top of page
THE ROBING ROOM
where judges are judged
Hon. Marilyn L. Huff
District judge
S.D.Cal.
9th Circuit
Average Rating:
4
-
23
rating(s)
rating submitted
Please send me alerts on this judge
subscribed
Ratings:
What others have rated
Hon. Marilyn L. Huff
evaluator
ID
date
Temp* Sch* Indu* Comp* Punct* Ev-Cv* Ev-Cr* Flex Bail Crim Settle Trial Sent Coop Average
Other
22245
1/2/14
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Civil Litigation - Private
20834
1/2/13
8
3
8
1
10
3
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
5.5
Other
18266
1/2/12
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Civil Litigation - Private
10225
1/2/10
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
Civil Litigation - Private
8536
1/2/09
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Civil Litigation - Private
7515
1/1/08
4
2
3
2
5
1
0
2
0
0
2
0
0
0
2.8
Civil Litigation - Private
6621
1/2/08
5
5
5
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
Civil Litigation - Govt.
6179
1/2/08
2
5
7
0
9
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
4.8
Civil Litigation - Private
6083
1/2/08
10
0
10
10
9
10
10
10
10
10
7
0
10
0
9.8
Civil Litigation - Private
5242
1/2/07
4
2
2
0
5
1
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
2.8
Criminal Defense Lawyer
5125
1/3/07
9
9
8
8
9
9
9
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
8.7
Criminal Defense Lawyer
4585
1/2/07
2
1
8
2
8
0
3
0
6
8
0
9
4
1
4
Civil Litigation - Private
4187
1/1/07
5
5
4
2
5
5
0
5
0
0
1
0
0
0
4.3
Civil Litigation - Private
4016
1/2/07
1
1
2
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1.2
Civil Litigation - Private
3697
1/2/07
1
1
0
1
2
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1.2
Criminal Defense Lawyer
3241
1/2/06
1
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
5
10
0
0
5
3
1.7
Criminal Defense Lawyer
2574
1/1/06
3
2
2
4
3
3
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2.9
Criminal Defense Lawyer
1251
1/2/06
3
5
5
0
7
0
5
5
0
5
0
5
5
0
5
category average
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Items marked with (*) are averaged into the displayed overall rating
Fam
Par
Qu-Arg
At-Arg
Sch
Cri
Civ
Lab
Imm
How familiar are you with the work of this judge? (1=Not at all familiar,10=Extremely familiar)
Participates in Oral Argument (1=Rarely,10=Always)
Quality of Questions During Oral Argument (1=Poor,10=Extremely insightful)
Attitude during oral argument (1=Consistently inappropriate,10=Consistently respectful)
Scholarship as reflected in Opinions (1=Poor,10=Outstanding)
General Inclination in Criminal Appeals (1=Strongly ProGovernment,10=Strongly ProDefense)
General Inclination in Civil Rights Appeals (1=Strongly Pro-Defendant,10=Strongly ProPlaintiff)
General Inclination in Labor Law Appeals (1=Strongly ProEmployee,10=Strongly ProEmployer)
General Inclination in Immigration Appeals (1=Strongly ProImmigrant,10=Strongly ProGov.)
evaluator
ID
date
Fam Par Qu-Arg At-Arg Sch Cri Civ Lab Imm
Other
22245
1/2/14
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Civil Litigation - Private
20834
1/2/13
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Other
18266
1/2/12
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Civil Litigation - Private
10225
1/2/10
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Civil Litigation - Private
8536
1/2/09
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Civil Litigation - Private
7515
1/1/08
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Civil Litigation - Private
6621
1/2/08
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Civil Litigation - Govt.
