Hon. Audrey A. Creighton See Rating Details
Associate District Judge
Circuit Court
Montgomery County
6th Circuit
See Comments

Attorney Average Rating:   4.4 - 12 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




What others have said about Hon. Audrey A. Creighton


Comments


Other

Comment #: MD3761
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
It is amazing that these ridiculous posts continue. What would you losers do without Judge Creighton? You are completely obsessed, confused and down right stupid. Get a life!

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: MD3760
Rating:1.0
Comments:
Some judges choose justice. Some judges choose money. With Judge Creighton it is no contest. She will always choose the later when self-gratification and/or personal enrichment is an option. With this judge on the bench it is one miscarriage of justice after another.

Prosecutor

Comment #: MD3759
Rating:1.0
Comments:
For those who think that a judge need not adhere to judicial ethics, should not be held accountable for her actions and be given carte blanche to do whatever she wants to do, please pay attention.
From www.MyRealityLaw.org/blog --

The American Bar Association’s Model Rules of Professional Conduct prohibit a lawyer from having “sexual relations with a client unless a consensual sexual relationship existed between them when the client-lawyer relationship commenced”. Most states have adopted this rule or something analogous. Presumably, Creighton and Senning did not have a consensual relationship prior to his becoming her client. Senning was 19 at the time; the future judge was 48.

The first question to be addressed from this matter is: what the hell was Maryland Governor Martin O’Malley thinking when he appointed Creighton to the bench? This, in turn, involves the subsidiary question: What kind of vetting was done before Creighton was given the awesome responsibility to make decisions effecting the lives of litigants who come before her? It is difficult to believe that the Creighton/Senning affair was a total secret. Something like that is bound to get out and, once it’s out, it is way out. Everybody knows about it and soon. Was Creighton’s unprofessional conduct overlooked or ignored by those trusted with the responsibility of assuring the integrity of judicial appointments? Or, was the process so inadequate that this lapse of professional judgment was missed? Either way, it is an embarrassment to the judiciary.

If there is one quality folks want from their judges, it is judgment. Note the similar root word. This is not a linguistic accident. Commencing an intimate relationship with a burglar/thief three decades one’s junior does not speak well of one’s judgment. It is especially troubling for a judge.

Let us examine the potential ramifications of a judge having an intimate relationship with a criminal. First, there is the possibility of blackmail. The judge may, understandably, want to keep the affair quiet. So, she may be asked to do judicial favors as a quid pro quo. Then, there is the issue of conflict of interest. If the judge becomes aware of a secret grand jury investigation involving her lover or one of his associates, can the judge be trusted not to spill the beans and compromise the investigation? Also, if the criminal has access to a judge, the criminal has access to any court records the judge has in her possession. Some of those records are sealed with good reason. Lest someone thinks love conquers all, a judge/criminal romance is a very bad idea.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: MD3709
Rating:1.0
Comments:
A dishonest and shameless hypocrite who preaches rule of law, but does not practice rule of law. Not in her rulings, nor in her so-called private life.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: MD3660
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
Not even a pretext of principled decision making. In a case which opposition insurance company lawyer refused to provide discovery or answer interrogatories, a motion to compel and/or for sanctions (which inexplicably had not been ruled upon for nearly a year) and a renewed motion in the interim, were filed. On the day of the trial Judge Creighton refused to provide any remedy whatsoever to the outstanding motions, or even to reschedule the trial date until after compliance with discovery, because "the matter's already set-in for trial." Her verdict (surprise, surprise) went on to reward the defendant's insurance company (their lawyer even joked during recess that the "fix was in") despite overwhelming photographic evidence and testimony which should have been a slam-dunk for the plaintiff.
As author Brian Khan recently pointed out, when not only politicians but judges are allowed to receive gifts in unlimited amounts, how can a litigant really expect any justice when he goes up against deep-pocketed corporations and insurance companies?
[Redacted by Ed.]

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: MD3606
Rating:1.0
Comments:
As those who practice in MoCo's Circuit Court by now well know, as well as those who risk arguing their case before her, Audrey Creighton not only has a history of bad decisions, but absurd and shameless decisions, both on and off the bench.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: MD3550
Rating:1.0
Comments:
As previously noted on this site, The Washington Post on 7/15/14 reported that Audrey Creighton is now under investigation by the Commission on Judicial Disabilities. What they did not report is that this is not the first time that she has been before the CJD on ethics charges. Not only did the Commission fail to do its job the last time around, the nominating committee failed miserably in its vetting process, and/or Creighton lied to them about her past.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: MD3536
Rating:1.0
Comments:
Not the brightest bulb on the bench. Far from it! In District Court, whenever a decision was required, she would announce a recess, as if to make a call from chambers to whoever was advising her. When returning to the bench, more often than not, still she couldn't get it right. How did she ever get to be a judge?

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: MD3434
Rating:9.3
Comments:
I had a trial with Judge Creighton and was very impressed with the way she handled the matter. She made appropriate inferences, listened to the witnesses, and was cognizant of the law. She took the matter under advisement for approximately 30 minutes, during which time she thoroughly reviewed the evidence and made an intelligent ruling.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: MD3412
Rating:1.0
Comments:
Judge Creighton lacks even the most basic understanding of trial mechanics, she seems to lack an appreciation for the law, and she is overwhelmingly unimpressive as a jurist. She didn't belong on the District Court bench and certainly is unqualified to sit in the Circuit Court.

Other

Comment #: MD3328
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
The comments posted cannot be deleted by any Judge. Perhaps the reason the website is removing the comments is because the comments left are vulgar. The purpose of this website is for the people, law officials or lawyers to comment on a case that was held in front of a specific judge. Therefore, people can be aware how a judge proceeds in rulings or etc. This is not a forum to discuss the public life of any judge.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: MD3250
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
Judge Creighton lacks even the most basic understanding of trial mechanics, she seems to lack an appreciation for the law, and she is overwhelmingly unimpressive as a jurist. She didn't belong on the District Court bench and certainly is unqualified to sit in the Circuit Court.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: MD2962
Rating:9.7
Comments:
Smart woman, good lawyer and good judge.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: MD2654
Rating:9.0
Comments:
Judge Creighton is a thoughtful, dignified and respectable member of the Circuit Court bench.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: MD2321
Rating:9.3
Comments:
Judge Creighton will likely exceed the expectations generated by her high levels of legal acumen and judicial management.

Perhaps the governor should be more consistent in his appointments.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: MD2315
Rating:8.4
Comments:
She is kind, very smart and caring. She is fair and understanding. Great judge. I heard she can sing too!