Hon. Cynthia M. Rufe (E.D.Pa.)
Bigoted crooked unjust
Other - (5/20/2018 12:26:03 PM)
Hon. William J. Martinez (D.Colo.)
I'm a criminal defense lawyer and I'm moved to respond to the last comment. I categorically disagree with the writer's characterization of Judge Martinez as sarcastic and highly critical of counsel. While he expects lawyers to be prepared and know the law and rules of procedure, I've been before him on many occasions and he has been uniformly courteous, respectful and even kind to my clients every time. He has, to my knowledge and research, varied downward in most if not all of the sentences he has imposed post-verdict. So for the previous commentator to opine that the Judge exacts a "heavy" trial penalty is delusional. I know from civil law colleagues that he rarely grants full summary judgment, and frequently goes to trial on cases most of his colleagues would have dismissed. From what I can see he is not afraid to go to trial and reveres the parties' constitutional right to do so. And he's smart, works hard, and runs a very efficient chambers and courtroom. If only we had more judges like Judge Martinez on this court.
Criminal Defense Lawyer - (5/19/2018 4:21:55 PM)
Hon. Charles R. Norgle (N.D.Ill.)
A man this bereft in intellect and basic human decency has no business being a federal judge in the United States of America.
Civil Litigation - Private - (5/19/2018 2:57:44 PM)
Hon. Rosemary S. Pooler (C.C.A)
Judge Pooler is a credit to the Second Circuit, is troubled by injustice be it civil or criminal, but is Bound by Supreme Court precedent and the colleagues she must confer and find common ground in the back room. It's how the system works, but she'll dissent if the issue is important, and is not a pushover.
Criminal Defense Lawyer - (5/19/2018 11:19:21 AM)
Hon. Dennis Jacobs (C.C.A)
Judge Jacobs is an example of excellent temperament. He reasonably expects the parties to know the law and the record. He struggles with criminal cases because he knows (a) the quality of representation is low in state courts; and (b) the U.S. government should not be given a free hand simply because they are expected to be the smartest in the room. Takes his role in civil rights cases very seriously. They are hard to prove, but when there is a question of act, he will affirm or reverse as the evidence presents itself. Struggles with tough cases, and must compromise with two other judges, remember.
Civil Litigation - Private - (5/19/2018 11:15:48 AM)
Hon. LaShann Moutique DeArcy Hall (E.D.N.Y.)
Beyond unfair. Sad part is I had faith in her. She shouldn’t be in the position she is. I pray she loses her power because she’s using it for the wrong reason.
Other - (5/18/2018 12:31:30 PM)
Hon. Virginia A. Phillips (C.D.Cal.)
I would never appear before this Judge again.
Civil Litigation - Private - (5/17/2018 7:58:14 PM)
Hon. Paul Adam Engelmayer (S.D.N.Y.)
Great Judge. Very considerate of the parties, jurors, and lawyers. He is very serious about even the smallest of cases. It was a pleasure to have a trial with this Judge.
Civil Litigation - Private - (5/17/2018 2:11:29 PM)
Hon. Sarah A. L. Merriam (D.Conn.)
Mediated a case with her. Big mistake. She had no interest in trying to persuade the parties. She failed to convey an important term to the other side. She was impatient and defensive with counsel and the process. At one point she lost her temper and insulted both counsel. Not a competent mediator.
Civil Litigation - Private - (5/17/2018 11:22:13 AM)
Hon. Robert J. Bryan (W.D.Wash.)
The judge seemed fair at the outset but turned on a dime when a new attorney came aboard for the defendant union that had served clerkships in both the district and circuit with jurisdiction in my case. From that point forward both attorneys fabricated evidence served subpoenas on me for videotaped depositions twice with less than five days notice refused to sign their discovery requests. . . . The list goes on. The judge wouldn't consider anything I wrote. He ruled in favor of the defendants each and every time even with the employer defendants attorney failing to sign the discovery request ( which from what I read in frcp 26 g I had no duty to respond to and the request must be stricken from the record and the attorney sanctioned) sanctioned me for objecting. Because of the defendants I've been blacked by every employer lost my daughter and am indigent soon I will lose my house because I can't pay the taxes. A house I have paid off mind you. The judge dismissed my claims with prejudice because I missed a deposition that no one noticed. On top of the dismissal the judge granted sanctions stating that I was the noticing party and since I didn't attend I owed the other parties attorneys fees for attending the deposition. Since I'm in pro per the judge never considered my pleadings and to top it off the ninth circuit 3 judge panel never gave my brief a glance or what the judge did. Additionally the attorney from the unions connection in the ninth held on to my supplemental brief until the panel Made its decision then again until an hour after the mandate issued. In both cases the docket shows that the clerk had my filings before hand the first for a week and the second the docket shows only a day but I had it certified when I mailed it which the return service shows it was the week before. What can I do now? The Supreme Court? I dont' have the money and can't get a loan on my house because I don't have a job. Supreme Court? I can't afford a burrito Supreme.
Litigant - (5/15/2018 8:21:38 PM)