ILNews

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.”•

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
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

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. The fee increase would be livable except for the 11% increase in spending at the Disciplinary Commission. The Commission should be focused on true public harm rather than going on witch hunts against lawyers who dare to criticize judges.

  2. Marijuana is safer than alcohol. AT the time the 1937 Marijuana Tax Act was enacted all major pharmaceutical companies in the US sold marijuana products. 11 Presidents of the US have smoked marijuana. Smoking it does not increase the likelihood that you will get lung cancer. There are numerous reports of canabis oil killing many kinds of incurable cancer. (See Rick Simpson's Oil on the internet or facebook).

  3. The US has 5% of the world's population and 25% of the world's prisoners. Far too many people are sentenced for far too many years in prison. Many of the federal prisoners are sentenced for marijuana violations. Marijuana is safer than alcohol.

  4. My daughter was married less than a week and her new hubbys picture was on tv for drugs and now I havent't seen my granddaughters since st patricks day. when my daughter left her marriage from her childrens Father she lived with me with my grand daughters and that was ok but I called her on the new hubby who is in jail and said didn't want this around my grandkids not unreasonable request and I get shut out for her mistake

  5. From the perspective of a practicing attorney, it sounds like this masters degree in law for non-attorneys will be useless to anyone who gets it. "However, Ted Waggoner, chair of the ISBA’s Legal Education Conclave, sees the potential for the degree program to actually help attorneys do their jobs better. He pointed to his practice at Peterson Waggoner & Perkins LLP in Rochester and how some clients ask their attorneys to do work, such as filling out insurance forms, that they could do themselves. Waggoner believes the individuals with the legal master’s degrees could do the routine, mundane business thus freeing the lawyers to do the substantive legal work." That is simply insulting to suggest that someone with a masters degree would work in a role that is subpar to even an administrative assistant. Even someone with just a certificate or associate's degree in paralegal studies would be overqualified to sit around helping clients fill out forms. Anyone who has a business background that they think would be enhanced by having a legal background will just go to law school, or get an MBA (which typically includes a business law class that gives a generic, broad overview of legal concepts). No business-savvy person would ever seriously consider this ridiculous master of law for non-lawyers degree. It reeks of desperation. The only people I see getting it are the ones who did not get into law school, who see the degree as something to add to their transcript in hopes of getting into a JD program down the road.

ADVERTISEMENT