Linda M Capitti

Judge Linda Capitti often allows matters to drag on unnecessarily, which can financially exhaust litigants and cause harm to the children caught in the middle. It also appears that she shows favoritism toward certain law firms, raising concerns about fairness and impartiality. Unfortunately, issues like this are not unique; in New York, Judges Sherri Eisenpress and Kathleen Waterman-Marshall were reportedly forced to retire following allegations of misconduct. Kudos to Sarah Wallace of NBC News for shining light on these issues!

This judge doesn’t even try to hide her bias. She expresses annoyance and gets animated during hearings. She may be out of touch with the average person as she expects a person living on disability to pay 90% of their earnings to child support. She allows whichever side she is clearly advocating for to lie brazenly with no repercussions, glossing over inconsistencies as she pleases, and making completely one sided rulings. This is what happens with unchecked power.

A group of matrimonial attorneys and the judges they "sponsor" (which started with Waterman Marshall) are raging rampant, taking away litigants’ children and engaging in dissipation of marital assets. See: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wK7Eppe8jLk. Please contact the DOJ with additional information so that these abusive tactics end: https://civilrights.justice.gov/report/.

She is literally replacing Waterman-Marshall bias behavior, disregard with less monied spouses and validating lies as the law. Why replace the wrong with the mistake?

This judge took over lots of cases after the previous judge, Kathleen Waterman-Marshall, was removed from handling divorce cases. She seems to be sticking to the orders from the prior judge, who was the worst. When you tell Capitti what Waterman-Marshall did wrong, she gets animated and shuts you down. I think she's been placed to squash any uprising from the Waterman-Marshall cases and make litigants go away. In doing so, it feels like she's stating to repeat some of Waterman-Marshall's bad behaviors.

This is a mediocre judge. She avoids fairly treating litigants as to their choice of settlement or trial. Capitti instead demonstrates a family court-like approach to pressuring litigants into settlements despite lacking adequate professional input from otherwise court-approved resources. She freely snaps at attorneys who do not go along with her settlement mindset. She does not comprehend how divorce actions are resolved, and she demonstrates an intellectual laziness typical for a Manhattan judge.

Unfortunately, despite high expectations for Judge Linda Capitti, her first six months on the bench at 60 Centre Street have been disappointing. Many have raised concerns about the quality of her decisions and legal reasoning. Some even suggest she may be attempting to shield Judge Kathleen Waterman-Marshall from scrutiny.

Judge Linda Capitti and Judge Aija Tingling recently joined the NYC matrimonial bench, taking on the majority of cases previously overseen by Judge Kathleen Waterman-Marshall. Judge Waterman-Marshall was reassigned following widespread concerns, including dozens of formal complaints to the Commission on Judicial Conduct and televised NBC investigations into allegations of misconduct. Unfortunately, many of the cases now before Judges Capitti and Tingling should have been vacated outright due to the apparent bias and questionable rulings issued under Judge Waterman-Marshall. Litigants, many of whom were parents unfairly stripped of their rights, have suffered serious consequences due to these prior injustices. Judge Capitti, in her nearly four months on the bench, has earned a reputation for being tough but fair. She stands in stark contrast to her predecessor, who was widely criticized for ignoring the constitutional rights of those before her. Judge Capitti appears to approach her role with more thoughtfulness and balance, which is encouraging. However, the primary concern raised about Judge Capitti is her pace in correcting the deeply flawed decisions she has inherited. While some of the harm done under Judge Waterman-Marshall may be irreversible, the continuation of unjust rulings simply due to judicial inertia compounds the problem. Rigidity in the face of obvious injustice does not serve the interests of fairness or due process. Judge Capitti has a critical opportunity to not only distinguish herself from the incompetence of the past but also to help set the matrimonial division on a fairer, more just path alongside Judge Tingling. The moment demands courage and urgency. The families affected by these decisions deserve nothing less.