
Insights from recent episode analysis
Audience Interest
Podcast Focus
Publishing Consistency
Platform Reach
Insights are generated by CastFox AI using publicly available data, episode content, and proprietary models.
Most discussed topics
Brands & references
Total monthly reach
Estimated from 1 chart position in 1 market.
By chart position
- 🇮🇳IN · Politics#1901K to 10K
- Per-Episode Audience
Est. listeners per new episode within ~30 days
300 to 3K🎙 Daily cadence·88 episodes·Last published 1w ago - Monthly Reach
Unique listeners across all episodes (30 days)
1K to 10K🇮🇳100% - Active Followers
Loyal subscribers who consistently listen
400 to 4K
Market Insights
Platform Distribution
Reach across major podcast platforms, updated hourly
Total Followers
—
Total Plays
—
Total Reviews
—
* Data sourced directly from platform APIs and aggregated hourly across all major podcast directories.
On the show
From 19 epsHosts
Recent guests
Recent episodes
EP 110 That's All, Folks!
Jun 18, 2026
Unknown duration
EP 109 Sounding Off
Jun 16, 2026
Unknown duration
EP 108 White Trash Dude
Jun 10, 2026
Unknown duration
EP 107 Slap of the Wrist, Hold the Slap
Jun 8, 2026
26m 08s
EP 106 – Dry Friday
Jun 5, 2026
38m 33s
Social Links & Contact
Official channels & resources
Official Website
Login
RSS Feed
Login
| Date | Episode | Topics | Guests | Brands | Places | Keywords | Sponsor | Length | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 6/18/26 | ![]() EP 110 That's All, Folks! | JudgeMental Podcast – Episode 110: "That's All, Folks!"Episode 110 marks a milestone and a momentary goodbye. The hosts raise a Miller High Life to celebrate reaching 110 episodes — now downloaded in 69 countries in less than one year — before announcing they're stepping back from the podcast to focus on building out their core platform.What's Discussed in This Episode:The Hiatus AnnouncementChristine and co-hosts explain why they're taking a break: the emotional and logistical toll of the podcast has become unsustainable. Christine opens up about retaliation she's faced, the weight of holding others' trauma without compensation, and the need to reset. The team emphasizes that no content is being removed — the mission is simply shifting focus toward developing the Judge-y app, the website, and the judicial accountability community they've built."We built what could be a huge movement, and will be. But we don't owe our day-to-day, not sleeping at night."The Bridgeman CaseThe hosts note that nothing was filed by the GAL in the public record, but that an order has come down and a case management conference is upcoming. Christine raises concerns about matters potentially being handled off the public record via what she describes as a "shadow docket," and calls for transparency. She says the case "gives her the heebie-jeebies," noting the involvement of a high-profile family and the presence of an unidentified individual at a confidential hearing.The Matt Bevin CaseA bench warrant was issued after former Governor Matt Bevin appeared remotely at a sentencing hearing despite three explicit notices requiring his in-person attendance. The hosts debate whether the judge's handling — issuing a bench warrant that was recalled upon payment of a $250 fine — was proper enforcement or political theater. Christine argues it was the latter, given that Bevin almost certainly knew he'd just pay the fine. Co-host Trey pushes back, noting the judge was consistent in requiring in-person attendance and was building a proper record for escalating consequences.Attorney Accountability & ComplacencyA broader conversation emerges about the "pussification of Louisville lawyers" — attorneys who privately complain about judicial misconduct and incompetence but won't file motions, preserve the record, or stand up for their clients. The hosts argue that attorney complacency is one of the biggest systemic problems in family court, noting that attorneys who "play the game" get more court appointments while clients suffer.Prosecutors & The Judicial SystemThe team discusses how prosecutors routinely fail domestic violence victims — including cases where a person admitted on recording to drugging and raping their spouse and still received minimal consequences. Christine argues the problem isn't about gender or race but about unchecked power: "Absolute power corrupts absolutely."Judge Lauren Ogden & The Social Dynamics of the BenchA candid moment: Christine shares that the only two family court judges she'd "have a beer with" are Angela Johnson and Lori Goodwin. She expresses concern that Judge Johnson may be getting herself into a situation that "could be one to break," while also noting the troubling dynamic of attorneys who trash judges in private but pose for photos with them publicly.Stay Connected & Support the Movement:📲 Download the Judge-y app and join the community: judge-y.com🐦 Follow us on social: @Judgingthejudges💬 Share your story — all submissions are confidential🛒 Buy merch to support the show💰 Community membership is $10/month — if you genuinely can't afford it, email Christine directly to discuss a waiver🎙️ Share old episodes with friends, legislators, and anyone who cares about judicial accountabilityAll episodes remain available. The team will make announcements about future plans on their website and social channels.LEGAL DISCLAIMERThe content of this podcast is for informational and entertainment purposes only. It is not intended to be, and should not be construed as, legal advice. Engaging with this content does not create an attorney-client relationship between you and the hosts, guests, or their firms. The views and opinions expressed on this podcast are solely those of the individuals involved and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of any law firm, company, or organization. We make no representations or warranties regarding the accuracy, completeness, or applicability of the information presented. Any reliance on the information in this podcast is at your own risk. Laws are constantly changing, and every situation is unique. You should always seek the advice of a qualified attorney for your specific legal concerns. | — | ||||||
| 6/16/26 | ![]() EP 109 Sounding Off | JudgeMental Podcast – Episode 109: "Sounding Off"Hosted by Christine & TreyEpisode SummaryChristine and Trey open with a bittersweet announcement: this is the last week of the JudgeMental Podcast — at least in its current daily format. They reflect on the emotional and psychological toll of deep-diving into family court cases, and make clear that continuing will require the show to become more financially sustainable. The Judge-y app isn't going anywhere, and the website will be updated. Follow the show on Instagram @Judgingthejudges and download Judge-y at judge-y.com.Main Topics1. Trey's Correction on Judge Lauren Ogden Reversal StatisticsTrey clarifies a misstatement from a previous episode: when he cited how many times Judge Ogden had been "reversed," he had actually conflated all negative appellate treatment — including writs granted and emergency relief — with formal reversals by the Court of Appeals. He clarifies that Judge Ogden has fewer formal reversals than Judge Preston but an extraordinarily high number of writs and emergency relief orders, which are not tracked in the same case research databases as reversals.2. Judge Lauren Ogden Appointed to Child Fatality Review PanelSecretary of State Michael Adams has appointed Judge Lauren Ogden as the new chair of the Child Fatality and Near Fatality External Review Panel for a two-year term. Christine and Trey express serious alarm given Ogden's appellate record, particularly in cases involving children and domestic violence. They discuss the case Hansen v. Work, in which the Court of Appeals reversed Judge Ogden after she promised to hear from children in chambers, then dismissed a petition alleging child violence without hearing a single witness.3. The Pattern of Appellate ReversalsTrey explains the distinction between "episodic" judicial errors (varied mistakes across different areas of law) versus "structural" failures — where a judge is repeatedly reversed for the same type of misconduct. Judge Ogden's record falls into the structural category, particularly around due process violations, failure to make evidentiary findings, and ignoring appellate directives. The Court of Appeals has not just reversed her — in some cases it has directed her to enter specific rulings because the evidence was so clear.4. Reflections on Family Court & The Emotional TollChristine opens up about the personal weight of reporting on these cases, including holding confidential information about children who have lost their lives after being placed by the Cabinet for