Hon. Maxine M. Chesney See Rating Details
District Judge See Comments
N.D.Cal.  
Average Rating:2.9 - 6 rating(s)
Please send me alerts on this judge
E-mail Address:




Add your own rating

E-Mail Address (will not be displayed)
Confirm E-mail Address
Zip
Occupation
Add a comment only

Ratings

*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=Chronic`y 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=Most Lenient,10=Most Harsh)
Typical Discount Off Guidelines for Cooperators:    (1=10%,10=100%)
  Items marked with (*) are averaged into the displayed overall rating
Comments


Please type what you see below:

  

What others have said about Hon. Maxine M. Chesney


Comments


Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: 35307
Rating:1.8
Comments:
My client was a third-party involved in a very large action as the result of a discovery dispute. Plaintiffs' class attorney was prosecuting an action based on a prior government prosecution, and plainly had no independent evidence supporting the filing of suit. Naturally, class plaintiffs' issued grossly overbroad discovery, imposing massive costs on the third parties dragged into plaintiffs' dragnet. The district judge (or her law clerks) failed to follow any of the case law, all of which was deferential to third-parties trapped in someone else's case. There was no evident understanding of the industry in which the case arose, the inadequacies of plaintiffs' case, or how gross an imposition compliance was - in a context where plaintiffs' counsel had plainly done no homework, except to theorize off of the government's earlier prosecution (with different burdens of proof and focus). How many cases like these result in massive waste to third parties all because a judge can't grasp what is going on.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: 25016
Rating:3.2
Comments:
she thinks she's smarter than lawyers and sets out to prove it by being punitive. Doubt her intellectual honesty. Bias a big issue.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: 8719
Rating:1.6
Comments:
Cannot make up her mind and stick to it. Seems to have trouble understanding written arguments and can't make decisions (always a great trait for a judge). Far too swayed -- even intimidated -- by glib arguments from polished big firm lawyers.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: 7874
Rating:8.0
Comments:
Courteous to counsel. She gives too much leeway in delays but is fair.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: 5469
Rating:1.7
Comments:
Not an impressive judge. Has great difficulty with complex issues and does not seem to spend the time needed to review the cases and grasp what is before her. Good sense of humor, but very snappy and impatient with attorneys, very mercurial and sometimes petulant. Even temperament in front of a jury, but otherwise can be downright unpleasant. Unpredictable, changes her mind, mostly because does not seem to pay as much attention as she should to briefs when they are presented before her. Can also be very biased, favors the large law firms and the establishment, and can be unsympathetic to the point of unfair with individuals.