Hon. William H. Pauley III See Rating Details
District Judge See Comments
S.D.N.Y.  
Average Rating:6.4 - 25 rating(s)
Please send me alerts on this judge
E-mail Address:




Add your own rating

E-Mail Address (will not be displayed)
   
Confirm E-mail Address      
Zip
Occupation
Add a comment only

Ratings

*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=Chronic`y 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=Most Lenient,10=Most Harsh)
Typical Discount Off Guidelines for Cooperators:    (1=10%,10=100%)
  Items marked with (*) are averaged into the displayed overall rating
Comments



What others have said about Hon. William H. Pauley III


Comments


Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: 22010
Rating:1.0
Comments:
I was a Pro Se Plaintiff against some large firms. It was a civil rights case where clearing firms, which receive federal assistance, denied me access to the capital markets for no reason. It was a pretty simple straight forward case and should have been allowed to proceed to a jury. Pauley took 8 months to dismiss the entire case. In his decision, which I think was personally written by a clerk and he just signed it, he cited large, well known cases and completely disregarded any law. What complicates matters is that I have another case involving the NSA. I had aksed Pauley to recuse himself because of his views that the collection of data by the NSA was constitutional. It was revealed later on that wasn't the case and so he had a conflict of issues with me and should not have ruled on the civil rights case. But my request to have him removed pissed him off and he treated me like some piece of garbage after that. When he ruled against me, I submitted a response that I wasn't happy and he should have recused himself especially facts that have come to light about the NSA. He then removed my letter from the ECF and revoked my access. So, if you like a Judge who decides what gets put on the docket or not, this guy is for you. I will now be reporting him to the Second Circuit and Senate Judiciary Committee. In the dictionary next to bias and God complex is a picture of Pauley. He should be removed from being a Judge.

Other

Comment #: 21367
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
His Honor is an idiot! There's no other way to put it.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: 21366
Rating:4.0
Comments:
This judge has been wrong in so many ways on so many constitutional rulings that have been overturned at the circuit level in decisions over the last few years, as to have demonstrated such significant ignorance of our Constitution that he needs to retire. Whether he has become feeble-minded, or has a personal political agenda that is anathema to America's two-hundred-plus years of legal precedent is for others to debate -- either way he has to go. I, as a first-year law student, could rule more effectively and honestly than Judge William H. Pauley III. With all due respect to the legal profession and the American legal system, he has to go.

Litigant

Comment #: 21363
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
This judge is so uninformed with regard to the Bill of Rights that he needs to be removed from the bench.

Other

Comment #: 21359
Rating:1.0
Comments:
Defending an unconstitutional practice with an unconstitutional, controversial Act of Congress is laughable. This is another setback for patriots who believe in personal freedoms: the public demands better from all judges, especially those at the federal level.

Other

Comment #: 21351
Rating:1.0
Comments:
This judge needs to be removed from the bench. He has no idea of what the Constitution means. He needs to be required to attend a refresher course in U.S. history, and to study our founding fathers and what their intent was. He makes me sick.

Other

Comment #: 20152
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
He is very fair-and I appreciate being in his courtroom and I appreciate his ruling in a case I witnessed.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: 13237
Rating:8.4
Comments:
Very evenhanded in civil litigation. Bent over backwards and remained highly civil to a not very bright, bullheaded plaintiff

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: 11962
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
Received a non-Guidelines sentence of 15 months against Guidelines of 41-51 months for a young woman who permitted her boyfriend's friend to rob the bank branch where she was a teller, after two prior shoplifting arrests and perjury at a suppression hearing, but a fair amount of mitigation. He was obviously troubled by the case and struggled over the sentence and deserves a lot of credit for balancing the need for deterrence and punishment and -- as he put it -- the need to give the defendant a "time out" -- and giving her a chance to finish college, turn her life around and move on.

Other

Comment #: 11646
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
As a Nevada resident and a lover of wild horses, I was outraged to read your decision allowing the Colorado Mustang Gather to continue. Do you even know what the heck the BLM does and/or stands for? Inasmuch as you are listed in the Eastern District of New York I don't think you are knowledgeable about the BLM. Additionally, I don't believe you have ever witnessed a round-up of these majestic animals because quite possibly you'd be brought to tears unless you are an unfeeling individual. It's not only Colorado where horses are being rounded-up, it's throughout the entire West and for no good reason (at least as far as we the people are concerned). In order to find the underlying reason for these round-ups, you need to follow the money – who does what to who for how much? And, you’ll get your answer. You, Judge Pauley, have given the go ahead for the BLM to continue to decimate America's wild horse populations and you Judge Pauley are part and parcel of the decimation/killing of our, the peoples wild horses and you need to be held accountable. Are you aware that wild horses wherever they roam do not belong to the BLM? They don’t and if any round-ups take place it should be in rounding-up the BLM. It's obvious to me that our government is out to rid America of its wildlife and in particular, our Icons of the West, wild horses, wolves and bison. Sadly, they are getting away with it and again for the reason that the East doesn't know what the West is doing and vice versa.
Your decision was wrong.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: 11645
Rating:8.0
Comments:
No nonsense. Just be prepared, follow his rules and you'll do fine. He refuses to suffer fools...like opposing counsel in the matter I had before him. Once he realizes that someone is an idiot...it's permanent.