Health and Family Services. She references the book Chaos by Tom O'Neill as a parallel to her experience going down difficult investigative rabbit holes.5. The Judge-y App & What's NextJudge-y, the app that empowers the public to rate and review judges, is not going away. Trey notes that he has been processing judge-addition requests and clarifies the app's policy: retired judges who are no longer taking appointments are generally not added to the directory. Judges who are retired but still accepting case appointments are still considered active and remain eligible for the platform.Download Judge-y at judge-y.com | Follow: @JudgingthejudgesKey Cases MentionedHansen v. Work – Court of Appeals reversed Judge Ogden after she dismissed a child violence petition without hearing witnesses, despite having promised to interview children in chambers.Resources & Links🔗 Download the Judge-y app: judge-y.com📲 Follow on Instagram: @Judgingthejudges📧 Contact Secretary of State Michael Adams: sos.secretary@ky.gov📚 Chaos by Tom O'Neill (referenced by Christine)LEGAL DISCLAIMERThe content of this podcast is for informational and entertainment purposes only. It is not intended to be, and should not be construed as, legal advice. Engaging with this content does not create an attorney-client relationship between you and the hosts, guests, or their firms. The views and opinions expressed on this podcast are solely those of the individuals involved and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of any law firm, company, or organization. We make no representations or warranties regarding the accuracy, completeness, or applicability of the information presented. Any reliance on the information in this podcast is at your own risk. Laws are constantly changing, and every situation is unique. You should always seek the advice of a qualified attorney for your specific legal concerns. | — | ||||||
| 6/10/26 | ![]() EP 108 White Trash Dude | JudgeMental Podcast – Episode 108: "White Trash Dude"Hosts: Trey & ChristineEpisode SummaryIn this episode, Trey and Christine dig into the case of Leslie Calabrese, a former Cuyahoga County (Cleveland), Ohio family court judge who pled guilty and was sentenced to 60 days for her role in a judicial corruption scheme. The hosts break down what happened, why it matters, and what it reveals about systemic issues in courts across the country — including right in their own backyard of Louisville, Kentucky.What We CoverThe Calabrese Case: A sitting domestic relations judge in Cleveland who repeatedly appointed a personal friend — and his daughter's company — as receivers in divorce cases, funneling over half a million dollars to that firm.The Cover-Up: Staffers were ordered to delay and withhold public records requests to let the scandal "blow over." She also allegedly manipulated which cases were assigned to her docket.The Sentence: 60 days — the hosts debate whether this is justice or a slap on the wrist, and whether her political dynasty family connections played a role in the lenient outcome.The RICO Question: Christine argues this constitutes an organized criminal syndicate. Both hosts question why federal prosecutors haven't been more aggressive.The Family Dynasty: Calabrese came from one of Ohio's most prominent political families — including Supreme Court justices, appellate judges, and the mayor of Cleveland — and was reportedly the first woman in the family elected to public office.The Broader Pattern: What's the legal line between a judge appointing someone they know (because they're reliable and available) versus criminal cronyism? Hugh and Trey explore where that line is — and where it's clearly being crossed in Louisville.Louisville Parallels: Christine details a pattern she sees locally — judges appointing former staff, campaign attorneys, business managers, and even their tenants as GALs, FOCs, parenting coordinators, and custodial evaluators — with no statutory requirement to do so.What You Should Ask Your Attorney: If your attorney regularly receives court appointments from the judge on your case, they may be unwilling to challenge bad rulings in order to protect that financial relationship. Ask the hard questions before you hire someone.The Photo: A post circulating in Louisville showing a sitting judge, a sitting GAL/FOC, attorneys, and a court-appointed custodial evaluator socializing