[pbh101]

The judge still decided this was the winning side. I don’t really see a problem with this, especially as seeing it is at the end of a deliberative process. By that time, the winning attorney may have a good idea of where the judge stands, what the ruling would be and is also incentivized to stay on their good side.

[mmooss]

The judge is supposed to be independent of influence, and fair to both sides. A decision for one side is rarely that 'one party gets everything they want'; it just leans in their direction, especially on the fundamental issues. The ruling also may yield an outcome more aligned with one party, but for different reasons.

> the winning attorney may have a good idea of where the judge stands, what the ruling would be and is also incentivized to stay on their good side.

You haven't seen many litigators at work. Their job is to "zealously" represent their client, getting as much as possible. The speculation about the rest is just hope, not due process.