RH ETO RICAL THEORY IN AM ERICAN

LEG A L PR A C TIC E

DISSERTATION

P r e s e n te d in P a r t i a l F u lf il lm e n t of the R e q u ire m e n ts fo r the D e g re e D o cto r of P h ilo so p h y in the G rad u a te

School of The Ohio S tate U n iv e rs ity

By

R ic h a rd D avis R iek e , B . S . , M . A,

******

The Ohio S tate U n iv e rs ity 1964

A pproved by

A d v ise r D e p a rtm e n t of Speech

VITA

June 13, 1935 B orn--A lton, Illinois

1957 , , . , B. S . , Southern Illinois U niversity , Carbondale,Illinois

1957-1958. . Teaching A ssis tan t, D epartm ent of Speech, TheOhio State U niversity , Columbus, Ohio

1958 . . . . M. A ., The Ohio State U niversity , Columbus, Ohio

1958-1964. . In stru c to r, D epartm ent of Speech, The Ohio StateU niversity, Columbus, Ohio

PUBLICATIONS

"E arly Steps Tow ard the Unification of Speech and Psychology in the 20th Century, " C entral States Speech Journal, Vol. XII, No. 2, 1961, pp. 127-133,

FIELDS OF STUDY

M ajor F ield: Speech

Studies in R hetoric and Public A ddress, P ro fe sso rs P au l A, Carm ack, H arold F , Harding, W illiam E , U tterback, and W, Hayes Yeager

Studies in G eneral Communication. P ro fe sso rs F rank lin H. Knower, W allace C, (FotherIngham, and Keith Brooks

u

TA BLE O F CONTENTS

C h ap te r P ag e

I. INTRODUCTION .....................................................................................1

O rig in s of R h e to r ic a l T heory in L eg a l P ra c t ic e C o n tem p o ra ry I n te r e s t in L eg a l R h e to ric a s E x p re s s e d

in the L i te r a tu r e C oncep ts R e lev a n t to the Study

R h e to r ic a l th eo ry L e g a l education

O rg an iza tio n of the R em ain d er of the Study

n . RH ETO RICA L IN FLU EN CES IN EARLY PROFESSIONA L

E D U C A T IO N ............................................................................................ 47

The In fluence of G re a t B r ita in P a th s to L e g a l E d u ca tio n in A m e ric a

The L aw SchoolP ro fe s s io n a l a s so c ia tio n s M oot c o u r ts and law clubs

P r a c t ic a l a s p e c ts of the law c u rr ic u lu m

III. CHARACTER O F RHETORICAL THEORY IN MODERN

LEG A L E D U C A T IO N .........................................................................90

Law O ffice v s . Law School The P r o p e r F u n c tio n of the Law School R ecogn ition of L eg a l R h e to ric in L aw School C u rr ic u la

O b je c tiv e s of p r a c t ic a l w ork in law schools C onten t of p r a c t ic a l c o u rse s

The id e a l p r a c t ic a l co u rseThe conduct of re p re s e n ta tiv e p r a c t ic e c o u rse s

P r e -L a w R e q u ire m e n ts

111

C h ap te r P ag e

IV. A LEG A L RHETO RIC OF PRA CTITIO N ERS . . . . 176

The P r e r e q u is i te s of th e S u ccessfu l A tto rneyIn te rv ie w s w ith a C lien tThe P re p a ra t io n of P le a d in g sG ath erin g and A rra n g in g E v id en ce B efo re T r ia lThe S e lec tio n of the Ju ryThe O pening S ta tem en tP re s e n ta t io n of E v idenceC ro s s -E xcuninationC losing A rg u m en tA p p e lla te A dvocacy

V. A PPRO A CH ES TO THE VALIDATION O F LEGAL

R H E T O R I C ......................................................................................... 298

L a w y e r-C lie n t In te rv ie w s E v id en ce in the T r ia l C o u rt

VI. SUMMARY AND C O N C L U S I O N S ....................................................341

B I B L I O G R A P H Y ................................................................................................... 351

IV

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

O rigins of R hetorical Theory in Legal P rac tice

Man*s attem pts to p re sc rib e standards of social behavior have

always n ecessita ted the establishm ent of sufficient authority to see that

the standards w ere followed. "While fo rce has always constitu ted one

efficient form of au thority , it has usually proved undesirab le fo r one

reason or ano ther. Thus, m an has sought a m ore desirab le substitute

fo r fo rce. The system s of law which have been the re su lt of th is search

have the problem of lacking lihe im m ediately apparent authority which is

p ossessed in ru le by fo rce . To avoid th is problem , early laws w ere

said to be the d ic ta tes of the gods, and as such even m ore powerful than

the force of m an against m an. The lead e rs w ere usually said to be

e ither gods them selves or appointed by the gods, and th e re fo re , the

word ot the lead er was law --absolute and subject to no appeal.

Under a system of absolute ru le by a divine lead er th ere was no

need for a m ethod of decision-m aking designed to d iscover a ra tional

b asis for securing belief. In ancient Egypt, fo r exam ple, the leader

w as sa id to be ap p o in ted by gods and h is w ord co n s titu ted th e law of the

co u n try . T h e re w as e s ta b lis h e d a c o u r t to c a r r y out the la w , b u t i ts

function w as s e v e re ly r e s t r i c te d by the co n s ta n t p re se n c e w ith in the

n a tio n of the m a k e r of la w s . A s a r e s u l t , th e re w ere no la w y e rs o r

p le a d e rs ; the ju d g e s a c te d bo th a s co u n se l and a r b i te r s . If a c itiz e n had

a co m p la in t to m a k e , he su b m itted i t in w ritin g to the c o u r t w h ich , in

tu rn , gave i t to the p e rs o n a g a in s t w hom th e co m p la in t w as d ire c te d .

T h is defenden t th en w ro te a re p ly . T h e re w as a tim e s e t a s id e d u ring

w hich w itn e s s e s cou ld com e fo r th and sp ea k to the ju d g es . A f te r th is ,

the c o u rt announced a d e c is io n . ^

The fu n c tio n of the c o u r t w as to in te r p r e t the w ill of the s o v e r ­

e ign . C le a r ly , th e c o u r t h ad only th a t d is c re t io n in m ak ing the

in te rp re ta t io n th a t the le a d e r chose to a llo w . T hus, in e f fe c t , the c o u rt

had no f re e d o m of in te rp re ta t io n a t a l l . L a te r , in the d ev e lo p m en t of

g o v ern m en t and law , th e d iv ine pow er of so v e re ig n s d im in ish e d and the

pow er of la w -m a k in g w as sp re a d am ong the n ob ility . T he ju d g m en ts

w hich had b een c o n s id e re d in s p ire d by god w ere c a r r ie d o v e r in the fo rm

of p re c e d e n ts to be u s e d by the c u r re n t ju d g e s .

In G re e c e , th e p o w er to g o vern and m ake law w as m u ch m o re

f re e ly d is tr ib u te d th a n h ad b een the c a se e a r l i e r . Solon, a m a n in v e s te d

w ith the p o w er to m ak e law , b ecam e m o s t in flu en tia l on th e dev elo p m en t

^H enry W. S co tt, The E vo lu tio n of L aw (New Y ork; The B o rd en P r e s s P u b lish in g C om pany, 1908), pp . 85 -9 2 .

of law in m any w ays. M o st p a r t ic u la r ly , w ith r e g a rd to the p re s e n t

study , he w ro te law s in p u rp o se ly am biguous language so a s to give

g re a te r d is c re tio n of in te rp re ta t io n to the ju d g e s . Solon in ten d ed h is

law s to be ap p lied a c c o rd in g to th e ir s p ir i t r a th e r than th e ir le t t e r . I t

could be ex p ec ted th a t to the ex ten t th a t the ju d g m en t of the c o u rt w as

given g r e a te r f re e d o m in se le c tio n of p r in c ip le s fo r d e c is io n to th a t

ex ten t g r e a te r e m p h as is w ould be p la c e d upon the m ethod by w hich the

d e c is io n of the c o u rt w as re ac h e d .

I t i s no t su rp r is in g th a t sh o rtly a f te r the tim e of Solon the f i r s t

ev idence of the ex is te n c e of a group of m e n - - s k i l le d in p e r s u a s io n - -

'3a c tin g a s ad v o ca tes b e fo re the c o u r ts i s found. D em o sth en es is the

m o s t no ted of th e se m en .

I t i s re a so n ab le th a t so long a s th e re w as l i t t le o r no co n ce rn fo r

the m an n e r by w hich ju d g es m ade d e c is io n s th e re w as no in te r e s t in the

study of the th eo ry of ju d ic ia l d ec is io n -m a k in g . H ow ever, a s soon a s a

g roup of ad v o ca tes o r p le a d e r s a ro se who engaged in the re g u la r p r e s e n ­

ta tio n of c a s e s b e fo re the c o u r ts i t w as only to be ex p ec ted th a t m en

w ould becom e in te re s te d in re a so n s why som e ad v o ca te s w ere m o re

su c c e ss fu l in w inning c a s e s than o th e rs ; o r , why ju d g e s found ju s tic e

re s id in g in one p o s itio n r a th e r than the o th e r .

^I b id . , p . 112. ^I b id . , p . 116.

The s y s te m of ju r is p ru d e n c e w hich had grow n f ro m the m o st

an c ien t t im e s in vo lved p ro c e s s e s w hich seem to have evo lved n a tu ra lly

f ro m a s itu a tio n of conflic t: one m a n a s s e r te d a c h a rg e and an o th e r m an

a s s e r te d a c o n tra ry p o s itio n . E a c h a ttem p ted to p r e s e n t h is p o s itio n in

such a way a s to show th a t t ru th and ju s tic e w ere w ith h im . The judge

h e a rd o r re a d th e se s ta te m e n ts and decided who w as on the side of law .

T h is w as the c a s e in an c ien t E g y p t, w hich is about a s f a r b ack a s u se fu l

h is to ry in th is a r e a h a s g o n e . A s the freed o m of the ju d g es in c re a s e d ,

th e re fo re , m o re and m o re a tte n tio n w as given to the m a n n e r in w hich

the lit ig a n ts p re s e n te d th e ir p o s itio n s fo r a rb i tr a t io n .

W hile th e re i s re a so n to b e liev e th a t m any p e r s o n s m ade an

e ffo rt to le a r n m o re about the p r o c e s s of ju d ic ia l d e c is io n -m a k in g , t r a ­

d ition h a s i t th a t C o rax w as the f i r s t to se t down fo rm a l p r in c ip le s u n d er

the nam e of rh e to r ic o r the a r t of p e rsu a s io n . ^ I t i s A r is to t le , h o w ev er,

who is g e n e ra lly c re d ite d w ith p re se n tin g the m o s t sy s te m a tic and

in flu en tia l d isc u s s io n of rh e to r ic , and i ts re la tio n to the leg a l p ro c e s s .

A r is to tle saw the ta sk of ju d ic ia l d ec is io n -m ak in g a s s im ila r to the

le g is la tiv e p o licy -m ak in g s itu a tio n b u t y e t re q u ir in g som e d is tin c tio n s in

the a p p lica tio n of the r h e to r ic a l p r in c ip le s . T hat i s to say , he b e liev ed

% i d . ,5

B ro m le y Sm ith , "C o ra x and P ro b a b ili ty , " The Q u a r te r ly J o u rn a l of Speech E d u c a tio n , VII (F e b ru a ry , 1921), pp. 13-14 .

th a t the sam e s y s te m a tic p r in c ip le s of rh e to r ic ap p lied to bo th s itu a tio n s ,

b u t the le g a l s itu a tio n d em anded c o n tro l in the u se of p ro o fs .

I t is u se fu l to e la b o ra te upon A r i s to t le 's th eo ry of the le g a l p r o ­

c e s s b ec au se h is th e o ry c o n s titu te s a su b s ta n tia l in tro d u c tio n to the

p ro b le m of the p r e s e n t s tudy . A r is to t le v iew ed the p ro c e s s of app ly ing

p r in c ip le s of law to sp e c ific l i t ig a n ts a s a rh e to r ic a l p ro c e s s . To

A r is to t le , f u r th e r , r h e to r ic invo lved the d isc o v e ry of the a v a ila b le

m e a n s of p e rsu a s io n ; an d to h im , the v e ry h e a r t of p e rs u a s io n w as the

dev elo p m en t of lo g ic a l a rg u m e n t th ro u g h the m ed iu m of the en th y m em e

o r r h e to r ic a l sy llo g ism a s he c a lle d i t . ^ He th u s th e o r iz e d th a t m an i s

b o th capab le and d e s iro u s of m ak ing ra t io n a l d e c is io n s . In co n n ec tio n

w ith th is , A r is to tle ad v an ced the id ea th a t t ru th and ju s tic e w ere

n a tu ra lly in c lin ed to p r e v a i l o v e r th e i r o p p o s ite s , and th u s , if p e r s u a s io n

w e re given a chance to d is c o v e r a l l the p ro o fs av a ilab le in the p a r t ic u la r

s itu a tio n the ou tcom e w ould n e c e s s a r i ly be a tru e and ju s t one. ^ If an

u n ju s t d ec is io n w e re m a d e , sa id A r is to t le , i t w as s im p ly b e c a u se the

d e fen d e r of the p ro p e r side fa ile d to d is c o v e r a l l the av a ilab le m e a n s of

p e rs u a s io n .

I t fo llow s f ro m th is th e o ry th a t in the c o u rt of law w hat i s n eed ed

i s a n opportun ity fo r the p a r t ie s in the l i t ig a tio n to be given fu ll

^W. R hys R o b e r ts , " R h e to r ic a , " in T he W orks of A r is to t le , W. D. R o ss (e d ,) , (O xford: The C la ren d o n P r e s s , 1946), XI, p . 1354a.

^ Ib id . , p . 1355a.

op p o rtu n ity to d isc o v e r and s e t fo r th the av a ilab le m e a n s of p e rsu a s io n .

