HOW COURTS MAKE RULINGS
Here, there and in casual conversations, I have spoken with people who have had horrible experiences with the court system. For those who have had these problems, read closely…
For most people, litigation is the last resort. Few enjoy a courtroom packed with loud lawyers, intense judges and strangers studying our every move. Unfortunately, some situations arise in which court involvement is necessary for a controlled conclusion. To make matters even more tense, most who enter the legal system are not sure what the result is going to be.
So, to the person who may experience the anxiety of being thrust into something new, I offer you a few tid-bits of knowledge concerning (a) the importance of preparation and (b) the court’s reasoning process. Both of these topics may help you to “hedge your bet” when faced with the confusing law or the ominous court environment.
First, at its simplest function, a court's goal is fair and impartial treatment of parties with competing interests. In pursuit of this goal, the court will focus on the law with a secondary focus on the greater good (as the law is presumed to be a guide to the greater good). Then, when presented with facts, the court attempts to balance the competing interests of the parties based on the law and strength of the facts presented.
Detailed facts, and the truthfulness of those facts, have huge value. Details, such as time, place, and condition of the situation giving rise to the trial, helps the court better understand how something happened. Simply, details are crucial.
Another reason why detailed facts are so important is that they give a clearer picture of what happened. When facts presented are vague, the reception of those facts by the court may not be very clear. When that happens, the final picture it receives is unclear. As a result, the trial conclusion may not necessarily reflect the actual happening that gave rise to the litigation, because the picture given to the court was distorted.
Unfortunately, the evidence and past facts are all we have. To show exactly what happened without any margin for error, we need a time machine to bring the judge back in time to see the events unfold in real-time. This is impossible, so, the court does the next best thing. Our system is limited to recreation of past events, through facts presented by lawyers or the parties to show their versions of what happened. Accordingly, the weight and strength of the facts presented, to recreate the actual happening, are absolutely of the highest importance.
Therefore, the detailed facts of an event giving rise to litigation have a huge impact on how a judge will rule. And, most of the time, the person best positioned to accumulate the facts will be the party involved in the litigation.