Hon. Nancy Bradburn-Johnson See Rating Details
Commissioner
Superior Court
King County
See Comments

Attorney Average Rating:   2.5 - 7 rating(s)
Non-Attorney Average Rating:   3.0 - 4 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


Please type what you see below:

    

What others have said about Hon. Nancy Bradburn-Johnson


Comments


Civil Litigation - Govt.

Comment #: WA2233
Rating:1.0
Comments:
I was overwhelmed to see the leading country for justice system and human rights and a role model to the world to which the entire world looks up is presented by a judge like her who is obviously narcissist, discriminative who is put in a position that affects people's entire life and judges and orders with obvious bias and evidence-free! The question is how come there are medical vetting and assessments for the smallest and least significant matters you would want to go through and for certain occupations, however there is none, more specifically to check mental well -beings for positions as judges.

Litigant

Comment #: WA2220
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
Absolute 0 Rating
She is rude judgmental does not look at facts or documents coincides with trustees and attorneys. They have their circle.
Mean and nasty should be removed from the bench

Other

Comment #: WA2125
Rating:2.0
Comments:
Very unprepared for the case. very disorganized. Decisions appeared arbitrary and not based on the law. Very sloppy with her orders with significant math errors leading to unjustifiable fee. Parental plan with significant error. Unwilling to correct obvious errors on reconsideration - reversed within 2 hours by the Judge in revision. Overall highly incompetent. She appears to know it herself. Appears that she is known by the attorneys to be not bright and to be incompetent.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: WA1899
Rating:1.0
Comments:
unfair weighting of case evidence. Despite obvious false allegations she decided to keep a DVPO in place. No regard for the impact of these things on actual people. Very bias, chose hearsay and fabrications over findings of fact.

Other

Comment #: WA1360
Rating:10.0
Comments:
She is very fair.

Litigant

Comment #: WA1326
Rating:1.0
Comments:
Always rude mean like she hates what shes doing always sides with corporate trustees and attorneys makes you provide information that trustee has no legal grounds to even ask for does not PROTECT the elderly. Embarassing you very bias if you dont have represantion. She never presents herself well like she just woke up doesnt seem to have good knowledge of trusts elderly laws and their rights make desisions without legal documents before her to make a proper moral ethical judgement to which could have a negative impact on the one being denied.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: WA1313
Rating:2.4
Comments:
Does not seem to grasp the big picture, and God forbid you try to tell her anything. She knows best.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: WA1204
Rating:1.6
Comments:
In serious argument over safety of child and prudence of decision, this Commissioner gave absolutely zero consideration of a multitude of evidence proving the error in her previous decision. Would not consider nor hear the argument for modification. Instead, tried her best to make litigant appear un-educated and not worthy of her cubicle. Bedside manner = zero. Perhaps stuck for too long in her basement kingdom?

Other

Comment #: WA972
Rating:1.0
Comments:
She is absolutely the most degrading and offensive person I have ever met. Her sole purpose is to make sure you are degraded and embarrassed. Not to mention, she doesn't actually know the law, she just likes to nit-pick and reject things on her whims.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: WA908
Rating:6.6
Comments:
I agree - she is cranky and downright mean sometimes. Seems to take pleasure in embarrassing attorneys (especially new attorneys). She is thorough, which would be a good thing except that sometimes she digs deep enough to find issues that...aren't. As though she's trying to find SOME way to rule against you because she doesn't like your shirt that day or something. Kind of odd. I generally try to avoid her, but I'm not going to say she's "awful" or "incompetent."

Litigant

Comment #: WA849
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
In complete agreement with other comment about issues with her temper and sharp comments designed to put you down. She consistently challenges litigants on issues that aren't before her.

The sad part is her challenges are pathetic because she doesn't keep up with case law and struggles with trying to recall the basics. Clearly, she feels left out of the action glued to the bench in her tiny room where she can't preside over trials.

Avoid her if you can. If you can't, good luck.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: WA831
Rating:1.7
Comments:
Crabbiest commissioner or judge I've ever appeared before (think parochial school nun). Don't stand in the wrong spot. Don't talk, even in a whisper, when you are waiting for your turn. Don't ever interrupt her and immediately stop speaking when she interrupts you. Comes across as a real control freak.

She seems to try to engage in the matter in front of her, but gets stuck with irrelevant material. Asks for the law on issues that are not material to the disposition of the case and then won't let go. Seems as if she's trying to make people look or feel stupid.

She is on time though and seems willing to be flexible with scheduling, if it accomodates her schedule - not the attorneys'.