Robert J. Jonker

Results-oriented. Often ignores the briefs, law, and evidence to reach a conclusion he wants.

Something wrong up there....Something not right.

[Redacted by Ed.] In terms of analytical abilities, he clearly does not have a legal mind. Maybe he would have been a good math professor. But he does not understand the law or how it works. Very results-oriented and just makes something up to reach the conclusion he wants.

The prior post is obviously a law clerk. Jonker is highly unpredictable, largely because he does not follow the law. In fact, he often ignores controlling law to reach the result he likes.

As a civil litigator, I've been a plaintiff and defendant in his court. He was very knowledgeable about the case from the R16 conference forward, and his office has bent over backwards to be helpful with scheduling dates, etc. His demeanor is great, he'll pull the trigger on SJ motions, and you get great cues from him too ('You can file that motion, but based on the facts as I see them today, it sounds like a tough motion to win'). Very, very good judge.

He is a wildly loose cannon. He appears to be completely unpredictable, except that he exhibits a strong left-wing bent politically. He seems to view himself as a Holmesian maverick-genius. If so, he is driven solely by dreams of grandeur. This guy is the epitome of injustice because he pays no attention to the law or the evidence at all. In other words, he is totally detached from reality.

He is the opposite of a good judge. He routinely ignores controlling law. Everyone said that he was reputed to be very good, smart, etc., etc. I'm not sure where this came from. But it clearly has not showed up once in the several matters I have had him on. If I would have an opinion aside from all the secondhand rah-rah, I would say that the man doesn't have a clue. Either that or, worse, he deliberately disregards the law and evidence to reach a decision that he personally thinks is best.