Appellate courts "rely upon the presentation of oral argument by well-prepared attorneys to assist [them] in reaching an appropriate resolution of the often difficult questions presented in the cases before [them]." In re Aguilar, 34 Cal.4th 386 (2004). Yet few provide any hint of what they actually want to hear during argument before the attorneys step up to the lectern. As a result, attorneys spend countless hours preparing for every conceivable question and studying every case and page of the record, spreading themselves thin rather than honing in on issues of most concern to the court.
This system is inefficient for attorneys and in particular their paying clients, as well as for courts, whose precious time is being consumed by unhelpful oral arguments. Fortunately, some appellate courts are moving towards disclosing their thoughts in advance of argument so counsel can truly be "well-prepared." Hopefully other appellate courts will follow suit.
The historical role of oral argument
This content has been archived.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
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
