I don't know how this show has remained on the air for 5 years. Judge Judy created it, but these judges don't compare well to her. Perhaps it's their focus on achieving unanimity that makes too many of their decisions seem unfair. Oftentimes, I find myself agreeing with Judge Acker when she dissents. (Although she was never on the bench in real life, she's the best judge on this panel, IMHO.) Judge Corriero wears his heart on his sleeves, sometimes inappropriately. I was gobsmacked when he practically apologized to a pit bull owner for ruling in favor of the plaintiff who had sued her for damages related to an attack by the defendant's dog. Whaaat?!? Lastly, what's up with Judge DiMango and Judge Corriero's inability (or refusal) to call the litigants by their names. Every one is "you," "he," "she".... They disrespect the litigants by not bothering to address them by name. Plus, for those of us who aren't staring at the TV the entire time to see on whom the camera is focused (because we're multi-tasking), it's hard to follow along. Even Judge Judy, who is probably older than DiMango and Corriero, can recall and use the names of the parties who come before her. How hard is that? (And if it is hard, the show's producers should place name cards on the front of the podia.) "Hot Bench" is amateur hour compared to Judge Judy. She should give Judge Acker her own show and be done with it.
