Smith
F--
provisional — 80% — 4.0 of 5 opinions sound, per qwen3.8-27b; would rank in the top 100% of 80 graded judges, but ten opinions are needed for a standing letter — 5 so far
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.
6cases reviewed on appeal
732opinions authored
1,565panels sat on (not as author)
—5 merits decisions: a rate is shown from 10
Outcomes on appeal
Areas
By year: 2014 1 · 2013 1 · 1998 1 · 1914 1 · 1910 1 · 1900 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
- People v. Head
- People Ex Rel. San Francisco Bay Conservation & Development Commisson v. Smith
- Norman I. Krug Real Estate Investments, Inc. v. Praszker
- People v. Jose M.
- Bayside Auto & Truck Sales, Inc. v. Department of Transportation
- Ladas v. California State Automobile Ass'n
- Hansen v. Workers' Compensation Appeals Board
- People v. Reed
- Cohen v. McIntyre
- Donohue v. San Francisco Housing Authority
- Wilson v. Century 21 Great Western Realty
- McIntosh v. Aubry
- People v. Bishop
- Pietrelli v. Peacock
- People v. Woods
- People v. Monroe
- Sierra Club v. California Coastal Commission
- People v. McCullough
- Reebok International, Ltd. v. Marnatech Enterprises, Inc.
- People v. Turner
- People v. Torres
- People v. Hill
- California Labor Federation v. Occupational Safety & Health Standards Board
- In Re Marriage of Hinman
- McKinney v. Department of Motor Vehicles