The Illinois Trial Practice Weblog

Tip: What to Do with Those Stacks of Legal Magazines

Every month, the legal magazines keep piling up. Some might actually contain some useful information. But when are you going to find the time to read them? If you're like me, you're prone to simply glance at the new magazines and add them to the stack, where you hope to be able to get to them "someday."

There's a better system, which works reasonably well. It's sort of obvious, but on the other hand, I've never seen anyone use this system--although I've kept at it pretty well since I started stacking up legal magazines about eighteen years ago.

The system works like this:

• Set aside some time to tackle one of those stacks of magazines;
• Flip through each magazine quickly, and rip out only those articles you want to keep for future reference, judging from the title. There's no need to actually read the articles at this point--if you do, you'll never get through the stack;
• Take the articles you've saved, insert the edges in a 3-hole punch, and file each away in binders set up with descriptive dividers that approximate the issues you face in your own practice.

For me, this means notebooks containing articles about substantive law and notebooks with articles about procedure--most obviously, trial procedure. For example, I have a notebook that contains articles, separated by dividers, about written discovery, pre-trial motions, motions in limine, voir dire, opening statement, direct examination,  trial evidence, damages, cross examination, closing, jury instructions, and so on. When I want to find an article about a particular topic, or when I just want to read up on the latest ideas about a particular topic, I know where to look.

Another option is to scan the articles you want to save and store them in computer folders set up like notebooks. But since I'm old-fashioned, I prefer paper, which takes up more space but which I can flip through more quickly when I need to.

Self-Editing Tips for Legal Writers

When you're close to a final draft, use this self-editing checklist to add a bit of polish--or give it to your assistant to do the same.

• Are the headings correctly numbered?
• Are acronyms explained?
• Are the parties referred to in the same way throughout the brief?
• When referring to the parties, have you used proper form of singular, plural and possessive, e.g., "plaintiff," "plaintiffs," "plaintiff's," "plaintiffs'"?
• Is your use of any contractions stylistically proper, given the type of work you're writing?
• Have you relied too much on the passive voice?
• Can any sentences be shortened by breaking them in two?
• Are there footnotes that can be moved into the text or omitted entirely?
• Have you attempted to omit all needless words?
• Have you used a large word where a small one will do, e.g., utilize v. use?
• Have you examined each sentence for subject-verb agreement?
• Are all the words spelled correctly?
• Are the case citations complete and accurate?
• Have the cases been Shepardized?
• Are pinpoint citations complete and accurate?
• Are long quotations properly indented?
• Have you proofread carefully, not once but twice (including once backwards, if you desire complete accuracy)?
• Have you responded to all your opponent's arguments, or at least explained why you didn't?

Doubtless there are other editing points I've overlooked. Add them to your own checklist when you think of them.

E-Filing Resources for Newbies

Those who don't practice regularly in federal court might still be in the dark about e-filing. Some resources:

• The ABA's Electronic Filing Resource Page contains some basic information about state and federal e-filing systems, as well as a list of vendors and helpful links;
• The ABA's page of Electronic Filing Court Rules will be helpful to any lawyer with a national practice who needs quick links to e-filing instructions throughout the country;
• The Electronic Public Access page of the federal judiciary can help with new or forgotten PACER accounts or passwords.

Thanks to Celia C. Elwell, a paralegal in Oklahoma City, for these links. In Illinois, e-filing is underway in pilot programs in Cook, DuPage, and Will counties. Information here.