together — captioned "May in one word: flourishing."Key TakeawaysA judge was actually prosecuted and sentenced to jail time for appointment-based corruption. That matters."This is how we always do it here" is not a legal defense.Disclosure. Disclosure. Disclosure. If the relationships aren't a problem, why hide them?Receivers, GALs, FOCs, parenting coordinators — these appointments are discretionary, not mandatory. And that discretion is ripe for abuse.Ask your attorney about their relationships with opposing counsel and the judge.Resources & Links🌐 Website: judge-y.com📲 Download the app: Judge-y — empowering you to rate and review judges for judicial accountability and transparency📣 Follow us: @JudgingthejudgesLEGAL DISCLAIMERThe content of this podcast is for informational and entertainment purposes only. It is not intended to be, and should not be construed as, legal advice. Engaging with this content does not create an attorney-client relationship between you and the hosts, guests, or their firms. The views and opinions expressed on this podcast are solely those of the individuals involved and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of any law firm, company, or organization. We make no representations or warranties regarding the accuracy, completeness, or applicability of the information presented. Any reliance on the information in this podcast is at your own risk. Laws are constantly changing, and every situation is unique. You should always seek the advice of a qualified attorney for your specific legal concerns.JudgeMental Podcast is produced by Trey & Christine — two lawyers determined to save the system. | — | ||||||
| 6/8/26 | ![]() EP 107 Slap of the Wrist, Hold the Slap✨ | judicial misconductfederal judge scandal+5 | — | Judicial Conduct CommissionChrisley | — | judicial misconductfederal judge+6 | — | 26m 08s | |
| 6/5/26 | ![]() EP 106 – Dry Friday✨ | judicial accountabilityfamily court system+4 | — | JudgeMental Podcast | — | judicial accountabilityfamily court+7 | — | 38m 33s | |
| 6/3/26 | ![]() EP 105 Pants on Fire✨ | legal ethicsfamily court+5 | — | Friends of the CourtMorgan v. Getter+2 | — | Friends of the Courtdeception+5 | — | 31m 24s | |
| 6/1/26 | ![]() EP 104 Groundhog Day✨ | appellate decisionsfamily courts+3 | — | Kentucky Court of AppealsLewis Family Court | Kentucky | appellate decisionsfamily courts+3 | — | 31m 48s | |
| 5/22/26 | ![]() EP 103 Sun's Out, Beers Out✨ | judicial accountabilitydue process violations+3 | — | Judge-yCourt of Appeals+2 | FloridaMiami | Judge Lauren Ogdendue process+3 | — | 53m 41s | |
| 5/18/26 | ![]() EP 102 Anyone There?✨ | judicial conductcourtroom accountability+3 | — | — | LouisvilleKentucky+1 | Judge Derwin WebbLouisville Family Court+3 | — | 42m 06s | |
| 5/15/26 | ![]() EP 101 Lame✨ | Kentucky family court systemjudicial conduct+3 | — | Judicial Conduct CommissionKentucky Bar Association | — | Kentuckyfamily court+5 | — | 28m 04s | |
Want analysis for the episodes below?Free for Pro Submit a request, we'll have your selected episodes analyzed within an hour. Free, at no cost to you, for Pro users. | |||||||||
| 5/13/26 | ![]() EP 100 Century✨ | First Amendment rightsself-policing organizations+4 | — | LMPDKentucky State Police+1 | — | LMPDFirst Amendment+5 | — | 30m 25s | |
| 5/11/26 | ![]() EP 99 Safer?✨ | Safer Kentucky Actjudicial accountability+3 | — | — | Jefferson CountyKentucky+1 | Safer Kentucky Acthomelessness+3 | — | 37m 25s | |
| 5/8/26 | ![]() EP 98 Wednesday on Friday✨ | social media criticismjustice system+5 | Trey | SPLC | Louisville | social mediajustice system+5 | — | 21m 04s | |
| 5/6/26 | ![]() EP 97 The High Life✨ | First Amendmentschool discipline+3 | Trey | Castano Unified School DistrictMartin Luther King Jr.+1 | — | First Amendmentschool discipline+3 | — | 26m 42s | |
| 5/4/26 | ![]() EP 96 Derby Week✨ | judges on social mediajudicial transparency+4 | Trey | — | TexasKentucky | judgessocial media+5 | — | 27m 26s | |
| 5/1/26 | ![]() EP 95 Fight Club Friday✨ | divorce lawattorney ethics+4 | — | Courier Journal | KentuckyFrankfurt Avenue | divorce attorneyslegal debate+4 | — | 41m 12s | |
| 4/29/26 | ![]() EP 94 You Shall Not Pass✨ | judicial dramalegal analysis+3 | — | — | Lexington, Kentucky | court accesslegal analysis+3 | — | 37m 25s | |
| 4/27/26 | ![]() EP 93 FBI, Where Are You?✨ | Bridgeman casecourtroom management+4 | — | FBIBridgeman | — | Bridgeman caseFBI+6 | — | 27m 46s | |
