Hon. John F. Stavely See Rating Details
County Judge
County Court
Boulder County
20th Judicial District
See Comments

Attorney Average Rating:   2.8 - 1 rating(s)
Non-Attorney Average Rating:   1.0 - 4 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. John F. Stavely


Comments


Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CO311
Rating:2.8
Comments:
He does not see to be very concerned with what the laws are. He just uses his own judgement as if we are not living in a democracy.

Other

Comment #: CO298
Rating:1.0
Comments:
Judge Stavely allowed the lawyer for the plaintiff to speak at length about irrelevant issues but cut off the defendant as she tried to argue her case. It seemed the judge assumed that a person who lived in a mobile home wouldn't say anything worth listening to.

The defendant argued her case on the basis of her lease, which states that the owners will provide water at no extra charge, and on the basis of the Colorado Mobile Home Park Act which, in Section 38-12-207 (2), specifically prohibits use of eviction as a means to collect utility charges not provided for in the lease. But the judge's ruling mentioned nothing about the law. It was as if he simply hadn't listened to the defendant.

What good is a a law if the judge ignores it?

Other

Comment #: CO296
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
He ignored the Colorado statute which
states that eviction cannot be used as a
remedy for non-payment of utility charges in a recent mobile home case. What use are the government and public's painstaking efforts to balance the rights of park owners and home owners if they are made irrelevant by judges who don't feel bound by the law.

Other

Comment #: CO295
Rating:1.0
Comments:
Thousands of people worked to pass a new state law protecting citizens, and this judge disregarded it. I thought judges were supposed to uphold the law. This is the kind of judge that makes people think the justice system in this country is broken.

Litigant

Comment #: CO294
Rating:3.0
Comments:
Judge Stavely completely ignored statutes as if they did not matter as much as his opinion and even outright ignored several very specific statutes. How can his opinion matter more than what the law says?

Other

Comment #: CO293
Rating:1.0
Comments:
ignored applicable law in ruling.