Hon. Holly B. Fitzsimmons See Rating Details
Magistrate Judge See Comments
D.Conn.  
Average Rating:7.2 - 11 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)
  Items marked with (*) are averaged into the displayed overall rating
Comments



What others have said about Hon. Holly B. Fitzsimmons


Comments


Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: 21548
Rating:3.2
Comments:
She lacks a sense of fairness. She did not conference the case once during the trial. Every ruling was against the military reservist, giving him no chance of winning. She had no idea of how to determine credibility. She did not marshal the evidence. This judge lacks a sense of humanity. She may be effective when settling cases, but she had no conferences and made no attempt to do so. She believed that there was no merit to the case before it began. Did she know the plaintiff or his law firm? If so, there was a severe conflict of interest. Under a pretense of possessing knowledge, she disallows evidence unfairly and permits wrong inferences. In the case of Hart vs. Epstein, she exhibited a preference for Epstein, as if she knew him personally. She showed a lack of knowledge of the USERRA law. Her past indicated that she had a conflict of interest and should have excused herself. Her only answer to criticism is to send U.S. Marshals. Her rulings to exclude evidence favorable to the reservist invited back from Iraq and then fired without cause within three days is a tragedy for our country, which has been put under the rug.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: 21543
Rating:9.5
Comments:
Judge Fitzsimmons has repeatedly settled complex employment cases for me in a very even-handed and kind way. At one point, she sat for over 40 minutes and allowed a distraught plaintiff to describe in horrible detail what had happened. She was calm, supportive, and effective in bringing the parties together. I've had decisions from her go against me, but they have been well-reasoned and fair.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: 20947
Rating:3.2
Comments:
Re: Hart vs. Epstein. 1) She should have recused herself. 2) Bifurcation was an abuse of judicial discretion. 3) She allowed improper inferences. 4) She refused to allow the jury to know that the U.S. Department of Labor had found in favor of the active reservist called to active duty. 5) She refused to charge the jury that the decision by the Department of Justice was not on the merits, which is the law. 6) She refused to charge the jury to find on the cause of action for retaliation, although she expressed surprise that there had been no hearing on the fallacious charge of the reservist violating restrictive covenant. 7) She determined that a disinterested witness should be characterized the same as a party witness.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: 12463
Rating:2.8
Comments:
She did not recuse herself based on her past experience in wrking as a US Attorney. she showed marked partiallity and lack of intellect and ability to differentiate. She does not deserve to be a Federal Judge.She displayed bias in her rulings and lack of the ability to distinguish and judge credibility. She did not recuse herself when her background favored employers and she formerly worked for the US Attorney's office whose reputation was an issue.

Other

Comment #: 11933
Rating:1.0
Comments:
She lacks the ability to distinguish cases. She did not disclose predilections before the trial of a case.She lacks common sense or life experiences. She treated military reservist as a second class citizen.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: 11665
Rating:9.0
Comments:
Has the most real trial experience of any judge in the Connecticut district. Friendly, unassuming, very smart. Not garrulous or overly intrusive during trials; let's the lawyers try their cases. A huge asset to the federal bench.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: 11375
Rating:9.7
Comments:
Excellent. Thoughtful, informal but no-nonsense, smart as a whip.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: 8945
Rating:8.8
Comments:
Excellent Settlement Judge - Was well prepared for settlement discussions in complex insurance matter. Took the time and resources to settle the matter.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: 4565
Rating:8.3
Comments:
Truly an excellent Judge. Smart, Fair, professional, pleasant and very effective.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: 3012
Rating:10.0
Comments:
Highly respected and well-liked, Fitzsimmons is a great asset to the federal bar. Very fair, treats lawyers and litigants with respect - my clients like her and trust her judgment on matters of settlement.