6179
1/2/08
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Civil Litigation - Private
6083
1/2/08
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Civil Litigation - Private
5242
1/2/07
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Criminal Defense Lawyer
5125
1/3/07
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Criminal Defense Lawyer
4585
1/2/07
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Civil Litigation - Private
4187
1/1/07
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Civil Litigation - Private
4016
1/2/07
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Civil Litigation - Private
3697
1/2/07
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Criminal Defense Lawyer
3241
1/2/06
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Criminal Defense Lawyer
2574
1/1/06
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Criminal Defense Lawyer
1251
1/2/06
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
category average
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Non-lawyer Rating
(if applicable)
evaluator
ID
date
Rating
Other
31036
1/2/19
1
Other
23148
1/1/15
10
Other
21659
1/1/14
1
Other
12924
1/2/11
1
Other
10126
1/2/10
1
category average
-
Temp*
Sch*
Indu*
Comp*
Punct*
Ev-Cv*
Ev-Cr*
Flex
Bail
Crim
Settle
Trial
Sent
Coop
Temperament (1=Awful 10=Excellent)
Scholarship (1=Awful 10=Excellent)
Industriousness (1=Not at all industrious 10=Highly industrious)
Ability to Handle Complex Litigation (1=Awful 10=Excellent)
Punctuality (1=Chronically Late 10=Always on Time)
Evenhandedness in Civil Litigation (1=Demonstrates Bias 10=Entirely Evenhanded)
Evenhandedness in Criminal Litigation (1=Demonstrates Bias 10=Entirely Evenhanded)
Flexibility in Scheduling (1=Completely Inflexible 10=Very Flexible)
General Inclination Regarding Bail (1=Pro-Defense 10=Pro-Government)
General Inclination in Criminal Cases Pre-Trial (1=Pro-Defense 10=Pro-Government)
Involvement in Civil Settlement Discussions (1=Least Involved 10=Most Involved)
General Inclination in Criminal Cases Trial (1=Pro-Defense 10=Pro-Government)
General Inclination in Criminal Cases Sentencing (1=Pro-Defense 10=Pro-Government)
Typical Discount Off Guidelines for Cooperators (1=10% 10=100%)
comments1
Comments:
What others have said about
Hon. Marilyn L. Huff
Other
comment #:
31036
rating:
0
Very biased judge. As others have already said, her version of the facts are based on the party/side she likes. Completely disregards all the evidence on other side. In my honest opinion she does not deserve to be called Honorable anything. Dishonorable is a better title.
1/2/19, 4:18 PM
Other
comment #:
23148
rating:
0
(Criminal case) I have read some of the comments here, my experience with Judge Huff is totally different. She was fair and applied the law correctly in my case. She even allowed me to stand in anytime my attorney and the prosecutor were called to the bench. My attorney at that time (BGS)is now a Magistrate Judge in San Diego, I made a big mistake with him, he was awesome and a real good attorney. I was bull headed and didn't listen to him like I should have. I would like to credit him with being a person who helped me become a better man. Oh, and I have not had the pleasure of needing another criminal attorney since then.
1/1/15, 5:20 PM
Other
comment #:
22245
rating:
0
She allows for entrapment and illegal acts by the Government on Conspiracy cases, allows 'Cherry Picking' and lies by the AUSA's or U.S. Attorney's, excludes critical evidence for the Defense, doesn't understand complicated laws or 'Illegal' wire tapping defendants thru criminal aliens who are Felons under FBI supervision, allows the lying convicted felony criminal aliens to testify AFTER the AUSA LIED about locating the witness in violation of the 6th Amendment.Allowing altered and tampered documents blacklisting a criminal alien informant who's only motive is to lie to get a Green Card.Most Judges would have dismissed this type of case with the LIES by the Government(AUSA) and charged the AUSA with criminal misconduct.The defendant was NOT allowed to talk tot he Grand Jury. A Government 'informant'(criminal Felon alien) Can NOT solicit or participate in any alleged crimes and have a defendant set up or charged with a Conspiracy!!That is against the law!Otherwise, the Government is complicit in that alleged crime as well.
1/2/14, 1:51 AM
Other
comment #:
21659
rating:
0
In her courtroom, the defendant is guilty even before the trial starts.
1/1/14, 4:22 PM
Civil Litigation - Private
comment #:
20834
rating:
5.5
She seems to favor plaintiffs. She appears to have difficulty with complex legal issues and subtleties in the law. If she forms an opinion, nothing will change her mind - whether the law is on your side or the facts.
1/2/13, 10:46 PM
Other
comment #:
18266
rating:
0
Has reviewed Medicare/HMO Appeals, and favored the US HHS in each review with no consideration of the facts substantiated by the Plaintiffs. In each review found a different reason to uphold the Defendant. Not good for the little guy!
