Hon. David B. Katz See Rating Details
Superior Court Judge
Superior Court
Essex County
Vicinage 5
See Comments

Attorney Average Rating:   9.0 - 1 rating(s)
Non-Attorney Average Rating:   1.0 - 2 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 B. Katz



Comment #: NJ1948
Not fair, take side with prosecutors ALWAYS!

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: NJ1947
A terrific, thoughtful, fair, thorough, intelligent, courteous and able jurist!


Comment #: NJ473
Completely biased and unfair.

He allowed testimony in reference to evidence that was NOT mentioned in the original complaint (TRO) in a Domestic Violence case.

This evidence was then used to form an assumptive opinion of the defendants motives in trying to establish his intent.

He also ignored the way the plaintiff tried to be evasive in answering certain questions and was unclear with her memory of certain emails and events.
The defendant was clear and direct in remembering everything that happened, and he had ample evidence that showed that the plaintiff was using the justice system to play games and to get back at the defendant for breaking up with her.

The list goes on and on of the things he did inappropriately within the case mentioned. Who knows how many other innocent defendants were victimized by a biased court system that typically favors women no matter what they say or claim.

He should be removed of his robe and disbarred.