“Quite honestly, we get one new civil case every business day of the year. We spend so much of our time reading the law and interpreting the law, that that does not leave much time for consideration of whether the law is prudent or might be written in a better way. I spend all of my time, with the assistance of my law clerks, trying to read the law and interpret it and apply it to the facts presented in any particular case. So I cannot say that I have spent much time at all considering the propriety of the laws that I have had occasion to interpret.”

—  Thomas Hardiman

Judicial and Executive Nominations (November 14, 2006)

Adopted from Wikiquote. Last update June 3, 2021. History

Help us to complete the source, original and additional information

Do you have more details about the quote "Quite honestly, we get one new civil case every business day of the year. We spend so much of our time reading the law …" by Thomas Hardiman?
Thomas Hardiman photo
Thomas Hardiman3
American judge 1965

Related quotes

John Coleridge, 1st Baron Coleridge photo

“I am sure from my experience of juries that, in a criminal case especially, they will obey the law as declared by the Judge; they will take the law from the Judge, whether they like it or do not like it, and apply it honestly to the facts before them.”

John Coleridge, 1st Baron Coleridge (1820–1894) British lawyer, judge and Liberal politician

1 Cababe & Ellis' Q. B. D. Rep. 133.
Reg. v. Ramsey (1883)

John Holt (Lord Chief Justice) photo

“Whatever at common law might be amended in civil cases, was at common law amendable in criminal, and so it is at this day.”

John Holt (Lord Chief Justice) (1642–1710) English lawyer and Lord Chief Justice of England

The Queen v. Tutchin (1704), 1 Salk. 51 pl. 14.

Elena Kagan photo

“I think people are great in many different ways. So, I think some justices are great because they have extraordinary wisdom, they have an understanding of how to apply the law in their times … in a way that's completely consistent with … the text of the law and the purposes of the law, and in a way that's completely right for the times in which they live in.”

Elena Kagan (1960) Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States

Interview on C-SPAN (9 December 2010) http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/297143-1.

Samuel Butler photo

“The written law is binding, but the unwritten law is much more so.”

Samuel Butler (1835–1902) novelist

The Law
The Note-Books of Samuel Butler (1912), Part VII - On the Making of Music, Pictures, and Books
Context: The written law is binding, but the unwritten law is much more so. You may break the written law at a pinch and on the sly if you can, but the unwritten law — which often comprises the written — must not be broken. Not being written, it is not always easy to know what it is, but this has got to be done.

Robert Chambers (publisher, born 1802) photo

“This skeptical method consists very much in vicious circles. You cannot know whether a fact be a fact till you have ascertained the laws of nature in the case, and you cannot know the laws of nature till you have ascertained facts.”

Robert Chambers (publisher, born 1802) (1802–1871) Scottish publisher and writer

Source: Testimony: its Posture in the Scientific World (1859), p. 9

“There may be cases in which there is so much of difficulty in knowing where the law stands that we take time to consider, and sometimes doubt much and sometimes differ among ourselves. But I believe every one of the Judges acts upon the principle that he is before man and God in the discharge of his duty, and acts upon his solemn oath, and declares tbe law not according to any political fancy, or for the purposes of serving one party or serving another, but according to the pure conviction of his own mind without looking to any party.”

Sir John Bayley, 1st Baronet (1763–1841) British judge

Case of Edmonds and others (1821), 1 St. Tr. (N. S.) 899.

“General laws cannot give way to particular cases.”

William Henry Ashurst (judge) (1725–1807) English judge

King v. The College of Physicians (1797), 7 T. R. 290.

John Marshall photo

“[T]he constitution controls any legislative act repugnant to it.... It is emphatically the province and duty of the judicial department to say what the law is.... So if a law be in opposition to the constitution; if both the law and the constitution apply to a particular case, so that the court must either decide that case conformably to the law, disregarding the constitution; or conformably to the constitution disregarding the law; the court must determine which of these conflicting rules governs the case. This is the very essence of judicial duty.... Those then who controvert the principle that the constitution is to be considered, in court, as a paramount law, are reduced to the necessity of maintaining that courts must close their eyes on the constitution, and see only the law. This doctrine would subvert the very foundation of all written constitutions... It would be giving the legislature a practical and real omnipotence... The judicial power of the United States is extended to all cases arising under the constitution.”

John Marshall (1755–1835) fourth Chief Justice of the United States

5. U.S. (1 Cranch) 137
Marbury v. Madison (1803)

Washington Gladden photo

“I only wish to have the principle recognized that no man liveth to himself; that no man's business is his business alone; that all business is stewardship; that there is no law of life but Christ's law; that the main question for every man is not how much he can get, but how much he can give.”

Washington Gladden (1836–1918) American pastor

The New Idolatry (1905), p. 242

John Eardley Wilmot photo

“I have always thought that formerly there was too confined a way of thinking in the Judges of the common law Courts, and that Courts of equity have risen by the Judges not properly applying the principles of the common law, being too narrowly governed by old cases and maxims, which have too much prevented the public from having the benefit of the common law.”

John Eardley Wilmot (1709–1792) English judge

2 Wils. 341.
Collins v. Blantern (1767)

Related topics