Court time is limited, and schedules are often full. When preparing for a hearing, coordinating depositions, or assembling a trial record, minor process issues can cause significant delays that judges note. Judges sometimes call these issues “pet peeves,” but they are practical concerns. Courts aim to keep proceedings efficient, fair, and well-documented, especially when disputes are decided based on written records and tight schedules.
For trial teams, the pressure is familiar: last-minute changes, overlapping deadlines, multi-party schedules, and exhibits scattered across emails, file shares, and case management systems. The ten issues listed below are common complaints from judges about attorneys’ habits both in court and in filings. Each includes a suggested prevention step that can be integrated into litigation workflows, such as transcript management, real-time text, exhibit preparation, remote proceedings logistics, and deposition video readiness.
Why Judges React to Issues Like Pet Peeves
Most judicial frustration stems from three concerns. First is time. A delayed hearing can throw off the entire day and affect every party that prepared and appeared. Second is process fairness. If one side is disorganized or unprepared, it forces the court to spend time compensating for that gap. Third is record usability. Many rulings turn on whether the court can quickly locate support, follow the testimony, and confirm what was actually presented. When lawyers make the court do extra searching, judges notice.
This is why “pet peeves” tend to repeat among attorneys in the courtroom. They are not random preferences. They are friction points that slow the work and muddy the record, often causing frustration among court staff. If your team builds repeatable processes for organization, citations, and exhibits, you remove much of what judges associate with avoidable courtroom problems.
What Are Judges’ Top 10 Pet Peeves and How to Prevent Them
Judges manage busy schedules and depend on attorneys to keep hearings and motions efficient and organized. Common complaints often revolve around consistent themes: maintaining time discipline, submitting clear and focused requests for relief, professional behavior, and providing a record that the court can quickly review without extensive searching. The following list outlines 10 common frustrations judges face, along with practical steps you can incorporate into your hearing preparation and case management workflow.
1. Tardiness
Late arrivals disrupt the sequence of hearings and place the burden on everyone else, including attorneys in the courtroom, to wait. Judges usually know that emergencies happen, but repeated lateness suggests poor planning. Build buffer time for security lines, parking, elevator delays, and last-minute client issues. If an actual conflict arises, notify chambers as early as possible and be prepared to proceed as soon as you are called.
2. Lack of brevity in motions and oral argument
Judges want the requested relief and the shortest reason for granting it near the start. When the “ask” is buried, the court has to read longer to find the point, and your best arguments lose force. Use headings that match the required elements. State the relief in the opening section. Keep the background only if it affects the ruling. Where the record matters, cite it precisely rather than summarizing broadly.
3. Incivility toward staff or opposing counsel
Disrespect to courtroom staff reads as disrespect to the court. Interruptions and bickering also create a messy record and can damage credibility. Keep your tone even in emails and on the record. Do not argue with staff. If opposing conduct is an issue, address it through the proper procedural channel rather than escalating during a hearing.
4. Poor communication with opposing counsel
Judges do not want to manage your logistics. They often see avoidable disputes caused by a lack of early coordination: unconfirmed deposition dates, last-minute witness conflicts, and undefined exhibit exchange plans. A practical fix is a short coordination call early in the schedule to lock down dates, witness availability, exhibit exchange timing, interpreter needs, and any remote access details. Confirm agreements in writing.
5. Overly casual communications
Emails, letters, and on-the-record remarks shape how the court views preparation. Informal address and casual language can signal that you are not treating the proceedings with the seriousness it demands. Use titles and surnames in court. Keep written communications professional. When a witness prefers a particular form of address, record it consistently so the transcript remains consistent.
6. Insufficient preparation on evidence and procedure
Judges often get frustrated when counsel cannot explain how key exhibits will be introduced, authenticated, or tied to testimony. Evidence questions arise in trials, hearings, and motion practice, often based on declarations and attachments. A prevention step is early exhibit control. Build an exhibit list that matches your filing citations. Identify the source for each key exhibit and its foundation path. For hearings, prepare a packet with consistent labels so the court can quickly locate items.
7. Sloppy citations and record support
For many judges, this is the biggest pet peeve because it wastes time right away and undermines the court's confidence in the rest of the filing. Broad references like “see Exhibit A” force the judge to hunt for the support, and many judges will not do that work. Precision is the fix. Use pinpoint citations to the exact page, paragraph, or Bates range. If you cite testimony, use page-and-line references to the transcript. Consistent exhibit labels and stable transcript naming also help your team maintain accurate citations across drafts, replies, and hearing binders.
8. Not tailoring the presentation to the judge and the forum
Standing orders and local practices vary by court and judge. Judges notice when counsel ignores page limits, format rules, or pre-hearing steps, which can lead to substantive issues. Before you appear, review standing orders and local laws for the assigned judge and court. Confirm hearing technology expectations and any courtesy copy practices. If the matter permits remote participation, confirm the platform, test access, and assign one person to troubleshoot.
9. Missing materials
Hearings slow down when the court lacks the materials counsel is referencing. Missing attachments, inconsistent exhibit numbering, and inaccessible audio or video files waste court time. A prevention step is a “day-before” materials audit: confirm that every cited exhibit is filed and accessible, that labels match the references in your motion, and that any media has a tested playback path. If the testimony will be used later, record usability should guide how you label and store exhibits from the start.
