Susanne J. Ross
County Court · San Miguel County · retention evaluations: 2018
2018 retention · County Court · San Miguel County
4 percentile · rank 68 of 71
composite 0100
2 percentile · rank 125 of 128
composite 0100
26 13th percentile among peers · 7th percentile statewide
4130
Composite index 4.46 among peers (2.47 statewide): the mean of the three percentiles below. Rank orders by it.
2.86 of 4 · 4.23 percentile
2.593.90
2.78 of 4 · 3.52 percentile
2.593.90
33.00% 5.63 percentile
0.00%100.00%
Attorneys
- Overall grade
- 2.58
- Say “meets standards”
- 33.00%
Non-attorneys
- Overall grade
- 2.93
- Say “meets standards”
- 58.00%
| Category | Score | Peer median | Peer range (dot is this judge, line is the median) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Case Management | 2.90median 3.50 | 3.50 | |
| Application and Knowledge of Law | 2.65median 3.38 | 3.38 | |
| Communications | 2.75median 3.58 | 3.58 | |
| Diligence | 2.74median 3.42 | 3.42 | |
| Demeanor | 2.75median 3.49 | 3.49 | |
| Fairness | 2.90median 3.60 | 3.60 |
Commission: meets standards Split vote 5–4
The Seventh Judicial District Commission on Judicial Performance, with one Commissioner absent, voted 5 Commissioners to 4 Commissioners that Judge Susanne J. Ross MEETS PERFORMANCE STANDARDS.
Judge Ross was appointed to San Miguel County Court in September 2015. Judge Ross received her undergraduate degree in Education from Wayne State University, master’s in Guidance and Counseling from Eastern Michigan University and law degree from the University of Detroit School of Law. Before appointment she was in private practice and had served as Deputy District Attorney for the 7th Judicial District. Over the term Judge Ross presided over misdemeanor, criminal, civil, small claims and traffic matters.
The Commission observed Judge Ross in court, reviewed opinions she authored, reviewed survey responses from attorneys and non-attorneys who had experience with the Judge, interviewed the Chief Judge, the District Attorney and the Public Defender, reviewed Judge Ross’ written self-evaluation and conducted a personal interview. Both attorneys and non-attorneys were surveyed regarding Judge Ross’ performance. Of the 6 attorneys responding to the survey, 33% responded yes, meets performance standards, 17% responded no, does not meet performance standards and 50% had no opinion to the question meets or does not meet performance standards. Of the 20 non-attorneys responding to the survey, including defendants, 58% responded yes, meets performance standards, 37% responded no, does not meet performance standards and 5% had no opinion to the question meets or does not meet performance standards. Of this non-attorney population, 100% of the jurors responded Judge Ross meets performance standards.
Based on the Commission’s overall evaluation, Judge Ross meets performance standards with a goal of improvement. The Commission, with one Commissioner absent, voted 5-4 that Judge Ross meets performance standards.