Litigation training in short supply

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
Indiana Lawyer Focus

Fewer jury trials during the past decade have created concern that young lawyers are losing the ability to gain real-world litigation experience, leading more lawyers to turn to law schools and internal firm training to get what has been a fixture in the practice of law.

State courts have seen the number of trials drop by more than 500 between the years 2000 and 2010, which attorneys attribute to an increased use of mediation. Court statistics released by the state judiciary’s administrative division show that 1,514 jury trials occurred last year; in 2005, there were 2,450 jury trials.

herzog_david-mug.jpg Herzog

“Litigation still drives our system,” said Valparaiso University Law School professor David Vandercoy, who teaches skills training and heads up the school’s legal clinic. “We’re moving forward on the thought that even with a decline in jury trials, our system is still adversarial in nature, and so lawyers need to be equipped to handle these litigation issues even if they can’t get the experience from actually being in court.”

At Valparaiso, Vandercoy said half of the third-year law class does firm externships to help provide that experience.

“Most of our students see that litigation training as something that makes them more marketable,” he said. “They need these skills whether they’re litigating or not.”

Law firms agree about the importance of litigation exposure. Many have mentoring programs for associates or send younger attorneys to litigation training programs. Some have mock courtrooms – Faegre Baker Daniels has one in its Minnesota office.

Faegre Baker Daniels partner David Herzog, a longtime litigator at the trial and appellate level, said his firm sends third-year litigation associates to the National Institute for Trial Advocacy to learn those skills.

“It’s getting harder and harder to get that experience, and while NITA is a great resource, there’s no substitute for real-life trial experience,” he said. “You aren’t ever going to see an end to litigation and jury trials because sometimes reasonable people disagree, and the only way to resolve a dispute is to go to court.”

Herzog, like many lawyers, attributes the decline in litigation experience to the increase in alternative dispute resolution. He said attorneys used to be responsible to maneuver mediation during the course of litigation, but now that role has been largely transferred to neutral mediators. Herzog thinks the decrease in jury trials has actually had a negative impact on attorney-to-attorney mediation.

“The saying used to be that you settle cases on the courthouse steps … because that’s when the sense of real urgency and pertinent risk sets in,” Herzog said. “Having that trial experience makes you appreciate the risks of litigation and gives you credibility with opposing counsel when trying to settle a case. If you’ve never tried a case, and you sit across the table trying to get a specific number, that lack of experience is a credible threat to your bottom line.”

experience-chart.gifIndianapolis attorney Kara Kapke with Barnes & Thornburg, who’s been with the firm since 2005, tries to weave courtroom-specific aspects of a case into all of her litigation tasks. For example, when she’s doing a deposition or planning for motion writing, she often asks herself what might happen in court and how she would respond.

“Even if you’re not on your feet in court, you’re at least keeping your mind fresh about what litigation might throw at you and how you can handle that,” she said.

Her colleague, partner Scott Murray, said that the firm pairs younger attorneys with seasoned litigators, sends associates to training and also puts them on the front lines of arbitration where they can get experience that’s similar to what they might face in a courtroom. He recalled how a team of associates divided its handling of questions, motions and other aspects of arbitration against a lead partner at a New York law firm.

“You have to get that experience where you can, and these days it’s tougher to find those opportunities,” he said.

bruess-charles-mug.jpg Bruess

Retired attorney Charles Bruess in Brownsburg – who practiced law 30 years at Barnes & Thornburg before becoming a courtroom deputy for U.S. Judge David Hamilton in the Southern District of Indiana – has been working for the past three years to help teach what he describes as “the lost art of litigation” to the legal community. He wrote the book “What You Didn’t Learn in Law School about Trial Practice,” in 2007, and since then, he’s been teaching continuing legal education and consulting with attorneys on litigation practices he observed during his career.

Bruess is working with the Indiana State Bar Association to possibly offer free CLE on the topic of litigation, and he hopes that more of the legal community is willing to embrace the CLE to learn the litigation lessons that come from first-hand experience.

Lawyers who have attended Bruess’ sessions have told him that they took his lessons with them into practice. These can be simple tasks such as knowing to look up a judge’s local rules before stepping into court and being prepared for objections to not be recorded if the lawyer is not standing up, Bruess said.

“I get a lot of personal satisfaction from that, bumping into people who say they’ve asked themselves a question at a deposition or thought about something before going into court,” he said. “These things may never happen to you as a practicing lawyer, but at least you’ll know they are possible in litigation and you can be ready.”•


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.