comments:
Not suited as a trial judge. Not very bright or hard working. Better suited to working as a child support collection attorney or DHS staff attorney. Not very bright. Way out of her league in her current position. Must be the most overturned on appeal of any judge in Oklahoma. A perfect example of what happens when voters pick judges. A great cookie recipe is not a qualification one should seek in picking a judge. If she had any honor she would resign immediately.

Other

Comment #: OK878
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
I would rate her perfomace as "Extremely Poor" I think that she is a liability to the Judicial System. Many of her cases are being over-turned on appeal, but that is after a lot of damage has been done by her incompetent or biased decisions

Other

Comment #: OK877
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
I have not had much occasion to go before a judge so I really did not know what to expect. Having gone through this process, I would have to say Judge Mary Fitzgerald is "NOT COMPETENT" to be on the bench. First off she granted a summary judgement ( Where a judge decides that the case doesn't need to go to trial because there is no dispution of material facts)) Although we disputed the so called facts and denied that many of the items sought were ever in our posession. This judge made a determination without us even having a day in court,and without her doing any fact finding as to whether the items sought were in our posession or had ever been in our posession, and then later admitted that she didn't even read crucial parts of the case. When it became apparent after a nearly 3 year ordeal, that there was crucial errors made by her in this case, she was still going to allow a for a conversion case to proceed against me. There are many examples in my case where this Judge denied my rights of due process. This case has since been appealed and reversed by The Supreme Court citing Judge Fitzgerald with "ABUSE OF DISCRETION". Some might deem that a victory, but after 3 years of "JUDICIAL HELL" where nearly every motion we made was denied despite proof provided by her own appointed fact finder. I can only hope that by writing this, others who go before this Judge will be aware.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: OK593
Rating:7.9
Comments:
Smart and even handed. Easy to approach and understands lawyer issues. Her time as a clerk for Tom Brett certainly helps her.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: OK558
Rating:10.0
Comments:
My view is that she is not addressing her opinions to a voting base. Willing to make unpopular decisions which, may cause consternation. I think she is improving.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: OK553
Rating:1.7
Comments:
Clearly has no interest in the law or even trying to learn it. Doesn't read briefs and often just signs whatever an attorney puts in front of her, with the result that orders are entered, vacated, reversed on appeal, etc.

Other

Comment #: OK514
Rating:1.0
Comments:
Clearly this judge will not decide for individual rights when a ruling may jeopardize her voting base.

Other

Comment #: OK513
Rating:1.0
Comments:
Doesn't have the patience to apply due process and seems clueless on property law.

Litigant

Comment #: OK512
Rating:1.0
Comments:
Issued a judgment in which she quoted our own arguments against us. Doesn't seem to have read our brief or understood it.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: OK456
Rating:2.4
Comments:
Out of her league. The appellate courts know her to be incompetent. She simply doesn't belong on the bench. Doesn't know the law and doesn't want to learn it.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: OK384
Rating:7.6
Comments:
Inexperienced, but willing to learn. She has the courage to consider and rule on dispositive motions, which is unfortunately rare among her peers.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: OK242
Rating:1.1
Comments:
She used to at least be nice - now that has faded. She lacks even the most basic understanding of the legal process, and does not seem to be taking steps to improve.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: OK62
Rating:3.8
Comments:
Doesn't like to work. Doesn't even read motions - just denies them. Nice and pleasant, but needs to try a little bit.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: OK49
Rating:7.9
Comments:
She is inexperienced, but works very hard to understand the issues involved. She would learn faster if lawyers would appropriately brief issues prior to trial. She is fair and enjoyable to practice in front of.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: OK25
Rating:8.6
Comments:
She is bright and she is learning. She cares about what is right.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: OK15
Rating:2.3
Comments:
Nice lady, but simply lacks any measure of trial experience, and seems to further lack the desire to educate herself on what she should be doing.