W ith th is , th e judge (in th is w o rd A r is to tle a lso in c lu d ed a ju ry ) w ould

a r r iv e a t a p ro p e r d ec is io n . H ow ever, b e c a u se of the unique a s p e c ts of

the le g a l s itu a tio n , A r is to t le f e l t som e ad d itio n a l c o n tro l w as c a lle d fo r

in the c o u r t. He a rg u e d th is w ay. In the n o b le r e n d e av o r of le g is la tiv e

p o licy -m ak in g the p a r t ic ip a n ts w e re bo th d e b a te r s and ju d g e s . T h a t i s ,

the p e r s o n s p re s e n tin g th e p ro o fs w ere a lso the p e r s o n s judging th em .

The p o licy -m a k e r s n e c e s s a r i ly had a v ita l in v o lv em en t in the ou tcom e

of th e d e c is io n -m a k in g p r o c e s s fo r the p o licy w ould be th e i r s and w ould

a ffe c t th e ir a c tio n s . T h u s , if a p e r s u a d e r u sed a s p ro o f ap p e a ls

d ire c te d no t to w ard the i s s u e b u t the m en d ec id in g i t (such a s a ro u s in g

of p re ju d ic e , p ity , a n g e r , e t c . ) the ju d g es w ould, by v ir tu e of th e ir

p e rs o n a l in v o lv em en t in the o u tco m e , s t i l l m ak e a n en lig h ten ed and

p ro p e r d e c is io n . T h is w as n o t the c a se in the c o u r t, A r is to tle c la im ed .

On the c o n tra ry , in the c o u r t the judge o r ju ry w as c a lle d upon to decide

a p ro b le m w hich w as of v i ta l in te r e s t to o th e r p e r s o n s u n re la te d to the

ju d g es . T he c o u r t h ad no in v o lv em en t in the ou tco m e of the c o n tro v e rsy ,

only the l i t ig a n ts . In fa c t, j u r i e s w ere sp e c if ic a lly s e le c te d on the

b a s is of th e ir ig n o ra n ce of th e p e rs o n s o r p ro b le m s b e fo re the c o u r t.

T h u s , sa id A r is to t le , th e lik e lih o o d th a t ju d g es w ould d ec id e on the

b a s is of a p p e a ls i r r e le v a n t to the is s u e s w as in c re a s e d . F o r in s ta n c e ,

a s a ju ry i s h e a r in g a rg u m e n ts abou t a p ro b le m w hich h a s no in te r e s t to

th em they a r e m o re lik e ly to v iew the p ro b le m in lig h t of th e ir own f e e l ­

in g s and be sw ayed by the m o s t p leas in g and p la u s ib le sp e a k e r, and thus

choose be tw een the l i t ig a n ts on the b a s is of w hich se e m s the m o s t

a t t r a c t iv e . T h is , d e c la re d A r is to t le , co n s titu te d choice and no t ju d g m en t

and could e a s ily h appen w hen the ju ry h ad no s tak e in the outcom e of the

d e c is io n -m a k in g p r o c e s s .

In add ition to the p ro b le m ju s t s ta te d , the ju d ic ia l p ro c e s s a lso

su ffe re d f ro m the n eed to m ake im m ed ia te d e c is io n s a s opposed to the

o p p o rtu n ity fo r c a lm d e lib e ra tio n in the le g is la tiv e a sse m b ly .

In re sp o n se to th e se conditions of the le g a l s itu a tio n , A r is to tle

th e o r iz e d th a t i t w as p o s s ib le to reg u la te the rh e to r ic a l a s p e c ts of the

l i t ig a tio n in such a w ay a s to in su re (or a t le a s t m o re n e a r ly a s s u re ) th a t

the ju d g es would dec id e on the b a s is of sound ju d g m en t. S p ec ifica lly ,

A r is to t le a g re e d w ith a lre a d y e s ta b lish e d p r a c t ic e s of the c o u rts to

exclude any p ro o fs c o n s id e re d i r r e le v a n t to the r e a l is s u e s of the c a s e o r

lik e ly to d is t r a c t the ju d g m en t of the c o u rt f ro m the i s s u e s . The th e o ry

w as th a t the ju d g es cou ld not b a se th e ir d e c is io n on im p ro p e r p ro o fs if

they w e re exposed to none.

A r is to tle f u r th e r re a so n e d th a t if the p o lic ie s of the le g is la tiv e

a s se m b ly w ere m o re lik e ly to be sound than th o se of the c o u r t, th en the

law s of the a s se m b ly should be a s ex ten siv e and sp ec ific a s p o ss ib le so

a s to rem o v e a s m u ch of the d ec is io n -m ak in g p ro c e s s f ro m the c o u r t a s

p o s s ib le . T h a t i s , the c o u r t faced two sp ec ific ta sk s : (1) to d e te rm in e

8

the fa c ts of the sp e c ific ca se b e fo re the co u rt; (2) to d e te rm in e the a p p li­

c a tio n of the law to th o se fa c ts . C le a r ly , s ta te d A r is to t le , the a s se m b ly

cou ld not be ex p ec ted to le g is la te fo r each sp ec ific c a s e , so the c o u rt

w ould a lw ays be n eed ed to d e te rm in e fa c ts . H ow ever, the a s se m b ly

cou ld so s e t fo rth th e law a s to m ake i t s a p p lica tio n to fa c ts c le a r in

m o s t c a s e s . T h is , in e ffec t, a s su m ed th a t p r in c ip le s of law cou ld be

s ta te d in such language a s to rem o v e the d is c re tio n of the judge in d e te r ­

m in in g ap p lica tio n to g iven fa c ts . T h is a ssu m p tio n r e s t s upon a th e o ry

s im i la r to the one above; the fa c to rs w hich m ove judges (including

ju r ie s ) to decide w h a t i s fa c t in a given c o n tro v e rsy and then to dec ide

how the law is to b e ap p lied to the fa c ts can b e so re g u la te d a s to m ak eg

the ju d g e 's d e c is io n p re d ic ta b ly ra tio n a l.

Two co n c lu s io n s m ay be draw n f ro m th is d isc u ss io n of A r i s to t l e 's

th e o r ie s . F i r s t , A r is to t le c le a r ly b a s e d h is th e o ry of ju r is p ru d e n c e

upon an a ssu m p tio n of a cap ac ity w ith in m an fo r ra tio n a l d e c is io n -m a k in g

a s opposed to d e c is io n s founded upon n o n -ra tio n a l b a s e s such a s p ity and

p re ju d ic e . Second, A r is to tle v iew ed the p ro c e s s of ju d ic ia l d e c is io n ­

m ak in g a s e s s e n t ia l ly a rh e to r ic a l one. T h a t i s , a ssu m in g the law is

g iv en , i t w as the du ty of the litig a n ts to d isc o v e r the av a ilab le m e a n s of

p e r s u a s io n (that i s , th e sum to ta l of p o ss ib le p roofs) to b r in g the ju d g es

to b e liev e in the t r u th o r ju s tic e of one cau se over the o th e r , w ith in the

®Ibid.

co n tex t of r e s t r i c t io n s on the u se of p ro o fs c o n s id e re d to ap p ea l to the

n o n -ra tio n a l m o tiv e s of the ju d g e s . To A r is to t le , the en th y m em e w as

the p r im e v eh ic le of p ro o f in fo re n s ic p e rs u a s io n ju s t a s i t w as to h im in

a l l rh e to r ic a l s itu a tio n s .

C o n tem p o ra ry I n te r e s t in L e g a l R h e to ric a s E3q>ressed

in the L i te r a tu re

W ith the b ack g ro u n d of the th e o r ie s of A r is to t le , i t s e e m s r e a ­

sonable to m ove to m o d e rn A m e ric a n le g a l p r a c t ic e and in q u ire two

th in g s:

1) I s th e re re a s o n to b e lie v e th a t an in te r e s t in the r h e to r ic a l

a s p e c ts of the law co n tin u es in the U nited S ta te s?

2) H ave s c h o la rs of rh e to r ic a l th e o ry m ade th o ro u g h study of the

r h e to r ic of the law ?

If th e re is s t i l l a s tro n g ly r h e to r ic a l e le m e n t in the a d m in is tra t io n of law

i t cou ld be ex p ec ted th a t m e m b e rs of the le g a l p ro fe s s io n w ould be

in te re s te d in i t and th a t rh e to r ic a l s c h o la rs w ould study i t . B e fo re any

fu r th e r in v e s tig a tio n in the a r e a is u n d e r ta k e n --w h ic h i s p ro p o se d in th is

s tu d y - - i t s e e m s n e c e s s a ry to in v e s tig a te th e se two q u e s tio n s .

The m o s t r e c e n t te s tim o n y f ro m the le g a l p ro fe s s io n w ith re g a rd

to the rh e to r ic a l a s p e c ts of law w as g iven a t the 1959 C o n feren ce on

L e g a l E d u ca tio n . B etw een the 15th and 18th of Ju n e , 1959, le g a l s c h o la rs ,

p r a c t i t io n e r s , educatbat»». and no ted r e p re s e n ta t iv e s of o th e r d isc ip lin e s

10

gathered in Ann A rb or, M ichigan to participate in the 1959 C onference on

L egal Education. P r o fe s so r C harles W. Joiner of the U n iversity of

M ichigan Law School detected an im portant them e that w as to com e from

the conference in h is opening ad d ress when he said .

F i r s t an d fo re m o s t fjthe la w y e r] w ill continue to b e a h a r d - h ead ed ad v o ca te an d co u n se lo r; he m u s t con tinue to be an a c c u ra te , c le a r an d c a re fu l th in k e r , a r t ic u la te in the p re se n ta tio n of id e a s , bo th to h is c lie n t and to the c o u rts and trib u n a ls*

He no ted th a t the la w y e r w ill r e ly on th eo ry m o re and p re c e d e n t le s s in

dev elo p m en t of c a s e s and in g iving ad v ice . P r o f e s s o r J o in e r w as co n ­

c e rn e d w ith the p r e - le g a l tra in in g of the law y e r; he d id not ap p ro v e of

" re g im e n tin g th e p r e - la w s tu d en t into c o u r s e s . " "H ow ever, " h e w ent on

to say , "we m u s t dem an d ex ce llen ce be p ro v e d b e fo re e n te r in g in the

study of law . " The e x c e lle n c e w ith which he w as co n ce rn ed w as d iv ided

in to two p a r t s : " 1) We m u s t have m o re p ro o f of sk ill in co m m u n ica tio n .

2) We m u s t d em an d p ro o f of a b ility to an a ly ze an d th ink in dep th about a

d ifficu lt p ro b le m , R o ss L . M alone, then p r e s id e n t of the A m e ric a n

B a r . A s so c ia tio n , su p p o rte d P r o fe s s o r J o in e r 's in te r e s t in the p r e - le g a l

tra in in g b e in g o b ta in ed . W hile i t i s t ru e , he n o ted , th a t good la w y e rs

have com e f ro m a l l s o r t s of back g ro u n d in v inderg raduate study , " i t i s

no p ro o f a t a l l th a t th e m an w o u ld n 't have b een a b e t te r law y er h ad he h ad

9The Tw elfth Annual Summ er Institute of L ega l Education, The Law Schools Look A head, 1959 C onference on L ega l Education (Ann A rbor, M ich ., 1959.

^°Ibid., p. 45. ^ % id . , p. 51

11

the b e n e fit of p re - le g a l tra in in g w hich w as d es ig n e d a t le a s t to im p ro v e

h is sk ills of com m im ication . " "I hope, " he concluded , " th a t the confe-

12re n c e is going to give som e fu r th e r thought to d e c is io n s in th is a r e a . "

A n o th e r m em b er of the law facu lty of the U n iv e rs ity of M ich ig an --

Luke K. C ooper r id e r - -c o m m e n te d upon the o b je c tiv e s of p ro fe s s io n a l

le g a l ed u ca tio n " in the b ro a d e s t te r m s . "

L aw school m u s t t r a in the s tuden t in the la w y e r’s tech n iq u es w ith h is m a te r ia ls , a t the le v e l of p re d ic tio n and advocacy . R e fe re n c e , h e re , i s to som eth ing o th e r than the ’c a se a n a ly s is ' te ch n iq u es w hich we d r i l l in to our s tu d en ts in the tra d it io n a l caseb o o k c o u rs e s . The exchange w hich g o es on in the c la s s ro o m in such c o u rs e s i s v e ry la rg e ly d r i l l in the handling of id e a s , of a b s tr a c t io n s , r a th e r th an in the handling of m a te r ia ls , by w hich I m ean the le g a l m a te r ia ls , c a s e s , s ta tu te s , re g u la tio n s , e t c . , w hich a r e o r m ay be re le v a n t in p a r t ic u la r lit ig a tio n a l o r p o te n ­t ia l ly l i tig a tio n a l s itu a tio n s . The la t te r type of tra in in g o u r s tu d en ts re c e iv e only on a h ap h a z a rd b a s is . M oot c o u r t i s an a p p ro a c h , b u t is thought of a s beyond the c u r r ic u lu m , hence goes w ithout p ro p e r su p e rv is io n , and the e x p e r ie n c e w hich the studen t g e ts f ro m i t is low in q u a lity , qu ite in su ff ic ie n t, and p e rh a p s m is le a d in g . P ro b le m s have b een in c o rp o ra te d in som e c o u rse s , w hich i s c e r ta in ly fo r th e good, b u t they u su a lly p ro c e e d upon the a ssu m p tio n th a t the s tu d en t a lre a d y know s the fund am en ta ls of how to d e r iv e a p re d ic tio n o r an a rg u m e n t f ro m le g a l m a te r ia ls , and tlia t a l l th a t r e m a in s to be done is to open up an opportun ity fo r p r a c t ic e . T h is a ssu m p tio n is p ro b ab ly unsound a s to the m a jo r i ty of s tu d en ts . T he P ro b le m s and R e s e a rc h c o u rse s a r e a g r e a t s te p fo rw a rd , b u t we n eed to re co g n ize th a t the function w hich th e y seek to p e r fo rm is one of the p r im e functions of the law sch o o l, and d e s e rv e s to be t re a te d v e ry s e r io u s ly , not a s a side is s u e . The w ay a law y er h an d les a s ta tu te o r c a se p re c e d e n t in p re p a r in g a b r ie f o r opinion is qu ite d iffe re n t f ro m the w ay the sam e c a s e o r s ta tu te i s h an d led in a tra d it io n a l law school c la s s , and the tra d it io n a l c a se d r i l l i s of l i t t le a s s is ta n c e in le a rn in g th a t tech n iq u e . S till, i t i s a technique w hich can be taugh t in a r e la t iv e ly sh o rt a llo c a tio n of t im e , and c e r ta in ly does not re q u ire th re e y e a r s of d r i l l .

