The yes is that yes, judges generally have pretty wide discretion in applying any given rule, and they apply their own sense of what's reasonable given the circumstances. They're more likely to go out of their way to help a pro se litigant who's making a good effort and bend the rules to make things move along fairly.
The no is that judges are allowed to impose their own 'local rules' about little things like how many holes should be punched in the filings submitted to them. If you fuck these up they are generally sticklers for them and get unreasonably (From our perspective as lawyers) upset about this.
The other call out is the sentencing guidelines in criminal law. You can google it, but there's been some controversy and history about how much judges can 'deviate' from the sentencing guidelines when giving convicted criminals their jail time.
The yes is that yes, judges generally have pretty wide discretion in applying any given rule, and they apply their own sense of what's reasonable given the circumstances. They're more likely to go out of their way to help a pro se litigant who's making a good effort and bend the rules to make things move along fairly.
The no is that judges are allowed to impose their own 'local rules' about little things like how many holes should be punched in the filings submitted to them. If you fuck these up they are generally sticklers for them and get unreasonably (From our perspective as lawyers) upset about this.
The other call out is the sentencing guidelines in criminal law. You can google it, but there's been some controversy and history about how much judges can 'deviate' from the sentencing guidelines when giving convicted criminals their jail time.