Comment #: DC637
Rating:1.0
Comments:
Heard very little evidence before conviction resulting in the minimum because anything above that would be flagged as supposed to a simple assault for a conversation being had by two people where the "Victim" admitted she was in no danger and able to walk away freely.

Comment #: DC615
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
The bottom 10 judges remain the same over years in DC Superior Court. Occasionally it changes, but this judge has constantly been on the list at the bottom.He has been granted open access to all medical records whether related to the injury or not. The injury involves multiple attempts to draw blood and nerve damage. So basically if I was treated for removal of my appendix, he has allowed opposing counsel access to those records even though they have nothing to do with the drawing of a blood injury. How he reached his decision lacked the application of logic and common sense in a simple needle prick case. Showed biased in favor of Hospital/Defendant. Completely ignored HIPPA.

Comment #: DC613
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
So many bad comments about him. I have a civil case before him that he and opposing counsel has tried to frame as medical malpractice, but amounts more so to negligent hiring, training, and supervision of hospital staff. Lawyers say when something is too complicated for him he looks for the easiest way out. He didn't even rule on motions to quash and protective order before a deadline. So now medical records are wide open. Yeah, this is scary with him.

Comment #: DC565
Rating:1.0
Comments:
This judge majorly screwed up an estate case and caused the mother of a deceased child to lose hundreds of thousands of dollars in personal representative commissions wrongly awarded carte blanche to a deceptive sister. This judge's lack of scholarship was obvious. He weighed no factors in assessing the award. He apparently knew the lawyer and assumed her proposed order was good enough and missed looking at the credible objections raised by opposing counsel in the file. Even though the case was reversed on appeal, the deceptive sister took all the money and failed to return any of it to the estate. He does not belong on the bench. What a disservice.

Comment #: DC508
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
Lopez should not be a judge. He is an embarrassment to the court. Perhaps he may have been better in years past, but he is overdue to retire or be removed. Lopez proved himself to be confused, confusing and pompous, ignorant and negligent, biased and prejudiced, petty and vindictive, in the two recent cases in which I was involved - one criminal, as the victim of several violent crimes, and one related civil action. Lopez is not competent; he got basic facts, events, and names wrong back and forth throughout the criminal proceedings, and is also unbelievably ignorant of some basic aspects of the law. We had to worry that simple open-and-shut criminal convictions might be appealed simply because of errors due to Lopez's incompetence, laziness, or negligence. Lopez had to find all-guilty on all criminal charges against the defendant, but only because there were two dozen witnesses, all sorts of video of the crimes from security cameras from multiple locations on many different dates, texted threats and admissions by the defendant, etc. Despite all this, with no evidence or witnesses for the defense, Lopez concluded, 'well this is a classic he said, she said'. What?! Unbelievable. Lopez then proceeded to let the person off on probation. When the crimes targeting the victim continued and then escalated immediately after sentencing, Lopez was made aware of all this, and chose to do absolutely nothing, except to help further drag the victim through the mud. Including that Lopez was so sloppy, negligent, and lazy in writing up his original criminal sentencing orders that they ended up being unenforceable. Lopez literally contradicted himself in places, so then when he had to enforce his own orders (even though the terms of the sentences were made perfectly clear in the trial transcripts), Lopez sided with the convicted criminal and did nothing. Lopez also allowed the convicted criminal and his attorney to openly perjure (like one day saying one thing, but the opposite the next day) and commit violations of law and bar ethics (like knowingly lying and presenting doctored and false evidence, openly coaching the defendant to change his testimony, etc). I'd probably advise any victim of violent crime to firmly insist on another judge if they get Lopez or, if this is not possible, to simply drop the charges or let the violent offender plea. Trust me, I know all too well how sad it is that I have to say that. I agree with the other poster: Lopez should not be a judge.

Comment #: DC419
Rating:1.3
Comments:
nice guy should not be a judge

Comment #: DC214
Rating:9.0
Comments:
Judge Lopez is a fair and even-handed jurist that gives all litigants the benefit of the doubt, and doesn't allow counsel to get away with over-spinning issues in a given case. Some would criticize Judge Lopez for being too accommodating, but these critics obviously don't take into account that different judges employ different methods to attain the goal of consistently resolving cases efficiently but without sacrificing legally sound judgments and rulings. Efficiently managing one's courtroom - which Judge Lopez does quite well nearly always notwithstanding the fair share of imbeciles that come before him - cannot be overstated. If it weren't for courtroom efficiency, single-issue and non-complex matters would take years to adjudicate or resolve, such as is currently the case in California's state courts, which nearly all currently run at snail's pace.

Comment #: DC194
Rating:3.0
Comments:
We had an unusually long and complicated case, made so by the plaintiff who largely perjured herself in the complaint and on the stand. the complexity of the issues alleged and the facts that were presented as proof that the allegations were unfounded seemed to confuse the Judge enough for him to issue a decision that was internally contradictory and convoluted with little regard for the proven facts in the case.

He was fair and objective in running the hearing, but seems to have missed the point. A complaint lacking merit should be dismissed.

Comment #: DC137
Rating:1.0
Comments:
Judge Lopez made a very, very poor ruling on an estate matter that was subsequently reversed on appeal after costing my client over $50,000 in lost money that could not be recovered from the co-personal representative. The judicial disability commission should have severely reprimanded him for mistakenly signing an Order that awarded an outrageous sum of money to a co-personal representative without following the legal standards for awarding commissions to personal representatives. My client won on appeal but never recovered over $50,000 in monies that the co-personal representatives received in error. He did not read the file and did not consider an opposition that was in the file at the time of his ruling. My client's loss was so great after losing her daughter. It was unthinkable how this judge caused so much damage to her and the estate.

Comment #: DC134
Rating:4.0
Comments:
Officious and unbright

Comment #: DC130
Rating:3.8
Comments:
Unable to make difficult decisions, i.e., "to judge," and therefore is very poor. Cannot deal with misbehaving counsel and lets counsel get away with poor conduct at the expense of their clients and the system.