Hon. Lisa K. Hammond See Rating Details
Special Judge
Court
Oklahoma County
See Comments

Attorney Average Rating:   5.0 - 4 rating(s)
Non-Attorney Average Rating:   1.0 - 5 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. Lisa K. Hammond


Comments


Other

Comment #: OK1297
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
This judge is extremely biased. She ignores the rules of evidence. if she decides that she does not like you, she will make slanderous remarks about you in the courtroom. She is unethical and decides the case before all of the evidence is heard. She does NOT consider the best interest of the children, only her biased agenda.She has put my child Iin continued Iimmediate danger. This judge needs to be off the bench! !!!!!

Other

Comment #: OK1256
Rating:1.0
Comments:
Judge Lisa Hammond is a judicial hot mess. Her decisions reek of "Jim Crow" law tactics. Nowhere on earth does asking a father if he is using drugs, and then obtaining a denial, constitute a determination of the best interests of the child regarding custody -- and this is coming from someone who used to be a drug prosecutor and serves on the board of various nonprofits whose purpose is to protect children. She has got to know what time it is when one parent does the right thing and informs the judge of another parent's use of illegal drugs, and then she fails to order the drug test. She cannot be that green. She is essentially condemning that child to a life of neglect and danger, while the using parent increases his drug use and all that that entails. Of course, Judge Hammond won't be around to hear the juvenile case when the child winds up in that court -- or worse, in criminal court. I'm sure she won't show up for the funeral when the child is killed as a result of neglect or an auto accident where the drug user was under the influence. We don't know anyone and we have no political or economic ties to persons in power, but we expect justice when we come to court, and you might get away with trampling on my rights but I'll be damned if I'll just stand by and let judges put my children in jeopardy. Judge Hammond must go, and I am open to any and all suggestions about how to expedite her removal. Please email me with all of your ideas.

Litigant

Comment #: OK1240
Rating:1.0
Comments:
Every comment that I have read is exactly correct about this judge. It's sad, the children's lives that she has put in harm's way because she is biased against one parent or attorney. She doesn't hear all of the evidence before making a decision, and her rulings are unjust and based on her personal opinion, and not based on facts or the law. We go to court to get justice. There isn't any justice in this judge's courtroom. She will bend or overlook the law to fit her opinion. Until someone is ready to stand up and fight for what's right, she will continue the behavior that she has gotten away with for way too long. I haven't found an attorney yet that wants to question her behavior, due to the consequences that they fear she will impose upon them, or future cases that they might have before her. When she is removed from the bench, because of her actions, justice will finally be served in her courtroom.

Litigant

Comment #: OK1234
Rating:1.0
Comments:
She has a poor judicial temperament and fails to follow case law. She is extremely prejudiced against counsel that she has negative personal sentiment towards. Despite her being what most would consider an alcoholic (consuming one or two bottles of wine with her dinners), she would judge another for their abuse of any substance. (This is likely because she was a drug prosecutor in her earlier career.) Procedurally, she will stand defiantly by her choice to not grant a protective order on a technicality, which then results in the murder of the person seeking the protective order. How is this person in any way adequate to serve society's best interests?

Other

Comment #: OK1229
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
How she is still a judge is beyond me! I'm in a custody case where she has granted temporary custody of my daughter to her father. He has since taken my daughter to buy weed, and has had her (and continues to have her) at his friend's house where he smokes weed and drinks. All this because I had a failed drug test for opiates -- regarding which, I have a prescription for hydrocodone which I have to take for pain due to a motorcycle accident. She refuses to hear anything or to take into consideration my medical condition. Her father never had paid me a dime of child support, and she set my child support payments based on an incredible amount of money which I have never made in my life. It's set maybe $500 more per month then it should be. She has made many rude and uncalled-for statements towards me that were untrue. Now I am unable to see my daughter until I have 30 days of clean UA's. She also stated that my prescription medication does not excuse my failed test for opiates. I can't go 30 days without my medication. So now it's been 4 months since I have seen my daughter. She is not a medical doctor -- she is supposed to be a judge but she is a poor excuse for one.

Other

Comment #: OK1211
Rating:4.0
Comments:
Both posters are exactly right: she is extremely biased and has a "poor judicial temperament." I could not agree more. Following my hearing, an attorney who was present in the courtroom and not associated with my case whatsoever came up to my husband and I and stated, "Well, that was really unfair!" Judge Hammond made numerous snide remarks during the trial that were directed at me, which were uncalled for, inaccurate, and incredibly unprofessional. I am scared to death to have her make any decisions regarding my family and my child. I'm praying for a fair resolution and for the truth to be evident and for justice to truly be served.

Other

Comment #: OK1157
Rating:1.0
Comments:
Extremely biased and does not follow the intent of state statutes, nor will she listen to the opinions of expert witnesses if she decides she doesn't like you. In cases involving child custody, it is unreasonable to go against the best interests of the children in order to punish a parent because she doesn't personally like that parent. I don't understand how she is allowed to remain a judge as I have discovered from talking to more than one attorney, she often arrives at controversial decisions not based on logic, law or fact. Her decisions have proven to be harmful to my children and there is nothing I can do about it.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: OK1038
Rating:1.5
Comments:
Has her favorites. Poor judicial temperament. Can be openly biased in favor of one side against the other. Poor knowledge or understanding of the evidence code.