This is a story? Seriously?

Weak

What the hell sort of transition is that picture supposed to represent?

Also, Judge Judy is hilarious.

Jude Judy:

A fine product of NYLS.

Judge Eiler probably hasn't had her ticket punched since the Carter administration, so cut her some slack.

Judge of the day should clearly have been Judge Schiller. http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1202422520886

wow i wish i can have those 30 seconds of my life back

I don't get the picture. What the hell is it suppose to mean? This is one boring post. I keep checking back to see if ATL has recovered from lameness only to be disappointed every time.

4:04 - Slow news afternoon.

But the post on Phil Telfeyan being in the DOJ report was good, as was the post yesterday on the weirdo whose book Scalia wouldn't sign.

Complements to the crew at Wired for completely wasting their time creating an image that means nothing.

Judge Judy was a "real judge" no different than she is on TV.

"angry, disdainful, condescending and/or demeaning" . . . "rude, impatient, undignified and intimidating"

Sounds like the majority of professors and partners I've had the pleasure of working with, and is pretty much SOP for most big firm (and some small firm) lawyers. Who was doing the complaining here? What rock did that person crawl out from under?

Next, please.

"What the hell sort of transition is that picture supposed to represent?"

You have to look closely at the 'after' pictire to see the droul.

The transition is after the judge's prefrontal lobotomy performed at the 'sensitivity training'.

ALT readers have been spoiled, and are inured to any bad judge story not involving sexual misconduct, cow porn, morbid obesity, strip clubs, transvestitism, or (ideally) all of the above.

3:54 is right.

"Schiller agreed, saying: "Unfortunately for Limerick [Golf Club], their sub-par performance occurred in the pleading stage of this case and not on the golf course."

The judge then succinctly summarized his holding in a poem:

With arguments hard to resist,
The movant correctly insists,
His joinder was tardy,
And so the third-party
Complaint is hereby dismissed."

"A Seattle-area judge has been accused of routinely interrupting litigants and lawyers and addressing them in a manner that is "angry, disdainful, condescending and/or demeaning."

Isn't every judge like this?

BTW: Don't hate on Judge Judy. Doesn't she take in about $100 mil a year?

I had a case in front of this nut-ball and she sanctioned me $500 for something totally ridiculous. It was pretty unbelievable. She should be removed from the bench ASAP.

Judge Judy Eiler is a mean, horrible, angry person.
I was already going to write a letter to the courts to complain when I saw her on the news.

20 - why are you commenting on a post from June? did she just turn you down for a clerkship?

I went before this judge 2 months ago. She is dangerous, and a jerk. She was reprimanded 3 years ago for the identical charges. What does it take to remove such incompetence.

I recently had a towing appeal case before her, and I can confirm from personal experience, that the negative descriptions are entirely accurate. In fact, these characterization do not go far enough, in that they focus on what appear to be merely personality flaws, while ignoring the fundamental bias and deliberate ignorance of both the law and the rules of evidence that were the defining aspects of her conduct (at least in my case).

In my case, the towing company stated that they had sent two letters notifying me that they had towed my car. I testified that I had received NO letters from them, and pointed-out that the law (RCW 46.55.150) requires that they keep both a record, AND A COPY of the legally-required letter, and asked that they present the copies of the letters that they claimed to have sent. Judge Eiler refused my request, saying "I don't need the letter; I have testimony." She then went on to conclude that though they are required to send a letter, there is no requirement that I receive it. (Meaning that she would have to believe that not one but TWO letters were independently lost in the mail.)

In sum, though it is clear that she has an offensive personality, what is more important is her faulty intellect, and her astonishing bias. Her position as a judge is more than just an embarassment to the legal profession; it is a continuing source of injustice for every party who has the misfortune of appearing before her.

I to went before this judge and she is mean, rude, condencending and yes she is an embarassment to the legal profession. She is the worst judge I have ever had to see and she should be taken off the bench and disbared too!

Was before her yesterday. She took testimony only and refused to look at evidence. She believed the plaintiff when he told her that his 1996 Jeep Grand Cherokee, 6 cylinder, 2 wheel drive, with 180,000 miles, had a blue book value of $4,200.

In her before picture, Judith looks like a conservative, but sweet old woman.

As for the after picture, she looks a bit... well, not rude or intimidating. Her eyebrow arch should have been raised and she should have big disgusting smirk.