Hon. John P Chupp See Rating Details
Judge
District Court
Tarrant County
141st
See Comments

Attorney Average Rating:   4.4 - 10 rating(s)
Non-Attorney Average Rating:   1.0 - 8 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


Please type what you see below:

    

What others have said about Hon. John P Chupp


Comments


Other

Comment #: TX1220
Rating:1.0
Comments:
Lazy, doesn't really care about the truth, wants to get though the docket quickly and go home early. Condemned an innocent man because of paperwork pedantry.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: TX1191
Rating:1.5
Comments:
I have probably been in front of over 30-40 judges in 10 or more counties, and Judge Chupp is by far the worst. He had no idea what he was doing. Not sure if it is his normal demeanor or just his defensive nature due to his incompetence, but he just kept interrupting me, yelling, and attempting to belittle me in front of my clients. Then shut off the zoom hearing without letting me speak.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: TX1190
Rating:4.8
Comments:
I do not feel like this judge spends the time to know about the case on hand. He came to court essentially uninformed of the case. He also shows partiality! Seems to me that an ignorance of the substance of the case isn't fair and just!

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: TX1185
Rating:1.0
Comments:
Does not read a single brief. Will decide the outcome of every motion and case on the first words spoken by the plaintiff.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: TX1048
Rating:1.0
Comments:
Wow, I could not believe all the other people with the same story. He does not even read evidence. Just make a decision without knowing the facts. Make comments when they should be kept to himself. I would say the worst Judge I've ever seen. Judge Judy could be his mother.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: TX943
Rating:1.0
Comments:
Knew nothing about the law relevant to the case and did not care to learn it. Worst judge I have ever practiced before and I lave been licensed for almost 40 years. I’d heard stories, but assumed they were exaggerations. They were not.

Other

Comment #: TX930
Rating:1.0
Comments:
sirloinlmao isn't "that bad" but furries are still automatically incorrect about basically anything by being a furry.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: TX925
Rating:10.0
Comments:
Couldn’t ask for better

Other

Comment #: TX904
Rating:1.0
Comments:
More than willing to bet he is only still a judge because he ran unopposed last election. No way in hell a CHUMP that immediately picks one side without listening to evidence is indicative of someone who just needs to bow out gracefully and let people with actual brains, or human decency, take the spotlight.

Other

Comment #: TX902
Rating:1.0
Comments:
Didn't really understand the law or the facts of the case before him.

Litigant

Comment #: TX885
Rating:1.0
Comments:
If it wasn't obvious before Judge Chump doesn't actually view ALL evidence before making a decision, it definitely is all. The "Honorable" Judge better start watching his back from now on, this is not going to go away easy for him.

Other

Comment #: TX881
Rating:1.0
Comments:
Has no working knowledge of anti-SLAPP laws and yet was presiding over such a case. Never seen such disrespect for due process. Elections cannot come sooner for the many mistakes Chump has made during his tenure.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: TX880
Rating:10.0
Comments:
Tie Beard committed notary fraud

The loss is his fault and his fault alone

no appeal will work, ty had no proof and you can't introduce new evidence on appeal

Die Mad, convics

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: TX879
Rating:10.0
Comments:
Nick Rekkieta is a hack grifter

Other

Comment #: TX874
Rating:1.0
Comments:
The rumors about this judge were true to the point. He already makes up his mind before hearing any type of evidence. Makes me wonder could anyone be a judge or just that he is one of the few who could care less about the law.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: TX733
Rating:2.3
Comments:
The other attorney did not need to even show up as Judge Chupp advocated for opposing counsel's position before either side could speak. His actions really harmed my client.

Litigant

Comment #: TX714
Rating:1.0
Comments:
Horrible. Makes up his mind before hearing any evidence. Dont know how this guy stays on the bench-follows no procedure, could care less about precedents or the law.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: TX153
Rating:2.6
Comments:
we were there for an age discrimination summary judgment hearing. The judge, who hadn't read the briefs, decided the best solution was for me to hire the Plaintiff at my office because he was dismissing the case. When I told him I had met the legal test for age discrimination, he stated that I had to do more than meet the legal test. Absurd.