1 minute read
FROM THE BENCH
Q & A W I T H H O N . R A N D A L L M . H O W E
Arizona Court of Appeals, Division One
Advertisement
3. What is your biggest pet peeve in written motions?
Attorneys should not use demeaning or snarky language about opposing counsel and the arguments of the other side. It doesn’t make the argument more persuasive, and it wastes page space. Judges are annoyed by such ad hominem attacks. If an argument is unreasonable or outlandish, the judges will know. Show the argument is bad; don’t tell us how stupid the attorney is for making the argument.
4. If you were to recommend on book to a young lawyer (fiction or non-fiction) regarding the legal profession, which would it be?
1. In oral argument, what is one thing lawyers who appear in front of you should always do?
Answer questions directly and succinctly, even if the answer is unfavorable to your position. In oral arguments, judges are just trying to discern the right ruling and have specific questions they need answers to. Evading or ignoring questions annoys the judges and makes them question your credibility and competence. If an answer is necessarily unfavorable to your position, judges will always give you an opportunity to explain why the unfavorable fact or legal proposition doesn’t hurt your position in the end.
2. Is there anything lawyers should avoid during oral arguments?
Attorneys often evade or ignore questions. Also, attorneys often don’t know when to stop talking and sit down. If you get the sense that the judges are favorably disposed toward your position, answer any questions the judges may have and sit down. No attorney has been penalized for not using all available argument time.
Legal Argument: The Structure and Language of Effective Advocacy, by James Gardner and Christine Bartholomew. The book does a great job in explaining how to organize and structure legal arguments.
5. Who is your favorite Supreme Court Justice and why?
Antonin Scalia. He was a great legal analyst and writer. He also understood that judges should stick to the text of statutes or the constitution and keep their personal opinions away from deciding the proper outcome of a case.
