Hon. Michael J. Kelly See Rating Details
Special Judge
Court
Kanawha County
13th Circuit
See Comments

Attorney Average Rating:   - 0 rating(s)
Non-Attorney Average Rating:   1.0 - 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




What others have said about Hon. Michael J. Kelly


Comments


Litigant

Comment #: WV93
Rating:1.0
Comments:
Biased, non-judicial temperament, sexist, unfair, and really really nasty ... possibly the worst judge WV has ever had. It is just unbelievable that he is even a judge ... a good reason why neutral parties give the WV Judicial system a D for impartiality and quality.

Other

Comment #: WV27
Rating:1.0
Comments:
Well!!! I should tell you all - if you dig into his past - I suggest you hire someone he practiced law with or had a relationship with. That would give you a sure win. He does not recuse himself or consider the facts. Whats that saying - It's not what you know - it's who you know. In Mike Kelly's courtroom - that is the truth. He is making his friends wealthy. Hey!!! Good for you Mike Kelly - use your position!!! Whose going to stop you??? We should all start a blog and share our experiences with this judge. Next time around lets show him what the little people think of him. He does not serve the people, he serves himself. Shame on you!!!

Litigant

Comment #: WV26
Rating:1.0
Comments:
He has a mean temperment, he is sexist, and he is a legend in his own mind. He is singularly the worst family Judge in WV ... maybe the worst Judge of any kind in WV. He is anything but fair ... he is intentionally intimidating and enjoys his little power trips. He is ridiculously bias toward women. He has a personal relationship with many attorneys that creates a lot more than the appearance of impropriety. Almost all the attorney's who practice in front of him think he is horrible. He should be removed from office but he is close friends with those in power in the judicial system including Judge Workman whose ex-husband got some of his "Justice" during their divorce. If he runs for a higher office, I will spend whatever it takes to be damn sure he is exposed and defeated.

Other

Comment #: WV25
Rating:1.0
Comments:
I feel that this Family Law Master makes his determinations and rulings based upon his friendships with the attorneys that appear in his court. This does not follow the law when it comes to Discovery or Ethical Conflicts of Interest. This Judge should be held accountable when his rulings become unfair and bias. One example of this, is he does not annouce prior to a hearing his relationships with attorneys that appear in his court. When a Judge holds a postion that the ruling impacts children - and he is hearing a case in which one of the attorneys was someone he cohabitated with, was law partners with and helped in his election campaign. In this sitution his ethical obligation should have been to recuse himself or at least make it known on the record to all appearing parties - no, instead he keeps in hush! Hush! and seems to constantly rule in favor of his friends. Please note that this judge shuold be watched closely. He is not above the law and his actions should be held accountable. This Judge should not serve as a Family Law Master.