10. Weak meet-and-confer efforts on disputes
Judges can often tell when counsel did not narrow a dispute item by item. In federal practice, a motion to compel must include a certification that the movant has, in good faith, conferred or attempted to confer to obtain the discovery without court action. Treat conferral as a working session. Narrow what you can. Confirm what is still disputed. Then bring only the remaining issues, supported by the smallest record needed for the court to decide the dispute efficiently.
Judges' Expectations for Meet-and-Confer Discovery Disputes
A meet-and-confer is a good-faith effort to resolve or narrow disputes before involving the court. Rule 37 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure mandates a certification that the parties have genuinely attempted to confer. A productive meet-and-confer involves more than a single call and a statement of disagreement. Courts expect attorneys to narrow issues, exchange specific positions, and simplify the dispute. Rule 37 certification underscores the importance of making a sincere effort before filing motions, a concern for the state bar. A reliable, streamlined process involves preparing a brief conferral packet before the call and maintaining consistency across cases. This packet enables both parties to swiftly assess the issue and propose compromises without having to read the entire file.
Example contents of a conferral packet:
One-page dispute summary that states the relief requested and the requests at issue should be presented to the judge’s chambers for review
Item-by-item chart with the request, response, narrowed proposal, and remaining dispute
Key exhibits with Bates labels and short titles that match the chart
Short confirmation notes that reflect what remains unresolved
Trial Exhibit Preparation Checklist That Avoids Courtroom Delays
Exhibit confusion can waste court time and lead to disputes about whether the judge is reviewing the same version that counsel is referencing. The best solution is to ensure consistency across all phases: deposition, motion, and trial exhibits should follow stable naming and numbering conventions that do not change late in the case.
The goal is not volume. The goal is control: version management, stable file names, and a plan for how exhibits will be displayed and referenced on the record.
Exhibit readiness checks:
One master exhibit list with stable numbering and short titles
Each exhibit is labeled with a Bates range and a file name that matches the list
Duplicate and near-duplicate versions flagged and resolved
A foundation plan tied to each key exhibit, including who will authenticate it
A tested playback plan for video, audio, and demonstratives
Real-Time Text and Transcript Management for Faster Preparation
When deadlines shorten, the interval between “testimony occurred” and when the team can utilize the record becomes risky. Real-time transcription can help bridge this gap by enabling attorneys and paralegals to tag issues as they happen and verify wording for follow-up questions and drafts. It also enhances citation accuracy by capturing exact language while it is still fresh.
Remote Depositions and Conduct That Safeguards the Record
Depositions can be conducted by telephone or other remote means if the parties agree or the court orders it. The deposition notice should specify how the testimony will be recorded, especially if an additional recording method is planned, which must be disclosed beforehand. This helps avoid disputes during the session about what is being recorded or who bears the extra cost.
Record quality still relies on disciplined on-the-record habits. Objections should be brief and not argumentative, and questioning should continue while objections are noted. This practice keeps the transcript clear and minimizes disagreements over tone and coaching, which is especially important when parties are not physically in the same location.
Remote logistics may also be affected by subpoena limits for nonparty witnesses. Procedural rules often restrict where a subpoena can require a nonparty to appear and typically mandate payment of a daily attendance fee and mileage when attendance is compelled. These restrictions impact scheduling, particularly when witnesses are in different states or when late changes require rescheduling.
Video Depositions, Synchronized Transcripts, and Their Use in Court Proceedings
While video is not necessary in all cases, it can be beneficial when testimony might be used in court or when demeanor and pacing influence the presentation. When video is used, syncing the transcript to the footage can reduce review time, improve clip accuracy, and streamline trial prep. Litigation teams can search the transcript, navigate to relevant segments, and create clips that match transcript citations.
Most court systems have rules governing the use of deposition testimony in court. These rules usually focus on basic criteria like proper notice, fairness to all parties, and whether the testimony is admissible under the relevant evidence rules. When a deposition is taken with the intention of later use, the record quality often improves because the team is more disciplined in managing overlapping speech, identifying exhibits, and maintaining consistent transcript references.
Partner With NAEGELI Deposition & Trial for Organized Court Reporting, Transcripts, And Trial Support
NAEGELI Deposition & Trial offers comprehensive support to help legal teams prevent common courtroom errors and avoid the judge’s top 10 pet peeves. Whether your team is coordinating depositions across different jurisdictions, preparing hearing packets, or creating a transcript record for future use in accordance with court rules, our services ensure consistent exhibits, reliable transcript delivery, and professional video and text presentations.
Contact us today to request a rate sheet or to schedule a skilled court reporter at (800) 528-3335 or email schedule@naegeliusa.com.
You can also use “SCHEDULE NOW” or live chat for litigation support services.
Frequently Asked Questions About Pet Peeves from Judges
Why do judges pay attention to pinpoint citations?
Pinpoint citations speed up the court's verification process. They also minimize disagreements over the record and enable the court to decide without requiring extra briefing.
When does real-time text provide the greatest benefit?
It is most effective when multiple depositions happen in quick succession, when briefing deadlines are soon after testimony, or when teams require instant access to precise wording for drafting and issue tracking.
How do remote depositions impact exhibit management?
Remote depositions make exhibit handling more deliberate. You need one plan for how exhibits will be shown and marked, whether that is a pre-marked set shared ahead of time, a secure portal during the session, or a controlled screen share. Once you pick the method, stick with it so the witness and the transcript stay aligned.
What is the benefit of syncing video to the transcript?
Syncing reduces review time and helps ensure that video clips match the intended transcript excerpts. It also supports more accurate trial clip selection and smoother preparation for presentations.