Related Posts
Chief
Bowl Leader
Additional Posts in Litigation & Arbitration
Mentor
New to Fishbowl?
Download the Fishbowl app to
unlock all discussions on Fishbowl.
unlock all discussions on Fishbowl.
That was just a preview…
Sign Up to see all discussions
Sign Up to see all discussions
- Discover what it’s like to work at companies from real professionals
- Get candid advice from people in your field in a safe space
- Chat and network with other professionals in your field
Sign up in seconds to unlock all discussions on Fishbowl.
"" is an unusual email domain. If correct, please proceed to the next step
Messaging rates may apply
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
New to Fishbowl?
Download the Fishbowl app to unlock all discussions on Fishbowl.
Share
Embed this post
Copy and paste embed code on your site
Preview
Download the
Fishbowl app
Scan your QR code to download
Fishbowl app on your mobile
Sign up for free to view this conversation on Fishbowl
Sign up for free to continue using Fishbowl
Messaging rates may apply
It's about understanding the opinions and proclivities of the judge, not about a personal connection.
This ^
It’s a joke about connections. And jokes are often half-meant.
lol. Absolutely holds truth. Sure, all judges in a jurisdiction follow the same rules, but there's lots of room within that framework to practice how they want. Knowing how a judge likes to run hearings or how they prefer pleadings to look can make things move more smoothly for attorneys. I know judges who care a whole lot about format and others who don't. Some judges don't bother reading the filings before a hearing, so you need to be prepared to walk them all the way through the matter. Others get borderline offended if you offer to submit a proposed order.
You can buy some judges at the Supreme Court.
The way people use that phrase is usually to imply that if you know the judge, they will be more favorable to you. That’s not the truth. But knowing the judge is definitely an advantage in the sense of understanding the judge’s rules, how they will handle different situations, and how they tend to decide things.
I clerked at our state trial court for 4 years. To me, this is about your reputation. There are some lawyers who have been practicing before the court for years, are always on time, the case law says what they say it says, honest, etc. And when they needed a hearing or a continuance etc, they got it because they had a reputation with the court.
Follow up Q: Getting to know a Judges preferences, nuances, understanding their opinions/proclivities, etc. requires you to appear before them often. But when you’re practicing in numerous different counties, and different areas of law, you are before quite a variety of Judges; thus, do you think there is strategy to sticking to practicing in only one or two jurisdictions/circuits/counties? Or maybe even just one? It limits cases/case load no doubt (unless you target that demographic heavy/specific in ads/leads)… do you think it’s more important to focus particularly to being before the same judges often, I.e. for what the meme eludes to? Or is it too limiting of one’s practice? Curious of bowlers thoughts/perspectives!
This is entirely dependent on the volume of your cases and how long you’ve been practicing. I practice in about 8-10 surrounding counties and I’m pretty familiar with most of the judges, although new ones are always coming in so it’s a constant cycle of learning.
I tend to agree. It’s not about connections but a judge’s sensibilities. Some judges are set in their ways and they will rule on a particular issue the same each every time. Obviously these are the hardest to convince unless you come up with with something new to present to them and they are bound to it.