The judge comparison tool gives you a structured, side-by-side view of two to four judges so you can make informed decisions about venue, strategy, and argument approach in a single glance.
Starting a comparison. The fastest way to begin is from any judge profile — click the Compare button in the profile header. A comparison panel opens on the right. Search for a second judge and add them. Alternatively, go to Tools in the sidebar and select Compare Judges to build a comparison from scratch.
You can compare up to four judges at once. Add additional judges using the plus button in the comparison panel. Each judge appears as a column.
What is compared. The comparison table covers: ruling grant rates broken down by motion type, tentative ruling posting frequency (does this judge post tentatives consistently?), average days from motion filing to ruling, oral argument style (prefers brief arguments vs. extended presentation), typical brief length preference, procedural preferences (IDC requirements, meet-and-confer standards), and key local rule highlights.
Filtering the comparison. Use the Motion Type dropdown above the table to filter all statistics to the motion type relevant to your matter. This collapses the table to the most relevant rows and makes the comparison immediately actionable.
Interpreting the table. Cells are shaded green when a judge is relatively more favorable on that metric compared to the other judges in the comparison. This shading is relative — green does not mean universally favorable, only favorable within your comparison set.
Exporting results. Click Export to PDF to generate a shareable comparison document formatted for inclusion in a trial preparation binder or internal memo. Firm and Enterprise plans can export with firm branding.
Data limitations. Judges with fewer than 15 rulings in our dataset for a given motion type are flagged with a low-data indicator. Do not over-rely on comparison data for these judges without supplementing with direct inquiry.