Judges' Views of Lawyers in their Courts

Abstract

In a prior issue of this Journal,' I reported tabulations and statistical analyses of the results of a survey of judges concerning the competence of trial advocates appearing in their courts. The survey was designed to focus on the courtroom performance of attorneys as observed by trial judges. The survey questionnaire, which was sent to all judges of general jurisdiction (both state and federal), was intended to elicit judicial evaluations of advocacy competence from both long-term and more immediate perspectives, from the trend in advocacy competence since the judge had come to the bench to ratings of attorneys who had appeared in the judge's five most recent contested trials. The factors that judges consider in evaluating the competence of trial advocates, as well as judges' opinions about various measures that might be used to ensure or enhance the quality of trial advocacy, also were explored. The previously reported survey results were based on responses to specific questions about these issues. I included a general open-ended question as the final item on the survey questionnaire to permit respondents to emphasize or expand on their prior responses to specific questions, as well as to raise any additional issues. I did not analyze the responses to this question in the previous article but will examine them in this article. The general question read as follows: Your comments on the general state of the trial bar, your views on the causes of and cures for trial advocacy incompetence, and any other general observations are solicited.