IZ lb id . , p . 71. 1 3 lb id ., pp. 119-120.

12

Speaking bo th a s a p ra c tic in g a tto rn e y and a s the B a r E x a m in e r of D e tro it,

M ich igan , T hom as H, A dam s in d ica te d th a t " r e g a rd le s s of the ch an g es in

d ire c tio n w hich the su b stan tiv e law m ay take we m ay a ssu m e th a t fo r

m an y y e a r s to com e the p r in c ip a l sk ill w hich a law y e r w ill re q u ire i s the

a b ili ty to co m m u n ica te . I t is t r u e , he n o te s , th a t th e re w ill r e m a in

o c c a s io n s in w hich a law y er n eed s only the know ledge of the law and the

a b ility to app ly i t to a g iven s e t of fa c ts and com e fo r th w ith an opin ion a s

to w h e th e r o r no t a c o u rse of ac tio n m ay be leg a lly u n d e rtak en , "M uch

m o re o ften , h o w ev er, i t i s n e c e s s a ry th a t the la w y e r be ab le to s a tis fy

som eone e ls e of the soundness of h is c o n c lu s io n ," " T h is ," A dam s s a y s ,

"he can only do if he i s ab le to s ta te h is p o s itio n in a m an n e r w hich o th e rs

m ay e a s ily u n d ers tan d ,

M ore sp ec ific a lly , A dam s n o te s th a t f ro m the tim e the young la w ­

y e r ta k e s h is b a r ex am in a tio n to h is f i r s t in te rv ie w w ith a c lie n t o r a

p ro sp e c tiv e em p lo y e r, h is f i r s t o ra l a rg u m en t o r w r itte n b r ie f , "he w ill

be co n fro n ted w ith the p ro b le m of se llin g h im se lf o r h is p o s itio n to an

a u d ito r w ish ing to u n d e rs ta n d b u t too busy to c o n s id e r and re c o n s id e r a

s ta te m e n t in an a ttem p t to give lo g ic a l m ean ing to an ap p a ren tly i l lo g ic a l

s ta te m e n t, The a u d ito r w ill f re q u e n tly be one who is not t ra in e d in

law . T hen , when d isc u ss in g w ith a c lie n t a p r a c t ic a l co u rse of a c tio n ,

i t i s n e c e s s a ry fo r the law y er to be ab le to co m m u n ica te the b a s is of h is

^ % id . , p . 154. ^^Ibid. ^ ^ Ib id ., p , 155.

13

opin ion in such a w ay th a t the c lie n t u n d e rs ta n d s and a p p re c ia te s it; the

c l ie n t m u s t u n d e rs ta n d the le g a l a s p e c ts invo lved in the s itu a tio n in o rd e r

to know w hat fa c ts the law y er need s to b eg in to fo rm an opin ion , A dam s

e m p h a s iz ed in h is sp eech th a t teach ing co m m u n ica tio n i s the job of both

the u n d e rg ra d u a te schoo l and the law schoo l. He n o te s th a t now n e ith e r

i s doing the job:

The a b ility to com m u n ica te c le a r ly (and inc lu d ed in co m m u n ­ica tio n is the a r t of red u c in g to w o rd s the a g re e m e n t of two p e rs o n s so th a t in the fu tu re th o se p e r s o n s and o th e rs w ill know w hat th a t a g re e m e n t w as) is a s im p o rta n t , if no t m o re im p o rta n t to a law y e r, than know ledge of ru le s of law . R u les of law w ill change d u rin g the p e r io d of p r a c t ic e b u t the a r t of and n e c e s s ity fo r co m m u n ica tio n w ill no t.

The law schoo l should not give i t s d e g re e o r s tam p of a p p ro v a l to any s tu d en t who does n o t have th is a b ili ty to a s a tis fa c to ry d e g re e .

T h is co m m u n ica tiv e sk ill should be developed b e fo re a d m iss io n to law schoo l. M uch of such co m m u n ica tiv e sk ill i s no t p e c u lia r to the law and can b e s t be taught o u tsid e a le g a l en v iro n m en t.The law sch o o ls should , th e re fo re , b r in g w hat p r e s s u r e they can , to b e a r upon th e i r re sp e c tiv e u n d e rg ra d u a te sch o o ls to p lac e m o re e m p h a s is upon th is ab ility .

In a d m ittin g a p p lic a n ts the law schoo l should a t the l e a s t be s a tis f ie d th a t the a p p lic a n t p ro b ab ly w ill be ab le to a c q u ire th is sk ill . F o r th o se a p p lic a n ts who do no t have the a b ili ty su ffic ien tly d eveloped the law sch o o ls should h av e , and re q u ire the s tu d en ts to ta k e , a c o u rse to develop th is sk ill . T h is c o u rse should be tau g h t w ithou t p r im a r y em p h as is on law o r s o -c a l le d 'le g a l w ritin g . * A fte r the s tu d en t h a s a c q u ire d a b a s ic co m m u n ica tiv e a b ility i s su ffic ien t tim e to s p e c ia liz e in 'le g a l w r itin g . ' The fa c t th a t m any s tu d e n ts w ith law re v ie w e x p e rien ce s t i l l do not have the co m m u n ica tiv e sk ill d e m o n s tra te s th a t m e re 'le g a l w riting* i s not su ffic ien t. N e ith e r the w ritin g of a c o n tra c t n o r a p le a to a ju ry i s 'le g a l w ritin g . *

The law sch o o ls m u s t th e m se lv e s a s su m e the re sp o n s ib il i ty fo r teach in g the co m m u n ica tio n 's sk ill u n til such tim e a s the u n d e rgra d u a te sch o o ls do th e ir job in th is r e s p e c t .

17ibid., p . 156.

14

A t th is p o in t, p e rh a p s i t i s w e ll to note th a t the 1959 C onference

on L e g a l E d u ca tio n h e ld a t the U n iv e rs ity of M ich igan w as not devo ted to

the p ro b le m of co m m u n ica tio n tra in in g fo r law s tu d e n ts . In sp ite of the

a p p a re n t c o n s is te n c y w ith w hich th is p ro b le m w as r a i s e d by the p a r t i c i ­

p a n ts , th is co n fe ren c e w as d es ig n ed to d is c u s s a l l the p ro b le m s fac in g

le g a l ed u ca tio n in the y e a r s to co m e. E a ch su p p o r te r independen tly

s e le c te d co m m u n ica tio n a s the p o in t to be s t r e s s e d . E a ch p a r tic ip a n t

in d ep en d en tly cam e to th is co n fe ren ce a lre a d y c o n c e rn e d w ith the p ro b le m .

A dded to th is f a c t is the r e a l iz a t io n th a t th e se p a r t ic ip a n ts re p re s e n te d

law sch o o ls a l l o v e r the U n ited S ta te s - -n o t one p a r t ic u la r type of schoo l

n o r one se c tio n of the n a tio n ,

T h o m as M , C o lley , D ean of the School of L aw of the U n iv e rs ity

of P it ts b u rg h , s u m m a riz e d the op in ions a s to th e im p o rta n c e of co m m u n ­

ica tio n to law w hen he s ta te d , " the law , is above ev ery th in g e ls e , a

co m m u n ica tin g p ro fe s s io n , " He sa id fu r th e r , "no law school can p re te n d

th a t i t i s tu rn in g out g ra d u a te s f i t to e n te r the p r a c t ic e w hen i t know s

18th a t th e i r co m m u n ica tio n f a c i l i t ie s a re a l l bu t n o n e x is te n t, "

The p a r t ic ip a n ts in th is co n fe re n c e , a f te r l is te n in g to the opening

sp e e c h e s w hich have b een d is c u s s e d above, n ex t w ent in to d isc u ss io n

g ro u p s fo r c lo s e r study of the p ro b le m s facinjg le g a l edu ca tio n . V ir tu a lly

e v e ry g roup c o n se n su s d is c u s s e d a t one po in t o r a n o th e r - -u s u a lly f i r s t - -

the p ro b le m of teach in g co m m u n ica tio n s k ills . To be s u re , m any w ere

18The L aw S chools L ook A head , op, c i t , , p , 166,

15

c o n ce rn ed only w ith le g a l w ritin g ; m any w ere co n ce rn ed w ith the e n tire

q u es tio n of p r a c t ic a l t ra in in g in law schoo ls; m any w e re co n cern ed with

the re la tio n sh ip of re sp o n s ib il i ty betw een the u n d e rg ra d u a te college and

the law school; b u t a l l w e re co n ce rn ed in one way o r a n o th e r w ith the

co m m u n ica tio n n eed s of the law y er and the p ro b le m of sa tis fy in g them .

The fin a l c o n se n su s , e n titled "T he Role of the L aw School in

D eveloping a L a w y er, " m ad e th is s ta tem en t:

The p ro b le m s fac in g so c ie ty re su ltin g fro m ra p id grow th of tech n o lo g ica l know ledge, th e in c re a s in g ra p id ity of tra n sp o r ta tio n an d co m m u n ica tio n , the la r g e r n u m b ers of p e r s o n s liv ing c lo s e r and c lo s e r to g e th e r , and the m o b ility of p e o p le , ind ica te th a t a l l la w y e rs w h e re v e r they w ill p ra c tic e n eed b ro a d know­led g e and cap ac ity . T o m o rro w 's law y er w ill n eed g r e a te r know ledge of, and a p p re c ia tio n fo r , the leg a l and so c ia l p ro b le m s of a l l p eo p le of th e w orld ; know ledge of, and a p p re ­c ia tio n fo r , the im p a c t of the tech n o lo g ica l ad v an ces on p eo p le s ; and the ca p a c ity to desig n and o p e ra te th e le g a l and so c ia l m a c h in e ry to m ak e th is com plex w orld , s ta te o r c ity , o p e ra te in p eace and in a c co rd an ce w ith law . The fu tu re w ill a lso c a ll fo r the sam e c a re fu l th in k e r , c lie n t c a r e ta k e r , and ad vocate so n e c e s s a ry today ,

The c o n se n su s w ent on to say , "T he law schoo ls have a r ig h t to dem and

of th e i r a p p lic an ts the c a p a c ity to re a d and u n d e rs ta n d , to o rg an ize , c o m ­

p o se , w r ite and speak e ffec tiv e E n g lish . " I t no tes th a t " the w ritte n and

spoken w ord a r e the la w y e r 's to o ls and they m u s t be s h a rp . " With

r e g a rd to the re la tiv e re sp o n s ib il i ty of co lleg es and law schoo ls in f i l l ­

ing th is need , the c o n se n su s s a y s , "the law schoo ls shou ld not ad m it

th o se who do no t m e e t s ta n d a rd s of p ro fic ien cy in co m m unica tion

1 9 lb id ., p . 5.

16

p r e s c r ib e d by th em . The law sch o o ls , on the o th e r hand , m u s t te a ch the

stu d en t to app ly to the law h is a b ili ty to com m unica te and m u s t dem and of

20h im q u a lity r e s e a r c h in depth and e ffec tiv e w ritin g on le g a l m a t te r s , "

F in a lly , the c o n sen su s n o tes th a t "the u n d e rg ra d u a te c o lle g e s n eed m o re

a s s is ta n c e th an is being g iven a t the p r e s e n t tim e in ad v is in g p r e - la w

s tu d e n ts . " W hile the p a r t ic ip a n ts s tro n g ly r e je c te d the id ea of p r e s c r ib e d

c o u rse s in co lleg e fo r those p re p a r in g to e n te r law schoo l, they did fe e l

th a t " s tu d e n ts should be ad v ise d th a t s tu d ie s in the a r t s and sc ie n c e s

should be p u rsu e d w hich w ill p ro d u ce (a) a b ro a d c u ltu ra l b ack g ro u n d , (b)

h a b its of th o ro u g h n e ss , in te l le c tu a l c u r io s ity and s c h o la rsh ip , and (c) the

ab ility to o rg a n iz e m a te r ia ls and com m u n ica te the r e s u l ts o ra lly and in

w ritin g ,

The te s tim o n y fro m the C o n feren ce on L eg a l E d u ca tio n su p p o rts

two te n ta tiv e co n c lu s io n s . F i r s t , th e re s e e m s to be no doubt th a t m e m ­

b e r s of the le g a l p ro fe s s io n in th e U nited S ta te s continue w ith an in te r e s t

in the r h e to r ic a l a s p e c ts of le g a l p r a c t ic e . Second, the te s tim o n y is

e x p re s s e d in such a way a s to su g g est confusion o y er the c h a ra c te r of

the rh e to r ic of law . C e rta in ly , the w ord " rh e to r ic " i s no lo n g e r u se d to

c h a ra c te r iz e the p ro b le m a r e a , and th e re se em s to be no d is tin c tio n

b e tw een g ra m m a r and o th e r e le m e n ta ry a s p e c ts of language and rh e to r ic

a s w as m ad e in the tim e of the a n c ie n ts .

2 ° Ib id . , p . 6. ^ % i d . , p . 7.

17

To le a rn w h e th e r o r no t r h e to r ic a l s c h o la rs have m ade a thorough

study of the rh e to r ic of the le g a l p r o c e s s a study of the l i te r a tu r e h a s

b een m ad e .

The H is to ry of Speech E d u ca tio n in A m e r ic a , p u b lish ed in 1954

u n d e r the a u sp ic e s of the Speech A s so c ia tio n of A m e r ic a , m a k e s no

re fe re n c e to a tte m p ts b y law sch o o ls to p ro v id e sp eech ed u ca tio n o r of

22 „la w y e rs and p o te n tia l la w y e rs to s e c u re i t , A f u r th e r ex am in a tio n of

the sc h o la r ly w o rk done by the f ie ld of sp eech w as m ade th ro u g h study of

T hons sen . F a th e r son , and T hons sen . B ib lio g rap h y of Speech E d u c a tio n ;

the supp lem en t to th a t w ork;^ '^ the Index to T he Q u a r te r ly J o u rn a l of

S peech ;^^ the T ab le of C o n ten ts of The Q u a r te r ly Jo u rn a l of Speech ,

2 2 K arl R . W allace (ed. ), H is to ry of Speech E d u c a tio n in A m e ric a , Speech A sso c ia tio n of A m e r ic a (New Y ork : A p p le to n -C e n tu ry -C ro f ts , I n c . , 1954).

