Hon. Carlos Armondo Samour, Jr. See Rating Details
District Judge
District Court
Arapahoe County
18th Judicial District
See Comments

Attorney Average Rating:   5.4 - 2 rating(s)
Non-Attorney Average Rating:   1.0 - 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. Carlos Armondo Samour, Jr.


Comments


Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: CO103
Rating:9.4
Comments:
He is a breath of fresh air in a county that is often difficult to practice in. He recently applied Batson in a trial finding a race neutral explanation incredible. You never see a Judge willing to do that.

Other

Comment #: CO90
Rating:1.0
Comments:
My wife and I have owned a local roofing company "Agape Construction & Roofing" with a Colorado "TM" Trademark for 19 years, another roofing company entered our market in 2009 after a major hail storm in July 2009, "Agape Roofing & Construction" refused to leave the State of Colorado,entered our market with "Agape Roofing" ads and Yellow page exposure, even when we served "Jesse Crow" owner of "Agape Roofing", Tulsa Oklahoma and informed him and his attorneys of our trademark, we had to file suit in Civil court> Judge Samour made my wife and pay for all our atty fees and all of his too!! This Judge did not read the 33 plus pages of evidence presented to him.

Judge Carlos Armando Samour Jr. cost my wife and I 10's of thousands of dollars in litigation fees and we own a "trademark" that is supposed to protect us and our business from this type of behaviour. He does not protect Colorado based businesses.

Please remove this Judge!!!!

Karl Burgeson
Agape Construction & Roofing
Case # 2009CV2425

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CO86
Rating:1.4
Comments:
Seriously lacking in understanding of and ability to handle civil litigation; has minimal understanding of procedural rules and appicable precedent; no common sense; either relies too heavily on his clerk or rules after minimal study of briefing.