top of page
THE ROBING ROOM
where judges are judged
Hon. Ivan L.R. Lemelle
District judge
E.D.La.
5th Circuit
Average Rating:
4.1
-
12
rating(s)
rating submitted
Please send me alerts on this judge
subscribed
Ratings:
What others have rated
Hon. Ivan L.R. Lemelle
evaluator
ID
date
Temp* Sch* Indu* Comp* Punct* Ev-Cv* Ev-Cr* Flex Bail Crim Settle Trial Sent Coop Average
Civil Litigation - Private
24900
1/2/17
10
0
9
10
10
10
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
9.8
Civil Litigation - Private
23982
1/2/16
4
1
1
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1.6
Civil Litigation - Private
23945
1/3/16
7
3
0
1
10
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4.4
Civil Litigation - Private
23842
1/2/16
10
8
8
10
8
8
0
6
0
0
10
0
0
0
8.7
Civil Litigation - Private
23008
1/1/15
2
1
4
2
5
1
0
6
0
0
1
0
0
0
2.5
Civil Litigation - Private
22652
1/2/15
1
1
1
1
5
1
0
5
0
0
10
0
0
0
1.7
Civil Litigation - Private
12558
1/1/11
1
1
1
1
3
1
0
1
0
0
2
0
0
0
1.3
Civil Litigation - Govt.
12285
1/1/11
1
3
4
2
4
2
3
7
5
5
4
5
5
2
2.7
Civil Litigation - Private
11996
1/2/11
1
1
1
1
2
1
0
1
0
0
5
0
0
0
1.2
Civil Litigation - Private
9715
1/2/10
7
7
8
0
7
7
0
10
0
0
7
0
0
0
7.2
Other
6554
1/3/08
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Criminal Defense Lawyer
6561
1/3/08
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
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
24900
1/2/17
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Civil Litigation - Private
23982
1/2/16
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Civil Litigation - Private
23945
1/3/16
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Civil Litigation - Private
23842
1/2/16
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Civil Litigation - Private
23008
1/1/15
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Civil Litigation - Private
22652
1/2/15
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Civil Litigation - Private
12558
1/1/11
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Civil Litigation - Govt.
12285
1/1/11
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Civil Litigation - Private
11996
1/2/11
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Civil Litigation - Private
9715
1/2/10
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Other
6554
1/3/08
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Criminal Defense Lawyer
6561
1/3/08
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
category average
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Non-lawyer Rating
(if applicable)
evaluator
ID
date
Rating
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. Ivan L.R. Lemelle
Civil Litigation - Private
comment #:
24900
rating:
9.8
He was fair and professional. At oral argument, he gave all a chance to be heard and asked questions that showed what he was thinking but gave litigants a chance to persuade him otherwise. He ruled quickly and gave a well-reasoned explanation of his decision. Not sure why all the negative comments, he seems like an excellent judge.
1/2/17, 3:59 PM
Civil Litigation - Private
comment #:
23982
rating:
1.6
Ignores well-settled law to get the result that he wants. He is doing a huge disservice to the litigants that come before him seeking justice under the law, by forcing them to appeal to overturn his refusal to obey the law. It's a shame that people with this little respect for the law are appointed to the judiciary.
1/2/16, 1:48 PM
Civil Litigation - Private
comment #:
23945
rating:
4.4
Outcome oriented. Will twist the law, or ignore the law entirely to reach the outcome that he wants.
1/3/16, 1:19 AM
Civil Litigation - Private
comment #:
23842
rating:
8.7
Great Judge. Fast. Champion of working class folks. Not one of these ideologues that we get with today's appointments. No idea why his rating is so low here. I think the defense bar may just be hatin'...
1/2/16, 10:14 AM
Civil Litigation - Private
comment #:
23008
rating:
2.5
He is an example of the broad range of scholarship and personality on the federal bench as he resides at the low end of the spectrum for both. His apparent self-recognition that he is in over his head leads him to be rude while at the same time quite unprepared. Although I won my trial before him, overcoming his meddling and personal attacks in front of the jury were far more difficult than dealing with oppposing counsel. I wish him well but I hope to never appear before him again.
1/1/15, 7:07 PM
Civil Litigation - Private
comment #:
22652
rating:
1.7
If he disagrees with your position in settlement negotiations and the case does not settle, he will roll over you during trial. He took over my case, questioned all the witnesses extensively, and displayed obvious bias in favor of the other party throughout. He did not understand basic legal principles and made several erroneous rulings. Overall, my worst experience in federal court.
1/2/15, 3:47 AM
Civil Litigation - Private
comment #:
12558
rating:
1.3
The worst Federal Judge in the South. It is truly ashame that someone of his unqualified caliber is allowed to sit on the Federal Judiciary. Lawyers both plaintiff and defense want to avoid him like the plague because they know once he presides that the case will be appealed and overturned because of his misguided legal conclusions.
1/1/11, 10:08 PM
Civil Litigation - Govt.
comment #:
12285
rating:
2.7
He cites Supreme Curt cases that he obviously doesn't know much about and tries to bluff you into a mistake. Someone needs to tell him that this is not a poker game - but real life for my clients. Obviously, he believes in using brashness as a cover for his lack of knowledge. The one great thing about having your case before Lemelle is that he is easily beaten on appeal.
1/1/11, 7:27 PM
Civil Litigation - Private
comment #:
11996
rating:
1.2
One of the worst Judges in Louisiana. I've been in front of his court many times and have won some and lost some but the level of incompetence is stunning for a federal judge. He has a very difficult time grasping even elementary legal principles. I'll give him one prop though he was somewhat involved in the settlement discussions in three of my cases even though he had no idea what the cases were about.
1/2/11, 2:07 PM
Civil Litigation - Private
comment #:
9715
rating:
7.2
1/2/10, 8:46 AM
Other
comment #:
6554
rating:
0
Horrible. Incompetent. Arrogant. Exhibit A for not giving federal judges lifetime appointments. Does not know the law, civil or criminal, though he thinks he's a scholar.
1/3/08, 12:22 AM
Criminal Defense Lawyer
comment #:
6561
rating:
0
Calls it like he sees it, and will rule for you if you have the law and the facts on your side, which is more than you can say of many federal judges. Has a tough side to him, but is not beyond reflection, and remains approachable in debate.
1/3/08, 3:23 AM
HOME
bottom of page