Moskowitz
B+
99% — 74.5 of 75 opinions sound, per qwen3.8-27b; in the top 26% 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.
1cases reviewed on appeal
76opinions authored
103panels sat on (not as author)
—1 merits decisions: a rate is shown from 10
Outcomes on appeal
Areas
By year: 1997 1 ·
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 authored (every role)
- United States v. Olmos-Gonzales
- Dremak v. Iovate Health Sciences Group, Inc.
- Repara v. Beers
- Ministry of Defense & Support for the Armed Forces v. Cubic Defense Systems, Inc.
- United States v. Vega-Ortiz
- In re Grand Jury Proceedings
- Hayes v. Dovey
- Valdez v. Kismet Acquisition, LLC
- In Re Hydroxycut Marketing & Sales Practices Litigation
- Dremak v. Iovate Health Sciences Group, Inc.
- Gomez v. Rossi Concrete, Inc.
- Dalton v. Lee Publications, Inc.
- United States v. Flores-Villar
- David v. Giurbino
- Raduga USA Corp. v. United States Department of State
- Swenson v. T-MOBILE USA, INC.
- Pirouzian v. SLM Corp.
- Sprint Telephony PCS, L.P. v. County of San Diego
- United States v. Olave-Valencia
- Jawad v. Barnhart
- United States v. Interian-Mata
- BRANNIAN v. City of San Diego
- United States v. Approximately 64,695 Pounds of Shark Fins
- Zarco v. Burt
- Partnoy v. Shelley