"The Robing Room: WA State Judges

Hon. Susan J. Craighead	See Rating Details
Presiding Judge Superior Court
King County	See Comments

Attorney Average Rating: 4.7 - 8 rating(s) Non-Attorney Average Rating: 2.0 - 9 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:

Not an even number!

What others have said about Hon. Susan J. Craighead

Comments

Civil Litigation - Govt.

Comment #: WA2135
Rating:1.7

Comments:
I experienced Craighead as a father trying to protect my babies from an alcoholic mother.

Craighead felt so much sympathy for the sorry state of the mother that she ignored all irrefutable evidence presented to her. At times I suspected Craighead was attracted to the mother for she often commented on how attractive she was.

Craighead awarded shared custody to an alcoholic after she had already lost it once. A year later, Craighead recused herself from presiding over my matter, for bias.

After multiple visits to ER/Rehab/Inpatient, mother eventually lost all custody of the children.

My family is fortunately now thousands of miles away from the toxic court of Craighead and the legacy she leaves in her poisonous wake.

Other

Comment #: WA1812
Rating:1.0

Comments:
This judge defies all process, logic, or law. She threw out a key report by her own appointed expert because it conflicted with her own narrative. She opted instead to believe a pack of unsubstantiated lies because it supported the femme fatale single mother tale that she seems to need to believe. Her hatred of men is palpable and irrational. Her rulings are deeply based in this rather than the law. She has done a great deal of damage with her inability to competently weigh the scales of justice.

Other

Comment #: WA1748
Rating:1.0

Comments:
The most stupid thing ever, she doesn’t read any of the papers and does not follow law.
How Is she a judge? Only God knows
If she was a criminal judge lot of innocent people would end of behind bars.

Litigant

Comment #: WA1736
Rating:1.0

Comments:
This Judge is being reported to the board and she will eventually lose her position due to her continuing to not follow the basic laws, civil rules, and illegal practices.

Litigant

Comment #: WA1733
Rating:1.0

Comments:
Horrible Judge she does not understand the simple truth of the facts and is extremely biased and does not follow the LAW Period! She has violated many civil rules, due process and judicial codes of conduct and the Constitution! Do not go in front of this Judge you will lose your sanity and you will lose everything you had including your children.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: WA1730
Rating:1.0

Comments:
Judge Craighead is biased and does not follow the Laws of Washington State. She has violated due process rights and rights to be heard and constitutional rights. She shouldn't be a Judge at all.

Court Staff

Comment #: WA1706
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
Judge Craighead is biased, unfair and quite simply an awful judge of character who does not put any effort into appreciating the details of a case or applying it within the context of the law.

Judge Craighead is physically ill and incapable of being a judge. Her unfortunate problems with her health have resulted in a lazy and incompetent judge who is easily swayed by flashy lawyers with catchy rhetoric and TV style demeanor versus an appreciation of facts and careful interpretation of the law.

If you are not a female and find yourself heading into family court matters with her then watch out because Craighead is the perfect example of what is broken in the Washington family court system.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: WA1559
Rating:10.0

Comments:
She is an excellent Judge. When you are before her, you will know.

Litigant

Comment #: WA1558
Rating:10.0

Comments:
She is an excellent Judge. When you are before her, you quickly realize that she has read all the materials. She asks for clarifications if needed to fully understand the situation.

I felt like she cares about the families when ruling on family matters. She cares about the children involved and applies life equations to the situation. Life is not a straight line, it is crisscrossed and difficult. She understands this fact.

I am glad to see that there are good Judges who actually take the time.

Other

Comment #: WA1555
Rating:2.0

Comments:
This judge has a brilliant background, and appears to be nice at first, but she is a horrible judge who doesn't hesitate to force her view of point onto the case, with no regard to the law. It is unfortunately that we have such a biased judge.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: WA1547
Rating:3.3

Comments:
This judge is a brilliant person with kind inclinations but is a horrible judge who very clearly shows her biases and who tries to create rules from the bench. I would avoid her at all costs.

Litigant

Comment #: WA933
Rating:7.0

Comments:
Judge Craighead is fair. I won't go into details because this was a criminal matter, but suffice it to say I could have faced much stiffer penalties than I otherwise did.

She was very hard on my wife when my wife asked to make a statement on my behalf, I actually think that is what ended up getting me sentenced to 4 months in KCJ and not sent home right there. She didn't like what my wife had to say. But all in all she weighed the entire situation and ruled fairly.

Other

Comment #: WA823
Rating:1.0

Comments:
Stupid. I watched this Judge Craighead in several cases. Wherever there was a powerful entity, such as a bank versus a little person, in one case they were a black man, in another case it was an insurance company and it was a white woman, the big guys win automatically with this judge, and evidence mattered not at all. In fact, one party showed the insurance company had forged a document, where it had been signed, when the litigant’s attorney proved that they had been out of the usa. That evidence just pissed Craighead off, and she began to sort of growl for the rest of the hearing. Another case where to big medical insurance companies litigating over which had more/less of responsibility covered medical costs of certain types of people that had dual coverage. Both insurance companies were smart to send in ONLY female legal teams (Craighead is very strongly anti men biased), and each team had two lawyers, to show they were giving plenty of work to these female lawyers. Craighead finally, in an almost rage of confusion, pronounced that she could not understand the case. The litigants tried multiple times to explain the issues to Craighead. Finally she pronounced she would have to review this outsie of court. Which meant she had to take it to another judge, and let them tell her what to do.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: WA694
Rating:8.6

Comments:
She handled a very complex landlord-tenant dispute. She seemed to understand the legal issues. She declined to rule on most of the issues prior to trial, which created much more work for all parties. (Both parties should have been able to narrow the issues through their respective motions for summary judgment). But, all in all, she handled it fairly.

Litigant

Comment #: WA459
Rating:1.0

Comments:
Judge Craighead took almost 3 months to decide a summary judgment motion. The matters were complex and she clearly didn't get it! When she finally ruled, she simply signed the moving party's motion, a deficeint order in and of itself, with no explanation.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: WA261
Rating:3.5

Comments:
Judge Craighead has no civil trial background and it shows. She is smart. But she cannot handle a courtroom and has no understanding about civil discovery. This is not sour grapes. She is bad.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: WA230
Rating:8.9

Comments:
Judge Craighead presided over a difficult and very emotional family law trial last year. Her preparation was thorough; she treated everyone in her courtroom with respect and was very sharp on both the law and evidence. She gave her ruling promptly and compassionately. I was extremely impressed by her in all respects.