23L e s te r Thons sen , E liz a b e th F a th e r son , and D o ro th ea T hons sen (com p. ), B ib lio g rap h y of Speech E d u c a tio n (New Y ork: T he H. W. W il­son C om pany, 1939).

^ '^ L este r Thons se n , M ary M a rg a re t R obb, and D o ro th ea T hons sen (com p. ), B ib lio g rap h y of Speech E d u ca tio n Supplem ent: 1939-1948 (New Y ork: The H. W. W ilson C om pany, 1950).

25 G ile s W ilke son G ray (com p. ), In d ex to The Q u a r te r ly Jo u rn a l of Speech V o lum es I to XL 1915-1954 (D ubuque, Iow a: W m. C. B row n Com pany P u b l is h e r s , 1956).

18

Speech M onographs^ and T he Speech T e a c h e r ;^^ G rad u a te T h e se s An

Index of G rad u a te W ork in S peech . T h ese r e fe r e n c e s y ie ld ed the

co n c lu s io n th a t s tu d en ts in sp eech have b een in te r e s te d in s tu d ie s of the

speak ing of in d iv id u a l la w y e rs , b u t have b een l i t t le co n ce rn ed w ith the

teach in g of sp eech in le g a l ed u ca tio n ,

A b r ie f re v iew of the p u b lic a tio n s w hich have b e en p ro d u c e d

re le v a n t to the re la tio n sh ip of sp eech to le g a l ed u ca tio n is re v e a lin g . In

1925 R alph Sm ith of the U n iv e rs ity of P it ts b u rg h p u b lish ed an a r t ic le in

T he Q u a r te r ly Jo u rn a l of S peech u n d er the t i t l e , "T he T each ing of P u b lic

28Speaking in L aw S choo ls, " S m ith ’s a r t ic le c o n c e rn e d a q u e s tio n n a ire

h e h ad s e n t to 142 law sch o o ls in the U nited S ta te s - - " a b i t m o re th an a

h a lf" re p ly in g . He d is c o v e re d th a t a " l i t t le m o re than a d ozen" o ffe red

c o u r s e s in th e i r c u r r ic u lu m s " th a t m ig h t be te c h n ic a lly and a c c u ra te ly

know n a s P u b lic Speaking, He a ls o .d is c o v e re d th a t g e n e ra lly th e se

^ ^ F ra n k lin H, K now er (c o m p ,) , T ab le of C on ten ts o f T he Q u a r ­te r ly J o u rn a l of Speech 1915-1956, Speech M onographs 1934-1956, and T he Speech T e a c h e r , 1952-1956 w ith a R ev ised Index C om piled T hrough 1956 (Speech A sso c ia tio n of A m e r ic a , 1957),

27 F ra n k lin H, K now er (co m p .) , "G rad u a te The se s A n Index of G rad u a te W ork in Speech , " Speech M onographs (1935-1963),

^^R alp h S m ith , "T he T each ing of P u b lic Speaking in L aw S choo ls, " T he Q u a r te r ly J o u rn a l of S peech , XL (F e b ru a ry , 1925), pp. 54-57 ,

^ % i d , , p , 54,

19

c o u rs e s w e re e le c tiv e and did not s a tis fy any of the r e q u ire m e n ts fo r the

law d e g re e . " T h e re a r e a t le a s t five in s t i tu t io n s ," the au th o r n o te s ,

" . , , in w hich the w o rk in P u b lic Speaking is p r e s c r ib e d and m ade a

re q u is ite p a r t of the law c u r r ic u lu m and a like n u m b er in w hich c r e d i t i s

g iven to w a rd the d e g re e , " The re m a in d e r of the a r t ic le b r ie f ly d is ­

c u s s e s the n a tu re of th e se co u r s e s - - s ta tin g th a t they e m p h a s iz e o u tlin ing ,

im p ro m p tu sp eak in g , psychology of p e rsu a s io n w ith r e g a rd to the ju ry ,

question ing a s in ex am in a tio n and c r o s s ex am in atio n of w itn e s s e s . They

use s ta n d a rd te x ts in pub lic speaking supp lem en ted by bo o k s of a p u re ly

le g a l n a tu re and a r e g e n e ra lly tau g h t by the sam e p e r s o n who te a c h e s

pub lic speak ing in the l ib e ra l a r t s co lleg e . The a r t ic le g ives b r ie f

a tten tio n to m o o t c o u r t p ro g ra m s in law sch o o ls , and c lo s e s w ith a s ta te ­

m en t by th en S e c re ta ry of S ta te C h a r le s H ughes in d ica tin g th a t w hile he

b e lie v e s th a t pub lic speak ing i s im p o rta n t to the la w y e r , th e re i s no

tim e in the law c u rr ic u lu m fo r i t . T he au th o r c lo se s w ith the s ta te m e n t

th a t th e re i s no q u es tio n of the value of teach ing pub lic speak in g , b u t i t

31should be p ro v id e d b e fo re g rad u a tio n f ro m co lleg e .

D uring the n ex t th ir ty y e a r s the fie ld of speech a s a n acad em ic

d isc ip lin e m ad e im p re s s iv e g row th . The am ount of sc h o la r ly r e s e a r c h

p ro d u ced w ith in the fie ld in c re a s e d , sp ec ia l a tten tio n w as given to w hat

w as c a lle d b u s in e s s and p ro fe s s io n a l speak ing , and the n u m b er of c la s s e s

3 0 ib id ., p . 55. 3 1 ib id ., p . 57.

20

o ffe re d in speech g rew in n u m b er and g e o g rap h ica l d is tr ib u tio n . By 1955,

12,071 g rad u a te d e g re e s h ad b een aw ard ed by d e p a r tm e n ts of sp eech .

D uring the th ir ty y e a r s follow ing R alph S m ith 's a r t ic le , th e re w as no

p u b lish ed ev id en ce of in te r e s t on the p a r t of the speech fie ld in the c o m ­

m u n ica tio n p ro b le m s of le g a l education .

In 1954, H. P h ilip C o nstans and D a lla s C. D ickey p u b lish ed an

a r t ic le e n title d "T he C o n tem p o ra ry R h e to ric of the L aw . H e re the

a u th o rs s e t fo rth the v a r io u s s itu a tio n s in w hich la w y e rs engage in

speaking: s e le c tio n of the ju ry , ex am in a tio n of w itn e s s e s , c r o s s - e x a m ­

in a tio n of w itn e s s e s , o b jec tio n s to te s tim o n y and a rg u m e n t on o b je c tio n s ,

the opening a d d re s s to judge o r ju ry , and the c lo sin g a rg u m e n t o r

sum m ation . T hey a lso add the s itu a tio n s of a rg u in g fo r a new t r i a l and

the a rg u m en t of an ap p ea l. A fte r a d isc u ss io n of each of th e se

s itu a tio n s , the a u th o rs p o in t out the need fo r la w y e rs to have tra in in g in

th e se v a r io u s ty p es of speaking and note the inadequacy of te x ts w hich

su it the need s of le g a l speak ing . They note th a t the f ie ld of sp eech h a s a

re sp o n s ib ili ty to f i l l th e se need s an d su g g est s tro n g ly th a t i t i s no t m ee tin g

it .

^ ^ F ra n k lin H . K now er, "G rad u a te T h e s e s ," op. c i t . , (June, 1955),p . 111.

P h il ip C onstans and D a lla s C. D ickey , "T he C o n tem p o ra ry R h e to ric of the L a w ," The S ou thern Speech J o u rn a l, XIX, No. 4 (May, 1954), pp . 277-282 .

^^Ibid., p. 277.

21

In 1955 , A lan K ent S h e a re r , a can d id a te fo r the M. A, d eg ree in

p u b lic a d d re s s a t the U n iv e rs ity of K an sa s , d e v ise d a c o u rse in le g a l

advocacy fo r p r e - le g a l s tu d e n ts , S h e a re r , who h ad had speech

e x p e rie n c e w hile an u n d e rg ra d u a te , a tten d ed law schoo l and re c e iv e d a

law d e g re e . W hile th e re , he a p p a re n tly p e rc e iv e d a n eed fo r such a

c o u rse and d ec id ed to develop i t a s a g rad u a te s tu d en t in sp eech . The

c o u rse w as p re p a re d f ro m w ritin g s by a u th o rs in bo th the speech and

le g a l f ie ld s and w as d es ig n e d a s an e x p e r im e n t w hich w ould m e a s u re

w h e th e r o r n o t s tu d en ts a tten d in g the c o u rse show ed s ig n if ic a n t im p ro v e ­

m en t in th e ir a b ility in le g a l advo cacy . U n fo rtu n a te ly , only two s tu d en ts

co m p le ted the c o u rse , and th is l im its the value of the s tu d y 's co n c lu s io n s .

A lso in 1955 , D onald E . W illiam s w ro te an a r t ic le on group

d isc u s s io n and a rg u m en ta tio n in le g a l ed u ca tio n . W illiam s no ted th a t

law , being co n ce rn ed w ith the su p e rv is io n of the r ig h ts and p r iv ile g e s of

m an and so c ie ty , d e s e rv e s th a t education b e s t d e s ig n e d to a s s u re i ts

e ffic ien cy . He a lso no ted th a t th e r e w as w id e sp re a d c o n tro v e rs y a s to

w hat m ade a good ed u ca tio n , in d ica tin g a n u m b er of a r t ic le s f ro m leg a l

jo u rn a ls w hich w ill be d is c u s s e d la te r in th is s tu d y . W illiam s o b se rv e d

th a t " sp ee ch and law have a lw ay s b een c o n s id e re d c lo se ly a llie d

^^A lan K ent S h e a re r , "A C o u rse in L e g a l A dvocacy fo r P r e - L e g a l S tuden ts (unpublished M a s te r 's th e s is . U n iv e rs ity of K a n sa s , 1955).

^^D onald E . W illiam s, "G roup D isc u ss io n and A rg u m en ta tio n in L e g a l E d u c a tio n , " The Q u a r te r ly J o u rn a l of S peech , X LI, No. 4 (D ecem b er, 1955).

22

d isc ip lin e s . " T u rn in g to an c ien t t im e s , W illiam s s a y s , " the c la s s ic a l

r h e to r s , ho ld ing th a t rh e to r ic w as an a r t w hich could e ffe c tiv e ly en e rg ize

37t ru th , d is c u s s e d ex ten s iv e ly i t s ap p lic a tio n to fo re n s ic speak ing . " He

fu r th e r a s s e r t s th a t " fro m an tiqu ity to the p r e s e n t day , the a s so c ia tio n

b e tw een th e se two s tu d ie s h a s b een p e rp e tu a te d . "

W illiam s a s s e r t s th a t th e re a r e two fo rm s of w hich a r e "uniquely

im p o rta n t" to th e p re - la w s tu d en t’s t ra in in g . T h ese a r e d isc u s s io n and

a rg u m e n ta tio n . In o rd e r to d isc o v e r the p r e s e n t (1955) th ink ing in law

sch o o ls and c o lle g e s re g a rd in g the v a lu e of d isc u s s io n and a rg u m en ta tio n

to the p r e - la w and law stu d en t, W illiam s sen t out a q u e s tio n n a ire to 39

law sch o o ls an d 157 u n d e rg rad u a te c o lleg e s o ffe rin g p r e - la w tra in in g ;

he re c e iv e d r e p l ie s f ro m 37 law sch o o ls and 141 c o lle g e s . T he re s u l ts

show ed th a t n in e ty -f iv e p e r cen t of the p e rs o n s rep ly in g fo r th e law

schoo ls "b e lie v e th a t tra in in g in g roup d isc u s s io n w ould be h e lp fu l to the

la w y e r , b u t none of th e se sch o o ls o f fe rs o r p la n s to o ffe r sy s te m a tic

study in i t . " H alf of th ese re sp o n d e n ts b e liev ed th a t th e c u r r ic u lu m w as

too crow ded to p e r m it an ad d itio n a l c o u rse of th is ty p e , and fo r ty p e r

cen t f e l t th a t t ra in in g in d isc u ss io n w as a lre a d y p ro v id e d in such c o u rse s

a s t r i a l ta c t ic e and le g a l n eg o tia tio n s and in the a c t iv it ie s of le g a l a id

c l in ic s . W illiam s co n c lu d es , h o w ev e r, th a t " th is k ind of tra in in g is

no t p r im a r i ly co n ce rn e d w ith p r in c ip le s and m ethods of g roup d iscu ss io n

b u t w ith le g a l p ro c e d u re s and p r a c t ic e s . "^9

3’ Ibid., pp. 397-398. 3Sibid., p. 399 39ibid.

23

W illiam s a lso d isc o v e re d th a t six ty p e r c en t of the u n d e rg ra d u a te

c o lleg e s o ffe red c o u rse s in d isc u ss io n , and th a t the schoo ls w hich did

no t in d ic a te d the re a so n w as th a t d isc u ss io n w as u til iz e d in ex is tin g

c o u r s e s . No schoo l re q u ire d i t s - p r e - la w s tu d en ts to take a c o u rse of

th is n a tu re and only four p e r cen t b e liev e " th a t such tra in in g w ould be

unhelpfu l to th e se s tu d en ts . " "T he ou tstand ing r e a s o n given fo r not

re q u ir in g p re - la w studen ts to study group d is c u s s io n ," th is q u es tio n n a ire

re v e a le d , " is th a t th e re h a s b een no g e n e ra l dem and fro m the law schoo ls

th a t s tu d en ts tak e th is tra in in g w hile u n d e rg ra d u a te s .

W ith r e g a rd to a rg u m en ta tio n , W illiam s found th a t none of the

law sch o o ls o ffe red study in b a s ic th e o re tic a l p r in c ip le s and a l l of the

p a r tic ip a tin g d ean s and law p r o fe s s o r s ex cep t one " th in k such tra in in g

would be h e lp fu l. " A gain , the crow ded c u rr ic u lu m w as given by o v er

s ix ty p e r cen t a s the re a s o n fo r not o ffe rin g the c o u r s e , and fo r ty - fo u r

p e r c en t in d ica ted th a t they fe l t such tra in in g b e lo n g ed in p r e - la w study.

