Hon. Lewis T. Babcock See Rating Details
District Judge See Comments
D.Colo.  
Average Rating:5.9 - 20 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:

  

What others have said about Hon. Lewis T. Babcock


Comments


Litigant

Comment #: 34160
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
Not really any room to depart from disgruntled comments. I didn't exactly deem his order explicitly reading: “Exercising my prerogative as a senior judge, I request that this case be reassigned.” Then again, as a pro se, black, woman litigant, having read others reviews, perhaps it was a blessing? Then again, not when I did not consent to U.S. Magistrate Judge Jurisdiction & go fig. I get Magistrate Judge Michael E. Hegarty ....Although this Mag. easily granted summary judgments to previous discriminative employers I filed Title VII suits against, he had no problem not recusing himself and following 28 U.S Code Sect.455(a-b)- “Any justice, judge, or magistrate judge of the United States shall disqualify himself in any proceeding in which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned. He shall also disqualify himself in the following circumstances: Where he has a personal bias or prejudice concerning a party.” Colorado Courts (esp. ARAPAHOE= Stapleton Spoils System; i.e. KKK)

Send e-mail to this poster 8/8/2021 8:38:24 PM

Other

Comment #: 33680
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
More focused on clearing his desk rather than right and wrong. Favors the rich & powerful over the law.
He dismissed a clear cut case in favor of the defendants.
[redacted by Ed.]

Send e-mail to this poster 2/26/2021 10:39:33 AM

Other

Comment #: 33324
Rating:1.0
Comments:
I wonder if he's in his bunker right now, too,during these protests
Horrifyingly biased. Absolutely unacceptable ??. He's been pulled out of retirement twice to do last minute quashing of my cases that Magistrate Gallagher launched on my behalf in the first place in 2016. I don't think he's helped one minority or woman. He dissmisses everything that shows blatant corruption in the Colorado Criminal justice system. GOOD OLE BOY! Apparently his court staff thinks he's lost a grip on current affairs? He just can't be anything but a bully...this generation of survivors and activists are not stopping. JUSTICE FOR ALL VICIMS OF POLICE VIOLENCE AND CORRUPTION IN THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM!

Send e-mail to this poster 6/9/2020 10:23:18 AM

Litigant

Comment #: 22902
Rating:1.0
Comments:
One of my attorneys tried to get out of the case because he was convinced Babcock was so biased we had no real chance of winning. Babcock abusively yelled at the other attorney so many times it probably made an impression on the jury; the attorney was so flustered by his outbursts she had a hard time handling the case. Babcock did nothing when he was told the opposing party had violated his orders not to reveal private medical information to the public. When I attempted to file a motion for perjury, clearly obvious because the opposing party's witnesses totally reversed what they said in their depositions on the stand, Babcock said that was "harassment" on my part (!??!) and threatened to punish me if I pursued it. Then he ordered my motion sealed so no one could see there was evidence the opposing party committed perjury. The opposing party, then confident they could get away with anything, stalked and harassed me for years. Babcock is not fit to sit on the bench. He is a Reagan appointee, very prejudiced and abusive toward attorneys in the courtroom.

Send e-mail to this poster 6/30/2015 11:47:37 PM

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: 22127
Rating:1.7
Comments:
extremely biased judge. Always rules in favor of big corporations and against individual plaintiffs. Reagan appointed him to protect "big business" and 30 years later, he is a faithful lackey to corporate America. If you represent plaintiffs against big corporations, and you draw this judge - don't even bother serving the complaint, as you will be thrown out of court on summary judgment. He's openly hostile to the 7th Amendment, and thinks all civil cases should be decided in the defendant's favor on summary judgment.

Send e-mail to this poster 10/27/2014 7:01:36 PM

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: 19106
Rating:10.0
Comments:
Great judge and I feel that way even though I think he made some mistakes in a major patent case I had before him. Now that he is on senior status he has the ability to pick the cases he wants to try. He recently decided to pass on a patent case of mine that was assigned to him. I was disappointed he did that but I believe he did that out of frustration with the Federal Circuit appellate court. I don't blame him. Many of the decisions coming out of the federal circuit recently are ridiculous.

Send e-mail to this poster 12/3/2012 12:40:24 PM

Civil Litigation - Govt.

Comment #: 9172
Rating:9.8
Comments:
He is knowledgeable and far more courteous than most of the federal judges in this judicial district. He has presided over two trials in which I was counsel. I have no trepidation about having a third before Judge Babcock

Send e-mail to this poster 9/9/2009 2:20:51 PM

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: 8271
Rating:8.9
Comments:
Even-handed and thoughtful.

Send e-mail to this poster 2/25/2009 12:33:46 PM

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: 7729
Rating:7.9
Comments:
Generally smart and even-handed.

Send e-mail to this poster 1/12/2009 11:02:47 AM

Court Staff

Comment #: 6764
Rating:2.7
Comments:
Most recently Judge Babcock sanctioned a pro-se litigant for filing a motion under FRCP 60, which he then denied upon reciept of the defendant's reply...without comment. I reviewed the docket in that case, and Judge Babcock has denied a half a dozen motions in a row upon reciept of the defendant's reply in the case with virtually no comment or factual finding of any significance attached to any of the said denials. (No rebuttal was even allowed by the pro-se litigant prior to any of the denials.) In fact I found that Judge Babcock even denied the pro-se litigant his statutory costs after the litigant won his patent infringement case at trial (a rare victory for any pro-se litigant, especially in the 10th Circuit). A disgrace to the judicial process, and to the rest of us that work within it. This is the United States, "with liberty and justice for all," except the pro-se litigants and anyone else (including staff) that upsets his version of reality.

Send e-mail to this poster 9/12/2008 11:53:30 PM

Court Staff

Comment #: 6457
Rating:4.2
Comments:
I would have to agree that his temper and his ability to apologize are equally disgraceful. In his review of a recent case, he denied a litigant all statutory costs and prejudgment interest due, with absolutely no reason given, after the litigant endured 10 years of patent litigation (and prevailed at trial pro se). Judge Babcock is a disgrace to the legal profession and the Tenth Circuit. Pro se or not, the law by statute required an award, or a valid reason for denial. Neither took place.

Send e-mail to this poster 7/8/2008 2:25:02 AM

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: 6449
Rating:4.5
Comments:
His primary interest seems to be clearing his desk rather than actually applying the merits to the law.

Send e-mail to this poster 7/5/2008 2:52:20 AM

Litigant

Comment #: 4792
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
Fails to review even his own docket for calendar errors. Fails to verify case law cited. A lazy individual to say the least.

Send e-mail to this poster 9/11/2007 12:14:56 AM

Court Staff

Comment #: 4341
Rating:5.6
Comments:
Treats court staff and the magistrates for that matter like they are a different species. Completely incapable of saying thank you, or of apologizing when he is wrong. Loses temper when inappropriate.

Send e-mail to this poster 7/13/2007 11:31:42 AM

Other

Comment #: 4286
Rating:9.0
Comments:
A good, solid judge

Send e-mail to this poster 7/4/2007 8:06:58 AM

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: 1874
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
Has great control of his docket, and is an effective Chief Judge. When he gets mad, look out! Also has difficulty making his mind up, but his decisions are typically fair in the end.

Send e-mail to this poster 8/25/2006 6:50:35 PM