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
    Dec 6 '15 at 22:49

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.

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.