F u r th e r , e ig h ty -o n e p e r cen t of the law sch o o ls in th is su rv ey o ffe r m oot

c o u r t a c t iv it ie s w hich p ro v id e s tu d en ts w ith tra in in g in advocacy , bu t

only th ir ty p e r cen t of the sch o o ls re q u ire s tu d en ts to p a r t ic ip a te . A lso ,

the e m p h a s is in th ese a c tiv it ie s is on le g a l p ro c e d u re s , no t on the u n d e r ­

ly ing p r in c ip le s of advocacy .

4°Ibid.

24

Of the c o lleg e s sam p led , e ig h ty -se v e n p e r cen t o ffe r a rg u m e n ta ­

tio n c o u r s e s b u t only th re e p e r cen t r e q u ire d the c o u rse of p r e - la w

s tu d e n ts . The la c k of th e re q u ire m e n t w as the sam e a s b e fo re - -n o

dem and f ro m the law sch o o ls . S ev en ty -e ig h t p e r cen t of th e se sch o o ls

o ffe re d e x t r a c u r r ic u la r debate and none r e q u ire d i t of p re - la w s tu d e n ts .

In the conclud ing p o r tio n of h is p a p e r , W illiam s r e i te r a te s the

a p p a re n t d isc re p a n c y b e tw een w hat is d e s ir e d by the law sch o o ls and

w hat they see k to p ro v id e th e m se lv e s o r have p ro v id e d fo r th em by the

c o lle g e s . He n o te s th a t the le g a l p ro fe s s io n i s unw illing to p r e s c r ib e

p re - la w c o u r s e s and the co lleg es w ill not r e q u ire th em u n til the law

sch o o ls do p r e s c r ib e , W illia m s ' c o n c lu s io n -- th e te a c h e r s of sp eech

should co m m u n ica te to the law schoo ls co n cern in g w hat they h ave to

42o ffe r .

The f in a l a r t ic le d isc o v e re d th rough th is s e a rc h of the f ie ld of

43sp eech w as w r itte n by D avid B , S tro th e r . S tro th e r , in d isc u s s in g

p e rsu a s io n in A m e ric a n le g a l p ro c e d u re , s t r e s s e s ag ain the fa c t th a t

law is co n c e rn ed w ith so c ia l co n tro l and the v a lu e of a c o u r t 's d e c is io n

is p ro p o rtio n a te to the " c la r i ty by which bo th co n s tru c tiv e and re fu ta tiv e

lin e s of a rg u m e n t a r e p re s e n te d by opposing co u n se l. . . . T h is

'^^Ibid. ^ ^ Ib id ., p . 402.

'^^David B . S tro th e r , " P e rs u a s io n in A m e ric a n L eg a l P ro c e d u re , "W este rn Speech (F a ll, 1961), pp. 231-236.

44I b id . , pp . 231-232.

25

a u th o r re v ie w s fro m a r h e to r ic a l p o in t of v iew the s ig n if ic a n t a ttitu d e s

to w ard p e rs u a s io n in A m e r ic a n a p p e lla te c o u r ts , and c a lls a tte n tio n to

bo th the b r ie f and the o r a l a rg u m e n t. In th is d isc u s s io n , he n o te s th a t

" , . , te n p e r cen t of a p p ro x im a te ly th i r ty th o u san d c a s e s h e a rd each

y e a r in s ta te and f e d e ra l a p p e lla te c o u r ts w here o ra l a rg u m e n t is u sed ,

am o u n ts to a nu m b er s iz e a b le enough to have a s ig n if ic a n t in fluence on

so c ia l re g u la tio n , and to w a r ra n t s e r io u s c o n s id e ra tio n , "^5

A fte r rev iew ing som e of the te s tim o n y fro m ju d g es and o th e r p e r ­

sons a s s o c ia te d w ith the law e m p h as iz in g the im p o rta n c e of o ra l a rg u m e n t,

S tro th e r ex am in es p o s s ib le c a u s e s of th e la c k of in te r e s t in i t . Among

o th e r s , he c i te s the f re q u e n tly m en tio n ed su rv ey am ong g ra d u a te s of the

H a rv a rd U n iv e rs ity L aw School w hich gave sk ill in advo cacy sig n ifican tly

the lo w e s t ra tin g am ong th o se s k il ls m o s t im p o rta n t in th e ir le g a l p r a c ­

tic e , T he au th o r a lso lo o k s f a r th e r b a c k in h is to ry to find the cau se of

the d iff icu lty . He sa y s .

The ex is tin g a ttitu d e to w ard advocacy r e f le c ts a b r e a k w hich e x is ts b e tw een law and o th e r a llie d le a rn e d a r e a s . It m ay have h ad i t s fo rm a l beg inn ing in 460 A . D , w hen E m p e ro r L eo w as the f i r s t to r e q u ire th a t a s p ir in g la w y e rs should take ex am in a tio n s b e fo re b e in g c e r t i f ie d to p r a c t ic e . A s the study an d p ra c t ic e of law b e c a m e in c re a s in g ly sp e c ia liz e d , o th e r a r e a s w hich had co n tr ib u te d m u ch to the la w y e r’s b ack g ro u n d an d developm en t w e re n e c e s s a r i ly d e -e m p h a s iz e d . The fo rm a l s tudy of rh e to r ic w as am ong th em ,

4 5 ib id ,, p . 232, '^^ Ib id ,, p . 235,

26

In the con clu sio n of h is a r t i c le , S tro th e r s ta te s w hat he fe e ls i s the p r o ­

b le m w ith r e g a rd to sp eech and the p r a c t ic e of law in ap p e lla te c o u r ts :

The p la c e of o r a l a rg u m e n t in A m e r ic a n le g a l p ro c e d u re i s p a ra d o x ic a l. Ju d g e s and law y e rs a g re e th a t i t is a p a r t of le g a l p ro c e d u re , b u t f ro m th is ju n c tu re on opinions d iffe r .Ju d g es p r e s e n t s tro n g c la im s fo r i t s e ffec tiv e u se b e ca u se i t a s s i s t s th em in d e te rm in in g so c ia l re g u la tio n . They p o in t out, fu r th e r , th a t the la w y e r can do m u ch w ith o r a l a rg u m en t to im p ro v e h is e f fe c tiv e n e s s . On the o th e r h an d , le g a l s c h o la rs and la w y e rs s e e m to su b o rd in a te the study of o ra l a rg u m e n t to such a d e g re e th a t m o s t la w y e rs , a t b e s t , have re c e iv e d l i t t le of such tra in in g a c a d e m ic a lly .

While a la w y e r m a y be tra in e d to p r e p a re a s e r ie s of v a lid a rg u m en ts in su p p o rt of a p o s itio n , h e i s s e r io u s ly h a m p e re d in the p re s e n ta t io n of h is ca se if he can n o t adap t sk illfu lly to the g iv e -a n d -ta k e of o r a l a rg u m e n t. If aU law y e rs w ere b e t te r equipped w ith know ledge of the u se of bo th the p r in c ip le s of rh e to r ic and law , th e c o u r ts w ould b e b e t te r p re p a re d to d i s ­p en se ju s t ic e in the n a tio n 's s e rv ic e ,

The p r e c e d in g / re v ie w of the c o n te m p o ra ry l i te r a tu r e of le g a l

r h e to r ic g e n e ra te s a n i n t e r e s t in fu r th e r study of the a r e a . W hile th e re

a p p e a rs a s tro n g in te r e s t in ob tain ing g r e a te r u n d erstan d in g of the r h e ­

to r ic a l functions and th e o r ie s in law on th e p a r t of the le a d e r s of the

le g a l p ro fe s s io n , the s c h o la rs of rh e to r ic h av e ev idenced only a p a s s in g

in c lin a tio n to p e r fo rm the n e c e s s a ry in v e s tig a tio n . The q u es tio n s s u r ­

rounding the e x is te n c e , c h a r a c te r , and v a lid ity of an u n d erly in g rh e to r ic a l

th e o ry in A m e ric a n le g a l p ra c t ic e r e m a in , fo r the m o st p a r t , u n an sw ered .

f ’ Ibid,, p, 236,

Ce

27

Concepts R e lev a n t to the Study

R h e to r ic a l th eo ry

W hile the te rm " rh e to r ic " i s an a n c ien t and v e n e ra te d w o rd , i t

i s a lso a m uch u sed w ord by sc h o la r and lay m an a lik e . F o r m any y e a r s ,

th e re h a s e x is te d quite a d iv e rg en ce of m ean in g s fo r the te rm , no t only

b e tw een sc h o la rs and la y m en , b u t am ong ind iv idual lay m en a s w ell. In

the opin ion of the au th o r , the te r m " rh e to r ic a l th e o ry " is m o re su itab le

to th is study than would be any of the o th e r te r m s u se d in s im ila r c o n ­

te x ts . B u t b ecau se of the am biguous c h a ra c te r of the w ord , i t is

n e c e s s a ry to d isc u s s i t s m ean ing a s u sed in th is study.

W ith re g a rd to the m u ltifa r io u s m ean in g s of " r h e to r ic ," D onald

C. B ry a n t sa id in 1953, "R h e to ric . . . en joys s e v e ra l o th e r m ean in g s

w hich . . . s e rv e to m ake a n a ly s is of i t d iff icu lt. In g e n e ra l th e se a re

the sam e m ean in g s w hich [JioytJ H udson rev iew ed th ir ty y e a r s ag o .

. . . B ry a n t p ro c e e d s to l i s t som e of the o th e r known m ean in g s

g iven to the te rm " rh e to r ic " : b o m b ast; h ig h -so u n d in g w ords w ithout

co n ten t, o r a to r ic a l fa ls if ic a tio n to h ide m eaning ; so p h is try ; o rn a m e n ta ­

tio n and the study of f ig u re s of speech ; m o s t com m only am ong aca d e m ic

fo lk ; F re s h m a n E ng lish ; and f in a lly , le a s t com m only of a ll , the w hole

a r t of spoken d isc o u rs e , e sp e c ia lly p e rsu a s iv e d i s c o u r s e . A s the

"^®Donald C, B ry a n t, "R h e to ric : I ts F u n c tio n s and i ts Scope, "The Q u a r te r ly Jo u rn a l of Speech , XXXIX, No. 4 (D ecem b er, 1953), 402.

"^ Ibid.

28

p r e s e n t study h a s b ro u g h t an ex ten s iv e ex am in a tio n of the w ritin g of le g a l

s c h o la rs and p ra c tic in g a tto rn e y s , i t can be sa id w ith a s s u ra n c e th a t

w hen th ey u se the te r m " rh e to r ic " they m o s t com m only m ean som eth ing

in the ra n g e of the f i r s t few B ry a n t d e f in itio n s --b o m b a s t, h igh sounding

w o rd s , e tc .

T h u s , the o b jec tiv e of th is sec tio n is to r e je c t m o s t of the p o p u la r

co n cep ts of " rh e to r ic ;" and re p la c e them w ith a m o re su itab le one fo r

the p u rp o se s of th is study.

M o st im p o rta n t in u n d e rs tan d in g the v a r io u s m ean in g s ap p lied to

rh e to r ic is the d iffe ren ce of p o s itio n tak en by P la to and A r is to t le , F o r ,

a s la te r in v e s tig a tio n in to le g a l education w ill r e v e a l , i t is th is v e ry

d iffe ren ce w hich h a s been so im p o rta n t in d e te rm in in g the ro le of c o m ­

m u n ica tio n tra in in g in le g a l edu ca tio n , P la to m ade h is p o s itio n c le a r in

th e G o rg ia s :

S o c ra te s , T hen do you th in k th a t to have le a rn e d is the sam e a s to b e lie v e ? T h a t i s , is know ledge the sam e a s b e lie f o r a r e th ey d iffe re n t?

G o rg ia s , To m y m in d , S o c ra te s , they s e e m d iffe ren t,S o c ra te s , You a r e qu ite r ig h t and you m ay co n firm y o u r

opin ion f ro m th is fac t: If anyone should a sk you, 'G o rg ia s , is th e re such a th ing a s a fa ls e b e lie f and a t ru e b e lie f? * I im ag in e th a t you w ould say th a t th e re i s ,

G o rg ia s , Y es,S o c ra te s , W ell th en , i s th e re both a fa lse and a tru e

know ledge?G o rg ia s , C e rta in ly n o t,S o c ra te s , T hen i t i s p e r fe c tly c le a r th a t know ledge and

b e lie f a r e no t the sa m e ,G o rg ia s , T ru e ,

29

S o c ra te s , S til l , th o se who have le a rn e d have b een p e r ­suaded ju s t a s m uch a s th o se who b e lie v e ,

G o rg ia s , T h a t is so,S o c ra te s , S hall w e, th en , a s su m e two k inds of p e rs u a s io n ,

the one p ro d u c in g b e lie f w ithout c e r ta in ty , the o th e r know ledge?G o rg ia s , Y e s , of c o u rse ,S o c ra te s , T hen w hich k ind of p e rs u a s io n co n cern in g ju s t ic e

and in ju s tic e d o es rh e to r ic e ffec t in law c o u r ts and o th e r public g a th e r in g s , the kind w hich p ro d u c e s b e lie f w ithout know ­led g e , o r th e k ind w hich y ie ld s know ledge?

G o rg ia s , I t w ould seem quite obv io u s, S o c ra te s , th a t i t is the k ind w h ich p ro d u c e s m e re b e lie f ,

S o c ra te s , So r h e to r ic , i t s e e m s , e ffe c ts a p e rsu a s io n w hich can p ro d u c e b e lie f about ju s t ic e and in ju s tic e , b u t canno t give in s tru c t io n about them ,

G o rg ia s , Y es ,S o c ra te s , The rh e to r ic ia n , th en , i s no t a te a c h e r of law

c o u rts and o th e r pu b lic g a th e rin g s a s to w hat is r ig h t o r w rong , b u t m e re ly a c r e a to r of b e lie fs ; fo r ev id en tly he could n e v e r in s tru c t so la rg e a g a th e rin g on such w eighty m a tte r s in a sh o rt tim e ,

G o rg ia s , H e c e r ta in ly co u ld n 't,

T hus, P la to v iew ed rh e to r ic a s a p ro c e s s w hich could p ro d u ce b e lie fs

w ithout a n e c e s s a r y c o r re la tio n w ith r e a l i ty . He co m p ared i t to p ro d u c ­

ing the a p p e a ra n c e of b eau ty th ro u g h c o s m e tic s r a th e r than t ru e b eau ty

p ro d u ced by b u ild in g up the body in g y m n a s tic s . T hus, P la to co m es to

be a s so c ia te d w ith the school of thought th a t s e e s rh e to r ic a s the p o te n tia l

enem y of in q u iry , know ledge, o r t ru th and ju s tic e depending upon the

p a r t ic u la r f ra m e of re fe re n c e of the in d iv id u a l. T h u s, in le g a l edu ca tio n ,

rh e to r ic could v e ry w ell be c o n s id e re d the a n ti th e s is of the o b jec t of le g a l

education , w hich i s in q u iry into the su b stan ce and sc ien ce of law and the

avoidance of the sh a llo w o r sham .

