James
D-
97% — 110.5 of 114 opinions sound, per qwen3.8-27b; in the top 74% of 80 graded judges
On the assumption that the model is right — qwen3.8-27b reads the court's own disposition right 70% of the time, graded on a curve: A is the top fifth of the judges graded under this model, F the bottom fifth; ++ / + / − / −− within the band. How the grade is made.
Analysis
No analyses yet. When they exist, this shows counts of the model's findings across this judge's reviewed cases — with the court's own dispositions beside them, and only from 10 cases.
Cases
- Faras v. Lower California Development Co.
- Adams v. Wiesendanger
- Higbie v. Shields
- Needels v. Coffee
- Johnson v. Southern California Edison Co.
- Harrison v. Turner
- Behrenfeld v. Breedlove
- Trow v. Moody
- Hansen v. Hansen
- Gibson v. Civil Service Commission
- People v. Mallicoat
- People v. Cuin
- Des Granges v. Crall
- Spinks v. Superior Court of Los Angeles
- People v. Cory
- Mission Fixture Co. v. Potter
- People v. Davis
- McCormick Lumber Co. v. Highland Sch. Dist.
- Hamlin v. Barnhart
- Robinson v. Anderson
- Pac. Carbonator Co. v. Haydes & Son
- Burr v. MacLay Rancho Water Co.
- County of Los Angeles v. Hammel
- Smith v. Indus. Accident Comm'n of Cal.
- Yount v. Arakalian Bros. Co.