| 4/24/26 | ![]() EP 92 It's Not Normal✨ | judicial improprietyfamily court+3 | — | Three FloydsGuardian ad Litem | — | judicial improprietyfamily court+3 | — | 36m 07s | |
| 4/22/26 | ![]() EP 91 Just No✨ | family court systemaccountability+4 | — | Jefferson CountyTikTok | — | family courtTikTok+6 | — | 27m 16s | |
| 4/20/26 | ![]() EP 90 Better of Alone?✨ | impeachmentjudicial accountability+5 | — | Kentucky Supreme CourtFayette County Family Court+1 | — | impeachmentjudicial accountability+5 | — | 26m 01s | |
| 4/17/26 | ![]() EP 89 Bottoms Up✨ | judicial accountabilitycourtroom drama+3 | — | — | Oldham CountyJefferson County | judicial accountabilitycourtroom drama+5 | — | 36m 19s | |
| 4/15/26 | ![]() EP 88 As Old as Time | JudgeMental Podcast – Episode 88 As Old as TimeKentucky's First-Ever Judicial Impeachment: Political Theater or Constitutional Crisis?In this episode, hosts Hugh and Christine — the minds behind Judge-y — dive deep into the unprecedented impeachment of a Lexington circuit judge by the Kentucky House of Representatives. This is the first judicial impeachment in Kentucky's 233-year history, and it raises serious questions about the separation of powers, the integrity of the judiciary, and whether our elected officials are using constitutional mechanisms for political ends.What We Cover:The Basics of the Impeachment: A Lexington circuit judge was impeached by the Kentucky House along strict party lines. The catch? The legislators behind the impeachment — led by Rep. Jason Nemes — refused to specify what misdemeanor the judge allegedly committed, which is a constitutional requirement for impeachment.Procedural Failures: Not only was no specific misdemeanor alleged, but the sworn affidavit required by statute was never filed, and witnesses at the hearing were never sworn in. Hugh and Christine break down why these aren't technicalities — they are fundamental constitutional and statutory requirements.The Kentucky Supreme Court Weighs In: After the House impeachment, the judge filed a writ with the Kentucky Supreme Court. The Court issued a sweeping ~44-page opinion halting the proceedings. Christine sides with the dissent, questioning whether this rose to the level of "irreparable harm" required for extraordinary relief. Hugh sees the supervisory role of the Supreme Court as broader and more open-ended under the Kentucky Constitution.Separation of Powers Showdown: The Kentucky Senate signaled it would move forward despite the Supreme Court's order — echoing troubling national trends where court orders are openly defied. Hugh and Christine discuss Marbury v. Madison and what happens when the judiciary lacks an "army" to enforce its rulings.The Dangerous Precedent: If judges can be impeached based on how often they rule against prosecutors — or in favor of defendants — what stops the legislature from using impeachment as a tool to control every judge in the state? Hugh and Christine connect this to larger concerns about judicial independence, civil cases, and the influence of donors and political appointees.The Miranda Parallel: Christine's sharp analogy — you can hate Ernesto Miranda the person and still acknowledge Miranda rights are constitutionally required — cuts to the heart of why "I don't like Matt Bevin, but…" qualifiers are unnecessary and sometimes harmful to legal discourse.What's Next: Christine predicts the Senate won't ultimately remove the judge — but isn't sure that holds now. She also raises the possibility that Andy Beshear's judicial appointments could become the next political target.Open Bar, Open Court: Starting Friday, Hugh and Christine will be answering YOUR legal questions live in the Judge-y community. Submit your questions exclusively at judge-y.com — not on social, not via DM, only in the community.Follow & Connect:Community & Show Notes: judge-y.comSocial: @JudgingthejudgesDownload the app: Judge-yLEGAL DISCLAIMERThe content of this podcast is for informational and entertainment purposes only. It is not intended to be, and should not be construed as, legal advice. Engaging with this content does not create an attorney-client relationship between you and the hosts, guests, or their firms. The views and opinions expressed on this podcast are solely those of the individuals involved and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of any law firm, company, or organization. We make no representations or warranties regarding the accuracy, completeness, or applicability of the information presented. Any reliance on the information in this podcast is at your own risk. Laws are constantly changing, and every situation is unique. You should always seek the advice of a qualified attorney for your specific legal concerns. | — | ||||||