C, H elm bo ld ( tra n s , ) P la to 's G o rg ias (New Y ork: TheL ib e ra l A r ts P r e s s , 1952), pp , 13-14,

30

A r is to t le i s id e n tifie d w ith the o th e r school of thought concern ing

r h e to r ic , fo r h e b eg in s h is d is c u s s io n of the su b jec t by noting th a t

"R h e to r ic i s th e c o u n te rp a r t of D ia le c tic . . . , In d ica tin g th a t the

en thym em e is th e v eh ic le of r h e to r ic a l p ro o f, A r is to t le say s.

I t i s c le a r , th en , th a t th e a r t i s t i c m ethod h a s to do w ith p ro o fs in th e s t r i c t e r s e n se . Now p ro o f is a k ind of d em o n ­s tra t io n ; f o r we e n te r ta in the s tro n g e s t conv ic tion of a th ing if we b e lie v e th a t i t h a s b een 'd e m o n s tra te d . • R h e to r ic a l p ro o f, h o w ev er, C is no t sc ie n tif ic d e m o n s tra tio n ] ; i t ta k e s the fo rm of an en th y m em e , th is b e in g , in g e n e ra l , the m o s t e ffec tiv e am ong the v a r io u s fo rm s of p e rsu a s io n . The en th y m em e, a g a in , i s a k in d of sy llo g ism ; now e v e ry kind of sy llo g ism fa lls w ith in the p ro v in c e of D ia le c tic , and m u s t be ex am in ed u n d er D ia le c tic a s a w hole, o r u n d e r som e b ran ch of i t . . . . T ru th and l ik e n e s s to txuth a r e d is c e rn e d by one and the sam e facu lty ; w hile h u m a n n a tu re , le t u s add , h a s ap titude enough fo r d is c e rn in g w hat is t ru e , and m e n in m o s t c a s e s do a r r iv e a t the t ru th . C onsequen tly one who is sk illed in d isc e rn in g the t ru th can do w e ll in w eighing p ro b a b ili t ie s . . . .

B u t th e a r t of R h e to ric h a s i t s va lu e . I t i s v a lu a b le , f i r s t , b e c a u se t ru th and ju s tic e a r e by n a tu re m o re p o w erfu l than th e ir o p p o s ite s ; so th a t, w hen d e c is io n s a r e n o t m ad e a s they should b e , the s p e a k e rs w ith the r ig h t on th e ir s ide have only th e m se lv e s to thank fo r the o u tco m e. T h e ir n e g le c t of the a r t n e ed s c o r re c t io n .

P ro c e e d in g to a d e fin itio n , A r is to t le say s , "So le t R h e to ric be defined a s

the facu lty . . . of d isco v e rin g in the p a r t ic u la r c a se w hat a r e the a v a i l­

ab le m e a n s of p e rs u a s io n . " T h is i s , " he sa y s , " the function of no

o th e r a r t . . . . "

^^L ane C o o p er, The R h e to r ic of A r is to tle (New Y ork: Apple to n - C e n tu ry -C ro f ts , I n c . , 1932), p . 1.

^^Ibid., p. 5. 53ibid., p. 7.

31

The o th e rs a r e each in s tru c tiv e o r p e rs u a s iv e w ith r e g a rd to som e sp e c ia l s u b je c t-m a tte r . T hus m ed ic in e in fo rm s u s abou t the co n d itio n s of h e a lth and d ise a se ; g eo m etry about the p ro p e r t ie s of m a g n itu d es; a r i th m e tic abou t n u m b e rs ; and so w ith the r e s t of the a r t s and s c ie n c e s . B u t R h e to r ic , i t would see m , h a s the fu n ctio n of d isc o v e rin g the m e a n s of p e rsu a s io n fo r e v e ry c a s e , so to sp eak , th a t is o ffered ; and hence we say th a t the a r t a s such h a s no sp e c ia l a p p lic a tio n to any d is tin c t c la s s of su b je c ts .

A r is to tle d iv id es the p ro o fs o r p e rs u a s io n s of rh e to r ic into two c a te g o r ie s :

n o n - a r t i s t i c - - " a l l such a s a r e no t su p p lied by o u r own e f fo r ts , bu t

e x is te d b e fo reh an d , such a s w itn e s s e s , a d m iss io n s u n d er to r tu r e ,

w r itte n c o n tra c ts and the lik e ;" and a r t i s t i c - - " th o s e th a t m ay be f u r ­

n ish e d by the m eth o d of R h e to ric th ro u g h o u r own e f fo r ts . T h e re fo re ,

A r is to tle p e rc e iv e s rh e to r ic and d ia le c tic a s co n s tan tly in te ra c tin g

p r o c e s s e s , n e ith e r co m p le te w ithout the o th e r .

R ic h a rd M . W eav er, in h is m o d e rn d isc u s s io n of the su b je c t,

f in d s th a t A r is to tle and P la to w ere n o t a s s e p a ra te d w ith r e g a rd to the

re la t io n of r h e to r ic an d d ia le c tic a s m any suppose . Studying the p o s itio n

of P la to a s e x p re s s e d in the P h a e d ru s , W eaver say s th is:

Now rh e to r ic a s we have d is c u s s e d i t in re la tio n to the lo v e rs c o n s is ts of t ru th p lu s i t s a r tfu l p re se n ta tio n , and fo r th is re a so n i t b e c o m e s n e c e s s a ry to say som eth ing m o re about the n a tu ra l o rd e r of d ia le c tic and rh e to r ic . In any g e n e ra l c h a ra c te r iz a tio n rh e to r ic w ill inc lude d ia le c tic , b u t fo r the study of m e th o d i t i s n e c e s s a ry to s e p a ra te the tw o.D ia le c tic i s a m e th o d of in v es tig a tio n w hose o b jec t i s the e s ta b lish m e n t of t ru th about doubtful p ro p o s itio n s .

^^Ibid. , pp. 7 -8 . ^^Ib id ., p . 8.

32

T h e re i s , th en , no tru e rh e to r ic w ithou t d ia le c t ic , fo r the d ia le c tic p ro v id e s th a t b a s is of ’h igh sp e cu la tio n abou t n a tu re ’ w ithout w hich rh e to r ic in the n a r ro w e r se n se h a s nothing to w ork upon. Y et, w hen the d isp u ted te r m s h ave b een e s ta b lish e d , we a r e a t the l im it of d ia le c tic . How does the noble rh e to r ic ia n p ro c e e d fro m th is p o in t on? T h a t the c le a r e s t d e m o n s tra tio n in te r m s of lo g ica l in c lu s io n and ex c lu s io n o ften f a i ls to win a s s e n t we h a rd ly need s ta te ; th e r e fo re , to w hat d oes the rh e to r ic ia n r e s o r t a t th is c r i t i c a l p a s sa g e ? It i s the s tag e a t w hich he p a s s e s fro m the lo g ic a l to the a n a lo g ica l, o r i t is w h ere f ig u ­ra tio n com es in to r h e to r ic ,

P la to say s th is in the P h a e d ru s :

S o c ra te s . W hen an o ra to r who know s no th ing abou t good o r ev il u n d e rta k e s to p e rsu a d e a c ity in the sam e s ta te of ig n o ra n c e , not by s ing ing the p r a is e s of an a s s ’s shadow m asq u e rad in g a s a h o r s e , b u t by reco m m en d in g e v il a s though i t w e re good (for he h a s stud ied the op in ions of the m ob and can p e rsu ad e i t to do e v il in p lace of good); u n d e r such c i r ­cu m stan c es w hat s o r t of a h a rv e s t do you th in k rh e to r ic would re a p f ro m the seed she h a s sown?

P h a e d ru s . N ot a v e ry accep tab le one.S o c ra te s . Can i t b e , th en , m y f r ie n d , th a t we have in su lted

the a r t of m aking sp eech es m o re f re e ly than w e should hav e? P e rh a p s she m ay re p ly , ’W hat in the w o rld i s the po in t of th is s tra n g e n o n se n se , g en tlem en ? R em em b er th a t I b r in g no com pulsion to le a r n the a r t of speech on anyone who is ig n o ra n t of the tru th ; in d eed , if m y adv ice is w o rth an y th ing , a m an should no t r e s o r t to m e u n til he h as le a rn e d the tru th . Y et th is b o a s t I can m ake: w ithout m e even the m an who tho rough ly is f a m il ia r w ith the fa c ts w ill be n o t a b i t n e a r e r to the a r t of p e rsu a s io n , ’

P h a e d ru s . And w on’t she be r ig h t to say so?S o c ra te s . I a g r e e - - i f , th a t i s , the a rg u m e n ts th a t com e

fo rw a rd to speak fo r h e r should give te s tim o n y th a t she is an a r t . Now I se e m , a s i t w e re , to h e a r som e a rg u m e n ts a d ­vancing to give th e i r év idence th a t she te l l s l i e s , th a t she is no t an a r t a t a l l , b u t an a r t le s s ro u tin e .

^^R ich ard M. W eav er, The E th ic s of R h e to ric (Chicago: H en ry R eg n e ry Com pany, 1953), pp . 15, 17-18.

^^W. C. H elm bold and W. G. R abinow itz ( tr a n s . ) , P la to ’s P h a e d ru s (New Yo rk : The L ib e ra l A r ts P r e s s , 1956), p . 47.

33

T h e re fo re , th e c la s s ic a l w r i te r s on the su b jec t say th a t rh e to r ic i s co n ­

c e rn e d w ith th e p r o c e s s of p e r s u a s io n and the m e a n s to p e rs u a s io n (no

d is tin c tio n b e in g m ade b e tw een w r i t te n and spoken p e r s u a s io n , a lthough

the e a r ly G re e k s w ere obv iously m o re co n ce rn ed w ith spoken p e r s u a s io n ) .

In sp ite of the a lle g e d s e p a ra tio n of p h ilo so p h ie s , b o th P la to and A r is to t le

fe l t th a t r h e to r ic n e c e s s a r i ly m u s t involve d ia le c tic o r the p ro c e s s of

lo g ic a l in q u iry and d is c o u rs e , a lthough P la to d isa p p ro v e d of the co n cep t

of p ro b a b ility upon w hich A r is to t le r e s te d h is s y s te m .

M oving to m o re r e c e n t in te rp re ta t io n s of r h e to r ic , D onald C.

B ry a n t i s an a r t ic u la te sp o k esm an of the m o d ern v iew of rh e to r ic by

th o se in the f ie ld of sp eech . In an a r t ic le on the fu n c tio n s and scope of

r h e to r ic , B ry a n t u s e s th is fo r a w ork ing defin itio n : " . . . I tak e rh e to r ic

58to be the ra tio n a le of in fo rm a tiv e and su a so ry d is c o u r s e . " L a te r

expanding on th a t d e fin itio n , B ry a n t no tes,

. . . I t U rh e to ric ] o p e ra te s ch iefly in the a r e a s of the co n tin g en t, i t s a im i s the a tta in m e n t of m ax im u m p ro b a b ility a s a b a s is fo r public d e c is io n , i t i s the o rg a n iz in g and a n i­m a tin g p r in c ip le of a l l s u b je c t-m a tte r s w hich have a re le v a n t b e a r in g on th is d e c is io n . '

F in a lly , r e s ta t in g h is m a in id e a in a way to d raw to g e th e r h is id e a s on

the m ean in g of rh e to r ic , the a u th o r say s th is

C O

D onald C, B ry a n t, "R h e to r ic : I ts F u n c tio n s and I ts S cope, "op. c i t . , p . 404.

^ ^ ib id ., p . 408.

34

. . . R h e to r ic , o r the rh e to r ic a l , is the function in h u m an a f fa i r s w hich g o v e rn s and g iv es d ire c tio n to th a t c re a tiv e a c tiv ity , th a t p r o c e s s of c r i t ic a l a n a ly s is , th a t b ra n c h of le a rn in g , w hich a d d re s s th e m se lv e s to the whole phenom enon of the d e s ig n e d u se of language fo r th e p ro m u lg a tio n of in fo rm a tio n , id e a s , and a tti tu d e s . Though i t is in s tru m e n ta l in the d is c o v e ry of id e a s and in fo rm a tio n , i t s c h a r a c te r is t ic fu n c tio n i s the p u b lic a tio n , the p u b lic iz in g , the h u m an iz in g , the an im a tin g of th em fo r a re a l iz e d and u su a lly sp ec ific au d ie n c e . A t i t s b e s t i t se e k s the ’e n e rg iz in g of t ru th , ’ in o rd e r to m ak e ’re a s o n and the w ill of God p re v a il . * B ut ex cep t in sc ie n c e , and no doubt theo logy , the p ro m u lg a tio n of t ru th , s u re o r d e m o n s tra b le , is out of the q u es tio n . N o rm a lly the r h e to r ic a l fu n ctio n s e rv e s a s h igh a d e g re e of p ro b a b ility a s the co m b in a tio n of su b je c t, au d ien ce , sp e a k e r , and o c c a s io n a d m its . R h e to r ic m ay o r m ay n o t b e invo lved (though the s p e a k e r - w r i te r m u s t be) in the d e te rm in a tio n of the v a lid ity of the id e a s b e in g p ro m u lg a te d . Such d e te rm in a tio n w ill b e the p ro v in c e in any g iven s itu a tio n of ph ilo so p h y , e th ic s , p h y s ic s , e c o n o m ic s , p o l i t ic s , e u g e n ic s , m e d ic in e , h y d ra u lic s , o r b u c o lic s . To r h e to r ic , h o w ev er, and to no o th e r •••ationale, b e lo n g s the e ffic ien cy - - th e v a lid ity if you w il l- -o f the r e la t io n in the id e a -a u d ie n c e -s p e a k e r s itu a tio n .

B ry a n t a d d r e s s e s h im se lf to the q u es tio n of the good an d b ad ends

of rh e to r ic ; h e say s i t d o es n o t m a t te r w h e th e r the in d iv id u a l i s a p re a c h e r

o r an a g i ta to r , a m e s s ia h o r a m oun tebank , advocate o r a d v e r t i s e r ,

th ey a r e a l l u s e r s of rh e to r ic and m u s t be s tu d ied . "T he f a c t i s , " B ry a n t

s a y s , " th a t in th e ir c h a r a c te r is t ic p reo c cu p a tio n w ith m an ip u la tin g the

p u b lic m in d , th ey a r e one. " He m ig h t have added the p r iv a te m in d a lso .

"T h ey m u s t n o t a l l be ap p ro v ed o r em u la ted , " he goes on to say , "but

^ ° Ib id . , pp . 412-413 .

35

they m u s t a l l be s tu d ied a s h ighly s ig n if ic an t so c ia l p h en o m en a , l e s t we

be ig n o ra n t of th em , and hence p o w e r le s s b e fo re th em , fo r good o r fo r

i l l .

R ecen tly , s c h o la rs of speech and co m m unica tion h ave tu rn e d to

p sycho logy , so c ia l p sycho logy , and o th e r so c ia l sc ie n c e s fo r m e th o d and

d a ta to advance th e i r u n d ers tan d in g of the com m unica tion p r o c e s s . T h is

h a s p ro d u ced a new v o cab u la ry and a new w ay of view ing co m m u n ica tio n

o r rh e to r ic . In R e a d e r in P u b lic O pinion and C om m unication , a n u m b er

of in d iv id u a ls w ith th is so c ia l sc ien ce o r ie n ta tio n p r e s e n t th e ir d efin itio n s

of co m m u n ica tio n . C h a r le s H. Cooley s a y s , "By com m u n ica tio n is

m e a n t the m e c h a n ism th rough w hich h um an re la tio n s e x is t and develop

a l l of the sym bo ls of the m ind , to g e th e r w ith the m ea n s of conveying

th em th rough space and p re s e rv in g th em in tim e " ; R o b e r t P a r k sa y s th a t

"co m m u n ica tio n m a in ta in s the c o n c e r t n e c e s s a ry to enab le o u r g ro u p s to

function to g e th e r" ; C a r l I . H ovland d e fin es co m m unica tion a s the " P r o ­

c e s s by w hich an in d iv id u a l (com m unica to r) t r a n s m its s tim u li to m odify

the b eh a v io r of o th e r ind iv id u als (co m m u n ica tees)" ; and R o b e r t C,

A ngell calls i t " m e re ly the p a ss in g of id e a s f ro m one m in d to a n o th e r .

The re c e iv in g m in d m ay n o t a c c ep t the id e a s , and even the o rig in a tin g

m in d m ay no t b e lie v e th em .

^ ^ Ib id ., p . 411.

^ ^ B e rn a rd B e re ls o n and M o rr is Janow itz (eds. ), R e a d e r in P u b ­lic O pinion and C om m unica tion , (G lencoe, Illin o is : F r e e P r e s s , 1953).

36

B ry a n t, the t ra d it io n a l rh e to r ic ia n , se e m s to a c c e p t th is new

o rie n ta tio n , a lthough he i s unw illing to re lin q u ish h is g e n e ra l o r ie n ta tio n .

He sa y s th a t m o s t w r i te r s of m o d e rn books on a s p e c ts of speech

. . . inc lude a s u p - to -d a te a s ta te m e n t a s p o ss ib le of the p y sc h o lo g ic a l and the ra tio n a l b a s e s of rh e to r ic . I t i s a co m m o n ­p la c e th a t of the s tu d ie s re c e n tly com e to new and p ro m is in g m a tu r i ty , p sy ch o lo g y , e sp e c ia lly so c ia l p sycho logy , and c u ltu ra l an th ro p o lo g y have m uch to te a c h m o d e rn rh e to r ic and to c o r r e c t o r r e in te r p r e t in t ra d it io n a l r h e to r ic . The sam e m ay be sa id of the v a r io u s new v e n tu re s in to the study of m ean in g , u n d er the g e n e ra l h ead of s e m a n tic s . How language m e an s is obv iously im p o rta n t to the ra tio n a le of in fo rm a tiv e and su a so ry d is c o u rs e . N e v e r th e le s s , in sp ite of I . A , R ic h a rd s ' book The P h ilo so p h y of R h e to ric , the th e o ry of m ean in g is no t the ph ilo sophy of rh e to r ic , any m o re th an i s the p sycho logy of p e rc e p tio n . R h e­to r ic i s the o rg a n iz e r of a l l such fo r the w ield ing of pub lic

• • 63opin ion .

F ro m the p re c e d in g d isc u ss io n i t is c le a r th a t th e re a r e two

m a jo r p o s itio n s f ro m w hich co m m u n ica tio n o r rh e to r ic i s today v ie w e d --

one f ro m the p e rsp e c tiv e of the h u m a n itie s and the o th e r f ro m the so c ia l

sc ie n c e p o in t of v iew . A s i s a lso c le a r , th e se p o s itio n s a r e n o t in c o m ­

p a tib le . F o th e rin g h a m , in h is fo rth -c o m in g book on the F u n c tio n s in

P e r s u a s io n p r e s e n ts a m o d e rn v iew of co m m unica tion and p e rs u a s io n

f ro m the p e rsp e c tiv e of so c ia l s c ie n c e . He in d ic a te s th a t p e rsu a s io n

(which c o n s titu te s a g r e a t m a jo r i ty of the com m unica tion e f fo r ts of the

law y er) " . , , i s co n ce iv ed a s fo llow s: When m e s s a g e s have b een a

m a jo r d e te rm in a n t of re le v a n t and in s tru m e n ta l e f fe c ts , p e r s u a s io n h as

^^D onald C. B ry a n t, "R h e to ric : I ts F u n c tio n s and i t s Scope, " op. c i t . , p . 415.

^'^W allace C. F o th e rin g h a m , F u n c tio n s in P e r s u a s io n (in p r e s s ) .

37

o c c u rre d . " He re c o g n iz e s five c r i t e r i a of p e rs u a s io n ; (1) The e ffec t

m u s t be re le v a n t to the g o a ls sought by the so u rc e of a m e ssa g e ; (2) the

e ffec t m u s t be in s tru m e n ta l , th a t i s , the l i s t e n e r 's re a c tio n is sought a s

a m e an s to fu r th e r b e h a v io r a s opposed to c o n su m m ato ry o r the e ffec t

being an end in its e lf ; (3) the e ffe c t m u s t be the r e s u l t of a m e ss a g e ,

w hich is d e s c r ib e d a s " a s ign o r g roup of s igns (s ig n a ls a n d /o r sym bols)

in ten tio n a lly u sed by a so u rce to a ffe c t a r e c e iv e r ;" ' (4) The fo u rth c r i ­

te r io n dem an d s th a t the r e c e iv e r of the m e ss a g e be f r e e to e x e rc is e

c h o ic e - -a c c e p t o r r e je c t , e tc , ; and the (5) fifth c r i te r io n c a lls fo r the

exchange of m e s s a g e s b e tw een d if fe re n t p e r s o n s , th a t i s , i t i s in t e r p e r ­

sonal.

F o th e rin g h a m v iew s co m m u n ica tio n a s a l a r g e r concep t than

p e rsu a s io n . "T he d iffe re n c e C b e tw een p e rs u a s io n an d co m m u n ica tio n ]

is th a t the e ffe c t of w hat i s sa id l in a co m m u n ica tio n ] m ay not s a tis fy

o th e r c r i te r i a of p e r s u a s io n - - in s tru m e n ta l i ty , s ig n if ic a n t m e ssa g e e ffe c t,

and ch o ice . " F o r the p u rp o se s of th is s tudy , h o w ev er, com m unica tion

w ill a lm o s t a lw ays su g g e s t the m ean in g F o th e rin g h a m g ives to p e rs u a s io n .

N ic h o ls , in h e r r e c e n t book R h e to r ic and C r i t ic is m , d is c u s s e s

rh e to r ic f ro m the h u m a n itie s p e r s p e c t iv e . She b eg in s by r e i te ra t in g the

po in t m ade by m any of th o se w hose th e o r ie s have ju s t b een rev iew ed :

th e re is a "hodge-podge of co n cep tio n s" w ith r e g a rd to rh e to r ic , "One

m ay n a r ro w the f ie ld , " she say s

38

by ru lin g out such a co n cep tio n a s th a t w hich m a k e s rh e to r ic m e re b la n d ish m en ts of a p ro s e p ie c e , o r e x c e s s iv e a e s th e t ic s .We m ay ru le ou t, too , such m o d e rn no tions a s th o se w hich s t r e tc h the concep tion of rh e to r ic to m ea n such th in g s a s the p o w er of the sun to in v ite one o u td o o rs . M o st peop le m ay be w illing to p la c e rh e to r ic w ith th o se a r t s w hich a r e co n ce rn ed w ith w o rd s in som e w ay o r a n o th e r . I tak e rh e to r ic to m ean the th e o ry and the p ra c t ic e of the v e rb a l m ode of p re se n tin g ju d g m en t and ch o ice , know ledge and fe e lin g . A s p e rsu a s io n , i t w o rk s in the a r e a of the con tingen t, w h e re a l te rn a t iv e s a r e p o s s ib le . In p o e tic , i t i s th e a r t of im a g in a tiv e ap p ea l; in s c ie n tif ic d is c o u rs e , i t i s the m ean s of so p re s e n tin g tru th as to f ix i t c le a r ly in the m in d of the l i s te n e r o r r e a d e r .

The p re c e d in g d isc u s s io n s u g g e s ts , then , the m ean in g to be a tta ch ed to

the te r m "co m m u n ica tio n tra in in g " in th is study . I t w as not m e a n t to be

an ex h au s tiv e d isc u s s io n , only one adequate to f a c i l i ta te th is study of

the co m m u n ica tio n ro le in le g a l education .

P e r h a p s the m o s t d iff ic u lt fe a tu re of th is d e fin itio n is th e a c t of

d is c r im in a tin g the p ro c e s s of co m m unica tion f ro m the p r a c t ic e of law

i ts e lf . F o r , m uch th a t i s c o n s id e re d the p ro p e r p ro v in c e of the law

o r ig in a te d in r h e to r ic . R e c a llin g the w ords of T h o m as M . C o U ey --"T h e

law i s , above ev ery th in g e ls e , a com m unicating p r o f e s s io n " - - i t is no t

d iff icu lt to see how th is h a s h ap p en ed . F o r ex am p le , in an c ien t R om e,

w hen C ice ro w ro te h is c la s s ic w o rk s on rh e to r ic h is a im w as th e tra in in g

of la w y e rs m o re th an any o th e r type of s p e a k e r . He w as a g r e a t fo re n s ic

^ ^ M a rie H ochm uth N ic h o ls , R h e to ric an d C r i t ic is m (Baton Rouge : L o u is ia n a S tate U n iv e rs ity P r e s s , 1963), pp . 7 -8 .

^^The L aw Schools L ook A h ead , op. c i t . , p . 415.

39

sp e a k e r h im s e lf , and w hen he d iv ided rh e to r ic in to five p a r t s - - in v en tio ,

d isp o s itio , e lo cu tio , p ro n u n tia tio , and m e m o r ia - -h e w as th ink ing p r i -

6Tm a r ily of the ta s k s of the law y e r . Law now la y s c la im to In v en tio ,

w hich i s d e s c r ib e d by Thons sen and B a ird a s the a tte m p t of the sp e a k e r

to find out w hat he should say , inc lud ing th e " e n tire in v e s tig a tiv e u n d e r ­

tak in g , the id e a of the s ta tu s [ o r is s u e a s the law y er w ould c a l l i t ] ,

and the m odes of p e r s u a s io n - - lo g ic a l , em o tio n a l, and e th ic a l - - in a l l of

th e ir co m p lex in te r r e la t io n s , C o m p are th is defin itio n w ith the

fo llow ing s ta te m e n t m ade by one study g roup a t the 1959 co n fe ren c e on

le g a l educa tio n .

