Hon. Larry D. Shaw See Rating Details
Special Judge
Court
Oklahoma County
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      
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. Larry D. Shaw


Comments


Other

Comment #: OK1702
Rating:1.0
Comments:
I stood before this judge two days ago, and I left feeling like the criminal. Judge Shaw was very impolite, failed to look into the case that was presented to him, and showed no interest in the matter. I was there to pursue a protection restraining order against someone who has shown over the years that they are unfit (mentally) and has jeopardized my entire family. Not only was this person present in court under Oklahoma County Jail custody, but they were also a fugitive from another state, which should have caught Shaw's attention, but it did not. This judge would ask a question, and before I could completely answer him he would cut me off with another question. His behavior was unethical and bias. It seemed as if he was checking off some type of question bullet list he had at the time. Seeming bothered and confused, he took his frustration out on myself and the defendant, denying my protection order. Had Judge Shaw took the time to look into the defendants criminal history, not only in the state of Oklahoma, and acknowledged the fact that this person has been arrested in OK for stalking/fugitive reasons, and listened like a real judge should do I believe I would have been granted my request. But now since he failed to do so, my family is now in jeopardy. The defendant is someone with a mental illness, who causes destructive harm to others property, and jeopardizes them with the ways of their lifestyle.
My request was falsely judged by Shaw, and now I have to think of another way to keep my family from this individual.

Other

Comment #: OK1458
Rating:2.0
Comments:
I just witnessed a case before this judge, it was a VPO hearing, for a VPO that was denied on an emergency basis, so it should have been a 2 minute discussion. Only the plaintiff was allowed to speak and the judge continued the case in order to make a 9 year old child testify. He was unfair, didn't even let the defendant say one word, and exhibited the poorest decision making possible. What animal makes a 9 year old testify??

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: OK1430
Rating:9.0
Comments:
I have observed Judge Shaw on a few cases and had a case before him (as plaintiff). He was generally soft-spoken and polite to all parties and witnesses, fair in his assessment of the facts, and allowed everyone time to be heard fully. He doesn't suffer fools gladly, however, so be on time and get right to the heart of your case. Answer his questions succinctly and don't talk too much. In the 3 cases I witnessed, he was always fair and correct, IMHO.