"The Robing Room: NY State Judges

Hon. Timothy Dufficy	See Rating Details
Civil Court
Queens County	See Comments

Attorney Average Rating: 3.2 - 16 rating(s) Non-Attorney Average Rating: - 0 rating(s)	Please send me alerts on this judge E-mail Address:

Add your own rating

E-Mail Address ()

* *

Confirm E-mail Address

* * *

Zip

Occupation

Add a comment only

Only items marked with (*) are averaged into the displayed overall rating.

General Rating Criteria

* 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=Chronically Late,10=Always on Time)
* General Ability to Handle Pre-Trial Matters		(1=Not all Able, 10=Extremely Able)
* General Ability as a Trial Judge		(1=Not all Able, 10=Extremely Able)
Flexibility In Scheduling		(1=Completely Inflexible,10=Very Flexible)

Criminal Rating Criteria (if applicable)

* Evenhandedness in Criminal Litigation		(1=Demonstrates Bias,10=Entirely Evenhanded)
General Inclination Regarding Bail		(1=Pro-Defense,10=Pro-Government)
Involvement in Plea Discussions		(1=Not at all Involved, 10=Very Involved)
General Inclination in Criminal Cases Pretrial Stage		(1=Pro-prosecution,10=Pro-defense)
General Inclination in Criminal Cases Trial Stage		(1=Pro-prosecution,10=Pro-defense)
General Inclination in Criminal Cases Sentencing Stage		(1=Pro-prosecution,10=Pro-defense)

Civil Rating Criteria (if applicable)

* Evenhandedness in Civil Litigation		(1=Not at all Evenhanded,10=Entirely Evenhanded)
Involvement in Settlement Discussions		(1=Not at all Involved,10=Very Involved)
General Inclination		(1=Pro-defendant, 10=Pro-plaintiff)

Comments

Please type what you see below:

Not an even number!

What others have said about Hon. Timothy Dufficy

Comments

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: NY13117
Rating:1.5

Comments:
A truly awful and unfair jurist. He let defense counsel blow every deadline and delay case for years despite an elderly client with an age preference. He then permitted defense counsel to file a summary judgment motion well beyond the deadline and 33 days before the trial. He ended up granting defendant’s motion the day before the trial despite a non-party witness affidavit being submitted which clearly created an issue of fact. When I called the part before the decision was rendered, the part clerk said the judge wasn’t feeling well and he would need to adjourn the trial. Then the decision dismissing the case came down. He clearly did not want to handle the trial so he dismissed the case on the eve of trial. 4 years of unfair litigation. He should be kicked off the bench and forced to retire.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: NY11116
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
Totally ignorant. Made successive motions. I lost the first one. So the second one I dumbed down and only cited one clear law. His ruling cited the law but adds the word NOT. What a fool.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: NY10620
Rating:9.0

Comments:
I very surprised by many of the comments. I had a personal injury trial in front of him a little over month ago. Basic pedestrian/motor vehicle with a few evidentiary wrinkles (but nothing crazy). He was very fair and let both sides try their case. With the few wrinkles that came up his rulings were spot on and well reasoned (reading straight from a case or text at times). He very l, very courteous to both sides and gave us all the flexibility we needed during the trial. I feel I should mention that his court staff is one of the next in the city. Overall an Excellent assignment!!!
Full disclosure, I have never argued a motion before the judge, so I can’t comment on those situations.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: NY10428
Rating:1.0

Comments:
The judge is lazy. His law secretary claims that he reads papers? He does not. He is more interested in getting papers and motions off his desk. If is unfortunate that we were assigned such a lazy man.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: NY8087
Rating:1.5

Comments:
He is more concerned with answering his phone while on the bench and is inept and shouldn't be a Judge

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: NY8014
Rating:1.0

Comments:
Doesn't seem to pay close attention to what's going on in the courtroom and doesn't appear to read papers submitted to him. Decisions are very extemporaneous with little or no thought given.
Not a very good judge. Not fair at all.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: NY7931
Rating:1.0

Comments:
Extremely Biased
If you are looking to get a fair shot, this is not the guy. Attorneys and litigants beware.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: NY7882
Rating:1.0

Comments:
Not only do I agree with the earlier comments, but I think they are way too kind in describing the absolute lack of competence, knowledge and ability to function on the bench.
Yes, he is an absolute disgrace.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: NY7835
Rating:1.0

Comments:
He does not know the law. He does not read the papers. He does not listen to the arguments. An extremely disrespectful and unprofessional demeanor. Very ivory tower kind of guy disassociated with reality. Extremely arbitrary in decision making. This is an individual who should not be on the bench or even be practicing law. In many respects he represents everything wrong with the legal system. Textbook incompetence. Definitely something off with this guy. He's not normal. There is somethings wrong with him,

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: NY7713
Rating:2.4

Comments:
Not very sharp on the law at all. Unable to grasp simple concepts of law. His Law Secretary is just as inept.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: NY7667
Rating:1.0

Comments:
Not competent at all. Shocked that
Someone of his limited intellectual and legal ability made it to the bench.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: NY7402
Rating:1.0

Comments:
A disgrace to the bench. A disgrace to the legal field. Probably learned to practice law in a pet shop; assuming he learned how to practice law at all,
[Redacted by Ed.]

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: NY7120
Rating:1.0

Comments:
This guy is as lazy as he is stupid. He simply does not care. A horrible ignorant judge with absolutely no idea how to practice law.
Probably got on the bench because of political connections. Certainly didn't get there based on ability.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: NY6763
Rating:8.9

Comments:
I was assigned for trial before Justice Dufficy on a PI case. His part is very well organized, and the staff move things along. The law clerk does an informal conference to get an idea what it's about, how long it will take, and what you will need like interpreters, etc. This is a good idea. The worst thing is to have the jurors and your clients sitting around while they try to get a Korean interpreter. You talk a little settlement. His clerk knows the law well, tries to use it to show strengths and weaknesses. He doesn't push too hard. He knows the PJI inside and out, sets up the charges and everything is ready to go quickly. He's been around. Then you go in to see the judge and talk settlement. The judge pushes both sides equally. If you can't settle, he runs the trial fairly, makes good rulings, and you're done, one way or another. I lost the case because the jury didn't like my client, or the evidence, the law, my and my adversary's presentation of the case and the choices that I made, not because of how Dufficy acted. I have great respect for his even-handedness. He's flexible with time, if you have a doctor's appointment (which I did). If fairness is the test, he passes with flying colors.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: NY6758
Rating:9.4

Comments:
He's very pleasant to appear in front of, and lets you try your case. Decisions are well reasoned and based on recent law. I disagree with the other comment, probably made by a disgruntled guy who lost. I lost a SJ motion I made, and the decision explained why and detailed existing law in the area. I wasn't happy I lost, but at least the decision was well reasoned and we'll supported.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: NY6097
Rating:1.0

Comments:
His SJ decision on a complex case reflected ignorance of basic long standing contract principles and a lack of attention to detail in ignoring directly applicable case law.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: NY1634
Rating:9.8

Comments:
Excellent professional judge. Judge Dufficy is a courteous and respectable judge who knows the law. He has respect for attorneys and handles matters in a fair manner.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: NY1273
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
Judge Dufficy is repectful of all litigants and has an excellent grasp of the law. He is practical and encourages quick resolutions of all matters without wasting valuable court resources. He is truly a Judge's Judge and a pleasure to appear in front of.