Hon. Richard T. Okrent See Rating Details
Judge
Superior Court
Snohomish County
See Comments

Attorney Average Rating:   2.7 - 1 rating(s)
Non-Attorney Average Rating:   10.0 - 1 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. Richard T. Okrent


Comments


Other

Comment #: WA1163
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
Wondering why this Judge would state that he would not take in to account any letters written by the community for sentencing of a man who shot & killed over drugs. This "man" is a career criminal & felon who got caught with multiple weapons! Everything since day 1 with this case has been wrong & backwards! Where is the justice system & how is this protecting the community?! Showing favor for the defendant & his lawyer (whom used to be a Judge as well himself) in this case is ridiculous! Hopefully Judge Okrent will see his role to make this a safer community with giving him the maximum instead of a slap on the hand because his family has money to pay!

Other

Comment #: WA1159
Rating:10.0
Comments:
One of the most honorable, honest, and intelligent gentlemen I have come to know and respect.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: WA944
Rating:2.7
Comments:
Judge Richard T. Okrent was appointed by Governor Chris Gregoire in January of 2011. In the fall of 2013, Judge Okrent rendered a Hague Convention decision regarding the international abduction of two very young sisters--in just 40 minutes. Judge Okrent ignored objections regarding surprise hearings, overburdening of a third party, refused to address multiple hearings scheduled at the same time, before different justices, refused to grant Trial, and rendered the decision under Washington State Law, and the UCCJEA's Home State Analysis. Judge Okrent lackadaisically dismissed the Defendant's right to Trial, to present witnesses, to acknowledge the Power of Attorney by the Petitioner to the Defendant, for the Children to have been removed from Canada, to reside in Washington State, and for the case to be heard under International Treaty, the Hague Convention. As a result, the case is still unresolved, in Canadian and U.S. courts, (Montreal and now the Washington State Supreme Court). After the Defendant proved misconduct to Canadian Courts, by the Petitioner--the Canadian courts justly stayed further proceedings, pending resolution of the case in the United States. Nevertheless, because of Judge Okrent's lack of diligence, disregard for court rules to issue findings of fact, appropriate notice, applying the wrong standard of law, and not ensuring a Pro Se litigants right to trial--the Petitioner has wrongfully succeeded in separating the children from their father and brother for over two years, and kept the case from being resolved for two years.