Judges speak out on effective written advocacy
Last Friday I had the pleasure of moderating a CLE on Effective Written Advocacy. The panel considered of Judge Stewart Bell; Judge Jackie Glass, Judge Kenneth Cory, Judge David Wall and Judge Elissa Cadish, all from the Eighth Judicial District. This is the busiest court in the country, with the most burdened judges in terms of caseload.
I can’t say it was much of a surprise to me to hear that what judges would really like to see in written advocacy is a concise explanation of what the writer wants, and why the writer should receive it. Nor was I surprised to hear that they are unimpressed by slurs and sneers against opposing counsel. (But judges – sometimes it just feels good to write those things!)
I was somewhat surprised to hear that judges don't mind having counsel take the opportunity for a preliminary procedural issue to ‘educate” the judge about the entire factual dispute underlying the merits of the case.
As for the ever popular citations in the text or in footnotes argument, these judges prefer them in the text, finding that method easier to read. I concur!
All in all, the CLE was a nice opportunity to hear from judges about what is really important to them.
