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

Attorney Average Rating:   1.0 - 1 rating(s)
Non-Attorney Average Rating:   1.0 - 1 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. David W. Densford


Comments


Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: MD2885
Rating:1.0
Comments:
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.

Other

Comment #: MD2884
Rating:1.0
Comments:
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.