Federal Appellate Oral Arguments: Getting — and Maximizing — an Invitation to Speak
It's no surprise that in this technological age where most legal work is done behind a computer screen, fewer than one-third of fully briefed cases receive an invitation to present argument in person.
November 27, 2017 at 05:32 PM
13 minute read
It's a well-known fact: U.S. federal courts, including appellate courts, are extraordinarily busy. Today's judges and clerks are faced with a steady stream of motions, panel and en banc argument sessions, petitions for rehearing, and administrative responsibilities. At least in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, many also are entirely comfortable reviewing briefs and even the electronic record from the comfort of an iPad. It's no surprise that in this technological age where most legal work is done behind a computer screen, fewer than one-third of fully briefed cases receive an invitation to present argument in person.
A few lesser-known facts: How to get that invitation, how best to prepare for oral argument, and what to do when standing before the panel itself. The following ideas can help prevent a case from being converted by a circuit court to “No Oral Argument” and giving it the strongest likelihood of success.
Make a Case for Oral Argument
Although FRAP 34(a)(2) favors oral argument, it does allow a panel to refuse oral argument if, by unanimous agreement, the panel finds it unnecessary. Nowadays, only those cases that are so unique or complex that panel members feel they should engage in substantive discussion before issuing an opinion are designated for oral argument.
Do not overlook the statement regarding oral argument. This is the first substantive offering a judge or clerk will review in your brief. Grab the court's attention with specific reasons why an in-person discussion would help resolve the case. Boilerplate language will be skimmed over and provide an unfavorable impression of what is to come.
As former Supreme Court Chief Justice William Rehnquist wrote in his book “The Supreme Court: How It Was, How It Is,” “If oral argument provides nothing more than a summary of the brief in monologue, it is of very little value to the court.” With this in mind, attorneys should seek to highlight some novel issue, identify an intra- or intercircuit split, or make a plausible claim that the court's decision will have an effect that extends beyond that particular case.
Once initial research is complete and briefs are filed, avoid bootstrapping information after the fact through the use of FRAP 28(j) supplementary letters. Certain courts, particularly the Fifth Circuit, routinely strike such letters unless they cite very recent developments.
Know — and Prepare for — Thine Audience
Once oral argument has been granted, this concept bears repeating: know the audience. While intelligent, soundly reasoned briefs and oral arguments are baseline requirements, it's equally important to remember who will be reading, hearing, and considering these documents and presentations. Each court has its own unique judicial history, processes, and preferences, and lawyers are well served to understand and adhere to established protocols.
Some courts, including the Fifth Circuit, announce the assigned panel with as little as one week's notice. That still allows time to research the panel and identify key information such as the judges' backgrounds, legal careers, and party of political appointment; whether cases cited in briefs were authored by any current panel members; whether panel members live in areas where the legal issue is particularly salient; and, in diversity cases, whether the panel members are familiar with relevant state law.
Attend court in advance. Doing so will provide a good sense of the pace of arguments, how hot or cold the bench might be, and whether any particular questions are favorites among the panel members.
Appearing Before the Panel: Less Is More
Permit a cliché: you only have one chance to make a first impression. The judges may know the case and briefs inside out, but they don't always know the lawyers who will be appearing before them — and when all is said and done, the goal is for them to talk about the arguments, not the attorneys.
Just as written arguments should be kept focused and on topic, presentations should be equally neat and streamlined. Avoid teams of lawyers that do little more than pass notes. Bring only the files and materials necessary to get the job done. If the questions turn toward an obscure part of the record or a case name is forgotten, simply request leave to submit a short supplementation letter following the argument. Keep the counsel table uncluttered. And never, ever shuffle papers under the microphone!
Speak up and slow down. True, judges' schedules are tight. But it's better for an attorney to speak once in a clear voice than to have the judges ask him or her to repeat what was just said.
Personal opinions, impassioned pleas, and any form of showmanship should be avoided. In “Ruminations from the Bench: Brief Writing and Oral Argument in the Fifth Circuit,” the Hon. Jacques L. Wiener Jr. said memorably, “Hot air and hyperbole seldom if ever achieve anything.” Dramatics may be seen as an attempt to shift attention from a weak legal argument. Also avoid raising new arguments that were not documented in the district court or the opening brief, as such efforts typically result in the court simply responding, “Argument waived.”
Respond to questions immediately, even if doing so temporarily changes the prepared script. On the other hand, if it is your adversary that dodges the panel's questions, seize the opportunity by addressing those questions right off the bat in rebuttal.
Last of all, one should have the courage of one's convictions and the courage to end the presentation and sit down while there is still time on the clock. In so doing, you might just see an appreciative nod from the bench.
Justin M. Woodard is an associate in the Business and Commercial Litigation Group of Jones Walker in New Orleans. He served as a law clerk on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit from 2016-17. He can be contacted at [email protected].
