OurFirm.ai

Judicial behavioral profile

Justice Mitchell J.
Danziger

New York Supreme Court, Bronx County

What Justice Danziger has required, taken from his transcripts, dockets, and decisions (published and unpublished).

Get the full profileRead the two free patterns

Parlatore Law Group · Sher Tremonte · Bruno Law · and more

Behavioral summary

In the cited rulings, Justice Danziger found trial questions in the City’s own evidence. He distinguished specific missing evidence from requests that merely hoped to find something useful.

These are patterns across the cited decisions, not findings about a disposition toward either side or about any litigant’s character.

Observed patterns

Each pattern is labelled by how many distinct cases show it and footnoted to the ruling. Where the record limits a pattern, the limit stays with it.

The City’s own evidence could defeat its request for dismissal

Recurring across three matters

The City’s own submissions sometimes prevented dismissal. In Lopez, testimony showed prior notice relevant to supervision. The defendants’ own evidence established that they started the prosecution and that it ended in the plaintiffs’ favor. In Thompson, conflicting accounts left the initial stop’s legality unresolved, even though later events justified arrest.

Preparation point

Look for the facts needed to oppose dismissal in the City’s own submissions.

How it played outSituation, action, outcome
The situation
The City requested dismissal.
What he did
He checked its own evidence for unanswered facts.
What made a difference
A later justification did not settle the legality of earlier conduct.
In his words1 quote

“defendants' own evidence establishes questions of liability”

Lopez v New York City Dept. of Educ., at *6. On questions raised by the defendants’ own evidence.

In the cited cases3 rulings

Thompson: later discovery of contraband did not settle whether the initial stop was lawful.

He distinguished useful missing evidence from hopes for more discovery

Recurring across three matters

Justice Danziger considered what the missing evidence could change. He ordered video disclosure before a lawsuit and before the claimant’s sworn municipal hearing, so the claimant could frame the claim with access to the footage. He decided contractor and tree-well motions when documents answered the claimed gap or the request for more evidence was speculative.

Preparation point

Identify the specific missing evidence and what it would change.

How it played outSituation, action, outcome
The situation
A party claimed that important evidence was missing.
What he did
He asked what that evidence would change.
What made a difference
Hope alone did not postpone judgment.
In his words1 quote

“no precedent compels this court to deny the application either.”

Matter of Barillaro v City of New York, 53 Misc 3d at 310. On granting video disclosure without binding precedent requiring denial.

In the cited cases3 rulings

Hennessy: the contract, punch list, and completion letter backed the contractor’s affidavit, so he did not wait for more discovery.

Sacko: hopes for more evidence about responsibility for the tree well did not postpone judgment.

Barillaro: he ordered surveillance-footage disclosure before the City’s statutory §50-h examination.

Sexual-misconduct reports mattered; transport violations did not give the same warning

Recurring across two matters

Justice Danziger examined what the school had been told before the alleged abuse.

Preparation point
How it played outSituation, action, outcomeIn his wordsHis quotesIn the cited cases2 rulings

He considered the stop, arrest, and use of force separately

Recurring across three matters

Justice Danziger’s older force rulings distinguished alleged beatings after restraint from tight-handcuff complaints followed by loosening and bruising that received no treatment.

Preparation point
How it played outSituation, action, outcomeIn his wordsHis quotesIn the cited cases3 rulings

Heavy storms made three- and four-day clearance delays reasonable

Recurring across two matters

Justice Danziger assessed the clearance delay against the storm conditions.

Preparation point
How it played outSituation, action, outcomeIn his wordsHis quotesIn the cited cases2 rulings

He did not grant dismissal on defenses the parties had not raised

Recurring across two matters

Justice Danziger decided the grounds and parties covered by the motions before him.

Preparation point
How it played outSituation, action, outcomeIn his wordsHis quotesIn the cited cases2 rulings

Cited rulings

Every observation traces to one of these decisions. The six behind the free patterns are listed here; the other five are in the full profile.

MatterIndex No.DecidedCitationPattern
Sacko v City of New York21898/2020EMar. 11, 20252025 NY Slip Op 34561(U)Pattern 02
Matter of Barillaro v City of New York-June 27, 20162016 NY Slip Op 26203Pattern 02
Sosa v City of New York300547/13Dec. 22, 20152015 NY Slip Op 51871(U)Pattern 01
Thompson v City of New York-Dec. 15, 20152015 NY Slip Op 25419Pattern 01
Hennessy v City of New York307847/09June 19, 20142014 NY Slip Op 50941(U)Pattern 02
Lopez v New York City Dept. of Educ.20288/04Mar. 24, 20142014 NY Slip Op 50493(U)Pattern 01

Built from the cited written decisions, published as NY Slip Op rulings and cited by printed page. Quotations are as printed, with only quotation-mark typography normalized. Confirm any passage against the decision before relying on it in a filing. OurFirm.ai is not affiliated with or endorsed by the court or any judge.

How to read this profile

Judge AI reports what a judge said and did in cited decisions, and labels how far each observation reaches. It does not forecast outcomes, compute grant rates, or characterize temperament, motive, or bias, and a question from the bench is never reported as a ruling. It informs your judgment; it does not replace it.

How Judge AI is built
Observed conduct
A specific ruling, order, or statement in a cited decision.
Recurring across matters
The same narrow conduct in two or more distinct cited cases. Not a rate.
Repeated within one matter
Several instances inside one litigation. Never counted as corroboration.
Isolated
One cited ruling. Reported, never generalized into a trait.

Other profiled judges

Built the same way, from each judge's own written decisions. Name any judge on your docket and we will build theirs. All New York profiles

Questions about this profile

Get the full profile

How has Justice Danziger handled the City’s requests for dismissal?

In the cited rulings he checked the City’s own evidence for unanswered facts, and in some cases that evidence prevented dismissal. A later justification did not settle the legality of earlier conduct. A negligent-hiring claim was still dismissed where later notice did not show notice at hiring.

How has Justice Danziger handled claims that evidence is missing?

He asked what the missing evidence would change. He ordered video disclosure before suit in one case, but decided other motions where documents answered the claimed gap or the hope for more evidence was speculative.

Can Judge AI predict how Justice Danziger will rule?

No. Judge AI builds behavioral profiles from real opinions, oral argument transcripts, and docket records so you can see how a judge has responded to arguments like yours before. It informs your judgment; it does not replace it or forecast an outcome.

Where does this profile come from?

From Justice Danziger’s written decisions. The profile cites 11 rulings across 11 cases from 2014 to 2025, each by case name, NY Slip Op citation, and page.

What is in the full profile?

All six observed patterns with every pinpoint, the limits and exceptions the record contains, and the preparation points that follow from them. We walk you through it on a 30-minute call and can build the profile for the judge on your next matter.

Judges like hearing their own words back to them.

Get all six patterns on Justice Danziger, with every pinpoint, on a 30-minute walkthrough. Then name the judge on your next matter and we will build that profile too.

Get the full profile

Enterprise MSA & BAA provided · Onboarding in 24 hours

2 of 6 patterns freeGet the full profile