A hearing is set next week to decide on my attorney’s motion to consolidate the lawsuits.

My attorney (who is seemingly very good) wrote a well thought out and logical motion to consolidate. The plaintiffs counsel wrote a detailed objection to the motion to consolidate.

My biased opinion is that the motion to consolidate is a nobrainer! However, in an attempt to be unbiased, I considered the merits of the objection and I think, “that’s logical and well-written too!”

I try and consider the position of the judge who has to make the decision. She knows NOTHING about the cases and all of the history between the parties dating back over 2 years now. Yet, she has a 15 minute window to make a decision whether to consolidate or not.

So, how can the judge possibly make well-informed decision?!?! I have to believe there is no way she’s reading either the motion or the objection! Those documents mostly seem like a justification to bill clients at an exorbitant rate!

I commented to my attorney that the motion seems like a nobrainer and I asked him if the plaintiff’s objection has any merit. He basically said it ultimately comes down to the judge’s discretion whether to grant a motion or not.

So, again, I’m left wondering how the judge is possibly going to make a well-informed decision? Or is it simply a guessing game?