Civil/Commercial Litigation (Lawsuits)/VERDICT OF THE JUDGE


If the judge is fully aware somehow personally on the culprit of a case pending, in presenting his verdict, has he to disregard entirely what he personally knows and to consider only the acceptability of the arguments forwarded by the Lawyers and the evidences received.

Thank you in advance.

Greetings Basil,

Before I respond further to your question, I must make clear that I do not represent you, and cannot give you individual particularized legal advice. No attorney client relationship is created by this email. For legal advice, you should hire your own attorney, and follow their advice. My role with AllExperts is limited to providing general information and suggestions for educational or general knowledge purposes. Before you take any action, consult with your own attorney.

I don't practice in your jurisdiction, and imagine the rules may be very different from what I am knowledgeable about.  For example, in Minnesota, judge's do not enter a "verdict"; that's a function of a jury.  If a case is tried here by a judge, the outcome is an Order for Judgment.  See for example

With that in mind, your jurisdiction probably has something like my local Minn. R. Civ. P. 63.  In pertinent part, please see Rules 63.02 and 63.03 set forth bellow for your examination.  A party in a circumstance like that you described would do well to bring whatever your equivalent is to a motion to remove the biased judge.

"63.02 Interest or Bias
No judge shall sit in any case if that judge is interested in its determination or if that judge might be excluded for bias from acting therein as a juror. If there is no other judge of the district who is qualified, or if there is only one judge of the district, such judge shall forthwith notify the Chief Justice of the Minnesota Supreme Court of that judge's disqualification."

"63.03 Notice to Remove
Any party or attorney may make and serve on the opposing party and file with the administrator a notice to remove. The notice shall be served and filed within ten days after the party receives notice of which judge or judicial officer is to preside at the trial or hearing, but not later than the commencement of the trial or hearing.
No such notice may be filed by a party or party's attorney against a judge or judicial officer who has presided at a motion or any other proceeding of which the party had notice, or who is assigned by the Chief Justice of the Minnesota Supreme Court. A judge or judicial officer who has presided at a motion or other proceeding or who is assigned by the Chief Justice of the Minnesota Supreme Court may not be removed except upon an affirmative showing of prejudice on the part of the judge or judicial officer.
After a party has once disqualified a presiding judge or judicial officer as a matter of right, that party may disqualify the substitute judge or judicial officer, but only by making an affirmative showing of prejudice. A showing that the judge or judicial officer might be excluded for bias from acting as a juror in the matter constitutes an affirmative showing of prejudice.
Upon the filing of a notice to remove or if a litigant makes an affirmative showing of prejudice against a substitute judge or judicial officer, the chief judge of the judicial district shall assign any other judge of any court within the district, or a judicial officer in the case of a substitute judicial officer, to hear the cause."

I urge you to immediately contact an attorney licensed to practice in your area to help you identify the local laws and rules that apply to this situation and bring an appropriate motion or equivalent action.

I hope this helps, good luck to you and your mom.

Morgan Smith
Minneapolis, Minnesota
Conciliation Court * Civil Litigation * Forfeitures * Construction * Family Law

Civil/Commercial Litigation (Lawsuits)

All Answers

Answers by Expert:

Ask Experts


Morgan Smith


Civil litigation (contract claims, landlord-tenant actions, forfeiture suits, residential construction defect matters), Family law (divorce, custody modifications, child support modifications, and pre-nuptial agreement), new business start-ups, civil forfeiture, asset forfeiture. Please do not submit your question as Private. It is my policy not to answer Private questions from members of the public here on AllExperts; I reserve that function to my private clients. Although AllExperts permits me to change your questions from Private to Public, it is my policy not to do that. I encourage you to resubmit your question as a public question. Your public question has the potential to help others with similar concerns. I suggest that you use a pretend name and otherwise alter sensitive facts that make you inclined to treat your question as Private, and submit your question to me Publicly.


I've been practicing law in the State of Minnesota since 1995. I've worked in skyscraper firms, and now my own small firm in Minneapolis. Past answers from my earlier participation on AllExperts is posted at:

AllExperts, Yahoo Answers,

J.D. William Mitchell College of Law, St Paul, MN

©2017 All rights reserved.

[an error occurred while processing this directive]