| 4/13/26 | ![]() EP 87 L.O. Down | JudgeMental Podcast – EP 87: L.O. DownIn this episode, the hosts dive into the latest development in the ongoing Bridgeman case — and it's a jaw-dropper. Jefferson County Family Court Judge Lauren Ogden has been photographed attending a high-profile charity fundraiser at the home of one of the active litigants appearing before her in court. Yes, really.What We Cover:The Bridgeman Case Background – Filed in 2024, this is a high-stakes custody dispute involving an heir to a significant estate. The hosts previously covered how the FOC (Friend of the Court) gave the father's estate a tour while skipping the mother's home entirely — and now there's more.Bourbon & Bow Ties at the Bridgeman Estate – A supplemental affidavit was filed in the pending 26A (Kentucky Supreme Court disqualification petition) revealing that Judge Ogden attended this annual fundraiser — held at the litigant's estate — as recently as June 2025, posting and being tagged in multiple photos on social media. The invitation itself, filed as a pleading exhibit, names the Bridgeman estate as the venue.The Coverup Is Worse Than the Crime – After the motion was filed, the photos were removed and Judge Ogden was untagged. Christine and Hugh are direct: that's not a strategy, that's a confession.The 26A Still Has Not Been Ruled On – The original petition to disqualify Judge Ogden — based on her November 2024 removal of the children from their mother at motion hour, without sworn testimony or a hearing — has been pending since November. Meanwhile, a pro se litigant's 26A in another division was resolved quickly.Due Process, Ethics, and Accountability – Christine and Hugh discuss the Kentucky standard (appearance of a conflict is enough), the pattern of reversals of Judge Ogden by the Court of Appeals, and why every other judge in the building who stays silent is complicit.The Call to Action – If judges are attending social events at litigants' homes while their cases are active, the bench is not a safe place for them. Period.Stay Connected:Visit us at judge-y.comFollow us on social: @JudgingthejudgesJoin the Judge-y community on YouTube — every Friday, Christine and Hugh go live for "Open Court," answering your questions exclusively in the community tab. (Preferably with a Kentucky-brewed beverage in hand.)Download the Judge-y app to stay up to date, rate judges, and be part of the conversation.LEGAL DISCLAIMERThe content of this podcast is for informational and entertainment purposes only. It is not intended to be, and should not be construed as, legal advice. Engaging with this content does not create an attorney-client relationship between you and the hosts, guests, or their firms. The views and opinions expressed on this podcast are solely those of the individuals involved and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of any law firm, company, or organization. We make no representations or warranties regarding the accuracy, completeness, or applicability of the information presented. Any reliance on the information in this podcast is at your own risk. Laws are constantly changing, and every situation is unique. You should always seek the advice of a qualified attorney for your specific legal concerns. | — | ||||||
| 4/10/26 | ![]() EP 86 Open Court, Open Bar Vol. 1 | EP 86 – Open Court, Open Bar Vol. 1 | The JudgeMental PodcastHugh and Christine are back with another round of Open Court, Open Bar — answering questions straight from the Judge-y community. This episode covers everything from AI in the courtroom to TikTok judges, city attorney conflicts, and the surprising power of circuit clerks in small-town Kentucky.In This Episode:🤖 AI Judges: Useful Experiment or Recipe for Disaster?A question from the Judge-y community sparks a deep dive into whether AI could (or should) replace human judges. Hugh and Christine agree that AI excels at legal research, pattern recognition, and analyzing case law at lightning speed — but it fundamentally cannot replicate human judicial discretion. The soul of judging, they argue, lies in the gray areas: weighing evidence, recognizing edge cases, and applying the kind of judgment that no algorithm can be programmed to have. Christine floats the idea of using AI to analyze judicial patterns across hundreds of cases — something Judge-y is uniquely positioned to explore.