Superior Court
4 reviews
Get notified when a new review is published
If you are young and/or female this will be the best 170.6 you will ever use. Openly sexist and unfair in his treatment of young female attorneys. Has little to no understanding of the Rules of Evidence and zero regard or ability to adhere to well established caselaw.
Tends to sunset in the afternoons - forgets easily then so best to put on best part of argument or case in the a.m; very pro-defense (especially if it involves the County or any governmental entity); very sarcastic in front of the jury but then will be better in a.m. He will try to sway the case towards the side he favors (depending on who the attorney is, and usually local). Very nice demeanor otherwise, but generally has a bias against 1) women; 2) outsiders (especially from L.A.) 3) young lawyers male or female - but this bias is less prevalent in a.m. When he gets cranky in afternoon, don't take it personally; I don't think he means it. I think California owes his a great debt for his many years of service to the bar and the bench -- but it is time for fresh blood in the Monterey courthouse.
Well past his prime. Should retire. A Monterey County Good Ol Boy who takes care of his old attorney friends and it shows in his rulings.. 170.6 from now on
Plaintiff litigated a meritless case for two years. Defense was prevailing until the assignment of Judge Wills. He proceeded to appoint a receiver over an LLC the plaintiff was not even a member of, was dissolved, and had no assets to manage. The receiver, under his management, cost the estate several hundred thousand dollars. This is just one example of the bias towards the plaintiff he showed. He ruled against a demurrer on the basis of duplicate claims in two different lawsuits and then turned around and found legal and factual basis to consolidate the two cases. The plaintiffs counsel threatened to ruin the reputation of a defense witness and put him in the hospital. All the court did was ask counsel if she did that instead of holding an evidentiary hearing for witness tampering. It goes on and on.