Indiana Judges Association: Zen and the art of case management

David J. Dreyer
February 1, 2012
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

“I only know that I know nothing.”


IJA-Dreyer-David I am a big fan of Socrates. After reading Plato’s famous renditions of Socrates’ dialogues in college, I decided to go to law school. It is there, I said to myself, that I can conjure real wisdom, Socratic wisdom. After clearing my mind of preconceived notions and acquiring total knowledge of my unawareness, I imagined a clear, unobscured vision of what is true and just. But when I read Pennoyer v. Neff during my first day in law school (civil procedure), I felt like Pinocchio turning into a donkey. How could such mundaneness have equal stead with the Constitution? I anxiously worried: Is this what law school is ultimately about? But I remained undaunted. On one hand, it seemed somewhat silly to see volumes of caselaw about how to do law, rather than what law is or ought to be. On the other hand, I began to realize that one cannot “practice” law without “practical” knowledge, so to speak.

So over many years, I found a kind of “sub-wisdom.” It came not from law study or research, but rather from living with real world cases. I actually discovered the wonder of civil procedure. Imagine my rapture. Risking permanent geek-ness, I was drawn to methods as much as ideals. I was fascinated with the intersection of intellectual thought and temporal systems, that is, where civil procedure becomes substantive law. Consequently, I stumbled onto the Zen of case management.

Knowing what you don’t know is a precious gift for judges (my non-knowledge could fill a Super Bowl at any venue). Such Socratic perspective allows one to approach a problem with wide-open eyes instead of a made-up mind. Many issues can be better resolved by using the patience it takes to wait for an answer – from a found case, from a fact, from an idea, sometimes just from thinking about it. Lawyers who tackle the difficulties of clients often find it difficult to tackle their own shortcomings, unless they can understand what they don’t know and figure it out. The toughest cases eventually require an intriguing balance of law, intuition, research, non-legal considerations, innovation, creativity and experience. Whatever we lack among these attributes will leave us unwise and feeling lost. Civil procedure teaches us that first things are first. “The larger stones do not lie well without the lesser,” says Socrates. Therefore, case management is the cornerstone of every law practice.

Under the Zen approach, it is taught, “The journey of a thousand miles must begin with a single step.” This is why a modified lawyer-Zen technique seems so appropriate for our constant case challenges. Wonder where to start on that mountain of motions? Sometimes it is better to avoid macro-analysis and wander around to find the best way to organize. “A jug fills drop by drop,” says Buddha. So don’t try to figure it out until the jug is full. More importantly, a Zen approach favors the experiential over the theoretical – deriving knowledge from basic everyday circumstances rather than unseen principles. In other words, let the problem come to you. Could civil procedure be a Zen practice? Not by Eastern standards, but case management is a Zen-like practice, full of calm, resourceful mindfulness. An old mentor of mine would always put the case file on the floor 90 days before trial (or whatever available time). It would lay chronologically, including exhibits, depositions, correspondence, the works. It could cover a whole room or more. In this way, he said, he would always see things he had not seen before, realize something new, find something that needed to be done and have the whole case in his visual memory. His wisdom was knowing how to find out what he did not know. Every lawyer has his or her own way – and a lifetime of practice to develop it.

But we face more common case management problems. Lawyers are often tempted to put the cart in front of the horse, or more precisely, the case management order before thinking about the case with your client and opposing counsel. There are few better ways to get on the wrong side of a judge than lack of planning, especially when that final pretrial tempts one to be like Pinocchio and his nose. Be a Zen-master and look around for insight. It surely is in front of you if you can schedule time to see it. Other helpful suggestions include:

• Lay the case on the floor (see above) – yoga mat is optional.

• Find good case management software – designers are usually from California, so they are very Zen-oriented.

• Read Plato – at least you feel like you are wise.

• Figure out a case management plan for each case – find your favorite techniques, but use your style as well the facts, law and the client to logically adapt the file to fit each case.

• Keep a chronological log of pleadings, correspondence, etc., but arrange the paper by priority rather than date – this will let you get to the motions fast (this even works with software/electronic files as well).

And consider making Socrates your secret, silent senior partner. Understanding your lack of knowledge and being open to change may be all the enlightenment you need to be a good case manager.•


Judge David J. Dreyer has been a judge for the Marion Superior Court since 1997. He is a graduate of the University of Notre Dame and Notre Dame Law School. He is a former board member of the Indiana Judges Association. The opinions expressed are those of the author.


Post a comment to this story

We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. I think the cops are doing a great job locking up criminals. The Murder rates in the inner cities are skyrocketing and you think that too any people are being incarcerated. Maybe we need to lock up more of them. We have the ACLU, BLM, NAACP, Civil right Division of the DOJ, the innocent Project etc. We have court system with an appeal process that can go on for years, with attorneys supplied by the government. I'm confused as to how that translates into the idea that the defendants are not being represented properly. Maybe the attorneys need to do more Pro-Bono work

  2. We do not have 10% of our population (which would mean about 32 million) incarcerated. It's closer to 2%.

  3. If a class action suit or other manner of retribution is possible, count me in. I have email and voicemail from the man. He colluded with opposing counsel, I am certain. My case was damaged so severely it nearly lost me everything and I am still paying dearly.

  4. There's probably a lot of blame that can be cast around for Indiana Tech's abysmal bar passage rate this last February. The folks who decided that Indiana, a state with roughly 16,000 to 18,000 attorneys, needs a fifth law school need to question the motives that drove their support of this project. Others, who have been "strong supporters" of the law school, should likewise ask themselves why they believe this institution should be supported. Is it because it fills some real need in the state? Or is it, instead, nothing more than a resume builder for those who teach there part-time? And others who make excuses for the students' poor performance, especially those who offer nothing more than conspiracy theories to back up their claims--who are they helping? What evidence do they have to support their posturing? Ultimately, though, like most everything in life, whether one succeeds or fails is entirely within one's own hands. At least one student from Indiana Tech proved this when he/she took and passed the February bar. A second Indiana Tech student proved this when they took the bar in another state and passed. As for the remaining 9 who took the bar and didn't pass (apparently, one of the students successfully appealed his/her original score), it's now up to them (and nobody else) to ensure that they pass on their second attempt. These folks should feel no shame; many currently successful practicing attorneys failed the bar exam on their first try. These same attorneys picked themselves up, dusted themselves off, and got back to the rigorous study needed to ensure they would pass on their second go 'round. This is what the Indiana Tech students who didn't pass the first time need to do. Of course, none of this answers such questions as whether Indiana Tech should be accredited by the ABA, whether the school should keep its doors open, or, most importantly, whether it should have even opened its doors in the first place. Those who promoted the idea of a fifth law school in Indiana need to do a lot of soul-searching regarding their decisions. These same people should never be allowed, again, to have a say about the future of legal education in this state or anywhere else. Indiana already has four law schools. That's probably one more than it really needs. But it's more than enough.

  5. This man Steve Hubbard goes on any online post or forum he can find and tries to push his company. He said court reporters would be obsolete a few years ago, yet here we are. How does he have time to search out every single post about court reporters and even spy in private court reporting forums if his company is so successful???? Dude, get a life. And back to what this post was about, I agree that some national firms cause a huge problem.