top of page
THE ROBING ROOM
where judges are judged
Hon. Katherine Bolan Forrest
District judge
S.D.N.Y.
2nd Circuit
Average Rating:
4.6
-
27
rating(s)
rating submitted
Please send me alerts on this judge
subscribed
Ratings:
What others have rated
Hon. Katherine Bolan Forrest
evaluator
ID
date
Temp* Sch* Indu* Comp* Punct* Ev-Cv* Ev-Cr* Flex Bail Crim Settle Trial Sent Coop Average
Civil Litigation - Private
27330
1/2/18
9
10
10
10
10
10
0
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
9.8
Civil Litigation - Private
26414
1/2/18
5
9
5
5
0
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
5.6
Civil Litigation - Govt.
26676
1/2/18
1
2
2
1
8
2
0
5
0
0
1
8
10
0
2.7
Other
25216
1/2/18
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Criminal Defense Lawyer
25247
1/2/18
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Civil Litigation - Private
25120
1/2/18
7
4
5
4
9
0
0
10
0
0
0
0
0
0
5.8
Civil Litigation - Private
24668
1/2/17
10
8
8
10
10
10
0
10
0
0
0
0
0
0
9.3
Civil Litigation - Private
24555
1/1/17
1
1
1
1
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
Criminal Defense Lawyer
24214
1/3/17
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Criminal Defense Lawyer
24227
1/1/17
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Civil Litigation - Private
23387
1/3/16
2
2
8
6
7
1
0
3
0
0
4
0
0
0
4.3
Civil Litigation - Private
23305
1/2/16
2
3
1
0
0
1
0
2
0
0
1
0
0
0
1.8
Civil Litigation - Private
22882
1/2/15
2
2
7
3
9
1
0
6
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
Criminal Defense Lawyer
22952
1/2/15
2
3
3
2
0
0
1
0
0
10
0
10
10
0
2.2
Prosecutor
22722
1/2/15
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Civil Litigation - Private
22760
1/1/15
3
1
1
1
10
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2.8
Criminal Defense Lawyer
22818
1/3/15
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Criminal Defense Lawyer
22819
1/1/15
3
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
1
1
0
1
1
0
1.7
Civil Litigation - Private
21579
1/2/14
10
9
10
10
10
10
0
10
0
0
0
0
0
0
9.8
Criminal Defense Lawyer
21190
1/2/13
8
7
10
0
10
0
10
5
0
5
0
0
4
0
9
category average
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Items marked with (*) are averaged into the displayed overall rating
Fam
Par
Qu-Arg
At-Arg
Sch
Cri
Civ
Lab
Imm
How familiar are you with the work of this judge? (1=Not at all familiar,10=Extremely familiar)
Participates in Oral Argument (1=Rarely,10=Always)
Quality of Questions During Oral Argument (1=Poor,10=Extremely insightful)
Attitude during oral argument (1=Consistently inappropriate,10=Consistently respectful)
Scholarship as reflected in Opinions (1=Poor,10=Outstanding)
General Inclination in Criminal Appeals (1=Strongly ProGovernment,10=Strongly ProDefense)
General Inclination in Civil Rights Appeals (1=Strongly Pro-Defendant,10=Strongly ProPlaintiff)
General Inclination in Labor Law Appeals (1=Strongly ProEmployee,10=Strongly ProEmployer)
General Inclination in Immigration Appeals (1=Strongly ProImmigrant,10=Strongly ProGov.)
evaluator
ID
date
Fam Par Qu-Arg At-Arg Sch Cri Civ Lab Imm
Civil Litigation - Private
27330
1/2/18
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Civil Litigation - Private
26414
1/2/18
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Civil Litigation - Govt.
