OurFirm.ai

Judicial behavioral profile

Justice Reginald A.
Boddie

New York Supreme Court, Kings County

What Justice Boddie has required, taken from his transcripts, dockets, and decisions (published and unpublished).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 Boddie checked whether a problem was corrected and how litigation documents were handled. He protected a business facing actual disruption. Predicted losses did not justify relief, and a lawyer’s email did not replace the required waiver signed by an officer.

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.

He looked at whether lawyers corrected problems after notice

Recurring across three matters

Justice Boddie considered what happened after a problem was identified. Leaving it uncorrected and making the opponent do extra work differed from correcting it promptly. Criticism alone did not justify every penalty.

Preparation point

Show what was corrected and what extra work the problem caused.

How it played outSituation, action, outcome
The situation
A party challenged a misleading filing or failure to follow a direction.
What he did
He checked notice, the correction, and the work caused for the opponent.
What made a difference
Prompt correction and no shown use or harm weighed against contempt.
In his words1 quote

“without explanation or correction even after the issue was raised”

Hilpert v 16 Judge SPV LLC, printed p. 15. His written description of the false citations left uncorrected after notice.

In the cited cases3 rulings

Hilpert left false case citations uncorrected. The cost award covered only the resulting cross-motion.

VOCAL distinguished the uncorrected production chart from withdrawn citations the court had not relied on.

Crestview denied contempt after prompt disclosure of sealed responses. No use of them or harm to the opponent was shown.

He controlled how litigation documents were searched, shared, and handled

Recurring across three matters

Justice Boddie addressed how documents were searched for, who could see them, and where they were kept. Obtaining documents for litigation did not settle how they could be used afterward.

Preparation point

Identify what went wrong and the safeguard needed.

How it played outSituation, action, outcome
The situation
The dispute concerned searches, public access, or custody of restricted documents.
What he did
He ordered safeguards aimed at the particular problem.
What made a difference
Access for litigation did not permit unrestricted public sharing.
In his words1 quote

“not a license for unrestricted public dissemination”

Huebner v Elberg, printed p. 5. His written distinction between litigation access and public sharing.

In the cited cases3 rulings

VOCAL required details about document holders and searches, with a 14-day deadline and a consequence for noncompliance.

Huebner restricted public access to about 16,000 legal-file documents.

Crestview required the original envelopes for inspection and supervised shredding within ten days, even though contempt was denied.

He granted protection for actual disruption of a business

Recurring across three matters

Justice Boddie granted limited protection for actual interference with a business.

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

He corrected clear contract mistakes without filling in missing terms

Recurring across two matters

Justice Boddie used the transaction documents to correct an obvious contract error.

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 four behind the free patterns are listed here; the other four are in the full profile.

MatterIndex No.DecidedCitationPattern
Voices of Community Activists & Leaders (VOCAL-NY), Inc. v Brisa Bldrs. Corp.528865/2023Mar. 26, 20262026 NY Slip Op 31230(U)Pattern 01
Huebner v Elberg527098/2024Jan. 23, 20262026 NY Slip Op 30293(U)Pattern 02
Hilpert v 16 Judge SPV LLC522220/2025Dec. 4, 20252025 NY Slip Op 34683(U)Pattern 01
Crestview 360 Holdings LLC v Wercberger504060/2025July 7, 20252025 NY Slip Op 32376(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 Boddie treated filings that were not corrected after notice?

In the cited rulings he checked notice, the correction, and the work caused for the opponent. False citations left uncorrected after the issue was raised led to a cost award limited to the resulting cross-motion, while prompt correction with no shown use or harm weighed against contempt.

How has Justice Boddie handled access to litigation documents?

He ordered safeguards aimed at the particular problem, such as details about searches, limits on public access, and supervised handling of restricted documents. Access for litigation did not permit unrestricted public sharing.

Can Judge AI predict how Justice Boddie 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 Boddie’s written decisions. The profile cites 8 rulings across 8 cases from 2025 to 2026, each by case name, NY Slip Op citation, and page.

What is in the full profile?

All four 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 four patterns on Justice Boddie, 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 4 patterns freeGet the full profile