We use cookies to improve security, personalize the user experience,
enhance our marketing activities (including cooperating with our marketing partners) and for other
business use.
Click "here" to read our Cookie Policy.
By clicking "Accept" you agree to the use of cookies. Read less
Judge-Shopping: What It Is and Why It Matters in the Legal System
Definition & Meaning
Judge-shopping is the practice of filing multiple lawsuits that claim the same issue, often in jurisdictions with several judges. The goal is to have one of these cases assigned to a judge perceived as favorable to the plaintiff's position. This tactic may also involve voluntarily dismissing or nonsuiting the other cases. Courts have the authority to intervene in such situations to maintain the integrity of their processes, especially in systems that rely on random judge assignments.
Table of content
Legal Use & context
Judge-shopping is primarily relevant in civil litigation, where plaintiffs may seek to manipulate the judicial system to their advantage. It can occur in various legal areas, including contract disputes, personal injury cases, and family law matters. Users can manage some aspects of these cases themselves using legal templates from US Legal Forms, but understanding the implications of judge-shopping is crucial for effective legal strategy.
Key legal elements
Real-world examples
Here are a couple of examples of abatement:
Example 1: A business owner files three lawsuits in different districts over a contract dispute, hoping one case will be assigned to a judge known for favoring plaintiffs in similar cases. (hypothetical example)
Example 2: A plaintiff in a personal injury case files multiple claims in various courts, intending to withdraw the less favorable cases if one is assigned to a sympathetic judge. (hypothetical example)
State-by-state differences
Examples of state differences (not exhaustive):
State
Judge-Shopping Regulations
California
Strict rules against judge-shopping; courts may impose sanctions.
New York
Judicial discretion to dismiss cases perceived as judge-shopping.
Texas
Provisions exist to prevent abuse of the judicial assignment process.
This is not a complete list. State laws vary, and users should consult local rules for specific guidance.
Comparison with related terms
Term
Definition
Difference
Forum shopping
Choosing a court or jurisdiction thought to be most favorable.
Judge-shopping focuses specifically on selecting a judge, while forum shopping involves selecting a court.
Case consolidation
Combining multiple cases into one for efficiency.
Judge-shopping seeks to manipulate outcomes, while consolidation aims for judicial efficiency.
Common misunderstandings
What to do if this term applies to you
If you suspect judge-shopping may affect your case, consider the following steps:
Consult with a legal professional to understand your rights and options.
Gather evidence of any potential judge-shopping activities.
Explore legal form templates from US Legal Forms to manage your case effectively.
Find the legal form that fits your case
Browse our library of 85,000+ state-specific legal templates.