What is the difference between a "pro tem" judge and a presiding judge?

PRO TEM, JUDGE - A temporary judge. A judge pro tem is not a regular judge, but someone (usually a lawyer) who is brought in to serve temporarily as a judge with the consent of the parties. Many courts use pro tem judges because there are too many cases for the regular judges to handle. Although every party has the right to have his case heard by a real judge, judges pro tem are often practitioners in the field in which they are asked to hear cases and have as much, if not more, knowledge than a real judge. Pro tem judges are used often in family law cases, especially in default divorces.

presiding judge n. 1) in both state and federal appeals court, the judge who chairs the panel of three or more judges during hearings and supervises the business of the court. 2) in those counties or other jurisdictions with several judges, one of them is chosen to direct the management of the courts, usually on an annual or other rotating basis. The presiding judge usually makes assignments of judges to specialized courts (juvenile, probate, criminal, law and motion, family law etc.), oversees the calendar, and chairs meetings of the judges.

(((((Linz))))) i think of there is judgment and then there is JUDGMENT. as quickly as I remind human beings, as i'm wont to do, that they are judging human beings in direct contradiction to the gospel they declare to stick to (Mat 7:a million, e.g.), they commonly come again with something like "we make judgments on a daily basis. How will we no longer?" yet you're ideal: having comments,esp. whilst someone's movements threaten to wreck you, or infringe on your rights, isn't in easy terms organic, that is mandatory. If someone says, "The Bible says to love one yet another and to no longer choose, so, those people who're hating and judging and sneering, even regardless of the undeniable fact that they call themselves Christians, do no longer look very Christian," that is an "I" assertion that is a extra of a fact-based opinion approximately what I detect. yet whilst someone says "given which you do no longer use the comparable non secular terminology as I do, or given which you consume meat on Fridays, or given which you splatter as a exchange of dunk, you're actually not saved and God will deliver you to hell," that is a judgment. that is a 'you-assertion' opinion that is presumptuous and conceited. that is one among those judgment that Jesus stated in Mat 7:a million and so forth. of direction you continually have the spectacular zealot who believes that just to disagree with him is a treacherous act of demoralizing judgment. they have an inclination to be people who have no theory that their very own comments would possibly no longer be organic, unadulterated fact. In my adventure, those tend to be the "blind-faithers" and because they're instructed to no longer think of roughly their ideals, they have no recourse to communicate an ordinary opinion different than to ***** which you're judging them by potential of disagreeing. Sorry it is so long. appears like i'm no longer able to declare something in under 2500 words. No, i'm no longer long-winded... I opt to think of of it as *colloquial.* :)