Navigating Illinois Trial Practice by Category

Since I started this weblog in January, 2004, I've written 689 posts. Most of these posts are assigned to one or more categories. You can get to these categories by clicking on the list that appears on the left side of the weblog. I've also listed the categories here, followed by the number of weblog posts that have been assigned to each:

Appeal 25
Books 15
Class Actions 21
Closing Argument 26
Courtroom Tech 29
Cross-Examination 31
Current Affairs 4
Damages 14
Depositions 107
Direct Examination 9
Discovery 68
Evidence 37
Experts 39
Instructions 8
Law Online 30
Legal Writing 37
Mediation/Arbitration 8
Miscellaneous 56
Motion Practice 33
Opening Statement 17
Pleadings 5
Requests for Admissions 8
Settlement 5
Trial Style 29
Voir Dire 33
Web/Tech 20
Weblogs 16

One other thing to point out: despite the title of this weblog, the majority of my posts aren't limited to Illinois. I probably should have called this the Trial Practice Weblog, but then the Illinois-specific posts wouldn't have been confusing. Consider the current weblog title a compromise of sorts.

The Supreme Court on Legal Writing

The news has already made its way around the law-related weblogs, but I wanted to bookmark it here for my own purposes: Bryan Garner's interviews about legal writing with eight U.S. Supreme-Court justices, all available in one place at LawProse, Inc.

In 2006-2007, Bryan Garner interviewed eight of the nine Justices about legal writing and advocacy. These are the complete interviews. Because the files are large, the videos may take a few moments to start playing.

LawProse is making these interviews available as a public service. Anyone may freely use these videos for educational purposes, with appropriate attribution to Bryan Garner or LawProse.

You should begin, of course, with Justice Scalia . . . and don't miss his "cocktail-party test" for determining whether your legal writing is being ruined by too much legalese.

A Litigation Weblog with an Attitude

Stewart Weltman, formerly a partner at Cohen Milstein Hausfeld & Toll P.L.L.C. and now the owner of Weltman Law Firm, has a new weblog: Lean and Mean Litigation Blog.

A representative post is titled "Another Reason Why You Shouldn't Play Games When Producing Documents," and contains this tip--

Don't redact or withhold on relevancy grounds - it is a dangerous metaphysical exercise for experienced trial lawyers and from my experience it is usually performed by young associates who - to say the  least - don't always have a "world" view. So, unless lightening strikes and the information deemed not relevant is information that could be damaging to your client for some reason not related to the case [very unlikely] don't redact on relevancy grounds.

Add it to your RSS reader.

More Practice Tips from My Deposition Book

The book I recently wrote about depositions, Deposition Checklists and Strategies (James Publishing, 2006 Rev. 2007), contains eight chapters. As a bonus, each chapter contains an assortment of "practice tips," comparable to the type of tips I post here on the weblog. Here are some of the practice tips you'll find in Chapter 5, Medical Malpractice--

• Practice Tip: Establishing Liability Without an Expert
• Practice Tip: Jury Instructions
• Practice Tip: Case Selection
• Practice Tip: Explaining Medical Malpractice Cases to the Client
• Practice Tip: Hospital Liability
• Practice Tip: Procedurally-Based Defense Strategies
• Caution: Pre-Litigation Collection of Medical Records
• Practice Tip: Selecting Your Medical Expert
• Caution: Don't Wait to Long to Consult an Expert
• Practice Tip: Thinking in Reverse About Witnesses
• Practice Tip: The Locality Rule and Expert Witnesses
• Practice Tip: The Difficult Witness
• Practice Tip: Prepare for the Doctor-Defendant Like You Would an Expert
• Practice Tip: Shortening the Preliminary Questions
• Practice Tip: Examine the Doctor's Original Medical Records
• Practice Tip: Admissibility of Statements by Your Client
• Practice Tip: Peer Review
• Practice Tip: The Defendant Who Is Qualified as an Expert
• Caution: Never Finish Until You're Done
• Practice Tip: Prior Lawsuits
• Practice Tip: Medical Terminology
• Practice Tip: "In Lay Terms"

For more information about the book, see this brochure at James Publishing (pdf). You can also learn more about the book in the following posts at Illinois Trial Practice--

• "Listing the Chapters in My Deposition Book"
• "A Plug for My Deposition Book: Some Specialized Deposition Outlines"
• "My Coverage of Expert Depositions in Deposition Checklists and Strategies"
• "Listing Some of the Practice Tips in My Deposition Book"