When a trial lawyer becomes a trial judge, the earth moves. Nothing in the trial lawyer’s training or experience prepares him or her for the role of neutral arbiter. Everything looks and sounds different. It is not just that he or she has acquired the power to decide. It is more than the fact that all participants are looking up at him or her, waiting for a ruling. The real change is the realization that he or she now has to be right as often as possible. People are looking.
It has been twenty-five years since the first time I walked up those steps to the highest chair in the courtroom. On that day, I learned two important lessons. First, I realized that everyone was standing because some guy with a gun was telling them to, a point that seems obvious but is really hard to grasp, if not retain. Second, I realized I had to rule in favor of somebody and, obviously, against somebody.
This Article will address the following question: What makes a judge rule one way and not the other?