Say you have had a hearing and it was thrown out for lack of evidence. Now you're having a second hearing with a new judge. Does he have to read all the new evidence, or can he throw it out, too?

  • I don't understand the question: Are you asking whether a judge can enter an order without considering the evidence presented to the court? Or something more specific?
    – feetwet
    Commented Dec 6, 2015 at 22:49

2 Answers 2


Without more detail, it's hard to know what you mean. Under reasonable circumstances judges do want to understand new evidence at hearings. However they have wide latitude.

A judge doesn't, technically, have to read everything you submit. For example, in Chevron Corp. v. The Weinberg Group (D.D.C. 2012) Judge Facciola stated, "Here, I would have to review 9,171 pages of documents. That seems inconceivable given my advanced years" (the background was a requested privilege review).


Judges are pragmatic creatures. I am of the opinion that one in ten pages of motions and other documents I have proffered to judges in the last 5 years have been read in their entirety. The other 9-in-10 have been skimmed at best, ignored at worst.

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .