Judicial Orders Supporting Next Gen

See bullet 5:

Young Lawyers

The Court strongly encourages litigants to be mindful of opportunities for young lawyers (i.e., lawyers practicing for fewer than seven (7) years) to conduct hearings before the Court, particularly when the young lawyer drafted or contributed significantly to the underlying motion or response. The Court believes that it is crucial to provide substantive speaking opportunities to young lawyers and that the benefits of doing so will accrue to young lawyers, to clients, and to the profession generally. Thus, the Court encourages all lawyers practicing before it to keep this goal in mind.

Click here to view the order

See Para. 7:  “The Court strongly encourages parties to permit less experienced lawyers, including lawyers from historically under-represented groups, to actively participate in the proceedings by presenting argument at motion hearings or examining witnesses at trial. The Court is amenable to permitting a number of lawyers to argue for one party if this creates an opportunity for such attorneys to participate.” Although the Court generally hears civil motions by Zoom, if an attorney with five (5) or fewer years of experience requests, the Court will consider holding a live, in-person hearing.

Judge Alison Nathan is not a judge at the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. The court’s Individual Rules and Practices in Civil Cases- July 7, 2022 states:

Junior members of legal teams representing clients are invited to argue motions they have helped prepare and to question witnesses with whom they have worked. Firms are encouraged to provide this opportunity to junior attorneys for training purposes. This Court is amenable to permitting a number of lawyers to argue for one party if this creates an opportunity for a junior lawyer to participate. The ultimate decision of who speaks on behalf of the client is for the lawyer in charge of the case, not for the Court.

Judge Johnson issued a Standing Order Regarding Courtroom Opportunities for Newer Attorneys that stated:

“ The Court is cognizant of a growing trend in which fewer cases go to trial, and in which there are generally fewer opportunities in court for speaking or “stand-up” engagements. This is especially true for newer attorneys, that is, attorneys practicing for less than seven years (“Newer Attorney(s)”). Opportunities for Newer Attorneys to speak in federal court are increasingly rare. Accordingly, the Court strongly encourages litigants to be mindful of opportunities for Newer Attorneys to conduct oral argument before the Court, particularly for motions where the newer attorney drafted or contributed significantly to the underlying motion or response.  The Court believes that it is everyone’s responsibility to assist in providing substantive experience to our next generation of lawyers and that the benefits of doing so will accrue to Newer Attorneys, to clients, and to the profession generally. Therefore, the Court strongly encourages all parties practicing before it to keep this goal in mind.   Recognizing the importance of the development of future generations of practitioners through courtroom opportunities, the Court adopts the following procedures regarding oral argument as to pending motions: (1) If a party is interested in having a Newer Attorney argue a motion, after the motion is ripe, the party should contact chambers to request oral argument and inform chambers that a Newer Attorney will argue the motion or a portion of the motion. (2) If such a request is made, the Court will: A. Grant the request for oral argument on the motion, if it is at all practicable to do so, even if the Court would not ordinarily permit oral argument. In those instances where the Court is inclined to rule on the papers, a representation that the argument would be handled by a Newer Attorney will weigh in favor of holding a hearing. B. Strongly consider allocating additional time for oral argument beyond what the Court may otherwise have allocated, were a Newer Attorney not arguing the motion. C. Permit other, more experienced counsel of record to speak on the motion as well, where appropriate, during oral argument. D. Notify opposing counsel if such a request is granted and request opposing counsel reciprocate in permitting a Newer Attorney to make its argument on the motion. All attorneys, including Newer Attorneys, will be held to the highest professional standards. Relatedly, all attorneys appearing in court are expected to be adequately prepared and thoroughly familiar with the factual record and the applicable law, and to have a degree of authority commensurate with the proceeding. The Court also recognizes that there may be many different circumstances in which it is not appropriate for a Newer Attorney to argue a motion. Thus, the Court emphasizes that it draws no inference from a party’s decision not to have a Newer Attorney argue any particular motion before the Court. Additionally, the Court will draw no inference about the importance of a particular motion, or the merits of a party’s argument regarding the motion, from the party’s decision to have (or not to have) a Newer Attorney argue the motion.”

“B. Participation by Junior Attorneys: The Court encourages the participation of less experienced attorneys in all proceedings — including pretrial conferences, hearings on discovery disputes, oral arguments, and examinations of witnesses at trial — particularly where that attorney played a substantial role in drafting the underlying filing or in preparing the relevant witness.  The Court is amenable to permitting more than one lawyer to argue for one party if this creates an opportunity for a junior lawyer to participate.  Nevertheless, all attorneys appearing before the Court must have authority to bind the party they represent consistent with the proceedings (for example, by agreeing to a discovery or briefing schedule), and should be prepared to address any matters likely to arise at the proceeding. The ultimate decision of who speaks on behalf of the client is for the lawyer in charge of the case, not for the Court.”

“Participation of Junior Attorneys. To assist in the training of the next generation of attorneys, the Court strongly encourages relatively inexperienced attorneys—in particular, attorneys with less than 5 years’ experience—to participate in all courtroom proceedings. Further, the Court is amenable to having multiple attorneys speak for one party if it creates an opportunity for a lawyer who is relatively inexperienced. However, all attorneys appearing should have the degree of authority consistent with the proceeding.”

The Court strongly encourages all attorneys and their clients to provide substantive speaking opportunities to less experienced attorneys.  The Court recognizes that newer attorneys do not have as many opportunities to appear and argue in court.  Although oral argument is not necessary for the Court to rule on the majority of motions filed before it, the Court will consider scheduling oral argument if a party requests it and commits to entrust the argument to an attorney who has been out of law school for fewer than six years.

The Court strongly encourages parties to permit less experienced attorneys to actively participate in the proceedings by presenting argument at motion hearings or examining witnesses at trial. The Court is amendable to permitting a number of attorneys to argue for one party at a motion hearing or case management conference if this creates an opportunity for such attorneys to participate.

Opportunities for Junior Lawyers:

The Court strongly encourages parties to permit less experienced lawyers to actively participate in the proceedings.  In the Joint Case Management Conference Statement, any law firm with more than 30 lawyers nationwide must submit a specific plan for how it intends, in the case, to provide opportunities to junior lawyers (six years or fewer years out of law school) to argue motions in court, to take depositions, and to examine witnesses at trial.  Specific junior lawyers must be identified.   Parties may indicate in their motion papers if they intend to have a junior lawyer argue the motion and request a hearing for that purpose.

The Court welcomes and encourages oral argument by less-experienced attorneys who are well-prepared on the issues.

“The Court has a strong commitment to supporting the development of our next generation of trial lawyers. Parties and senior counsel are encouraged to give newer practitioners the opportunity to argue in court. To that end, the Court will typically guarantee oral argument on any motion handled by a lawyer with 6 or fewer years of experience. The Court should be advised that a newer lawyer is doing the argument well in advance of the hearing date.”

The Court encourages larger law firms to give junior attorneys an opportunity to participate in the resolution of discovery disputes on telephone calls or at hearings. However, lead trial counsel must be present for all such proceedings.

The Court strongly encourages parties to permit less experienced lawyers to actively participate in the proceedings by presenting argument at motion hearings or examining witnesses at trial

Junior Attorneys.  In an effort to provide junior attorneys with opportunities to argue in court, on request, Judge Moskowitz will hold oral  argument on civil motions in the following circumstances: (1) where the motion will be argued by attorneys with less than 5 years of admission to the bar for at least two opposing sides; or (2) where the motion will be argued by an attorney with less than 5 years of admission to the bar on one side and the opposing attorney, irrespective of his or her experience, also requests oral argument. While the decision as to who should argue is for the lead attorney to make, the Court encourages the lead attorney to allow the junior attorney writing the motion papers to argue the matter. In those circumstances, the Court will allow the lead attorney to also participate in the argument.

Judge McShane strongly encourages litigants and law firms to be mindful of opportunities for young lawyers (attorneys practicing less than 7 years) to conduct hearings before the court in tandem with more experienced attorneys, especially where young lawyers drafted or significantly contributed to motions and responses. These opportunities include oral argument as well as witness examination.

Judge McShane believes it is important to provide young lawyers with substantive speaking opportunities to gain experience in court, as the benefits of such experience accrue to the young lawyer, clients, and the legal profession in general. However, Judge McShane understands that, in some instances, having a young lawyer appear may not be appropriate or in the client’s best interest. Therefore, an experienced attorney may supplement a young lawyer’s arguments and questions with their own if necessary.

5. Young Lawyers The Court strongly encourages litigants to be mindful of opportunities for young lawyers (i.e., lawyers practicing for fewer than seven (7) years) to conduct hearings before the Court, particularly when the young lawyer drafted or contributed significantly to the underlying motion or response. The Court believes that it is crucial to provide substantive speaking opportunities to young lawyers and that the benefits of doing so will accrue to young lawyers, to clients, and to the profession generally. Thus, the Court encourages all lawyers practicing before it to keep this goal in mind.

Additionally, the Court believes it is crucial to provide substantive speaking opportunities to young lawyers and that the benefits of doing so will accrue to young lawyers, to clients, and to the profession generally. Accordingly, the Court will consider, among other things, whether the requested oral argument presents a speaking opportunity for a young lawyer in determining whether to schedule oral argument on a motion.

“In accordance with the Court’s Local Rules, motions are usually decided without oral argument, but the Court will consider any request for hearing if the party or parties requesting oral argument specify the particular reasons argument may be helpful to the Court and what issues will be the focus of the proposed argument. Moreover, the Court shall grant a request for oral argument on a contested, substantive motion if the request states than an attorney who is less than seven (7) years out of law school will conduct the oral argument on at least one substantial issue in the case, it being the Court’s belief that new attorneys need more opportunities for Court appearances than they usually receive.”

“In accordance with Local Rule 7.1(E), motions are usually decided without oral argument, but the Court will consider any request for hearing.  Moreover, the Court shall grant a request for oral argument on a contested, substantive motion if the request states that a lawyer of less than five years out of law school will conduct the oral argument (or at  least the lion’s share), it being the Court’s belief that young lawyers need more opportunities for Court appearances than they usually receive.”

Guidelines for Trial and Final Pretrial Conference (in civil jury cases): 

“29. Counsel shall stand when making objections and shall not make speaking objections.  The one-lawyer-per-witness rule is usually followed but will be relaxed to allow junior lawyers a chance to perform.  Side bar conferences are discouraged.”

“39. The Court strongly encourages lead counsel to permit junior lawyers to examine witnesses at trial and to have an important role.  It is the way one generation will teach the next to try cases and to maintain our district’s reputation for excellence in trial practice.”

Guidelines for Trial and Final Pretrial Conference (in civil bench cases): 

“26. Counsel shall stand when making objections and shall not make speaking objections.  The one-lawyer-per-witness rule is usually followed but will be relaxed to allow junior lawyers a chance to perform.  Side bar conferences are discouraged.”

“29.  The Court strongly encourages lead counsel to permit junior lawyers to examine witnesses at trial and to have an important role.  It is the way one generation will teach the next to try cases and to maintain our district’s reputation for excellence in trial practice.”

Order Setting Initial Case Management Conference: 

“3. In the joint statement for the initial case management conference, any law firm with more than fifty lawyers nationwide must submit a specific plan for how it intends, in this case, to provide opportunities to junior lawyers (six years or fewer years out of law school) to argue motions in court, to take depositions, and to examine witnesses at trial. Specific motions, depositions, and junior lawyers must be identified. Please state whether it would be useful to require client representatives to attend the upcoming case management conference where this subject will be discussed.”

“the Court shall grant a request for oral argument on a contested, substantive motion if the request states that a lawyer of less than five years out of law school will conduct the oral argument (or at  least the lion’s share), it being the Court’s belief that young lawyers need more opportunities for Court appearances than they usually receive.”

“3. Courtroom Opportunities for Relatively Inexperienced: 

Attorneys The participation of relatively inexperienced attorneys in all court proceedings— including but not limited to pre-motion conferences, pre-trial conference, hearings on discovery motions and dispositive motions, and examination of witnesses at trial—is strongly encouraged.   All attorneys appearing should have the degree of authority consistent with the proceeding.  For example, attorneys participating in a pre-motion conference should have the authority to their clients to a motion schedule and should be prepared to address other matters likely to arise, including the party’s willingness to participate in a settlement conference with the assigned Magistrate Judge.   Relatively inexperienced attorneys who seek to participate in evidentiary hearings of substantial complexity (e.g., examining witnesses at trial) should be accompanied and supervised by more experienced attorneys.”

Opportunities for Young Lawyers 

The Court is aware of a trend today in which fewer cases go to trial, and in which there are generally fewer speaking or “stand-up” opportunities in court, particularly for young lawyers (i.e., lawyers practicing for less than seven years). The Court strongly encourages litigants to be mindful of opportunities for young lawyers to conduct hearings before the Court, particularly for motions where the young lawyer drafted or contributed significantly to the underlying motion or response. In those instances where the Court is inclined to rule on the papers, a representation that the argument would be handled by a young lawyer will weigh in favor of holding a hearing. The Court understands that there may be circumstances where having a young lawyer handle a hearing might not be appropriate – such as where no young lawyers were involved in drafting the motion, or where the motion might be dispositive in a “bet-the-company” type case. Even so, the Court believes it is crucial to provide substantive speaking opportunities to young lawyers, and that the benefits of doing so will accrue to young lawyers, to clients, and to the profession generally. Thus, the Court encourages all lawyers practicing before it to keep this goal in mind.

“Request for Oral Argument on Motions: 

Moreover, the Court shall grant a request for oral argument on a contested substantive motion if the request states that a lawyer of less than five years out of law school will conduct the oral argument (or at least a large majority), it being the Court’s belief that new lawyers need more opportunities for Court appearances than they usually receive.”

Civil Standing Order, Section 4(D): Young Attorneys

The court values the importance of training young attorneys.  The parties are encouraged to consider assigning oral argument to a young attorney.  If a written request for oral argument is filed before a hearing, stating an attorney of six or fewer years out of law school will present the oral argument, then the court will ordinarily hold the hearing, although the court’s schedule and calendar may require the hearing to be reset.  Otherwise, the court may find it appropriate in some actions to submit a motion without oral argument.

In addition, if a written request for oral argument is filed before issuance of a ruling stating that a lawyer six or fewer years out of law school will conduct all or most of the oral argument, the Court will entertain oral argument on the principle that young lawyers need more opportunities for appearances than they typically receive.

The Court strongly encourages the parties to permit junior lawyers to examine witnesses and to have an important role at trial

The Court strongly encourages the parties to permit junior lawyers to examine witnesses and to have an important role at trial.