Mary E. Wiss

Judge was confused during the civil jury trial and appeared to signal to the jury that she favorss one side. She also was confused during the in limine motions. She did encourage the parties to settle and even had a colleague take us for an entire day to settle the case. The matter did not settle despite protracted time. We then returned to her court. She appeared to have been advised by the settlement judge as to what happended during the discussions and then adopted a bias against us.

I just finished sitting as a juror in judge Wiss’s courtroom. It was painful to watch her treat the plaintiff who was a simple so rudely. The defendants were fraudsters. Judge Wiss kept giving the defendants every chance and was clearly prejudiced against the plaintiff.

[Redacted by Ed.] On multiple times, she mixes up the plaintiff and defendant during oral argument. She also appears to pick the party that she does not like during the motion in limine process and will screw that side with her rulings. I have seen her make completely opposite rulings on the same motion in limine with the only difference is that they occurred in different cases. Clearly, she will alter her view of the law depending on what side she thinks is deserving to win. I mean no dis-respect toward this experienced judge; just making a well informed observation that occurred multiple times in multiple cases that have been assigned to her in the past year. On the plus side, she encourages parties to settle before a jury is called in and she would assign the parties to a settlement conference judge. On balance, she would serve the court better as a settlement conference judge and part of the judicial mediation program. The time for her to actual be a trial judge has come and gone.

Judge had no intention of making an outcome based on evidence or providing outcome based on reasons pertaining to what info was brought before her. Provided no reasons for denial of my claim. Wasn't for me from the start I believe it was discrimination and based on reasons of personal nature not for the case itself. I AM NOT RITCH AND I AM NOT THE NORMAL OR IN THE CORRECT LIKING FOR THE OUTCOME TO BE FOR ME.JUDGE HAS NO SHAME OR EITHICS AT ALL. ANYONE WITH OUT A BRAIN CAN JUDGE BETTER THEN HER. NO REASON FOR ANY LEGAL OR OTHER WISE REASON CAN EXPLAIN HER NOT BEING FOR MY CASE. SHE HAS HATRED AND IS NOT A GOOD PERSON.

Judge had no intention of making an outcome based on evidence or providing outcome based on reasons pertaining to what info was brought before her. Provided no reasons for denial of my claim. Wasn't for me from the start I believe it was discrimination and based on reasons of personal nature not for the case itself.

Judge Wiss is not a good fact finder. Her decision seems arbitrary. I doubt her judgment is fair.

Seems to act as a stand-in or figurehead for others -- see comment CA5. Also personal biases control legal rulings. If you're advocating a non-controversial position, this judge could be better than one of the more mean-spirited judges in San Francisco

Wonderful judge; wonderful temperament; smart!

"Gold Standard" and "a real professional" have it right.