Katharine S. Hayden

What a gem on the federal bench. Appeared before her on a financial fraud sentencing. She was prepared on all outstanding disputed guidelines issues and bravely ruled in the defense favor on a close grouping issue where the circuit -- has for the most part -- leaned the other way, though not directly in our case. But we had a discrete issue and she leaned our way. This was a big help because the optics of the case were not terrific for the defense. In the end, we received a modest downward variance due to defendant's age and perhaps less than stellar health. From a final range of 63-78, we received a 54-month sentence. Sentencing is, I have heard from many judges, the hardest part of a federal judge's duties and you could see the thoroughly considered thought -- and perhaps anguish -- as she wrestled through the sentencing factors. Although I asked for less time, in the end we were not displeased with the sentence. And the mark of a great judge is, perhaps, I don't think the government was displeased either. In conclusion, a very brave judge imposing a non-guideline sentence in what seems still to be a guideline jurisdiction. Overall, her intellect, temperament and every other quantifiable factor that I could measure, suggests that she be cloned and placed in every single federal district court in the country. Fair and just, what more can you ask?

I rated her on a few qualifiers since I only sat in on a sentencing the other day. It's no surprise she's so highly rated. She's soft-spoken, super bright and considerate. She doesn't need to come off as the smartest person in the room -- though she likely is. Seemed very at ease and confident in rendering a non-guideline sentence to a sad sack with lots of quantifiable 3553 factors and a family that would be further traumatized by a custodial term, no matter how limited. Brave to impose non-guideline sentencing in a still mostly-mandatory guideline district. A pleasure appearing in her courtroom, though I will report back as proceedings progress.

very slow, 32 months to rule on settlement that was agreed on by all parties. Lawyers collecting fees while we wait for funds. Doesnt see little guy just lawyers.

Judge Hayden was very well prepared for oral argument of our motion. She had read all of the materials presented (which were not unsubstantial) and was familiar with the underlying facts of the case as well as each exhibit. Her questions were relevant and to the point - addressing the critical issues in the case. When she delivered her opinion, it was well reasoned and her thought process and analysis of the issues were well documented and clear.

Smart judge with a great temperament.