Other

Comment #: 11637
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
As a Colorado native and life long resident, I was appauled by the outcome of this hearing. OUR wild mustangs will continue to be tortured by the BLM, a rogue government agency. However, why should we have expected anything different. A judge is nothing more than a government public service figure that must remain in line with how the big corporations want this country to be run. I have no respect for any leadership of this country anymore. Judge Pauley, you must remember that respect is earned, it is not a given because you have the word "Honorable" in front of your name. You obviously did not reasearch the facts on how the BLM conducts these deadly roundups.....and if you did, and you realize how terrorizing they are to our mustangs, then shame on you for allowing the BLM to continue. I will not give up the fight until our mustangs have been given their much deserved justice.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: 11631
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
Judge - You have done this great country a disservice by not engaging fully in respect to the BLM's quest to obliterate wild horses in the U.S. The situation is at a critical crossroads and your treatment of this subject was an insult to say the least. I wish you would look at footage of the horses that are killed, many of them are foals. You have given the BLM free rein to continue to kill. As a taxpayer, I am outraged that my money is being spent on something so cruel and unnecessary.

Other

Comment #: 11630
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
Sir: I can not believe that with the evidence that was produced for the hearing you have given this type of ruling. As a Coloradan I am ashamed that my government and judicial system will not protect our American Mustangs.
But then we almost wiped out the Bald Eagle a symbol of America, the buffalo among lot of other species including MY Wild Horses!!! These animals are owned by WE THE PEOPLE and this government does not and will not listen to WE THE PEOPLE, I thought that maybe the judicial system would help, but I see they there is no one who will help the horses that we conquered this country on the back of. I as a voting taxpayer am ashamed that I am an american, THE MORAL CHARACTER OF A NATION IS DEFINED BY HOW WE TREAT OUR ANIMALS-Gandhi and we show no compassion for animals in this country so we have NO MORAL CHARACTER.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: 11415
Rating:4.5
Comments:
Ignored everything in our brief and still made us come to oral argument -- which began an hour and a half late -- so he could ask one question which we had demonstrated was not the question at all. I don't mind losing when I have reason to believe the judge has engaged with the issues, but this process was an insult.

Prosecutor

Comment #: 9907
Rating:3.5
Comments:
Another doosey by Judge Pauley suppresion of 230 kg of cocaine; easily reversed by 2nd circuit. Simply amazing the way this judge rules most times.

09-1144, US - v.- NAVAS, ALVAREZ, and MOREL

The district court held that a warrantless search of the trailer ran afoul of the Fourth Amendment. On appeal, defendants liken the trailer to a fixed structure, and argue that the district court properly suppressed the fruits of the search. The government argues that, whether or not attached to a cab, the trailer is subject to a warrantless search pursuant to the “automobile exception” to the Fourth Amendment’s warrant requirement. As the trailer was readily mobile and commanded only a diminished expectation of privacy, we hold that the
automobile exception applies. Therefore, we reverse.
Following Morel’s consent, the agents entered the warehouse and conducted the search at issue in this appeal. Acting on information from Navas’s post-arrest statement and the cooperating witness, they examined the top of the trailer and observed physical indicia of a secret compartment. The agents then “ripped off the sheet metal roof” of the trailer, discovered 230 kilograms of cocaine, and promptly seized the contraband.

The district court held that the search of the trailer in the warehouse violated the Fourth Amendment. It began by rejecting the government’s argument that Morel’s consent was sufficient to permit the search. The district court found it “undisputed that Morel verbally consented to a general search of the warehouse,” but concluded that his consent did not extend to a physically invasive search. In addition to defendants-appellees’ arguments relating to the automobile exception, Alvarez separately argues that we may affirm the district court based on the alternative
ground that “the search of the warehouse was performed . . .
without consent.” Because this assertion ignores the district court’s ruling that Morel consented to a general search of the warehouse, we reject it. Therefore, the court held, the warrantless search of the trailer was not justified by the consent doctrine. The court held that the exception was inapplicable because “[a]stationary trailer, detached from a tractor cab with its legs dropped, and stored inside a warehouse, is not a vehicle that is readily mobile or in use for
transportation.
Consequently, we are left with a straightforward legal question: Is the warrantless search of a trailer that is unhitched from its cab permissible under the automobile exception to the Fourth Amendment’s warrant requirement? We hold that the exception applies.

The district court reasoning that it was “hard to imagine a scenario where the [trailer] could have been hooked up to a cab” because defendants were under arrest.

2nd circuit appeals court ruled the suppression of evidence reversed.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: 9246
Rating:7.4
Comments:
Not a bad judge - somewhat pro-govt. in criminal cases (what else should one expect?) and pretty middle-of-the-road in civil litigation. Nice dry sense of humor but little tolerance of badly prepared attorneys.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: 5476
Rating:8.4
Comments:
I practice out of the district, but appeared pro haec in a civil case. The first time I appeared, I thought Judge Pauley was, well, a bit of a monster. After subsequent appearances, and upon further reflection, my final opinion is he is intelligent, fair and no-nonsense. At the end of the day, what more can you expect from a judge in the busiest federal district in the nation?

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: 2637
Rating:7.4
Comments:
He strictly applies the Guidelines and imposed a 2-point enhancement that was not included in the plea agreement, bumping up significantly the final offense level. He ultimately imposed a just and fair non-Guideline sentence below the minimum newly-determined total offense level due to certain non-exceptional, but relevant, 3553(a) factors, to basically honor the plea agreement. Unfortunately, despite his ultimately fair sentence, I have to agree with comment # 2292 in that his temperament was terrible. He seemed to enjoy demeaning counsel. When a simple polite request would suffice, he barked and bellowed. A very painful overall experience for counsel, defendants and observers.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: 2524
Rating:8.1
Comments:
Loves trial lawyers and is very good at handling complex cases. You must be prepared to be before him - otherwise he will be very grumpy. Always gets out well-regarded opinions quickly.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: 2292
Rating:5.0
Comments:
Poor judicial demeanor. Gratuitously nasty, and seems to enjoy demeaning counsel.