Hon. Sandra L. Townes See Rating Details
District Judge See Comments
E.D.N.Y.  
Average Rating:3.9 - 14 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. Sandra L. Townes


Comments


Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: 19902
Rating:2.0
Comments:
She was appointed by Bush because she's a black conservative. I appeared before her when she was in state court and she was condesending to my discovery argument in a police abuse case. A man came to me who had lost before her trying a police case and she treated him so unfairly at trial. He was STUPID not to take an offer of $200,000, but he lost because she precluded evidence of the guy's injuries. Gosh - injuries might suggest the guy was brutalized; better not let that in! The guy couldn't afford an appeal, and I didn't take the case. But he was stupid, and she screwed him.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: 18128
Rating:1.0
Comments:
An embarrassment. Shouldn't even be in domestic relations court.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: 11440
Rating:1.8
Comments:
An atrociously stupid judge. It is painful to be in front of her as she proudly displays her ignorance and pro-government opinions. No empathy, no brains.

Litigant

Comment #: 9951
Rating:1.0
Comments:
Judge Townes is a pro-government judge who in my view was unprepared to hear this case and went about her job as though it were to find a reason to justify putting a contibuting member of society in prison purely as a form of punishment rather than consider what might be in the best interests of society as a whole. In my case, she simply disregarded a wealth of information from experts and deemed herself better equipped to make a determination as to motives in the case. She dismissed written statements from doctors and instead decided these doctors were convinced to offer incorrect diagnoses that were the result of a lie by the defendant. One would need to be a pretty good liar to convince a medical professional to diagnose an illness that does not exist. Frankly, my view of Judge Townes is that she has become so hardened at sending people to prison that she is unable to believe that some defendents who are tried in her court are actually good people who have found themselves in trouble. She simply could not comprehend th defendent before her was not just another criminal she needed to get off the street. Very sad and certainly not someone I am proud to say represents the justice system in the U.S.

Other

Comment #: 9178
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
Excellent Judge. Fair, understainding and clear in the court room.

Civil Litigation - Govt.

Comment #: 7224
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
Judge Townes should have recused herself in my case because she worked for the agency that my adversary still works for. My case was dismissed by Judge Townes after two long years waiting for her to answer a summary judgmaent motion submitted by my adversary. I had a good case and I pray that the appeals court will see that I had more then enough for a jury to decide in my favor. I know that some will say that "this litigant is just mad that the judge dismissed the case". I say to the nay-sayers that I know I had enough evidence to go to trial and she just listened to my adversary's lies and only relied on those lies and not my real evidence.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: 6773
Rating:9.0
Comments:
Courteous to litigators; serious about her job; sees what really matters.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: 5596
Rating:8.3
Comments:
A fine judge. Understands the business realities of the litigation. Courteous and efficient. No complaints.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: 5275
Rating:2.2
Comments:
This judge is void of the fundamental sense of impartiality that ought to be a requirement for a seat on the bench.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: 5034
Rating:2.2
Comments:
Terrible, insecure and dogmatic. A frightening example of who shouldn't ever be put on the bench.

Litigant

Comment #: 4544
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
I am the plaintiff in a civil suit. The defendents asked for a summary judgement in July, 2006. Nothing has happened since,as of today (08/15/2007)both parties are still waiting as Judge Townes has yet to rule!

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: 3055
Rating:2.0
Comments:
In a pre-motion conference for a false arrest case, I found her to be very pro-police -- couldn't seem to comprehend that an officer might arrest someone without probable cause.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: 1292
Rating:3.7
Comments:
Difficulty understanding the arguments.