Daniel T.K. Hurley

Can think for himself. Let's the media dictate how he perceives or treat a criminal defendant.

I actually clerked for Judge Hurley shortly after he took the federal bench. Later, I went on to clerk for a federal appellate judge and have now practiced in federal court across the country for many years. Of Judge Hurley, I can say this: He is bright, articulate, and epitomizes what a federal judge should be and do. Hurley lets everyone have their say. He looks at the facts and the law and then tries to fashion a fair ruling that lies within the bounds of the law. But you do not want to be a criminal defendant whom Hurley sentences because you are going away for a very long time. In sum, parties would be much better off if more federal judges took their cues from Hurley's style of judging.

ANother whopper the 11th circuit smack down of Judge Hurley. This time he issues a stay of execution for John Ferguson a Florida DR inmate...days after the FL Supreme court denies relief and days before the execution. He cites no legal reasoning just that the defendant needs a "fair hearing". 11th circuit smack down stating there is "no substantial likelihood of success on the merits"; case closed. Execution to proceed. Seems like the Judge couldnt be bothered with SCOTUS precedent.

He is smart and has a good demeanor. I had a two month white collar trial in front of him. His schedule was rigid, but not too demanding -- regular breaks in the morning and afternoon, decent break for lunch. Stops at 5 on the nose. Thorough voir dire. Lost his temper with a lawyer once (after pretty grave provocation if you ask me), but then sua sponte told the jury the following day that he had been wrong to speak harshly. Now, on the other hand, he is an absolutely brutal sentencer. Gave the government more than they asked for and sentenced the defendant far beyond what he deserved (and even I recognized that he deserved a semi-harsh sentence).

Judge Hurley is excellent with the jury. He works hard to ensure the litigants receive a fair trial. He creates an excellent record, does his own research, is tough on oral arguments related to trial motions and jury instructions, and generally comes to the right legal and factual conclusion. He tries to force parties to settle -- even when it is not possible. He is slow to rule on pre-trial matters and allows discovery to continue too close to trial. Once at trial, he keeps a tight schedule, moves the case along, and gives well researched, highly intelligent rulings. His evidentiary rulings are fair and legally sound -- although he sometimes bends over backwards to ensure that the rulings create fairness -- not just legal correctness. He works hard to ensure a balance in his rulings and in the case. In short, I wish most judges handled themselves, the jury and the litigants so well at trial!

Good temperament; thoughtful; respectful; very good with jury. Very inflexible in trial scheduling despite counsel's conflicts. Pushes parties to settle. Demonstrates bias toward plaintiffs.

Willing to listen to both sides; very fair in civil matters

solid on the law for all sides

Can have his bad moments; can be charming too!

very tough