26676
1/2/18
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Other
25216
1/2/18
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Criminal Defense Lawyer
25247
1/2/18
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Civil Litigation - Private
25120
1/2/18
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Civil Litigation - Private
24668
1/2/17
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Civil Litigation - Private
24555
1/1/17
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Criminal Defense Lawyer
24214
1/3/17
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Criminal Defense Lawyer
24227
1/1/17
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Civil Litigation - Private
23387
1/3/16
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Civil Litigation - Private
23305
1/2/16
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Civil Litigation - Private
22882
1/2/15
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Criminal Defense Lawyer
22952
1/2/15
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Prosecutor
22722
1/2/15
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Civil Litigation - Private
22760
1/1/15
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Criminal Defense Lawyer
22818
1/3/15
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Criminal Defense Lawyer
22819
1/1/15
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Civil Litigation - Private
21579
1/2/14
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Criminal Defense Lawyer
21190
1/2/13
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
category average
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Non-lawyer Rating
(if applicable)
evaluator
ID
date
Rating
Litigant
25445
1/1/18
1
Other
25219
1/2/18
1
category average
-
Temp*
Sch*
Indu*
Comp*
Punct*
Ev-Cv*
Ev-Cr*
Flex
Bail
Crim
Settle
Trial
Sent
Coop
Temperament (1=Awful 10=Excellent)
Scholarship (1=Awful 10=Excellent)
Industriousness (1=Not at all industrious 10=Highly industrious)
Ability to Handle Complex Litigation (1=Awful 10=Excellent)
Punctuality (1=Chronically Late 10=Always on Time)
Evenhandedness in Civil Litigation (1=Demonstrates Bias 10=Entirely Evenhanded)
Evenhandedness in Criminal Litigation (1=Demonstrates Bias 10=Entirely Evenhanded)
Flexibility in Scheduling (1=Completely Inflexible 10=Very Flexible)
General Inclination Regarding Bail (1=Pro-Defense 10=Pro-Government)
General Inclination in Criminal Cases Pre-Trial (1=Pro-Defense 10=Pro-Government)
Involvement in Civil Settlement Discussions (1=Least Involved 10=Most Involved)
General Inclination in Criminal Cases Trial (1=Pro-Defense 10=Pro-Government)
General Inclination in Criminal Cases Sentencing (1=Pro-Defense 10=Pro-Government)
Typical Discount Off Guidelines for Cooperators (1=10% 10=100%)
comments1
Comments:
What others have said about
Hon. Katherine Bolan Forrest
Civil Litigation - Private
comment #:
27330
rating:
9.8
Brilliant woman! Sorry to see her go. Super hard worker. Admits it when she makes a mistake.
1/2/18, 11:00 AM
Civil Litigation - Private
comment #:
26414
rating:
5.6
For the few of you that provided this Judge with a good rating, the question is this: why would such a young article III judge retire so early in her judicial career asserting 'personal' reasons? Smells of something more.
1/2/18, 11:00 AM
Civil Litigation - Govt.
comment #:
26676
rating:
2.7
Glad to see her retire. Not fit for the bench. Has a mean streak that spills over into her decision-making. Moves cases along fast, but that's about it.
1/2/18, 9:36 PM
Litigant
comment #:
25445
rating:
0
Waste of time. She's a horrible judge. Disregards the facts and rules as she sees fit.
1/1/18, 9:23 PM
Other
comment #:
25216
rating:
0
HORRIBLE DECISION IN RAVI = FREEDOM TO SAY GOODBYE WHEN THE MANHAD NOTICES FOR YEARS THAT HE WAS AWAITING DEPORTATION
1/2/18, 4:58 PM
Other
comment #:
25219
rating:
0
Her Ross Ulbricht decision will go down as one of the worst decision any judge could make. She makes appeal decisions on cases she herself has handled. Absolutely despicable and reprehensible.
1/2/18, 6:05 PM
Criminal Defense Lawyer
comment #:
25247
rating:
1
Horrible judge. Don't think she has read the constitution or Bill of rights. She really should.
1/2/18, 2:13 AM
Civil Litigation - Private
comment #:
25120
rating:
5.8
I wholeheartedly agree with the other comments. Judge Forrest issues decisions very quickly, which is good, except that her speed results in her overlooking critical facts and even missing the entire thrust of a pleading. Nice enough lady, and I'm sure she's very smart, but she clearly went in the direction of speed versus quality in her decisions.
1/2/18, 3:13 AM
Civil Litigation - Private
comment #:
24668
rating:
9.3
I have observed her in a complex maritime case involving a variety of legal issues. She is fair, open, direct, and civil with counsel on all sides.
1/2/17, 1:01 AM
Civil Litigation - Private
comment #:
24555
rating:
1
This judge should not be on the bench. She makes her mind up and ignores evidence that does not support her view. She has no regard for the law and uses her power to intimidate litigants she does not like. She does things to make it very difficult to challenge her on appeal because she's more concerned about not being overturned than getting things right.
1/1/17, 1:59 PM
Criminal Defense Lawyer
comment #:
24214
rating:
0
Giving credit where it's due. Despite her well-earned reputation as a pro-government judge and harsh sentencer, she sua sponte carved out our client's home -- where he lived with his wife and young child -- from forfeiture and, some four years later, granted requested modifications of the home confinement phase of the sentence (turning around the motion in one day), adding her own language to our requests that further helped the defendant to seek employment and attend school-related and other events with his son.
1/3/17, 1:46 AM
Criminal Defense Lawyer
comment #:
24227
rating:
0
Calling her a judge is generous. The silk road case recently is the perfect example. The defense was completely centered around the allegation that the journal and bitcoin wallet were planted on Ulbritch's laptop. This is a tough defense because it forces the defense to prove wrongdoing and puts the burden of proof on them. Forrest dismissed all of the defense's expert witnesses stating that they weren't needed (in a complex cryptography case) despite the fact that the defense claimed that their expert witnesses could prove that most of the government's evidence needed to be thrown out for violating search and seizure laws. (Redacted By Ed.}
1/1/17, 9:23 PM