B. Ramifications of Legal Complexity What are the ramifications of recognizing our dissonance about the nature of law, and facing up to the conclusion that the law is complex, multidimensional, and difficult to categorize? Of course, legal realists and critical legal studies adherents have spilled lots of ink over these observations. The legal realists asserted the bankruptcy of formalism and the reality of judicial pragmatism. Facts and equities decide cases, they thought, and not necessarily in a neutral manner. Critical legal studies theorists followed the realists but distinguished themselves by their more dogged insistence that the law is indeterminate and biased. rules have little effect In cases d, because for each rule the judge can find a counter rule Further,the law offers precious little guidance on whether the rule or counter rule should apply in a given case. Judges must use their discretion to decide a case Notwithstanding private laws complexity, Professor Waddams has more faith in the relative predictability of legal decisions. He explains that courts use their"overall judgment after examining the various"complementary strands"in the reasoning. Even if each concept alone is insufficient to reach a decision, cumulatively the various concepts tend to support Hillman, Richness, supra note 10, at 176- Id at 194: see also dimensions of Private law at 205 Id. at 233 Id. at 19111 B. Ramifications of Legal Complexity What are the ramifications of recognizing our dissonance about the nature of law, and facing up to the conclusion that the law is complex, multidimensional, and difficult to categorize? Of course, legal realists and critical legal studies adherents have spilled lots of ink over these observations. The legal realists asserted the bankruptcy of formalism and the reality of judicial pragmatism. Facts and equities decide cases, they thought, and not necessarily in a neutral manner.40 Critical legal studies theorists followed the realists, but distinguished themselves by their more dogged insistence that the law is indeterminate and biased. Rules have little effect in cases, they reasoned, because for each rule the judge can find a counter rule. Further, the law offers precious little guidance on whether the rule or counter rule should apply in a given case.41 Judges must use their discretion to decide a case. Notwithstanding private law's complexity, Professor Waddams has more faith in the relative predictability of legal decisions.42 He explains that courts use their “overall judgment,”43 after examining the various “complementary strands” in the reasoning.44 Even if each concept alone is insufficient to reach a decision, “cumulatively the various concepts tend[] to support 40 Hillman, Richness, supra note 10, at 176-177. 41 Id. at 194; see also Dimensions of Private Law at 205. 42 Id. at 233. 43 Id. at 34. 44 Id. at 191