District
18 reviews
Very pompous. Interrupts you just to hear himself ask questions he knows the answers to. Talks down to counsel for the government and defense, alike. Difficult to sway with argument. Comes out predestined. Avoid at all costs IMHO.
He is cynical and sarcastic and does not, in my opinion, have much respect for the defense function. Repeatedly interrupts counsel for no good reason; asks questions in a cross-examination style, not to gather information in good faith, but merely to make his own point; thinks he's much brighter than he really his; brings his biases onto the bench
One of the most conscientious and even-handed judges I have ever encountered. Judge Stein takes tremendous care to understand a party's arguments and gets the law right.
Judge stein sentenced my son today and although he gave him a light sentencing there was one thing I really didn’t appreciate. He told my son he feel he could get a better job then to be an usher at a movie theater. My son got a promotion and became the head usher, but my question is what better job will he get going to prison and being a black male coming from prison what better job will he get? I felt he could’ve gave him supervised release for the three year instead of one year in prison. Just my thoughts
Thoroughly awful. Totally over his head in a complex case. Does not know what to do, so lets meaningful motions sit on his docket for many months. Then, like a schoolchild trying to disguise failure to complete the homework, he will scheme to have the assignment withdrawn, e.g. "motion denied without prejudice to refile later", etc. Disrespects attorneys from small firms with obvious and repeated slights and ad hominem attacks. The man is a discredit to the sdny specifically and the entire federal bench. He is on senior status and should just stay at home so the seat can be occupied a person who is competent and not poisoned by petty biases.
This judge is mediocre. He is slow to rule and result oriented. He thinks he is very clever. However he is of average intelligence for a district judge. He is a nice fellow.
I found it hard to explain how he came to his rulings. It was not a comfortable experience being before him though he appeared to work hard at getting it right he seemed to disregard the evidence he did not want to hear that would have required a contrary result.
This judge is a misery with an even demeanor. Don't be fooled.He will not allow a litigant to have their case decided on the merits once he has decided that an attorney is not important enough to be in his courtroom. He is inflexible and without an army of people in your office to meet his deadlines you will not survive because he will destroy your case with dates that make no sense. Beware little guys--he does not want you in his courtroom no mater the merits of your case. He does not care that behind it all there is an actual client with a good case. He has forgotten his purpose and has no soul.
Overall he was fair and unbiased. However, he is quick to dismiss or strike significant motions for non-substantive procedural (in one case he misapplied a local rule to do so) reasons without reviewing the underlying merits of the motion.
Let him think you are a progressive and write your own opinion. Look how he repaid Hillary Clinton for being appointed to the position by her husband. Hillarys' campaign manager Nemazee received a sentence 30% lighter than federal court guidelines for over 300 million dollar fraudulent loans, mostly for Democratic fundraising.
Overall not very impressed. Has a very shallow view of the law, and workmanlike application of law to the facts, with very little insight. Good example of civil-servant justice that CJ Rehnquist once talked about -- not awful, but rather mediocre.
Appeared before him on an expedited bankruptcy appeal that amounted to a TRO. Mastered a complicated set of facts very quickly and produced a fair, meaningful opinion practically overnight. Defied expectations.
Judge Stein showed analytical keenness and precision in a federal securities case. He wrote a clean, careful opinion that led to settlement of the matter.
Biased and vindictive -- a nightmare when it comes to the First Amendment.
This is a judge who recognizes incompetent lawyers and frivolous arguments instantly, but allows such parties every opportunity to have their arguments carry the day. If that means giving them enough rope to hang themselves, so be it. A pleasure to appear before.
He must be the most incompetent judge in the Justice System. He should be investigated for his poor decisions.
A very bright, conscientious hardworking guy with a mildly pro-prosecution bent who tries very hard to be fair and even-handed. He is courteous and patient and lets the lawyers try their cases.
Very much pro-police in Section 1983 litigation. Granted summary judgment on a case that any other judge would have allowed to go to trial.