Hon. Jan E. Dubois See Rating Details
District Judge See Comments
Average Rating:7.7 - 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. Jan E. Dubois



Comment #: 6657
3rd Circuit reversed Judge Dubois after he granted a new trial based on flaky testimony that didn’t have merit. Case no: 06-4080 US vs Kelly. The District Court abused its discretion in granting Kelly’s motion. Specifically, the government contends that the District Court erred in concluding that (1) Kelly had exercised sufficient diligence in regard to the discovery of the new evidence and (2) the newly discovered evidence would “probably produce an acquittal” at a new trial. The Government urged the District Court to conclude that the testimony was not credible and that, accordingly, Kelly could not satisfy the fifth prong of Iannelli. The Court declared, at the outset of its discussion, that “Jones’s prospective testimony, if believed, would probably produce an acquittal, and the jury is the appropriate fact-finder.” The testimony of a drunk and two that were never present at the bar in the first place. For the foregoing reasons, we will REVERSE the order of the District Court granting Kelly’s motion for a new trial and REMAND for the entry of a judgment of conviction and for sentencing.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: 3570
Judge Dubois is a meticulous and hard-working jurist who expects the same of lawyers. His Honor appreciates quality lawyering and goes out of his way to be very fair.