Hon. Richard E. Jordan See Rating Details
Associate Circuit Judge
Circuit Court
Montgomery County
6th Circuit
See Comments

Attorney Average Rating:   9.4 - 4 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      

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)

What others have said about Hon. Richard E. Jordan


Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: MD2577
No, it’s not ODD!!The comments are deleted by “Judge Creighton” herself. She is too weak, pathetic, to handle what the public has to say about her! She stupid as ever. Recall a warrant in her own handwriting for her criminal sex thing. Her entire career down the drain all for sex. Claim, she is Spanish to get votes. But check “WHITE” on her peace order. Dud!! It’s a little late for that Judge Creighton it’s all over the internet. She is the only one that thinks she was a good choice for a Judge. She is the only one that thinks she can sing. Judge Creighton you are the worst choice of a Judge. You only got the slot because they needed a Spanish person. It might have been posted by her little ugly boyfriend why she never delete it. Sleeping with a low life criminal thirty years younger than her. Move him in her house even after she elevated to Circuit Court. Where very serious decision are made. For years it’s been said in the court house she like little boys. No, one in their right mind can be that lonely. I, have a feeling her female body parts are not working that’s why she can’t get a real man. She also told us she was married. She has never been married or have any kids. I, never liked her. I had a case before her one time. The, entire time she was focus on how she looked. Always showed up at legal functions half naked or tight red dress with bright red hoe lipstick. Her lipstick was always uneven. That’s a sign she is unstable. I, say Judge Creighton need more than a mental health evaluation. She is as crazy as the criminals she represented. That's as sick as a child molester. A grown women who sit on the circuit Court Bench and Judge us. She, definitely, took advantage of Rickey Senning, because he needed a place to stay. I am not sure how she face herself in the morning. A very bad choice for a role model to our women. Actions speak louder than words. Creighton’s actions have proven she is a disgrace to the legal profession, to the judiciary, to the criminal justice system as a whole and to American University. Undeniably, she leaves a black mark on the reputation of all these entities. Her actions have produced serious consequences and cast tremendous doubt on her ability to serve. She needs to go. No the bottom two post are from Judge Creighton herself. It’s the only way she can get a positive review. The diaper snatcher herself. Why you think she never delete them. So full of herself. And makes the stupidest decision. A liar, and foolish ass. Let's see how full she be in November. Bye - bye Audrey. You are a waste of tax payer’s money. Shame on you. No judge has ever been as dirty and scandalous as you. At least get a real man.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: MD2021
In response to the posting of 8/15, I am the attorney on the other side of that case. First, Judge Jordan is one of the best trial judges we have on the bench. Secondly, the representations made by the poster are simply false. He did not appear in front of Judge Jordan. He had a file presented to this judge for a ruling on an ex parte and wildly frivolous motion to shorten time. Having practiced in this jurisdiction before all of the judges for more than three decades, I can safely say there is not a single judge who would have granted the relief sought by this lawyer. Thirdly, the poster did not have a client. He is a pro se defendant on a civil claim. Lastly, on ex parte matters presented to a duty judge, there is rarely if ever any explanation given by the judge to the party inasmuch as the matter is not presented in open court, on the record. Rather, the written motion is presented and ruled on in chambers. That is to say, there simply is no contact in motions of the type filed between the attorney and the judge. This poster chose to file an absurd motion seeking absurd relief. That he is unhappy with the result and would prevaricate about the details reflects on the poster, not on this able and well-respected jurist. Any party and his or her counsel would be ably served appearing anytime in front of Judge Jordan. He was an impeccable trial attorney who brought that same skill set to the bench with him. The only other posting on this site accurately describes Judge Jordan's abilities. Alas, the same simply cannot be said of the defendant/lawyer who posted the unfounded comments.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: MD1417
Appeared before Judge Jordan for the first time last week on motions. He was thoughtful, prepared, and willing to listen to counsel but in control of his courtroom.