Hon. Chris Wickham See Rating Details
Superior Court
Thurston County
See Comments

Attorney Average Rating:   3.7 - 4 rating(s)
Non-Attorney Average Rating:   - 0 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      

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)

What others have said about Hon. Chris Wickham


Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: WA815
Wickman is more concerned about his "very full calendar" than delivering justice and following the laws of Washington State. He is a bully that does not care to spend time considering evidence, rather makes decisions based on what will require the least amount of effort on his part. Rumor has it he is considering retirement soon and I certainly hope that is the case. Myself and OP had requested a GAL in a custody case and Wickman refused to appoint one because he had "all the information he needs" to make an equitable decision. This is unheard of. I would strongly advise an affidavit of prejudice for any case before Wickham. He is a disgrace.


Comment #: WA814
Rating:Not Rated
I found this judge to be extremely bias and prejudiced against a friends case. Ignored case law, proceeded with hearings in an unfair manner and failed to address the best interests of children. Very concerning to have a judge like this on the bench in family law cases, particularly when children are involved.

Civil Litigation - Govt.

Comment #: WA649
Judge Wickham personifies bias, prejudice, and contempt for the citizens who pay his salary. Tomas de Torquemada was more equitable and less biased in his pronouncements. If you are a government stooge wishing to cover up government corruption and allow wholesale abuses of civil rights, Judge Wickham is the judge for you. No unlawful or illegal conduct by the government is too glaring or offensive for this judge to approve of.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: WA329
Awful Judge. He's always "in recess" attending trainings and seminars and what have you. He does not work hard. Wickham is mean and belittling from the bench. He seems to hate strong women lawyers, who he loves demoralizing and cutting off. Ironically, he also has a huge bias for women litigants in family law, domestic violence cases. He has favorite lawyers who appear before him who never get an unfavorable ruling from him. He also has those lawyers who he does not like or respect who he treats very badly. My client have spent thousands of dollars when he was court commissioner successfully revising some of his most outlandish rulings. I do not trust him and would file an affidavit of prejudice in any case of mine that he is assigned to.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: WA168
Don't agree with some of his policies, but his consistency has improved over the years. Don't hesitate to go in front of him for any hearing or trial.


Comment #: WA103
Rating:Not Rated
Ignored case law,allowed the state to declare a federal sovereignty just to avoid the public records act.Let law enforcement lie in his court.