In a bench trial, the judge serves as the fact finder as well as deciding legal questions. The court hears testimony, reviews documents and other evidence, and makes findings about what happened. By contrast, in a jury trial the jury generally resolves disputed facts under instructions from the judge.
Bench trials are common in some complex civil matters and in proceedings where there is no right to a jury or where the parties validly waive it. An antitrust bench trial may involve technical testimony about market definitions, pricing, software systems and competitive effects. The judge still must apply the governing burden of proof and procedural rules.
A bench trial is different from a motions hearing. A judge can decide a legal issue on a motion without conducting a trial, and a bench trial can span many days of testimony and cross-examination. The result may include written findings of fact and conclusions of law, which help an appellate court review the decision.
When a report says that an antitrust case went to a bench trial, look for the issues actually tried and the judge's findings. Do not treat lawyers' opening statements, expert predictions or a proposed ruling as the court's final determination.