Handling Difficult Judges – Staying Persuasive and Professional Under Judicial Pressure

One of the paradoxes of trial practice is that you can prepare meticulously for every witness, every exhibit, and every line of argument—yet the one element that remains unpredictable is the judge. Most judges work hard to be fair, impartial, and courteous. But every lawyer who has spent real time in a courtroom knows the truth: sometimes the bench is not your ally. Sometimes the judge is distracted, impatient, idiosyncratic, or even openly hostile.

The real test of advocacy comes when your role as a zealous advocate collides with judicial pressure. In those moments, your professionalism, composure, and persuasion must carry you through. This post will explore strategies for handling difficult judges while still advancing your client’s case. Along the way, I’ll share two personal war stories from my own practice—episodes that still stick with me because of the lessons they reinforced.

Why Judicial Demeanor Matters So Much

A judge’s behavior affects the entire courtroom ecosystem. Jurors, witnesses, and even opposing counsel take their cues from the bench. If a judge is respectful and orderly, the proceeding has structure. If a judge is sharp-tongued or erratic, chaos can follow.

For jurors in particular, judicial demeanor has an outsized impact. Studies have shown that jurors interpret judicial comments as signals about how to view the case. Even if the judge intends only to “move things along,” a raised eyebrow or harsh rebuke can sway perceptions. That means when a judge directs criticism toward you, it’s not just your ego at stake—the credibility of your case can suffer.

Three Hours in Federal Court

Several years ago, I was trying a federal case that should have been straightforward from a procedural standpoint. On cross-examination, I began asking leading questions—as we all know, the standard format permitted and even expected during cross.

Without warning, the judge interrupted: “Counsel, you can’t ask that question.”

I was caught off guard. The question was garden-variety. No objection had been raised. I tried again with a slightly different phrasing. Again, the judge shut me down.

What followed was surreal. Every two or three questions, the judge interjected—telling me my questions were improper, hinting that I didn’t understand the rules, and doing so in front of the jury. For three hours, this continued. The jury watched as the judge berated me repeatedly for asking perfectly permissible questions.

After court recessed, something remarkable happened: counsel for both sides came over and said, almost in unison, “We were just as confused as you. None of that made sense.” These were seasoned attorneys, and they too were baffled. To this day, I don’t know why the judge chose that course, but the experience taught me a hard truth: sometimes the courtroom dynamic is beyond your control.

The real challenge was not losing my composure. My instinct was to push back, but I knew that sparring with the judge would only magnify the damage. Instead, I kept my tone steady, adjusted my questions as best I could, and saved my frustration for the hallway afterward.

Lessons Here

1. The Jury Watches You Closely

   Even as the judge was critical, I made sure never to roll my eyes, sigh, or otherwise show irritation. Jurors notice everything. If I had matched the judge’s irritation with my own, I would have compounded the damage. By staying calm, I at least preserved some credibility.

   
   

2. Don’t Escalate in the Moment

   Objecting to the judge’s treatment of you in front of the jury rarely ends well. Sometimes you must make a record, but do it respectfully and minimally. You can always request a sidebar or raise the issue outside the jury’s presence.

The Judge Who Forgot His Own Ruling

In another case, this time in state court, I encountered a different sort of judicial challenge: indifference. The judge in question was notorious for his lack of preparation and judicial demeanor. But nothing prepared me for what happened one morning when we were called in to argue a motion.

We had filed briefs. The motion was fully submitted. In fact, the judge had already issued a ruling granting our motion. Yet he called us in anyway, apparently having forgotten his own order.

So there we were, standing at the lectern, waiting to gingerly explain to the judge his mistake. However, it was a solid forty five minutes before we had a chance. The judge angrily berrated both parties, insisting that our arguments were weak and unpersuasive. He raised his voice, chastised us for wasting the court’s time, and suggested we didn’t understand the law.

The irony, of course, was glaring: the judge had already signed an order agreeing with the very arguments he was now denouncing. It was only later, when the clerk quietly pointed this out, that the situation untangled itself. By then, the damage to the dignity of the proceeding had been done.

Lessons Here

1. Amat Victoria Curam - Victory Loves Preparation

   
   

   Because we had prepared thoroughly, I was able to calmly and consistently restate our position, even under the judge’s barrage. That preparation gave me confidence that the law and facts were on our side, even when the bench seemed to forget.

   
   

2. Don’t Take Anything Personally.

   
   

   This episode could easily have become a personal affront. But the reality was the judge wasn’t singling me out—he was a well-known incompetent and difficult judge. Distinguishing between hostility and negligence helps you regulate your own emotional response.

   
   

3. Trust the Record

   
   

   Ultimately, what mattered most was not the judge’s momentary tirade but the written order. In appellate courts, the record is king. As long as your filings are clear and well-argued, the paper trail will outlast a judge’s bad day.

Practical Strategies for Handling Difficult Judges

Beyond war stories, what can attorneys do in these situations? Here are several strategies I’ve found essential:

1. Control What You Can

You cannot control the judge’s mood or predispositions. You can control your preparation, demeanor, and responses. Think of yourself as the stabilizing presence in the courtroom.

2. Use Respectful Persistence

If a judge is making rulings that hinder your case, preserve your objections respectfully. Say: “Your Honor, I’d like to make a brief record on this point.” Then state your position clearly and succinctly. Don’t argue endlessly—you just need enough for appellate review.

3. Reframe for the Jury

If the judge criticizes you in front of jurors, keep your demeanor calm. Jurors are often sympathetic to lawyers who are unfairly treated. Your composure can become an unspoken argument in your favor.

4. Seek Sidebars or Chambers Conferences

When possible, move disputes outside the jury’s presence. This prevents judicial criticism from contaminating jurors’ perceptions. It also gives the judge space to reconsider without feeling performative.

5. Focus on the Client

Remind yourself: it’s not about you. It’s about the client’s case. Your bruised ego is secondary. Sometimes that means swallowing your pride to keep the proceedings on track.

6. Maintain Professionalism for the Record

Even if the judge is antagonistic, your words will be transcribed. Future reviewers—whether appellate judges or disciplinary bodies—will see your professionalism, not your frustration.

The Bigger Picture: Advocacy and Civility

Difficult judges highlight a central paradox of advocacy: the most persuasive lawyers are often the calmest. Passion matters, but composure persuades. Losing your temper rarely helps your client, and it often hurts.

There’s also a broader civic lesson. Our legal system relies on respect for institutions, even when individuals within them falter. By modeling civility under pressure, lawyers reinforce that respect. We show jurors, clients, and the public that the rule of law transcends personalities.

Every lawyer who spends time in court will eventually face a difficult judge. Sometimes the challenge is hostility, as in my federal trial where I endured hours of unjustified criticism. Sometimes the challenge is indifference, as in my state case where the judge forgot his own ruling.

In both situations, the lessons were the same: stay professional, stay persuasive, and remember why you are there. Your role is not to win the judge’s approval but to advocate effectively for your client.

Difficult judges are part of the landscape of trial practice. How you respond defines your professionalism—and, often, your effectiveness as an advocate.

If you’ve ever faced a difficult judge, you know how disorienting and frustrating those moments can be. But with preparation, professionalism, and composure, you can protect your client’s case and your own credibility in the courtroom. At The Legal Beagle, we’ve built our practice on staying steady under pressure—whether that pressure comes from opposing counsel, insurance companies, or even the bench itself. If you’re dealing with a serious injury case and want an advocate who won’t back down no matter how tough the courtroom gets, reach out today for a free consultation.