⚖️ Laura Russell: Louisville's Highest-Rated Family Court JudgeThe community has spoken — Laura Russell holds the top rating for family court judges in Louisville on Judge-y. Hugh and Christine share their firsthand court-watching experiences, noting that her motion hours were consistently well-run, efficient, and fair to pro se litigants. Christine reviewed her anonymously and gave mostly five stars. The verdict: she's done a great job on the bench, and the absence of community complaints speaks volumes.🏙️ City Attorneys in Family Court: Who Do They Really Represent?A listener question about city attorneys tendering family court orders opens up a broader conversation about dual roles, conflicts of interest, and small-town legal politics. When city attorneys also work for the county attorney's office and take private cases, the lines get blurry fast. Christine recounts her Eastern Kentucky experience, where courthouse relationships — from who you eat lunch with to who controls the clerks — can have outsized influence on outcomes.📋 KREF, Campaign Treasurers & Judicial ConflictsA follow-up question digs into campaign finance disclosures and judicial conflicts. Christine and Hugh zero in on a pattern that makes both of them uncomfortable: in nearly every judicial campaign, the treasurer is an attorney who practices before that judge. They call for more specifics from the community and remind listeners that Judge-y exists precisely to surface these kinds of concerns.📱 Judge Brown: The TikTok Judge — Prepared or Not?A listener question about Jefferson Family Court Division VII judge's courtroom preparedness leads to a nuanced discussion. Hugh acknowledges he's seen her at her best — fully prepared, handling complex business valuations, running a tight remote courtroom during COVID — and at her worst, seemingly forgetting everything from the prior hearing. Christine's read from community submissions: it's all or nothing with her. The TikTok surgeon parallel also comes up: when you're distracted by your image, the people in front of you pay the price.🔔 Community Call-OutsHave experience with GALs or FOCs? Submit on Judge-y.Court staff causing issues? That's a conversation worth having — get on the app.Laura Russell submissions always welcome.Connect With Us:Rate any judge in America for free: judge-y.comFollow us on social: @JudgingthejudgesDownload the app: Judge-y — tag your judge, ask questions, spark debate, and join the paid community to follow specific judges and stay up to date on every case discussion.LEGAL DISCLAIMERThe content of this podcast is for informational and entertainment purposes only. It is not intended to be, and should not be construed as, legal advice. Engaging with this content does not create an attorney-client relationship between you and the hosts, guests, or their firms. The views and opinions expressed on this podcast are solely those of the individuals involved and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of any law firm, company, or organization. We make no representations or warranties regarding the accuracy, completeness, or applicability of the information presented. Any reliance on the information in this podcast is at your own risk. Laws are constantly changing, and every situation is unique. You should always seek the advice of a qualified attorney for your specific legal concerns. | — | ||||||
Showing 25 of 109
Pitch Fit is a Pro feature
See how bookable this show is for guests, which brands already advertise, the per-episode ad value, and the best-fit guest and sponsor profile. The numbers are blurred on the free plan.
How readily this show books outside guests like you.
How proven this show is for host-read sponsorships.
For Guests
ProFor Advertisers
ProUpgrade to Pro to unlock guest cadence, sponsor categories, fit scores, and per-episode ad value for this show.
Chart Positions
1 placement across 1 market.
Chart Positions
1 placement across 1 market.
