"The Robing Room: WA State Judges

Hon. Suzanne M. Barnett	See Rating Details
Judge Superior Court
King County	See Comments

Attorney Average Rating: 4.2 - 6 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 ()

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

What others have said about Hon. Suzanne M. Barnett

Comments

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: WA318
Rating:3.5

Comments:
Wow...wish I had read this site before I tried a discretionary ruling before this Judge. As I left the courtroom after she granted summary judgment on the key claim in my client's case her bailiff handed me back the 3-ring binder in which I had submitted my "working copies" saying "you could probably reuse the binder." I was surprised to see the SJ materials still inside because I imagined that they would have some markings or notes made by the Judge as she reviewed the materials. Yet, looking at the materials not only were there NO marks of any kind, the pages looked like they had not even been turned...they looked absolutely pristine! Suddenly her rather flip and very brief ruling made sense since she had clearly not read anything I submitted. Try explaining this to a client sitting there watching his case go down the drain!

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: WA315
Rating:2.6

Comments:
This judge does not appear to have a grasp on middling to somewhat complex issues, does not read what is placed in front of her, and, in my observation, is unseemly in her readiness ready to credit highly dubious to downright frivolous positions taken by government parties.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: WA305
Rating:8.5

Comments:
Suzanne Barnett is an experienced and no-nonsense judge who “gets it.” Civil rules and common sense prevail in her courtroom. In many ways, she is easily one of the top 10 judges in King County Superior Court. I hope she stays with us a long time.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: WA189
Rating:2.5

Comments:
Doesn't understand concepts very well. Doesn't read the paperwork. Makes odd decisions unsupported by law, but not due to bias so much as indecisiveness and lack of brainpower (two very different problems!).

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: WA92
Rating:3.7

Comments:
Likes to "split the baby" a lot. Does not seem like she actually reads and/or understands what is put in front of her.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: WA16
Rating:4.1

Comments:
Clients pay a lot of money and attorneys work hard to present arguments and evidence in motions. It would be nice if Judge Barnett actually read them.