Hon. Heidi M. Pasichow See Rating Details
Judge
Superior

See Comments

Attorney Average Rating:   4.9 - 2 rating(s)
Non-Attorney Average Rating:   - 0 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


Please type what you see below:

    

What others have said about Hon. Heidi M. Pasichow


Comments


Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: DC580
Rating:1.0
Comments:
She is very incompetent. Believes everything the government says, even when they are lying. They used unreported opinions in a case, when there was case law speaking the exact opposite. All she did was cause the parties unnecessary legal expenses appealing her sloppy ruling. She engages in ex parte conversations with other colleagues, who influence her sloppy rulings. Recently, she was engaged in a conspiracy to throw a case by writing about another individual in her decision. I recommend researching every case she cites for validity. She will believe anything. Not very smart. She has zero scholarship and research skills.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: DC358
Rating:8.8
Comments:
She is a great addition to the bench. She was a fantastic Assistant U.S. Attorney, and now she is continuing her public service with great style and love of the law.