Avocat
09-01-2004, 10:14 PM
Judge Horowitz is a decent guy, but as a mediator he is ineffectual. He will not volunteer a reasoned opinion, if asked directly he will say "I think a jury will find against you", or "I don't think you will win". Most lawyers in a mediation want an expert opinion from the retired judge to use to convince the client (or the attorney) whether or not the case/defense has merit and if so what is it worth/or will cost to try.
Basically, he is a good listener but does not provide enough feed back.
Recently I had him as an arbitrator, same thing, he makes decisions without telling you why. I'm not shy so I pressed him, his response is along the lines of "a falure of proof". Come on, tell me what is the reason, you have to in your written opinion/judgment. He then added just enough to the written statement of decision to make it probably stick. As it turns out it was a compromise and my opposition also was not happy. So guess what, we both decided to chuck the arbitration and sue in Superior Court!
Anyway, he had mixed reviews as a bench officer, mostly issuing sanctions when probably not warranted, he is among the less expensive retired judges out there, and there is a reason why.
Basically, he is a good listener but does not provide enough feed back.
Recently I had him as an arbitrator, same thing, he makes decisions without telling you why. I'm not shy so I pressed him, his response is along the lines of "a falure of proof". Come on, tell me what is the reason, you have to in your written opinion/judgment. He then added just enough to the written statement of decision to make it probably stick. As it turns out it was a compromise and my opposition also was not happy. So guess what, we both decided to chuck the arbitration and sue in Superior Court!
Anyway, he had mixed reviews as a bench officer, mostly issuing sanctions when probably not warranted, he is among the less expensive retired judges out there, and there is a reason why.