The Robing Room

Hon. Lorna G. Schofield	See Rating Details
District Judge	See Comments
S.D.N.Y.
Average Rating:4.7 - 16 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

Please type what you see below:

Not an even number!

What others have said about Hon. Lorna G. Schofield

Comments

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: 35465
Rating:7.5

Comments:
Judge Schofield is pleasant and professional. She is pragmatic for the most part, and by and large I found her to be more or less even handed. However, she made a number of peculiar rulings both against us (plaintiffs) and for us in a complex medical malpractice case. She denied some things that were, in my opinion, so flat wrong that they would have led to a reversal of her if the trial didn’t go our way. For example, she excluded a diagnostic radiology experts testimony, because she concluded that the surgical oncologist testimony covered with the radiologist would talk about, and was there for duplicative. She then denied calling that diagnostic radiologist as a rebuttal witness, when the defendants rolled out in their case and chief, for the very first time in the entire history of the litigation, a brand new theory regarding interpretation of the radiological films. And she then denied the request to make an offer proof of what the diagnostic radiologist would testify about. On the other hand, she admitted very sensitive valuable evidence of the plaintiff involving the decedent’s words in writing and audio when the decedent was never deposed which was clearly in her discretion to admit or deny. She did not allow any voire dire, which I think was a mistake and despite my raising the issue with the court, which she dismissed out of hand, allowed a woman to serve on the jury who didn’t speak anything better than basic, broken English. She does have a command of the record but I got the distinct feeling that early on in the case she had clueless judicial clerks making rulings that flew in the face of basic FRCP. However, on balance she ruled for and against Plaintiffs and defendants pretty evenly which in hindsight shows weigh against her since the defense lawyers made unbelievable arguments that were over the top and we should have won most of the issues in dispute, despite how self serving that sounds. On one occasion the defense lawyers committed outright fraud by literally modifying her actual prior Order (the actual document) and then attaching it to their papers. She seemed in-phased, and ignored our hue and cry which is another troubling episode. She put the parties on a clock that seemed to short but was barely enough time. Overall I’d give her a 6.5 rating.

Civil Litigation - Govt.

Comment #: 34264
Rating:1.0

Comments:
For justice, that trash needs to give COVID-19 a huge hug.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: 32920
Rating:8.8

Comments:
Surprised by these comments. Seems opposite to my experience and my colleagues'. Judge Schofield is prepared, frank, and doesn't waste the parties' time. She has a great grasp of the record, and unlike some judges, doesn't just take the Government's word for it.

Litigant

Comment #: 32865
Rating:1.0

Comments:
Garbage. Pure garbage.

Court Staff

Comment #: 32833
Rating:9.9

Comments:
Judge Schofield is a very intelligent, fair, and rational judge. Her rulings are grounded in case law, while understanding limitations of previous trials. She is able to hear all sides of a story, but always rules in favor of attorneys who are prepared and argue their case most effectively.

Other

Comment #: 32755
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
64az