Hon. Nilda Morales Horowitz See Rating Details

Supreme Court
Westchester County
See Comments

Attorney Average Rating:   1.5 - 1 rating(s)
Non-Attorney Average Rating:   1.0 - 3 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. Nilda Morales Horowitz


Comments


Court Staff

Comment #: NY5589
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
related to local White Plains lawyer Larry Horowitz working in favoring cases together.All the court officers know it there.

Other

Comment #: NY5299
Rating:1.0
Comments:
First she pumped me for information on the case which was newly given to her. When I repeatedly said I was uncomfortable without an attorney she said, "What do you expect me to do, read this whole file?" The next court appearance she refused to let me speak. Again I just wanted an attorney. This judge is actually contemplating allowing a mother with clear mental issues to submit a psych report of her own choosing, rather than going to WJCS as per court order. It will be disaster if the children in this case are given back to a proven neglectful drug addict mother by Judge Morales Horowitz.

Litigant

Comment #: NY5000
Rating:1.0
Comments:
Judge Morales-Horowitz (and I will stick to the facts here) granted the mother's demand for a forensic custody evaluation. Judge Morales-Horowitz signed the order, and I had no issue with the mother choosing the evaluator. The origin of the evaluation was, that the mother explained to me one night that her father (the grandfather) groped her while drunk as they were watching television. When I expressed concerns for our daughter, I was attacked in court as having psychological problems on my part by both the mother and her attorney. The mother's family delayed the evaluation, and a status report was sent to the court by the evaluator, indicating that the mother's family was non-responsive to requests to have the grandparents come in, who resided with the child. The mother stated to the evaluator that she had in fact considered that her father (the grandfather) molested her, and had discussed it with a counselor and "may have mentioned" it to me. The grandfather delayed the evaluation (and hence the status report) by not responding to repeated requests to come in for an interview. (The mother also has a history of drug addiction and "breakthrough repulse" as per the report, and had been admitted to a mental hospital in the past.) When the forensic report was finally submitted to the court, 40-plus pages clearly indicated these issues, including a familial bias against me, and "gatekeeping" by the mother's family. For the record, the evaluator interviewed the grandfather for one hour, and rightfully did not implicate the grandfather, but the mother's admissions confirmed my concerns, and what was relayed to me as to why the mother had the issues that she had, and used drugs to self-medicate. Judge Morales-Horowitz, a censured judge, concocted a story that both parties agreed to "dismiss" the report, and when I raised valid concerns she ridiculed me and denied me due process. She also ordered that there would be no first right refusal, telling me that I could worry about my daughter on my time, and that if the mother had to work on her access day for a 12-hour shift, I was not allowed to worry about my daughter's welfare. She told me to stop, as I was not going to have the child, and that she would remain with the grandfather. This was stated on the record (I have every transcript and she will not allow an order to show cause on the record to challenge her own words). I'm fighting for my daughter's welfare, and Judge Morales-Horowitz tried to throw out a report that clearly places a 4-year-old child at risk. Disregarding such a clear and concise forensic report (that the mother herself demanded) should be a crime, and this little girl has been disregarded by the judge, despite the evaluator's accredited work in the field, with recognition for the evaluator's work. I have no idea if this is customary. I have read this judge's censures, though, and I have full transcripts that accompany my judicial complaint. It's unbelievable, and these proceedings should be recorded on video so that such outrageous behavior could be reviewed, and so that children are not left calling their fathers at the age of 4, begging that Daddy please come and pick her up.

Civil Litigation - Govt.

Comment #: NY1132
Rating:1.5
Comments:
Clearly inept regarding family court legal issues and a propensity to make dangerous decisions.