Every attorney develops differently. Before entering private practice, I had the opportunity to spend nearly three years working on the other side of the bench—for two and a half years as a judicial law clerk for a Tennessee state court judge, and later for a semester as a judicial extern for a judge on a United States Court of Appeals.
That experience did not teach me any secret tricks for winning cases. It taught me something much more valuable: how judges think about their work, what they expect from attorneys, and what helps them make good decisions.
Those lessons continue to shape the way I approach every dispute. And although I started learning those lessons in another state, I have seen broad applicability of these lessons in every jurisdiction where I have practiced.
Judges Care Deeply About Fairness
One of the first things I learned is that judges are intensely concerned with fairness, not only actual fairness, but the appearance of fairness.
Most judges want every party to leave the courtroom believing they had a genuine opportunity to be heard. Within the limits imposed by the law and court procedure, judges generally try to ensure that each side receives equal treatment and sufficient time to present its position.
For litigants, this matters because the legal process is not simply about reaching the correct result. Confidence in the process itself is essential. As an advocate, understanding that priority helps me present arguments in a way that respects both the court and the opposing party while still forcefully advancing my client’s interests.
Your Reputation Matters More Than You Think
Judges see the same lawyers over and over again.
Over time, they inevitably notice which attorneys consistently submit accurate work, meet deadlines, cite authority carefully, and make reliable representations to the court.
Likewise, judges remember attorneys who exaggerate, overstate the law, or require the court to spend unnecessary time correcting mistakes.
A reputation for precision and dependability cannot be built overnight, but it pays dividends over the course of a legal career. It reinforces one of my guiding principles: credibility is one of an attorney’s most valuable assets, and it should never be squandered for a short-term tactical advantage.
Judges Are Human
Judges wear robes, but they are still people.
They become frustrated. Occasionally they overlook an issue one side considers critically important. After a long day filled with hearings, their attention can naturally begin to fade.
Every judge aspires to read every brief thoroughly and prepare for every hearing. The reality is that modern court dockets make that difficult. Even judges with full-time law clerks often face overwhelming workloads.
That reality reinforces an important lesson for advocates: oral argument should not simply repeat the written brief.
Instead, it should efficiently identify the issues that matter most, explain why they matter, and answer the questions that will help the judge decide the case correctly. Respecting the court’s time is not merely courteous; it is often the most effective way to communicate.
Judges Are Under Extraordinary Time Pressure
Many people imagine judges spending days carefully studying a single lawsuit.
In reality, most judges move rapidly from one matter to another. A single day may involve motions, hearings, criminal calendars, civil disputes, family matters, and emergency requests, each requiring immediate attention.
Understanding those demands influences how I prepare written submissions and courtroom presentations. Clear organization, concise writing, and focusing on the decisive issues make it easier for the court to quickly understand why my client’s position is correct.
Good advocacy often means making the judge’s job easier.
Every Judge Brings a Different Background
No two judges arrive on the bench with identical experiences.
Some previously served as prosecutors. Others were public defenders, insurance defense lawyers, plaintiff’s attorneys, government lawyers, or commercial litigators. Those backgrounds naturally shape the kinds of legal issues they have encountered throughout their careers.
Judicial assignments matter as well.
In larger metropolitan counties, judges often spend years assigned exclusively to criminal, civil, family, or specialty courts. Those assignments allow them to develop deep expertise in a particular area of law.
In many rural counties, however, judges hear nearly every type of case imaginable. Their experience is remarkably broad, although they may not have the same opportunity to specialize.
Recognizing those differences helps an attorney tailor presentations to the court without changing the substance of the law or the facts.
Judges Value Order in the Courtroom
Movies often portray dramatic courtroom confrontations, shouting matches, and lawyers interrupting witnesses until the judge pounds a gavel.
Real courtrooms are very different.
Judges care deeply about maintaining control of the proceedings. If they believe a hearing is becoming disorderly or that someone is disrupting the orderly administration of justice, they usually act quickly to restore order.
Whenever I see lawyers screaming at witnesses in courtroom dramas, I can’t help but laugh. Those scenes may make for great cinema, but they bear little resemblance to actual litigation. (I’m looking at you, Tom Cruise.)
Professionalism is not simply good manners—it helps create an environment where judges can focus on the evidence and the law rather than the conduct of the participants.
Good Judges Want to Reach the Right Decision
Perhaps the most encouraging lesson I learned is that judges genuinely want to get it right.
Good judges approach cases with intellectual curiosity and an open mind. They ask difficult questions because they want to understand the issues completely. They are willing to reconsider assumptions, study unfamiliar legal questions, and carefully examine competing arguments before reaching a decision.
That commitment deserves equally thoughtful advocacy.
Rather than relying on rhetoric or volume, effective lawyers help judges understand complicated legal and factual issues clearly and accurately.
Experience Behind the Bench Helps Me Better Serve My Clients
Working for judges gave me a perspective that few attorneys receive early in their careers.
I saw how judges evaluate arguments, what makes legal writing persuasive, why credibility matters, and how practical realities inside the courthouse affect litigation.
Those experiences continue to influence how I prepare cases, write briefs, argue motions, and try lawsuits.
There are no shortcuts in litigation, and there are certainly no secret formulas for persuading a judge. Success comes from careful preparation, credibility, thoughtful advocacy, and respect for both the court and the judicial process.
Those are lessons I learned behind the bench, and they continue to serve my clients every day.
