KYJKnow Your Judge v0.6.2by SwansLake
Judge directoryThomas A. Rademaker

Active Trial judge

Thomas A. Rademaker

Nassau County Supreme Court, Civil Term

New York · Nassau

Identity verifiedOfficial profile locatedOfficial sources collectedPresentation intelligence
01

Overview

Identity and service

Official judge-specific and circuitwide procedural guidance has been located for this profile.

Judicial role
Supreme Court Justice, IAS Part 11
Service status
Active
Court level
Trial
Jurisdiction
State
02

Background

Biography and career

Gender
Male
Race
White
Political affiliation
Republican (via other)

Education

  • Touro CollegeJD, 1996
  • SUNY OneontaBusiness/Managerial Economics, 1993

Professional career

  • Practitioner, David K. Lieb, P.C., 1997-1998
  • Practitioner, Peace, Agresta, Lemke & Blum, Esqs., NY, 1998-2000
  • Practitioner, Thomas A. Rademaker, P.C., NY, 2000-2003

Judicial service

  • Principal law clerk to the Hon. Philip Grella, New York Court of Claims, NY, 2003-2014
  • Judge, New York Family Court, Nassau County, NY, 2015-2019
  • Acting Justice, New York Supreme Court, Nassau County, NY, 2018-2020
  • Justice, New York Supreme Court, Nassau County, NY, 2020-2033

Source: CourtListener / Free Law Project public biographical data. Demographic and political labels are incomplete, source-attributed, and are not used to infer judicial behavior. “Via appointer” describes CourtListener’s attribution method, not verified personal party membership.

03

Before you appear

Preparation checklist

  1. 01

    Read the judge-specific standing order first when one is listed.

  2. 02

    Check the docket and case orders for requirements that supersede broader guidance.

  3. 03

    Confirm current remote-access and courtroom technology arrangements before the proceeding.

Scope note

Judge-specific guidance is shown first. Broader applicable courtroom, courtwide, districtwide, and statewide guidance remains separately labeled below it.

04

Presentation rules

What the public sources say

Judge-specificExplicit
Trial

Justice Rademaker requires a list of all pre-marked exhibits at the trial conference and advance notice of any exhibit the parties cannot stipulate into evidence.

Page
5
Section
Trials
Last checked
July 28, 2026
Verification
Automated checks passed
Read supporting source excerpt
A list of all pre-marked exhibits shall also be provided to the Court and to the stenographer. Counsel shall notify the Court of their inability to stipulate to the admission of any exhibits to be offered at trial.

The requirement is stated in an official standing order naming this judge.

StatewideExplicit
Court Proceeding

Leave required

New York statewide rules require permission before photographing, filming, videotaping, audiotaping, broadcasting, or telecasting in court facilities, including courtrooms.

Page
Official rule page
Section
Part 29.1(a); party litigation recording requests and appellate/court-specific permissions are separately addressed
Last checked
July 26, 2026
Verification
Automated checks passed
Read supporting source excerpt
Taking photographs, films or videotapes, or audiotaping, broadcasting or telecasting, in a courthouse including any courtroom, office or hallway thereof, at any time or on any occasion, whether or not the court is in session, is forbidden, unless permission of the Chief Administrator of the Courts or a designee of the Chief Administrator is first obtained

The requirement is stated in an official statewide source and is attached as applicable guidance, not as a personal preference.

StatewideExplicit
Hearing Or Trial

Allowed with notice

The official Guide to New York Evidence identifies court control over presentation of evidence as a statewide evidence topic; counsel should expect the assigned judge to control the mode and order of proof.

Page
Official evidence guide page
Section
Article 1, Court's Role table of contents; consult the current rule document and case-specific orders before relying on demonstratives
Last checked
July 26, 2026
Verification
Automated checks passed
Read supporting source excerpt
1.07. COURT CONTROL OVER PRESENTATION OF EVIDENCE

The requirement is stated in an official statewide source and is attached as applicable guidance, not as a personal preference.

StatewideExplicit
Trial

Allowed with notice

In New York Supreme Court and County Court civil cases, the court may require indexed trial exhibit binders, notebooks, or electronic equivalents for the court, counsel, and witnesses.

Page
Official rule page
Section
22 NYCRR 202.20-h(b); exhibit format and timing may be changed by the court
Last checked
July 26, 2026
Verification
Automated checks passed
Read supporting source excerpt
The court may direct that on the first day of trial or at such other time as the court may set, counsel shall submit an indexed binder or notebook, or the electronic equivalent, of trial exhibits for the court's use.

The requirement is stated in an official statewide source and is attached as applicable guidance, not as a personal preference.

StatewideExplicit
Trial

Allowed with notice

Civil trial counsel in New York Supreme Court and County Court must confer before trial and attempt to agree on exhibits to be offered without objection, unless the court directs otherwise.

Page
Official rule page
Section
22 NYCRR 202.34; contested exhibits are handled separately and court orders control
Last checked
July 26, 2026
Verification
Automated checks passed
Read supporting source excerpt
Counsel for the parties shall consult prior to trial and shall in good faith attempt to agree upon the exhibits that will be offered into evidence without objection.

The requirement is stated in an official statewide source and is attached as applicable guidance, not as a personal preference.

StatewideExplicit
Commercial Division Trial

Encouraged

For Commercial Division matters, New York rules encourage Virtual Evidence Courtrooms for managing and presenting trial evidence after authorization by request or court direction.

Page
Official rule page
Section
Commercial Division Rule 25-a; applies when the case is in the Commercial Division and the VEC is authorized
Effective
November 10, 2025
Last checked
July 26, 2026
Verification
Automated checks passed
Read supporting source excerpt
Virtual Evidence Courtrooms (VECs) may be used to facilitate real-time access to trial exhibits and other relevant documents.

The requirement is stated in an official statewide source and is attached as applicable guidance, not as a personal preference.

StatewideExplicit
Criminal Hearing

Allowed with notice

For New York criminal proceedings, virtual and hybrid appearances are governed by Part 200 consent, objection, public-access, and calendar-update requirements.

Page
Official rule page
Section
22 NYCRR 200.9-a; evidentiary hearings, pleas, sentencings, arraignments, and other proceedings have separate consent and objection rules
Last checked
July 26, 2026
Verification
Automated checks passed
Read supporting source excerpt
For all hybrid proceedings, all electronic appearances shall be projected in the physical courtroom in which the in-person portion of the proceeding is taking place in such a manner as to provide a reasonable opportunity for members of the public to view and hear the participants appearing electronically.

The requirement is stated in an official statewide source and is attached as applicable guidance, not as a personal preference.

05

Courtroom technology

Published equipment guidance

No technology specification indexed

Technology availability is separate from procedural permission and evidentiary admissibility.

06

Published opinion footprint

Decisions and citations

Opinion data is not yet indexed for this profile

This does not mean the judge has no published opinions or no caseload. KYJ will only show opinion counts after transparent, source-linked CourtListener matching is available.

07

Sources

Public documents behind this profile

08

Change history

How this profile entered KYJ

Current profile indexed

Identity imported from New York State Unified Court System. 7 presentation-related claims migrated with source provenance.