THE ROBING ROOM

This judge is an enigma wrapped in a mystery encased in the facade of neutrality. In a civil case that he took rather than refer to the magistrate for discovery, he favored local counsel and refused to sanction delay and sharp practice. The other lawyer has been sanctioned all over Southern New York, by the way. I tried to be as nice as I could, but he barely gave my client a win on summary judgment, then the trial was, with some exceptions, a travesty. Luckily he made so many mistakes, and a separate appellate decision came down rebuking one of his holdings such that I might win a reversal. He does not write opinions, but merely reads them into the record. His evidentiary rulings are from the hip, and be careful what you ask for - twice he sustained my objections with side comments that would have made it better for me not to have objected; could not have seen that coming. He referred to a pre-trial transcript in ruling a point and a holding on another issue, neither of which (the holding or the transcript) actually existed. He gave us one small good ruling that he would not have been reversed on had he not. For the most part, however, he took sides with a bombastic loudmouth whom other judges have found a disgrace to the profession. He has to work with this person everyday, but, if I get a remand, I will ask the judge to recuse himself. The second worst trial I've ever experienced. Easy to get along with at sidebar and a great temperament, but I hope I never appear before him again. I've appealed the travesty of a trial, however, so I may well get what I do not wish for.