1/2/12, 9:57 AM
Other
comment #:
12924
rating:
0
Criminal Case(Conspiracy with informant who is an illegal alien convicted of LYING to set up other law enforcement officials) should have been dismissed due to a violation of 'Fruits of the poisonous tree doctrine', key witness was an 'illegal alien' CONVICTED FELON for setting up other Customs officials up and admitted lying and was convicted in 1996. Lied again several times to get a green card as his motivation, witness tampering by the AUSA, Federal Agents altered evidence, Judge failed to take any action. AUSA was 'removed' for lying to this Judge, but not publicly. FBI Agent quit his career over this 'criminal case', all kinds of inconsistencies. She even gave special Jury instructions NOT to consider the informant's information(which was used to get a Grand Jury Indictment), but the damage was already done and even complimented the defense attorney on a good job of 'destroying the witness', but the Judge still refused to dismiss this case. The defendant was a former law enforcement official who was a known 'whistle-blower' with over 25 years experience and had a very credible background and a very high success rate on drugs cases he originated to this court. However, with the government's involvement in the Drug War, it cancels out all objectivity and it was purely a Political case against a whistle-blower. Even now, the FBI has FAILED to return a computer and other personal property for over 4 years and the court has done nothing to correct the wrongs done by the corrupt Judicial system and U.S. Attorney's under her jurisdiction. It appears the U.S. Attorney's are allowed to LIE, cheat and steal. Looking to have a 2255 filed, but have no real attorney.
1/2/11, 7:40 PM
Civil Litigation - Private
comment #:
10225
rating:
1
This judge never stopped being a lawyer. Example: she uses her position to advocate against Spanish speakers ripped off by crooked loan companies who seek redress in the courts without regard for statutes or judicial opinions. She goes out of her way to write unnecessary deterimental opinions in circumstances such as when a party merely seeks leave to file an amended pleading. This Judge favors politically connected elite local firms and punishes attorneys and their clients who file types of lawsuits she does not favor. This judge will unnecessarily dismiss an entire lawsuit with prejudice when there exist viable state claims that can be litigated in the State Courts where in similiar cases her collegues on the bench dismiss the federal claims and refuse to extend jurisdiction on the state claims leaving access to the courts open to the litigant. Such action can only be designed to delibrately harm the litigant and counsel. She believes that the Federal Court is reserved for big corporations and feels sorry for herself that she has a heavy case load. The worst judge in San Diego and a contrast to many of the other fine judges on the Federal bench
1/2/10, 10:30 AM
Other
comment #:
10126
rating:
0
During the past 6 years, Judgle Marilyn Huff has handled seven civil lawsuits involving intelluctual property issues focused primarily on trade dress and copyright claims initiated by one giant plaintiff. In each of the seven instances the suits were directly against small businesses. In my opinion, based upon my personal experience and observations, Judge Huff favored the plaintiff with skewed evidentiary rulings, unduly harsh bench verdicts and sometimes highly questionable wording in jury questions. She seems to have difficulty understanding, and openly questioned 'hard' accounting numbers in the evidence regarding the difference between gross sales and gross profits, profit percentages, and industry averages--at least in one of the cases- and openly, and inappropriately, stated her opinion regarding the credibility and her skepticism of the accounting evidence.I would note that the evidence was virtually unchallenged by opposing counsel in limited cross examination. The hard fact is that Judge Huff clearly appeared to lack understanding of the subject matter and the evidence supporting it. Additionally, she seemed inconsistant in her decisions and rulings involving the distinctions between the concept of trade dress and copyright. In my opinion, she exhibits a strong bias in favor of this particular Plaintiff, which appears to be on a questionable and aggressive crusade to use the court in a preemptive strike aimed at restricting or destroying legitimate business enterprises which do not actually compete in Plaintiff's segment of the market, Regrettably, I believe she has a marginal understanding of the issues in these types of cases, demonstrates bias in favor of this particular plaintiff, and is unable to disern any suspect or questionable motives in their pattern of conduct. I feel she has 'bought into' their approach to this particular pattern and type of litigation on these types of claims, and is now unable to evaluate each case on its own merits. It frankly appears to me that her courtoom is a sanctuary to the birds she likes, and hell to the efendants they have chosen.
1/2/10, 6:39 PM
Civil Litigation - Private
comment #:
8536
rating:
0
She is pathetic. The fact that she is on the bench means we need to look closer at how judges are nominated.
1/2/09, 12:38 AM
Civil Litigation - Private
comment #:
7515
rating:
2.8
This judge has no understanding of evidence. Once she picks a side, heaven help you if you are on the wrong side. Everything is admissible if it is from the side that she favors. Dreadful experience.
1/1/08, 1:36 PM