The Volokh Conspiracy
Mostly law professors | Sometimes contrarian | Often libertarian | Always independent
"Tips for Superior Court Motion Practice"
A possibly helpful list, from California Court of Appeal Justice John Shepard Wiley Jr., who served many years on the L.A. Superior Court, and who before that was my colleague at UCLA School of Law. Keep in mind that some of these have to do with the practices of the L.A. Superior Court (our local trial court), but most apply more broadly.
Written briefs
- Learn what you can about your judge. Judges are people, with worldviews and pet peeves and all the rest. Consider tailoring your presentation to your audience. But do not pander. ("I understand the Court has a collie. I have two!") When in doubt, err on the side of formality and convention.
- Straight away, summarize what action you want the court to take. The introduction next should present the heart of your argument. This is the most important part of your brief. Keep editing until it is fine and concise. Your conclusion should briefly reiterate the result you urge.
- Lead with your best and most important argument. In the opposition and the reply, however, track the moving paper's organization, so readers easily can follow the debate.
- Focus on legal authority. In state court, stick to published state cases on issues of state law. If a statute is decisive, anchor your argument in the statutory words. Put "policy arguments" last, or skip them. Trial judges often regard them as arguments of last resort: signs you have no favorable statutes or case law. But when distinguishing unfavorable precedents, show why it would be inadvisable to extend inapt precedent to this different situation.
- If there is an important and troublesome case, identify it and distinguish it as best you can. Ignoring a case is unwise: they will notice. Never try to trick opposing counsel or the court. That is poison.
- Never fudge a holding. The other side will catch you and make you pay. Don't give them this opportunity to damage your credibility. Be candid when a case is merely analogous rather than directly on point. Explain the differences and why the authority still applies.
- In opposition, respond to every argument and case in the opposing brief. In reply, do the same. Ducking a point makes readers conclude you have no good response and should lose. If a point is insubstantial, dispatch it swiftly but do not ignore it. Don't add new evidence or a request for judicial notice in the reply, where the other side has no opportunity to respond. Don't exceed page limits.
- Be concise. Edit. Then re-edit. As Fred Astaire said, "Get it perfect. Then cut two minutes."
- Attack the argument, not the person. Forcefully attacking an argument is good. ("This argument makes no sense.") As for opposing counsel, however, kill them with kindness. (E.g., "my colleague," "my friend," "misplaced" or "incorrect" or "erroneous" rather than "absurd" or "misrepresenting" or "bad faith" or "misleading the court.") This is especially true if opposing counsel is calling you names. Abusive opposing counsel give you a splendid opportunity. Don't stoop: make the contrast in professionalism obvious. Be the lawyer your mother wanted you to be. The court may well notice and remember. When publicly on the attack (and in tense private negotiations), try referring to the opposing party or client rather than directly to opposing counsel; being less direct can avoid triggering adrenal glands.
- No footnotes. Persuasive argument is linear and compelling. Footnotes are tangential and distracting. Judge Posner writes that footnote material peripheral to the argument can be deleted; if important it can be worked into the text. (Many judges do use footnotes themselves, but they will not fault you if you do not. Other judges will simply rejoice in your lovely prose.) Using footnotes to cheat on page limits is discreditable.
- If the motion is of a routine form (like a summary judgment motion), spend minimal time describing its nature. Avoid boilerplate. No block quotations. Elmore Leonard told writers to "try to leave out the part that readers tend to skip."
- Avoid exclamation points, jargon, acronyms, or abbreviations (unless everyone already knows the abbreviation, like "FBI"). It is fine to shorten a name in a clear way ("Wingnut National" or "the bank") but it is aggravating to have to search back in the brief to recall what "WNCU" or "MHNB" might be. Avoid words you have never heard anyone actually say, like "therein" or "hereinafter."
- Minimize adjectives. Unadorned statements are powerful. Let readers draw their own conclusions and choose their own adjectives. Show, don't tell.
- Take care on details. Use pinpoint page cites for every case. Do not tolerate grammar, spelling, or style errors. Follow the California Style Manual in California state court. (For instance, see rules 4:28.3 and 4:28.4.) When you have achieved the stature of Judge Posner, then you may indulge your contempt for style manuals.
- Exhibits: use tabs, so readers can find material easily. Online, upload each exhibit separately, because there are no convenient tabs.
Oral argument
- Do you even need oral argument? If the court posts a comprehensive tentative ruling, consider whether oral argument will be productive. Should you contact opposing counsel and submit on the tentative?
- If you do appear for oral argument, prepare, prepare, prepare. You (or someone) wrote the brief a while back, but the judge may have been poring over the cases only seconds before taking the bench. Be ready.
