Yet court officials are constantly surprised by the imprudence of people's courtroom-clothing choices.

　　One doctor in Texas appeared at his own medical-malpractice trial in blue jeans. 'In the old days, parents used to teach us to dress up in certain places,' says Richard Waites, a psychologist and trial consultant who was working for the hospital that employed the doctor.

　　Can clothes tip the scales of justice? We'd like to think not. There are the merits of the case, after all. But as Dr. Waites suggests, 'Justice isn't black and white. It's gray most of the time.'

　　One California judge I spoke with says she takes account of both the appearance and the behavior of those who come before her court. Sloppy dress at trial might seem to add to the case against a father accused of neglectful child-rearing, she says. Or a woman who is claiming poverty in a financial hearing might undermine her case if she's wearing highly expensive clothing.

　　Juries may be even more judgmental, especially as they sit for hours with little to look at . . . but you.

　　'Jurors notice everything,' says Patricia Glaser, a business litigator whose clients have included Kirk Kerkorian and Conan O'Brien. 'They notice the wedding ring, they notice if your hair is parted on the right or left, they notice if it's an Italian-cut suit or a Brooks Brothers, they notice if your shoes are scuffed every day, just like they notice if you're on time or not.'

　　Courts have rules of decorum for both behavior and dress. It's rare for judges to impose sanctions. When it does happen, it sometimes makes headlines: In May, a woman was held in contempt of court and jailed over a T-shirt with a message a judge found offensive, according to news reports. In April, a man wearing black jeans was turned away from an Inkster, Mich., court -- missing his traffic-court date.

　　When going to court, most of us would be advised to look like the embodiment of the Boy Scout creed -- trustworthy, loyal and helpful. 'It's like dressing for church,' says divorce lawyer Stacy Phillips, whose clients have included a sweet-looking Britney Spears in polka dots. She has lent her own clothes to ill-prepared clients, and their moms, on the way in to court.

　　It's also important to think about the more subtle messages that apparel can send. While a business suit is usually a safe choice, there may be cases in which it's not. Ms. Phillips says she represented a high-ranking female executive recruiter, who favored severe dark business suits, in a child-custody case. She sent the woman shopping for 'pastels and skirts,' she says. 'I wanted her to look vulnerable.' Meanwhile, a double-breasted suit, with its air of entitlement, may be too smug.

　　Even ties -- while usually advisable if the choice is conservative and doesn't attract attention -- may not be right in every situation. Ms. Glaser says she recently asked her real estate-developer clients not to wear ties in order to soften their edge. They don't normally wear ties, she noted, so they don't look comfortable in them.

　　For women, conservative slacks are as acceptable as a skirt or dress, according to nearly every court official I interviewed. Yet all of the women (the judge and the attorneys) say they prefer to wear skirts themselves in court.

　　While there was little consensus on pantyhose, there's no downside to wearing them (fashion considerations aside). There is, though, a possible downside to going bare-legged: Plenty of people believe fervently that a lady isn't fully dressed without her hose. If you get one of those judges, a pair of sheer nylons could prove a worthy investment.

　　I spent a day in Los Angeles Superior Court recently -- for research purposes, thankfully -- and was surprised at the variety of looks. I saw a tattoo on a lawyer's neck, for instance, and a lot of tees, untucked shirts, and jeans, both neat and sloppy, on litigants and witnesses. Dr. Waites says tattoos and business casual garb are more common these days, even among lawyers, but he wagers they're a fad that will quickly disappear.

　　The judge I spoke with says it isn't necessary to wear expensive clothes. I observed a middle-aged Latino couple who were tenants testifying in a trial involving housing code violations. The couple looked as though they had dressed up for church, she in a blue floral dress and jacket, and he in a pressed shirt and slacks. The landlord's representatives looked wrinkled and overly business-casual. They also seemed cocky. Was it the evidence or fashion factors that left my sympathies with the tenants?

　　'What we wear says so much about you,' says Nina Garcia, a judge on the Lifetime Television show 'Project Runway' and author of the recently released book 'What To Wear Where.' Before a court appearance, she suggests asking, 'How do you want to portray yourself?

　　Ms. Garcia's list of courtroom no-nos includes see-through or low-cut clothes, mini dresses, heavy makeup, loud patterns, clashing colors and noisy bangles. She advises looking for conservative clothes from 'wholesome brands' like Banana Republic, Ann Taylor or Brooks Brothers.

　　One parting and practical piece of advice, from Ms. Phillips, the lawyer: Take a jacket or sweater. Courtrooms can get chilly in many ways.

