Hon. David Horowitz, Retired -- ADR Services

[Avocat]

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.

[Law Monster]

I found Horowitz to not be a good mediator or arbitrator. He does not communicate any legal ****yis to the parties, he rules, and might say, "fail to meet burden of proof", or "I don't think so", but just does not come accross as knowing the law. He rules by the seat of his pants, or the smell test.

As a mediator, he gave a bottom line settlement proposal which made sense, and I reccomended it to my client, but because the judge did not forcefully explain why it was a good deal or the legal reasons concerning it, the proposal was not accepted by my client.

I would not use him again.