- Start your show right: when the court calls for appearances, state your name distinctly and with brio, and identify your client. Please don't begin with a mumble. The cliche about never getting a second chance to make a first impression is tired but true. If the motion is important, appear in person and not on the phone, for it is important to watch your audience carefully. Do not expect anyone to email or post a written tentative ruling you are not there to receive in person.
- Lead with your best and most important argument. You might get only minutes.
- If there is new authority, print out and highlight at least three copies of the new case: one for court, one for opposing counsel, and one for you. Give it to opposing counsel well before you begin your argument.
- Listen carefully to what the judge says. These words are precious: they are windows straight into the mind of your decisionmaker. Respond to that content. Answer questions directly. Dodging them is counterproductive. Begin with a plain yes or no, if possible, and then explain.
- If the judge issues a written tentative ruling, thank the court for this effort (especially if it is against you). Ask for a brief recess to study the tentative carefully and, if it is against you, to locate its central weakness. Concentrate on that linchpin rather than on disputing every point, start to finish.
- Never interrupt the judge. If the judge interrupts you, immediately stop speaking, listen carefully, and respond to that point. Do not interrupt or address opposing counsel. When your colleague has finished, stand and ask, "May I respond?" Comments or questions to opposing counsel are improper, unless the judge calls for an informal and off-the-record working session. Some judges want you to stand when speaking and prefer "Your Honor" to "Judge." (Local rule 3.95 used to require this usage.) Err on the side of caution until the judge says otherwise. Avoid "with due respect," which many judges perceive as insulting. "You guys" can be perceived as sexist and inappropriate to this formal setting.
- Smile and be friendly, even if the judge is a dragon. The general rule is to retain your emotional cool. After considerable experience, you may decide passion can be effective in the right situation, but this tool is sharp and can create self-inflicted wounds. The persona of "calm, reasonable, and friendly" is almost always better.
- Speak slowly. This can take a lot of practice. So practice. Do verbal tics plague your courtroom speech? Um? Like? You know? Eliminate these. With feedback and sustained training and effort, you can do this. Demosthenes perfected his oratory by speaking with pebbles in his mouth. Public speaking is an ancient art form. Study this heritage.
- Hire a court reporter. If you don't think the hearing is worth that cost, your appellate lawyer later may berate you and your trial judge may draw a silent and adverse inference.
- Visual aids can be great. Be imaginative. If some object or device is important to the case, and portable, consider bringing and displaying that thing.
- If the tentative is in your favor and the judge says the other side's oral argument has not moved her, just say "nothing further, unless the court would like to hear from me." After argument and a final ruling, do not attempt further argument.
- Ask for priority only if necessary.
- Bring a proposed order for the judge to sign on the spot.
Copyright 2023 by John Shepard Wiley Jr.
Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Many of these should hopefully be obvious. But as someone who used to be a regulator, and who now advises clients on how to deal with regulators, can I please echo this one:
2. Straight away, summarize what action you want the court to take.
So much this. I can't tell you how often I've had to chase through a 100+ page legal document to figure out what exactly the company wanted me to do. Put it on page 1, in a big box in bold underline.
Also this:
Ask for a brief recess to study the tentative carefully and, if it is against you, to locate its central weakness. Concentrate on that linchpin rather than on disputing every point, start to finish.
Half my job is undoing the damage done by lawyers who want to shoot at everything that moves. (Usually I recommend that the client move the lawyers' brief to an annex, and use the "main text" or "executive summary" to make the key point or points.)
Along the lines of "Throw Strikes", "Don't give the hitter anything good to hit",
Now maybe the justice can do one on writing opinions.
"If there is an important and troublesome case, identify it and distinguish it as best you can. Ignoring a case is unwise: they will notice. Never try to trick opposing counsel or the court. That is poison.
Never fudge a holding. The other side will catch you and make you pay. Don't give them this opportunity to damage your credibility. Be candid when a case is merely analogous rather than directly on point. Explain the differences and why the authority still applies."
This. So much THIS.
I was recently at a hearing when opposing counsel repeatedly shot themselves in the foot by not acknowledging the countervailing authority.
The order that came from the Court ... it did not go well.
A few things to remember-
1. You're usually a repeat player. Judges remember attorneys that play fast and loose with the precedent.
2. Trial court judges don't particularly like to be wrong (or, at a minimum, want to know when they are going out on a limb). If you "fool" a judge into a bad opinion, and they get reversed because you misled them into it - they'll remember.
3. Finally, integrity matters. I know this should be obvious, but I have to wonder.
"Hire a court reporter. If you don't think the hearing is worth that cost, your appellate lawyer later may berate you and your trial judge may draw a silent and adverse inference."
Eh. Not always. Depends on the hearing and the jurisdiction- this is a strategy, not a command.
