Hon. George Levi Russell III See Rating Details
District Judge See Comments
Average Rating:5.5 - 2 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      
Add a comment only


*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

Please type what you see below:


What others have said about Hon. George Levi Russell III


Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: 34343
I was a pro se litigant that experienced the displeasure in having my case reviewed by the (dis)honorable judge George L. Russell III. I'll be frank in saying that this person's courtroom decisions embodies the kind of corruption you'd see coming out of North Korea, Nazi Germany, or the dystopian world of George Orwell's 1984.

My case involved the Community College of Baltimore County (CCBC) profiling mentally ill students using their Student Incident Report (SIR) tool. This college hysterically did a weapon search on me and kicked me off their campus for four days after a professor filed an SIR about my mental condition. By the time I came back to campus, the Student Conduct Director had already concluded that I never violated any rules without them ever having to hear my side of the story.

After years of them trying to cover up this SIR about my mental disabilities by lying about its existence and dealing with intimidation tactics of them baselessly threatening to have me prosecuted for violating Maryland's wiretapping laws like Linda Tripp was (because one of their employees thought I had some secret tape recorder running while asking about the SIR), I eventually filed a lawsuit against the school and that made its way to Judge Russell III's bench.

I submitted all sorts of exhibits demonstrating that the college from top to bottom holds prejudice against the mentally ill (look up Charles Whittington and how CCBC wanted to use psychiatric analysis as a way of determining if he was a danger), how the college offered pretextual excuses for their actions by lying and offering changing/conflicting explanations, how their actions didn't match up with the polices and procedures outlined by their Department of Public Safety's guidelines, and how the college retaliated against me for filing suit by reversing their disciplinary ruling and publicly defaming me with abhorrent accusations.

Russell III responded by dismissing my counts of Section 504 discrimination and retaliation, and in his order, mentioned NOTHING about their lies and evidence of disability discrimination. In fact, he didn't just omit all of the strong points of my case, he had the audacity to write his ruling that made me look as if I was stupid. Despite the SIR on my mental disabilities being referred to as "the case" regarding my removal from campus, AND the reporting teacher's supervisor writing in an email that I was removed based on this SIR about my mental disabilities, this judge had the gall to claim that there was no evidence to suggest disability discrimination, and after snipping apart and mangling everything I presented in my lawsuit, Russell III showed me how little "honor" he had by writing my claims fell "woefully" short. Worse yet, this college reversed their disciplinary decision after I filed a lawsuit by telling the judge I made threats and presented twisted versions of events to ruin my reputation. For example, when I was given a philosophy class group project to do a presentation discussing the moral responsibility of murderers, the school cut out the part where I was told to do this as an assignment, gave ZERO context, and told the story as if I randomly got up in front of a class and started talking about murdering and murderers. And of course, Russell III couldn't acknowledge the college's misconduct, so he went along with their libel, referred to me as being "odd" in his ruling, and lied about me admitting to the abhorrent accusations the college blindsided me with. I lost at least one job opportunity because of the damage this college did with their actions and I'll probably lose out on the job opportunities that do background checks that profile mental health records. I have no criminal record, never did illegal drugs, and the only thing that disqualifies me is this school forcing me off campus and doing a weapon search because they're afraid that every mentally disabled student is going to be the next Virginia Tech shooter (even the college's spokesperson, Hope Davis, specifically named the Virginia Tech when talking about being careful in this "post-Virginia Tech world").

He's an absolute disgrace to American values, and an absolute danger to the rights of Americans while sitting on the bench. He SHOULD be impeached, fired, and disbarred from practice, but unfortunately, it seems he feels emboldened to comfortably make "the wrong" decision because no one else that could hold him accountable will ever do so. Also, let me be clear in saying that this clearly wasn't a simple mistake on his part. I filed a motion to reconsider while pointing out all of the info he omitted and he denied the motion writing that I never raised any new arguments or information.
[Redacted by Editor]

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: 19396
I worked with this man in private practice, between his tenures with US Attorney, before he became a state-court or federal judge. He was the first to congratulate me when I passed the Maryland Bar in 2000

He is a good man and will be a fine judge as was his father, who both showed me nothing but exemplary good will and kindness in trying to get me a job with the local PD when my job was eliminated.