Joseph H. Lorintz

Initially, my divorce case was overseen by Judge Joseph Lorintz, whose handling left much to be desired. Dissatisfied with the direction my case was taking, I made the decision to switch attorneys and was recommended Simonetti & Associates. To my surprise, I discovered that Judge Lorintz could no longer preside over my case due to a conflict of interest. Therefore, if you want to get away from Judge Lorintz, just hire Lou Simonetti.

Judge Lorintz is adjudicating my case. As you would expect, he's doing a bad job--But "good" and "bad" are subjective. You know what's NOT?--the record. This is a sample of what he's said about our divorce case *ON THE RECORD*: "…[W]e've lived a very traumatic experience with this case. It's been traumatic. And everyone here, other than yourself [my attorney], has been traumatized…." Now, I'm no jurist, but should a judge who claims to be "traumatized" by a case continue adjudicating cases? If, for example, a surgeon claimed that operating on patients caused her trauma, should she return to the O.R.? If arresting suspects caused a police officer trauma, should he return to the beat? Of course not. Why then should adjudicating over the lives of litigants be any different? Can you name a job a person should continue doing if they claim to be traumatized by doing it? To be continued…

He is a pompous narcissist absolutely terrible has no business deciding what to get for breakfast never mind decisions impacting peoples and children's lives