For example, imagine you're the moving party on summary judgment. The jurisdiction has a rules that makes it nearly impossible to challenge final judgments absent a hearing transcript. If you win, the other side can't appeal. If you lose, you're not going to appeal the denial.
... do you want the court reporter? Maybe not. Especially if you think you have a good shot at prevailing and you know the other side isn't likely to order one.
Same with other hearings.
Justice Wiley is an excellent judge, but this is exactly why many lawyers hate judges:
In opposition, respond to every argument and case in the opposing brief. In reply, do the same. Ducking a point makes readers conclude you have no good response and should lose. If a point is insubstantial, dispatch it swiftly but do not ignore it. Don't add new evidence or a request for judicial notice in the reply, where the other side has no opportunity to respond. Don't exceed page limits.
If you care about the sanctity of page limits, DON'T PUNISH US FOR IGNORING INSUBSTANTIAL ARGUMENTS. Answering a bunch of stupid arguments is exactly how you end up pushing up against page limits, especially in a reply brief.
Alternatively, if you want us to answer every argument, no matter how bad, then RELAX THE DAMNED PAGE LIMITS AND LET US DO IT.
Great point, and I agree with this. Judges ALWAYS say this. But this is only true if the moving party has written something good.
If they haven't, you are going to be a lot better off writing a response that actually gets to the crux of the issue and re-frames it in a manner that is intelligible. And IME, judges appreciate cutting through the BS and reducing the page count.
Finally, you're NOT SUPPOSED TO GO OVER EVERYTHING IN A REPLY.
FWIW, I agree with him that a lot of lawyers write inefficiently and run up on page limits for that reason.
But I have had briefs- especially replies- where I had to cut substance, not fluff, because of page limits. And the ability to say "that point's stupid and not worth addressing" is sometimes crucial to being able to focus the Court on what you really want it to focus on.
Also funny in contrast to #22:
So you have to reply to every single point from opposing counsel, but to the judge's own points, feel free to focus on the important ones.
Online, upload each exhibit separately, because there are no convenient tabs.
You can put tabs, or bookmarks, in a PDF Portfolio. Wonder why lawyers and judges don't take advantage of this. I would think it would be easier to have one PDF with five tabs, than five separate PDFs.
Don't assume that courts (or indeed anyone funded with tax money) has private sector-level IT snazziness. They are probably reading your submissions on some kind of antique Windows XP computer with only free software installed.
Federal courts, at least, have top of the line IT. State courts, not so much. Although it varies, in NY State courts, almost no judges today take paper, they want it all online.
Also, federal judges tend to have young clerks out of school, who are generally very tech savvy.
On the other hand, there’s that guy from New Jersey who makes you mail him a hard copy. (Yes, I’m still mad.)
That was actually pretty common pre-pandemic. It basically disappeared then, and few judges have chosen to revive it.
Woah.
I know that a lot of practice is standardized, but there is still so much variation from state-to-state (and within states).
Basic things that I often take for granted and assume that all states do sometimes end up as a peculiarity of local practice.
....but handmailing copies? That's not something I've heard of this century in my primary jurisdiction.
In federal court???
Yep. Most commonly for motions, but there were some judges who required them for letters to the court, also.
We don’t impeach enough judges.
All good. Thanks!
I love this! I worked for 24 years as a Superior Court research attorney, advising judges on law and motion matters. I reviewed each motion and prepared a memo before it went to the judge. I completely agree with the advice! Well, except for the part about addressing every single argument and cited case in the opposition or reply; that's not really necessary for points that are trivial or immaterial.
"Tips for Superior Court Motion Practice"
Is that
Tips for Superior (Court Motion Practice)
or
Tips for (Superior Court) (Motion Practice)
Yes.
A lot of this is basic writing that once was taught in high school.
Unfortunately lawyers too often are writing for clients/supervising attorneys rather than for the judges. Overwritten motions that are more likely to get denied are met with a shrug when the unfavorable result comes in and a "hard work! you tried your best!" pat on the back, whereas a concise motion might be taken as evidence of laziness even though more likely to be granted.
Captcrisis, truer words were never spoken. A lawyer needs to please his client. Some clients want incendiary briefs even after you fully explain to them the ramifications of that approach. A good judge, or at least one who had been in private practice, will understand.
and then...
Did anyone else have to look that up to see if it was actually a word and not a typo? I'm fairly well read and know all sorts of words I've never heard said aloud, and that one threw me.
Said jurist contradicted himself therein.
Excellent advice. I would add that many judges are lazy and stupid, so you should repeat your main point or points often in your brief to ensure that your message is heard. Second, never cite a case without explaining why it is being cited. Use a parenthetical explanation if need be. If you just cite to a case without explaining its relevance, the court might not understand the reference. Last, be very clear in your conclusion as to what you want the court to do.
ISWYDT.