　　有一个地方，第一印象的重要性甚至超过了招聘面试，超过了与对象父母共进晚餐的时刻。那就是：法庭。

　　然而，经常有人衣着草率地出庭，令法庭工作人员惊讶不已。

　　得克萨斯州一名医生穿着蓝色牛仔裤出席自己医疗失误案的法庭审判。心理学家威茨(Richard Waites)为这名医生所在的医院提供诉讼咨询服务，他说，以前，父母都会教育我们在特定场合要注意着装。

　　着装能否影响法院的判决？我们会认为不至于，毕竟审案应该就事论事。但威茨博士建议说：公正并不是非黑即白，在绝大多数情况下，它是灰色的。

　　我跟加州的一位法官聊过，她说自己在判案过程中，会把出庭人员的形象和举止作为考虑因素之一。一位被指控照顾孩子不周的父亲如果穿得邋里邋遢出庭，势必会导致自己处于更不利的局面。如果一位妇女声称自己陷入财务困境，却穿得珠光宝气来参加审讯，难免会让人心生疑问。

　　陪审团可能会做出更多的主观判断，尤其是考虑到他们要坐在陪审席上好几个小时，没什么可看的……除了出庭的你。

　　经济诉讼律师格雷瑟(Patricia Glaser)说，陪审员事无巨细都会注意到。他们不但会注意到你是否准时到庭，还会观察你的结婚戒指，观察你的头发是偏左分还是偏右分，观察你穿的西装是意大利的还是Brooks Brothers品牌的，观察你的鞋子是不是每天都用鞋托塑形。格雷瑟的客户包括亿万富翁柯克?科克莱恩(Kirk Kerkorian)和美国脱口秀主持人科南?奥布莱恩(Conan O'Brien)。

　　法庭对举止和着装都有礼仪规范，不过很少会对此类违规实施处罚，但一旦实施，往往就会成为头条新闻。据媒体报导，2010年5月，一名妇女因藐视法庭被判入狱，因为她穿的T恤上印了一句让法官觉得受到冒犯的话。2010年4月，一名穿黑色牛仔裤的男子被密歇根州英克斯特(Inkster)地方法院拒之门外，导致他错过了自己交通违规案的审理。

　　出庭的时候，我们中的绝大多数人都应该把自己打造成童子军信条的化身──可靠、忠诚、乐于助人。用离婚律师斯菲利普斯(Stacy Phillips)的话说就是，就像去教堂做礼拜一样。菲利普斯的客户包括外型甜美、喜欢穿圆点图案服装的布兰妮?斯皮尔斯(Britney Spears)。菲利普斯经常得在去法院的路上，把自己的衣服借给穿着不得体的客户，以及她们的妈妈。

　　服饰所传递出的一些更为微妙的信息也是很重要的需要考虑的因素。西装通常是一个安全的选择，但有时也不行。菲利普斯说，她有个女性客户是猎头公司的高管，喜欢穿颜色极深的西装。这位客户要为孩子监护权的诉讼出庭时，菲利普斯让她去买“浅色的衣服和裙子”。菲利普斯说，我想让她看上去弱势一点。此外，双排扣西装给人一种自大的感觉，可能也不适合法庭的场所。

　　如果领带的色彩保守，不引人注目，那么打领带通常是个不错的选择；但也有例外的情况。格雷瑟说，最近她让自己的房地产建筑商客户出庭时不要打领带，免得看上去紧张，因为他们平时不打领带，打了之后会显得局促不安。

　　我采访过的几乎每一位法庭工作人员都认为，女性穿保守的宽松长裤，与裙子和女式套装一样，都属于可接受的范围。不过，所有的女法官和女律师都说，她们自己更喜欢在法庭上穿裙子。

　　在是否穿连裤袜方面，人们没有一致的共识，不过穿连裤袜不会有什么坏处（不考虑时尚因素），而不穿袜子出庭倒是可能不太好。很多人都强烈地认为，一位女性如果没穿长筒袜，就不算是穿戴整齐。如果你遇到这样一位法官，那么买一双纯尼龙丝袜穿上是值得的。

　　最近，我在洛杉矶高等法院(Los Angeles Superior Court)呆了一天──谢天谢地，我去那里只是为了调查的目的──形形色色的装束让我大开眼界。比如一个律师的脖子上有刺青，不少诉讼人和证人穿T恤，有的衬衫不放进裤子里，有的则穿着或整洁或脏兮兮的牛仔裤。

　　跟我聊过的一个法官说，出庭时没必要穿昂贵的衣服。我注意到一对因涉嫌违反居住规定而做出庭陈述的中年拉丁裔夫妇。他们穿得跟去教堂差不多，女方穿一条蓝色花裙子和一件外套，男方穿一件熨过的衬衫和宽松长裤。房东的代理人都穿得很随便，衣服皱皱巴巴，而且个个态度傲慢。我下意识地就把同情心放到了房客一边，这是因为法律证据，还是由于着装因素呢？

　　美国Lifetime Television有线频道真人秀节目《天桥骄子》(Project Runway)评委加西亚(Nina Garcia)最近出版了《穿着的讲究》(What To Wear Where)一书，她说，穿着暴露了我们的很多信息。加西亚建议，在准备出庭前不妨问自己一个问题：你想给人留下什么样的印象？

　　加西亚的法庭着装禁区包括透视装、低胸装、迷你裙、浓妆艳抹、衣服夸张、撞色，以及叮当作响的手镯脚镯等。她建议出庭时穿保守一些的衣服，如Banana Republic品牌的wholesome brands系列，以及Ann Taylor或Brooks Brothers的服装等。

　　给大家一个实用的建议作为结束语，来自菲利普斯律师：带上一件夹克衫或套头衫，法庭里头一般会比较冷。