Virginia M. Kendall

Virginia is a disgrace. Virginia is W's biggest mistake, even bigger than invading Iraq. Virginia ruled on my case, and dismissed all my claims. The problem was, that she never addressed the facts or arguments in her opinion dismissing the claims. Even when faced with a motion to reconsider, which highlighted that she never addressed the facts or arguments, she continued to rule as she wanted; not as per the facts. [Redacted by Ed.] To all the posters on here who praise this nasty judge, you really need to stop. When a judge can act like this one does, even though it did not affect you or your case, does not allow you to say Virginia is great! Just because a rapist did not rape you, does not allow you to say that person was a good person as far as you are concerned. Virginia is now chief judge, which is the biggest joke ever. Virginia should only be in charge of pushing a broom around some warehouse or construction site, not deciding litigants' cases who truly have been wronged by the opposing party and Virginia only cares about her caseload or who she wants to prevail. Judges have to be neutral. Virginia isn't neutral. A high-profile case or two does not give her bragging rights as a qualified jurist or squelch her awful decisions in the past, and clearly she has put many people up to writing positive reviews for her. Virginia is too nasty and disgraceful to be a judge. The sooner she retires [Redacted by Ed.], the better off Illinois, Wisconsin and Michigan are. If all these "causes" she spends her time on, outside of the courthouse, actually knew her real personality, they would start another Bill Cosby #MeTooMovement, but for judges, and call it: #DisgracedJudges. [Redacted by Ed.]. Virginia took an oath to be fair, unbiased, and defend the Constitution of the U.S., Illinois, Wisconsin and Michigan. With happened with that oath Virginia? Do tell us citizens some day.

A review of some of the comments made about Judge Kendall could fairly lead one to conclude that we are speaking about an entirely different person. She is, to put it simply, outstanding in all ways. We all have had adverse rulings (and who among us has not, as a result, been frustrated with the judge?). But to consider Judge Kendall as anything other than a stand-out judicial officer and legal citizen (she writes, speaks, mentors, and just generally cares deeply about those around - and who appear before - her) leaves the impression that axes are being ground. Having worked around Judge Kendall since she assumed the bench, being familair with her reputation, and having known her when she served as a stand-out federal prosecutor, my perspective is that she has been, and remains, a model judge. What is more, I am confident that any random sampling of lawyers (and litigants) who appeared before her will yield similar results - whether on or off the record.

She doesn't do the job. Period. Fine example of why lifetime appointments are outdated and should be replaced with merit retention. She has no idea what is happening most of the time, even to the point of knowing why you are there. But of course, she will proceed as though she has studied all when in fact she is winging it at best. This is apparent to anyone with any wit about them, including those attorneys who have no compunction about misrepresenting the record, including their adversary's position, and are more than willing to take advantage of the situation. She tries to maintain a sunny disposition and grants motions off the cuff to get them off the docket but no real discretion is being exercised. She has an appointment for life but seems to view it as a title of nobility rather than a functional judicial position. In sum, a weak, nonperforming judge that our current system of lifetime appointments is not designed to deal with.

She would never let facts or law get in the way of a verdict