Hon. David W. Densford See Rating Details
Associate Circuit Judge
Circuit Court
St. Mary's County
7th Circuit
See Comments

Attorney Average Rating:   6.3 - 5 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      

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. David W. Densford



Comment #: MD5075
Hope to see this Judge right some of his wrong now that Laura Caspar is gone and Kelsey Patterson is running the show. It has been a pissing match thus far lets hope he starts standing up for the children and families raising the children instead of the low life scumbuags he tends to side with.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: MD3691
This man does not deserve the title or respect as a Judge.


Comment #: MD3690
Its a sad day when the judge is on the same team as the deadbeats..he is the ring leader in his own circus style courtroom. Down right disgrace should not be in a courtroom that has to do with the best interest of the children he is unfair and uses no common sense. Somebody above him needs to check him because he isn't solution he is the problem.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: MD3551
Great judge! Prepared! Asks intelligent, challenging questions! Polite, respectful and courteous!
(I say the foregoing having prevailed and lost before him.)


Comment #: MD3475
I have been waiting over a month to have a release on a grand that is being held in lingo at the courthouse for a child support payment on a contempt hearing. The absent parent failed to appear. The judge ordered the bond of a grand. The absent parent paid but now I have to wait for another hearing for the money to be released.This judge requires the case to be set back in for court before releasing the money and takes several more months because this parent lives out of county. btw the absent parent is 43 grand in arrears.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: MD3063
Extremely competent, knowledgeable, fair, and thoughtful. Polite and friendly, he is patient with all. His decisions are legally sound and well-grounded in Maryland law. His experience as a private attorney shows in his reasonable decisions. A breath of fresh air in St. Mary's County.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: MD2885
Issued a custody order detrimental a pre-existing custody case which had been filed months before issuance of his order and months prior to the motion filed in his court by the plaintiff seeking relief in his court. His action has caused severe mental, physical and financial distress to the plaintiffs in the pre-existing custody action.


Comment #: MD2884
Issued custody order circumventing an existing custody case filed months prior to his order! All judicial offices should be required to verify that no active actions are pending prior to issuance of an order regardless of whether or not the applicant seeking relief discloses knowledge of an impending case.