Hon. David L. Zwink See Rating Details
Judge
District Court
Palmer County
Third Judicial District
See Comments

Attorney Average Rating:   - 0 rating(s)
Non-Attorney Average Rating:   4.0 - 1 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

Only items marked with (*) are averaged into the displayed overall rating.


General Rating Criteria

* 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)
* General Ability to Handle Pre-Trial Matters (1=Not all Able, 10=Extremely Able)
* General Ability as a Trial Judge (1=Not all Able, 10=Extremely Able)
Flexibility In Scheduling (1=Completely Inflexible,10=Very Flexible)


Criminal Rating Criteria (if applicable)

* Evenhandedness in Criminal Litigation (1=Demonstrates Bias,10=Entirely Evenhanded)
General Inclination Regarding Bail (1=Pro-Defense,10=Pro-Government)
Involvement in Plea Discussions (1=Not at all Involved, 10=Very Involved)
General Inclination in Criminal Cases Pretrial Stage (1=Pro-prosecution,10=Pro-defense)
General Inclination in Criminal Cases Trial Stage (1=Pro-prosecution,10=Pro-defense)
General Inclination in Criminal Cases Sentencing Stage (1=Pro-prosecution,10=Pro-defense)


Civil Rating Criteria (if applicable)

* Evenhandedness in Civil Litigation (1=Not at all Evenhanded,10=Entirely Evenhanded)
Involvement in Settlement Discussions (1=Not at all Involved,10=Very Involved)
General Inclination (1=Pro-defendant, 10=Pro-plaintiff)
Comments




What others have said about Hon. David L. Zwink


Comments


Litigant

Comment #: AK4
Rating:4.0
Comments:
Having been a landlord in Alaska since 1993, I have brought numerous FED cases before both the Anchorage and Palmer courts.

In all cases, with the exception of Judge Zwink, the defendants were given 48 hours to vacate. I generally offered to extend this for most tenants, as it extends good will and the reality is that the writ of assistance takes time should the state troopers be required. In over 200 some-odd cases, I've only had the troopers come out a handful of times.

I understand that some landlords treat their tenants poorly. We do not. Our tenants are our customers and many reside with us for long periods of time. Currently we have over fifty units between Palmer and Anchorage. I feel that Judge Zwink is not evenhanded with respect to a landlord's rights.

In two instances, he has given tenants exceptionally generous amounts of time to vacate and left us feeling like we were "trying to get away" with something when we requested the standard 48 hours. Neither tenant left the units in any kind of rentable condition (as the judge believed they would), and one went so far as to flood his unit. Both tenants were given weeks to vacate.

There are several consequences:

1) Irresponsible tenants learn that they can live rent-free for 6-8 weeks (from the time the seven-day notice is given to the time they have to be out, including the delay to have the troopers come and execute a writ of assistance).

2) Good tenants who are in sincere need of an affordable apartment are delayed in getting one.

3) Responsible landlords who pay their taxes, utilities, sales taxes, salaries, maintenance, and interest and follow the rules are penalized and their families are denied the legitimate earnings from their economic activity.

4) Neighbors of the irresponsible tenants have to live with them far longer then is fair, especially when they are paying their contractual obligations.

The willful non-payment of rent to me should be a felony, no different from walking into a store with the intention of stealing or hiring a service with no intention of paying. I understand that a person's home is different and care does need to be exercised in ensuring that tenants are not taken advantage of. By the time we get to court we have tried diligently to help and work with the tenant. The tenants that we take that far have demonstrated no desire to pay and generally have articulated the same. They intend to run the clock for free for as long as they can (see consequence number 1).

I would only respectfully ask this judge to consider all of the law-abiding individuals his decisions affect when he gives an evicted tenant more than 48 or 72 hours to vacate.