It's a well-known fact: U.S. federal courts, including appellate courts, are extraordinarily busy. Today's judges and clerks are faced with a steady stream of motions, panel and en banc argument sessions, petitions for rehearing, and administrative responsibilities. At least in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, many also are entirely comfortable reviewing briefs and even the electronic record from the comfort of an iPad. It's no surprise that in this technological age where most legal work is done behind a computer screen, fewer than one-third of fully briefed cases receive an invitation to present argument in person.
A few lesser-known facts: How to get that invitation, how best to prepare for oral argument, and what to do when standing before the panel itself. The following ideas can help prevent a case from being converted by a circuit court to “No Oral Argument” and giving it the strongest likelihood of success.
Make a Case for Oral Argument
Although FRAP 34(a)(2) favors oral argument, it does allow a panel to refuse oral argument if, by unanimous agreement, the panel finds it unnecessary. Nowadays, only those cases that are so unique or complex that panel members feel they should engage in substantive discussion before issuing an opinion are designated for oral argument.
Do not overlook the statement regarding oral argument. This is the first substantive offering a judge or clerk will review in your brief. Grab the court's attention with specific reasons why an in-person discussion would help resolve the case. Boilerplate language will be skimmed over and provide an unfavorable impression of what is to come.
As former Supreme Court Chief Justice William Rehnquist wrote in his book “The Supreme Court: How It Was, How It Is,” “If oral argument provides nothing more than a summary of the brief in monologue, it is of very little value to the court.” With this in mind, attorneys should seek to highlight some novel issue, identify an intra- or intercircuit split, or make a plausible claim that the court's decision will have an effect that extends beyond that particular case.
Once initial research is complete and briefs are filed, avoid bootstrapping information after the fact through the use of FRAP 28(j) supplementary letters. Certain courts, particularly the Fifth Circuit, routinely strike such letters unless they cite very recent developments.
Know — and Prepare for — Thine Audience
Once oral argument has been granted, this concept bears repeating: know the audience. While intelligent, soundly reasoned briefs and oral arguments are baseline requirements, it's equally important to remember who will be reading, hearing, and considering these documents and presentations. Each court has its own unique judicial history, processes, and preferences, and lawyers are well served to understand and adhere to established protocols.
Some courts, including the Fifth Circuit, announce the assigned panel with as little as one week's notice. That still allows time to research the panel and identify key information such as the judges' backgrounds, legal careers, and party of political appointment; whether cases cited in briefs were authored by any current panel members; whether panel members live in areas where the legal issue is particularly salient; and, in diversity cases, whether the panel members are familiar with relevant state law.
Attend court in advance. Doing so will provide a good sense of the pace of arguments, how hot or cold the bench might be, and whether any particular questions are favorites among the panel members.
Appearing Before the Panel: Less Is More
Permit a cliché: you only have one chance to make a first impression. The judges may know the case and briefs inside out, but they don't always know the lawyers who will be appearing before them — and when all is said and done, the goal is for them to talk about the arguments, not the attorneys.
Just as written arguments should be kept focused and on topic, presentations should be equally neat and streamlined. Avoid teams of lawyers that do little more than pass notes. Bring only the files and materials necessary to get the job done. If the questions turn toward an obscure part of the record or a case name is forgotten, simply request leave to submit a short supplementation letter following the argument. Keep the counsel table uncluttered. And never, ever shuffle papers under the microphone!
Speak up and slow down. True, judges' schedules are tight. But it's better for an attorney to speak once in a clear voice than to have the judges ask him or her to repeat what was just said.
Personal opinions, impassioned pleas, and any form of showmanship should be avoided. In “Ruminations from the Bench: Brief Writing and Oral Argument in the Fifth Circuit,” the Hon.
Respond to questions immediately, even if doing so temporarily changes the prepared script. On the other hand, if it is your adversary that dodges the panel's questions, seize the opportunity by addressing those questions right off the bat in rebuttal.
Last of all, one should have the courage of one's convictions and the courage to end the presentation and sit down while there is still time on the clock. In so doing, you might just see an appreciative nod from the bench.
Justin M. Woodard is an associate in the Business and Commercial Litigation Group of
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllFrom ‘Deep Sadness’ to Little Concern, Gaetz’s Nomination Draws Sharp Reaction From Lawyers
7 minute readActions Speak Louder Than Words: Law Firms Shrink From 'Performative' Statements
6 minute readLaw Firm Diversity Pros Fear for Future of DEI Efforts Under Trump Presidency
Trending Stories
- 1'Everything Leaves a Digital Footprint': How to Navigate the Complexities of Internal Investigations
- 2Baker McKenzie Accepts Defeat on Australian Integration With Firm's Asia Practice
- 3PepsiCo's Legal Team Champions Diversity, Wellness, and Mentorship to Shape a Thriving Corporate Culture
- 4The Dynamic Duo Behind CMG's Legal Ops Team
- 5Land Use Issues Presented By Cold Storage Warehouses
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250