Writing in the 4th century BC, the Greek philosopher Aristotle warned his readers against submitting their problems to a judge’s discretion.
The judge should, we say, be allowed to decide as few things as possible.
Rhetoric, Book 1, Chapter 1, 1354b.
Aristotle gives several reasons for this, one of them being the hasty, assembly-line manner in which judges make their rulings.
Laws are made after long consideration, whereas decisions in the courts are given at short notice, which makes it hard for those who try the case to satisfy the claims of justice and expediency.
Id.
Here we are more than two millennia after Aristotle’s time and not much has changed when it comes to judicial decisions.
The district courts that I frequent typically hear 40 to 50 cases per session. Each case is given about two to three minutes before the judge renders his decision. (I know of one court where the clerk makes a conscious effort to limit each hearing to 2 ½ minutes.) Granted, some hearing can last longer; but litigants often have less time than they would like to make their case.
Needless to say, this is barely enough time for a judge to fully grasp a situation before he issues an order significantly impacting the parties’ lives.
If you are considering taking a personal or a professional dispute to court, it’s important that you understand the summary nature of court proceedings. And you need to accept the fact that the judge, who usually knows less about the facts and circumstances of a case than anyone, has the power to make decisions that can drastically change your personal and financial life.
Accordingly, it is almost always best to resolve your problems, whenever possible, outside of court.