Before my divorce my attorney and I went to court to have my ex’s assets frozen - the judge wanted a$50,000 bond- my ...
2.0
/ 5
Before my divorce my attorney and I went to court to have my ex’s assets frozen - the judge wanted a$50,000 bond- my attorney said I didn’t have that the judge said “put it under the divorce” which I guess they did and it was 6 months before the freez eorder was signed - yes my ex removed much of the money from our retirement accounts in the mean time - p.s. I had no access to them so the bond was probably not necessary - p.s. I realized after the divorce trial that this was the same judge who had denied the freeze- My lawyer got an order so the other side couldn’t use an expert witness for the finances - the other layer began to quote the letter in his summary - my lawyer protested - the judge said no it was fine and that he could have done the same - this wasn’t true as I didn’t have money for the expert and I had paid extra to have it excluded In his final decision the judge went exactly by what that expert had said re: finances whic really hurt me Financially - I have been working 2 jobs since and can’t retire Besides all this ; my attorney was going through his own divorce (for similar circumstances)with court dates sometimes on the same day as mine. I didn’t find out until after the trials. He and his partner didn’t use any of the info. I had written to them in court - no summary defending me- and when he didn’t bribing up something he told me he would and I asked him why in court at the end of the trial he said “I changed my mind”- He had time to go to hockey games with the opposing attorney - vacations- and as his partner had told me had driven back all night from S.C. From a 4th of July party to be at my last trial date. I really don’t believe in the justice system in the Montgomery county family law When the other lawyer got the judge on my case changed to this judge - I looked up reviews - he was almost disbarred for things he said to women defendants - when I brought this up to my attorneys there was no answer and no change of the judge
·Anónimo·Legal Professional···
This judge has to go!
2.0
/ 5
This judge has to go! Concerns about a Maryland Judge The Commission on Judicial Disabilities is an independent body with the power to investigate complaints against Maryland judges and, when warranted, conduct hearings about complaints and take certain actions or recommend other actions to the Court of Appeals. Contact the commission if you have questions or complaints about the conduct of a Maryland judge. Contact the Commission on Judicial Disabilities
·Anónimo·Lawyer···
Given the number of comments and the across-the-board low scores, this arrogant ass of a judge should be scrutinized ...
2.0
/ 5
Given the number of comments and the across-the-board low scores, this arrogant ass of a judge should be scrutinized for removal (if that's even possible). I had the exact same experience with him in that he was arrogant, an overall ass, and didn't remember basic facts of the case while spouting his angry ruling. Clearly a problem person.
·Anónimo·Litigant···
Holy mother of dog.
1.0
/ 5
Holy mother of dog. He wasn’t very successful in private practice, and he has been a disaster as a master and judge for years. ANYONE on that bench is preferable to him, especially in family law cases (OMG - there are no words) and especially if your lawyer is not part of the Bethesda/Rockville mafia.
·Anónimo·Lawyer···
Total disaster.
2.0
/ 5
Total disaster. Could care less for the law and evidence. He is arrogant, discourteous, and very biased. I pity those who go before him and are not his favorites.
·Anónimo·Litigant···
This Judge didnt appear to be successful in private practice and now the taxpayers of Montgomery county are paying hi...
2.0
/ 5
This Judge didnt appear to be successful in private practice and now the taxpayers of Montgomery county are paying his bills. Its clear he is chummy with the local bar by his demeanor in court. I think we should only allow judges to serve if they have been successful in practice. If private citizens do not want to use him, why should taxpayers have to pay for him.