"The Robing Room: WA State Judges

Hon. Julia L. Garratt	See Rating Details
Judge Superior Court
King County	See Comments

Attorney Average Rating: 2.7 - 2 rating(s) Non-Attorney Average Rating: 2.0 - 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

Please type what you see below:

What others have said about Hon. Julia L. Garratt

Comments

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: WA1681
Rating:4.4

Comments:
Very obvious favoritism to her lawyer friends and females. Barely able to keep her animosity towards male plaintiff (father) in check. Judgment against father was what one would expect to give a criminal, not a father whose kids were wrongly awarded to non-parent. She also allowed them to change their birth names to the couple she awarded custody and ruled that the father could have no contact for 4 years. It was the middle finger to the children's family.

Other

Comment #: WA1680
Rating:3.0

Comments:
judge was obviously pro-defense. Told plaintiff 'I don't know why we are here. I have already made up my mind'.
Plaintiff unable to afford a lawyer. Other side had very deep pockets ($200,000) to pay lawyer. She sided and punished plaintiff in a way that was 'over the top'. Clearly did not like plaintiff personally. Devastated our family

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: WA1556
Rating:1.0

Comments:
She failed to read or even consider evidence presented before her. She has a clear bias for friends who appear in her courtroom. She makes decisions without considering the evidence or facts. She is terrible, and appears to have a bias against immigrants.

Litigant

Comment #: WA733
Rating:1.0

Comments:
This judge forms snap opinions and is easily swayed by false testimony. She wears her biases on her sleeve and has a strong gender bias. She is an angry emotional woman rather than a rational jurist. Her performance is highly unprofessional and and seems to favour certain lawyers, her friends. I have seen her preside over a number of cases at multiple hearings. She should not preside over a kindergarten class, let alone a courtroom.