Claude M. Hilton

ProSe Litigant- the incumbent was a judge on two cases and in both cases he ignored all evidence. He even refused to recuse himself from the last case and dismissed it despite the fact that the U.S. General Attorney was served twice. Highly prejudice and does not in any way or shape accepts facts or truths. He allows Fraud On the Court and Abuse of Process with no regard to truth. He MUST be impeached as he is not trustworthy.

ProSe Litigant- this judge is prejudice and does not in any way reviews the evidence or information submitted. He is 100% one sided and does not care about truth. He rather supports criminals and misbehavior than those who are truthful. Definitely needs to be removed and impeached and all of his cases MUST be re-opened and reviewed.

Bullying the weak, disabled, poor. Had a case where the HOA violated the contract and applied harassment. Sued. Under his hands, we become the offenders and are to be punished. Nations with poor humans rights records have a fairer justice system (regarding civil disputes) than this judge's justice wrt to the weak.

A typical puppet of the hidden state, serving their agenda. He has nothing to add to law, he gets by on the power they give him and most likely offered up his soul for this.

According to the great majority of comments, this judge has already made up his mind about Chelsea Manning.

Pro Se litigant here, he issued summary judgement for the government without even addressing my claims. Pretty much a copy and paste of the governments opinion. I'm Appealing now.

Judge Hilton is the exemplification of why lifetime appointments are problematic. His reputation is well known: he does not rule in favor of employees regardless of the facts - which he alters to suit his personal judgment. He is unable to even stay awake through oral argument. Thanks to the protection of his lifetime appointment he cannot begin to comprehend the position of the parties that stand before him, terminated for discriminatory causes weakly justified by employers as cause.

The most prejudice judge with regard to average and below average income United States citizens that I have ever observed. This judge has no sense whatsoever of the search for Truth and Justice and he clearly avoids any reasonable search for Truth and Justice, especially if a large corporation or the federal government is the defendant! If there is an obscure rule or law that he can cite to dismiss an otherwise valid complaint against large corporations or the federal government, he will go to no end to search for and locate such and, once found, he will immediately dismiss the case irrespective of the facts presented by the average income United States citizen knowing full well that the average and below average income United States citizen has no recourse whatsoever for the wrongs perpetrated upon him or her by the Corporation or the federal agency before Claude M Hilton’s court!

Judge Hilton's reputation, as articulated on this page, is very sadly accurate. Neither case facts, recent case law, nor case evidence appear to be as valued as his pro-government stance. I agree with comments #6535 and #22996; run from Hilton unless you represent government.

My observations are in line with the majority of commenters and particularly #6535. He dismissed case on summary judgment, and his opinion was full of factual errors. It was clear he did not read the plaintiff's evidence. Shameful. I can't stress this enough: if you draw Hilton, re-file.

Judge Hilton is the bottom of the judicial barrel. He refuses to give defense counsel a full hearing of issues, he steamrolls through the process. He is not thoughtful or intelligent or in any way curious, he's just doing the job for a paycheck even though he's already in his mid 70s. There were four blatantly reversible errors in the one day trial we had before him - most egregiously, refusing counsel the right to make a record - and he issued summary denials of all pretrial motions without argument. He fell asleep six times in the one-day trial. He has no business on the federal bench.

This judge fell asleep more than once on Terrell Roberson's court case. Did not appear to be interested at all regarding the case. In 2010, the judge, the state prosecutors, and the public defender were all in on making sure that Roberson received a harsh sentence. Another young black man sentence unfairly.

While this judge presents a laid-back persona, he is very bright, and he is able to "cut to the chase," which sometimes causes less experienced counsel to believe wrongly that he is not fully engaged.

Judge Hilton is almost unabashedly biased against individual litigants. If you have a case on behalf of a plaintiff in a civil rights or employment case, or a little-guy-versus-big-guy case of any kind, you will lose. His decisions lack cohesiveness, and ignore any law that is "inconvenient."

This judge lacks knowledge, and is not a scholar, nor a reasonable individual. He is quite mediocre in fact, both as a judge and as a human being.

Judge Hilton is very bright and is able to cut to the chase quickly, but his demeanor sometimes belies this fact. He is a very good and fair judge.

I am a reporter who has sat in on many trials in the Alexandria VA courthouse. I've seen Judge Brinkema, Judge Lee, and others including Hilton. Judge Hilton is a real disgrace to the position. He falls asleep during argument and testimony, he is completely pro-government, and he is very unabashedly anti-Muslim.

The bottom of the barrel in terms of intellect and fairness.

I, as most of the other people who were solely the customer for Judge Hilton judgments, believe that he is lazy and shallow. Now, if you are wondering why there is this one person who left two lovely comments (5681 and 6703) about this judge, then check him out here: http://www.wcsr.com/default.asp?id=86&objId=614 Turns out that he has worked for Judge Hilton. Surprised now? The U.S. judiciary needs a real shakeout.

Judge Hilton is a breath of fresh air. He brooks no nonsense and makes the parties get to the point. Discovery will not be abused, and trial time will not be wasted in his court. His opinions are well-reasoned. He knows the law.