Thompson
B
99% — 70.5 of 71 opinions sound, per qwen3.8-27b; in the top 28% 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.
Outcomes on appeal
Areas
By year: 1995 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
- In re C.A. CA4/3
- S.D. v. J.M. CA4/3
- Real Properties Network v. D'Alessio CA4/3
- In re Flores CA4/3
- Lee v. Justin Auto Repair, Inc. CA4/3
- Knight v. South Orange Community College Dist.
- Colton v. Alai CA4/3
- People v. Flores CA4/3
- Performance Production Co. v. Virus Internat., Inc. CA4/3
- Tiger Loans v. Hao CA4/3
- Maldonado v. Fast Auto Loans
- People v. Labudis CA4/3
- People v. Vallejo CA4/3
- People v. Patrick CA4/3
- People v. Lipptrapp
- People v. Lopez CA4/3
- Marriage of Pallo CA4/3
- Reiner v. Cox Communications Cal., LLC CA4/3
- Protect Our Homes and Hills v. County of Orange CA4/3
- Cooper v. Gallegos CA4/3
- Guy v. Suntrust Bank Holding Co. CA4/3
- People v. Kauffman CA4/3
- People v. Murphy CA4/3
- People v. Ramirez CA4/3
- McCloskey v. City of Anaheim CA4/3