Frederick S Chung

Doesn't seam very experience in actual facts presented in case files.

I completely agree with the comments about Judge Chung. The proof of the pudding is that he was recently overruled by the Appellate Court on granting a motion for summary judgment in favor of the the corporate defendant. The Appeal Court found him in error on numerous legal issues. He is arrogant and disrespectful, especially to civil plaintiff lawyers. He has an outcome in mind before he reads the papers (if he reads them) and works back from there. He is definitely worth a peremptory challenge in almost any case before him.

This judge is pro-defendant and pro-corporations. He gives defendants all the discovery they seek and then blocks the plaintiff from any discovery. He makes up rules and doesn't cite or follow the Code of Civil Procedure when it comes to discovery. He gets short when you question him. Everyone in the plaintiff's bar knows he is the worst law and motion judge to draw in Santa Clara.

Judge has no concept of negligence cases or torts in California. Other reviews saying he is biased in favor of defense are spot on. Big Law background. Doesn't seem to have any trial experience so doesn't understand how his "law and motion" docket shapes trials. Worth a ding.

He is an arrogant but not particularly smart Big Law/Harvard former lawyer. His arrogance is exceeded only by his inability to understand complex matters. He prides himself on snarky commentary to lawyers and his self-perceived infallability. Another commentator notes that he remains a Big Law defense lawyer who has not lost his bias, especially on dispositive motions. This is spot on. No judge gets it right every time. But after appearing before him numerous times on behalf of plaintiffs he never gets it right.

This judge is an absolute clown. He was unprepared and was extremely combative, rude, and generally unprofessional on the bench. His demeanor was completely inappropriate for a judge, and I question how much litigation experience he had prior to becoming a judge, as he did not have a grasp on the law.

This Judge deterimined the vilations of the ADA and the Section 504 of the rehabilatation Act are not in teh broad public interest and will not be enforced in in Santa Clara County. Now the case is at issue in Federal Court with the Judge as a witness for actual damages

The most incomptentent judge of the Court made a deterimination as an appellate Panel the trial judge had no jurisdiction to enter an Ex Paret Order and refused to report the illegal conduct to the Judcial Perfromance Commission in violation of Canon 3 D 1 & 2 Now my case against the Superior Court has been ordered to none binding mediation over the Courts violations of the ADA Act with actual acts of retailations for damages

If you are a plaintiff faced with a dispositive motion (demurrer, motion for summary judgment) this is the time to exercise your ccp 170.6; this judge was a civil defense lawyer his entire career and has not yet drained the bias. He is exclusively disposed to help insurance defense counsel in any way he can including not following the law and ignoring the facts of your case-do not roll the dice with this Judge and disqualify him-he is the worst judge you could be assigned to, any other judge in that courthouse will give you a fair hearing.

This Judge is a complete idiot who stated in his opinion that the "Court has sole discretion to tp deny a hearing impaired defendant his rights to communicate with cout appointed legal counsel because under a State Supreme court decision holds that a California curt can deny a criminal defendant his federal constitutional right legal represenation