In d isc u s s in g the q u es tio n of w h e th e r le g a l éducation h a s any unique c h a r a c te r is t ic s th a t d iffe re n tia te law school tra in in g f ro m tra in in g in o th e r f ie ld s of know ledge, an a tte m p t w as m ad e to d e te rm in e the fundam en ta l p u rp o se of le g a l educa tio n . The a d v e r s a ry and d ia le c tic a l n a tu re of th e p ro fe s s io n w as p a r t ic u ­la r ly em p h a s iz e d , and the s k il ls d eem ed m o s t e s s e n tia l to the h ig h e s t q u a lity of p e rfo rm a n c e in the p ro fe s s io n w ere the a b i l i t ie s to an a ly ze , sy n th e s iz e , and th ink c r i t ic a lly , A k een sen se of re le v a n c e , a d a p tab ility , the e x e rc is e of sound ju d g ­m en t founded upon c a re fu l ex am in a tio n and ev a lu a tio n of bo th fa c ts and th e o r ie s , and the a b i l i t ie s to engage in s e lf -e d u c a tio n

° 'H a r r y C aplan ( t r a n s ,) , C ic e ro , A d H eren n iu m (C am b rid g e ; H a rv a rd U n iv e rs ity P r e s s , 1954), p , 7,

“L e s te r T h o n ssen and A , C ra ig B a ird , Speech C r i t ic is m (New Y ork: The R onald P r e s s Com pany, 1948), p , 79,

40

and to b r in g im ag in a tiv e th ink ing to b e a r on the re so lu tio n of e x is tin g and p o te n tia l p ro b le m s of le g a l s ig n ifican ce w ere a lso c o n s id e re d goals of the le g a l education , ^

S u re ly , C ic e ro w ould have a cc e p te d th a t s ta te m e n t a s a d e sc r ip tio n of

in v en tio ,

R ic h a rd M cK eon, in studying rh e to r ic in the M iddle A g es , a lso

n o tes th is fa c to r of p o r tio n s of rh e to r ic being a s su m e d in to an o th e r d is ­

c ip lin e ,

R h e to r ic i s , a t m o s t, an unu su a lly c le a r ex am p le am ong the a r t s and sc ie n c e s of a ten d en cy w hich a p p e a rs in the h is to ry of rh e to r ic only b ec au se i t i s u n iv e rs a l in in te l le c tu a l d isc ip lin e s .In a p p lic a tio n , the a r t of rh e to r ic co n trib u ted d u rin g the p e r io d f ro m the fo u rth to the fo u rte e n th cen tu ry no t only to the m ethods of sp eak in g and w ritin g w e ll, of com posing l e t t e r s and p e tit io n s , s e rm o n s and p r a y e r s , le g a l docum en ts and b r ie f s , p o e try and p r o s e , b u t to the canons of in te rp re tin g law s and S c r ip tu re , to the d ia le c t ic a l d ev ic e s of d isc o v e ry and p ro o f, to the e s ta b lis h ­m e n t of the sc h o la s tic m eth o d , w hich w as to com e in to u n iv e rsa l u se in ph ilo sophy and theo logy , and , f in a lly , to th e fo rm u la tio n of s c ie n tif ic in q u iry , w hich w as to se p a ra te p h ilo so p h y fro m th eo lo g y . In m a n n e r of ap p lic a tio n , the a r t of r h e to r ic w as the so u rc e b o th of d o c tr in e s w hich have long sin ce b eco m e the p ro p e r ty of o th e r sc ie n c e s (such a s the p a s s io n s , w hich w ere c o n s id e re d in handbooks of rh e to r ic u n til D e s c a r te s p ro p o se d a 'sc ien tific* t re a tm e n t of th em d iffe re n t only in d e ta ils ) and of p a r t ic u la r d ev ice s w hich have b een app lied to a v a r ie ty of sub ­je c ts (such a s to th e 'c o m m o n p la c e s ' w hich w e re so m e tim e s tech n iq u es fo r inven ting a rg u m e n ts , so m e tim e s m e a n s fo r d ila tin g s ta te m e n ts , so m e tim e s m ethods fo r d isc o v e rin g th in g s , o r to 'd e f in itio n ' o r 'o r d e r ' , w hich m ay be d e te rm in e d e n tire ly by c o n s id e ra tio n of the v e rb a l cond itions of e x p re s s io n , the p sy c h o lo g ic a l re q u ire m e n ts of p e rsu a s io n , o r th e c irc u m s ta n tia l p ro b a b ili t ie s of fa c t) . In th e o ry o r ap p lica tio n , the a r t of r h e ­to r ic w as now id e n tifie d w ith , now d is tin g u ish e d f ro m , the whole

^^The L aw Schools Look A head , op, c i t , , p , 27,

41

o r p a r t n o t only of g ra m m a r , lo g ic , and d ia le c tic (w hich w e re , in tu rn , d is tin g u ish e d f ro m o r id e n tif ie d w ith each o th e r) b u t a lso of so p h is tic an d sc ie n c e , of ’c iv il p h ilo so p h y ,* psycho logy , law , and l i t e r a tu r e and , f in a lly , of ph ilo so p h y a s such . Y et, if rh e to r ic i s d efin ed in te r m s of a s ing le su b jec t m a t t e r - - such a s s ty le o r l i t e r a tu r e o r d i s c o u r s e - - i t h a s no h is to ry d u rin g the M iddle A ges; the m an y in n o v a tio n s w hich a r e r e ­c o rd e d d u rin g th a t p e r io d in the a r t s w ith w hich i t i s r e la te d su g g es t th a t th e i r h is to r ie s m ig h t p ro fita b ly be c o n s id e re d w ithou t unique a tta c h m e n t to the f ie ld in w hich th e ir ad v an ces a r e c e le b ra te d .

T h e re fo re , fo r the p u rp o se s of th is s tu d y , the la w y e r’s a c t of finding

the law and f a c ts , of d isc o v e rin g the is s u e s w hich the law a llo w s, and

of a r ra n g in g th em in to a m ean in g fu l op in ion o r a rg u m e n t w ill be re c o g ­

n iz e d a s a u n iv e rs a l p a r t o f both the law and of r h e to r ic . T h is i s the

v e ry s tu ff of le g a l a d m in is tra tio n w hen one e x c lu d es the study of the

ph ilo sophy and h is to r y of the law and i ts r e la t io n to so c ie ty . T h is

study w ill c o n c e n tra te a tten tio n on th e p ro c e s s of la w y e rs em ploying

th is in fo rm a tio n to p e r fo rm the in te n tio n a l a c t of u s in g s ig n a ls and

sy m bo ls to a c c o m p lish such a p u rp o se a s the m o d ifica tio n of b eh av io r

o r the e s ta b lis h m e n t of an a ttitu d e o r opinion in o th e rs .

L e g a l E d u c a tio n

I t i s n e c e s s a r y to c h a r a c te r iz e le g a l ed u ca tio n in the U nited

S ta te s a s opposed to th a t in m o s t o th e r c o u n tr ie s and to le g a l education

R ic h a rd M cK eon, ’’R h e to r ic in the M iddle A g e s , ” C r i t ic s and C r i t ic is m A n c ien t and M o d ern , ed , R , S, C ran e (C hicago: The U n iv e r­s ity of C hicago P r e s s , 1952), pp , 295-296 ,

42

in the p a s t . A s th is s tudy w ill u se ed u ca tio n a l th e o ry and c o m m e n ta ry as

a b a s is fo r in fe re n c e s on th e o r ie s of le g a l r h e to r ic , i t i s n e c e s s a ry to

in d ica te the v a r io u s s o u rc e s of ed u ca tio n a l com m en t.

The p r im a r y fo rc e in A m e ric a n le g a l ed u ca tio n is the law school.

T h is i s a p ro fe s s io n a l in s titu tio n dev o ted to the o b jec t of p re p a r in g p e r ­

so n s fo r the p r a c t ic e of law . W hile m any such sch o o ls a r e s itu a te d

w ith in a u n iv e rs i ty , th ey m u s t be d is tin g u ish ed f ro m the l ib e ra l a r t s

s tu d ie s in law such a s i t s ph ilo sophy , h is to ry , r e la t io n to p o li t ic s and

C o n stitu tio n , b u s in e s s , e tc . In the U n ited S ta te s m o re than anyw here

e lse th e re h a s d ev e lo p ed a group of p ro fe s s io n a l m en who devote fu ll­

tim e to le g a l ed u ca tio n . They have g iven s e r io u s a tten tio n bo th to th e o r ie s

of le g a l a d m in is tra t io n a s w ell a s pedagogy . T h e ir a ssu m p tio n s and

u n d e rs tan d in g of r h e to r ic a l th e o r ie s in law a re e x p re s s e d in the g e n e ra l

ed u ca tio n a l p o lic ie s of law schoo ls; in the se le c tio n of c u rr ic u lu m ; in

the m a te r ia l c o v e re d in c o u rse s such a s those on t r i a l p r a c t ic e , ev id en ce ,

a p p e lla te p r a c t ic e , m o o t c o u r t, p lead in g , and o th e rs w hich m ay o r m ay

no t em p h asize the rh e to r ic a l p ro b le m s of the v a r io u s ta s k s u n d e r study;

in the p re s c r ip t io n of p r e - le g a l s tu d ie s o r the la c k th e reo f; and in the

e s ta b lish m e n t and su p p o rt of p o s t-g ra d u a te p ro g ra m s .

A second fo rc e in le g a l ed u ca tio n w hich w ill be ex am in ed in th is

study is th a t p ro v id e d f ro m the p ra c tic in g p ro fe s s io n i ts e lf . T h a t i s ,

m en who a r e a c tiv e ly engaged in the p r a c t ic e of law seek in v a r io u s w ays

43

to in fluence the c o u rse of p re p a ra tio n of law s tu d e n ts , and in so doing

they su g g est th e ir own th e o r ie s of the rh e to r ic of law . T h is p r a c t ic a l

pedagogy w as , a t one t im e , p a ram o u n t in le g a l education th ro u g h the

a p p re n tic e sh ip sch em e of p re p a ra tio n . In re c e n t t im e s , h o w ev er, the

th e o r ie s of the p ro fe s s io n a t la rg e com e f ro m p ro c e e d in g s and p a p e rs

p u b lish ed by p ro fe s s io n a l o rg an iza tio n s and books w r itte n by su cc e ss fu l

a tto rn e y s reco u n tin g th e i r fav o rite e x p e r ie n c e s and c a s e s ,

A fu r th e r no te should be m ade re g a rd in g A m e ric a n le g a l e d u c ­

a tio n a s c o n tra s te d w ith E n g lish le g a l ed u ca tio n . T ra d itio n a lly , and

c u r re n tly , the U nited K ingdom d iv ides the p ra c tic e of law in to two p a r t s - -

b a r r i s t e r s and s o l ic i to r s . A s is com m only known, b a r r i s t e r s fo rm the

h ig h e r p a r t of le g a l p r a c t ic e , co n c e n tra tin g ex c lu s iv e ly upon t r i a l p r a c ­

t ic e , In fa c t, a p p e a ra n c e s b e fo re the h ig h e r c o u r ts of G re a t B r ita in

a r e r e s t r ic te d to b a r r i s t e r s . S o lic ito rs , on the o th e r h an d , p e r fo rm

the office d u ties co n n ec ted w ith the law and a p p ea r in som e of the low er

c o u r ts u n le ss they choose to engage a b a r r i s t e r fo r th is w o rk a s w e l l - -

w hich i s no t uncom m on. In reco g n itio n of th is d iv is io n , E n g lish le g a l

education i s of two ty p e s and quite d if fe re n t to su it the n eed s of each

d iv is io n .

N e ith e r the d iv is io n of p ra c t ic e n o r the d iv is io n of le g a l education

e x is ts in the U nited S ta te s , A d m iss io n to the b a r of a s ta te q u a lifie s

one to a p p ea r b e fo re the c o u rts of th a t s ta te , and a d m iss io n to the b a r

44

does n o t r e q u ire any sp e c ia l ed u ca tio n fo r t r i a l p r a c t ic e . A lthough som e

p e r s o n s in the le g a l p ro fe s s io n in the U nited S ta te s have no ted a de fac to

sp e c ia liz a tio n of p r a c t ic e in A m e ric a and have th u s c a lle d fo r a fo rm a l

s e p a ra tio n s im ila r to th a t in the U nited K ingdom , th is h a s n e v e r com e

in to b e in g , T h e re fo re , in A m e ric a n le g a l ed u ca tio n no p ro v is io n is

m ad e fo r sp e c ia liz a tio n in t r i a l p ra c t ic e .

O rg an iza tio n of the R em a in d e r of the Study

The s e a rc h in to the o r ig in s of rh e to r ic a l th e o ry in leg a l p r a c t ic e

and the ex am in a tio n of c o n te m p o ra ry l i te r a tu r e bo th in law and rh e to r ic

g e n e ra te s q u e s tio n s re g a rd in g the u n d erly in g th e o r ie s of A m e ric a n le g a l

p r a c t ic e :

1) D oes a rh e to r ic a l th e o ry u n d e rlie m o d e rn A m e rica n le g a l

d e c is io n -m a k in g ?

2) If so , w hat c h a ra c te r iz e s th is th e o ry ?

3} If th e re i s a c o n s is te n t th eo ry a s su m e d in the le g a l p r o c e s s ,

does i t s ap p lica tio n a p p ë a r to be v a lid a ted ?

If the p re su m p tio n w hich co m es f ro m a n c ie n t rh e to r ic a l and le g a l

s c h o la rs s t i l l h o ld s - - th a t i s , th a t the a d m in is tra tio n of law th ro u g h the

ju d ic ia l p ro c e s s is p r im a r i ly , if no t a l to g e th e r , a rh e to r ic a l p r o c e s s - -

then one w ould ex p ec t th a t a r h e to r ic a l th e o ry of A m e ric a n ju r is p ru d e n c e

7 lF o r a d isc u s s io n of th is , see "Should A dvocacy be R e s tr ic te d to E x p e r ts ? " , J o u rn a l of the A m e rica n J u d ic a tu re S ocie ty , 19, N o, 3 (O ctober, 1935), p p , 85-89 .

45

e x is ts . If such a th e o ry does e x is t , i t is of in te r e s t to s tu d en ts of r h e ­

to r ic . T h e re fo re , th e o b jec t of th is study is the e x p lo ra tio n of the

q u e s tio n s l i s te d above.

A s th e m a te r ia ls of the s tudy do no t le n d th e m se lv e s to a d iv is io n

p r e c is e ly along the l in e s of the above m en tio n ed q u e s tio n s , i t i s u se fu l

to ex p la in the o rg an iz a tio n w hich th is study w ill fo llow . B e fo re i t is

p ro d u c tiv e to look fo r u n d erly in g rh e to r ic a l th e o ry in A m e ric a n le g a l

p r a c t ic e , i t i s n e c e s s a ry to u n d e rs ta n d fo rc e s in flu en c in g le g a l p r a c t ic e

in the U n ited S ta te s w hich a r e d is t in c t f ro m th o se o p e ra tin g in o th e r

c o u n tr ie s o r in the p a s t . S p e c if ic a lly , i t is in the a r e a of le g a l ed u ca tio n

th a t A m e r ic a n le g a l in flu en ces a r e qu ite d iffe re n t f ro m th o se e ls e w h e re .

The r e f o r ej in C h ap te r II w ill be d is c u s s e d d ev e lo p m en ts in le g a l e d u c ­

a tio n e a r ly in A m e ric a n h is to ry . I t w ill be d is c u s s e d in th is c h a p te r how

the in flu en ce of the p ro fe s s io n i t s e l f upon the le g a l p ro c e s s d im in ish e d

in fa v o r of the law schoo l. T h u s , a lthough the o b je c t of th is study is

the rh e to r ic of le g a l p r a c t ic e o r th e ju d ic ia l p r o c e s s , i t w ill be d is c o v e re d

in C h ap te r II th a t due to the em in en ce and a c tiv ity of law sch o o ls , m uch

of the d a ta fo r the study w ill co m e f ro m le g a l ed u ca tio n .

In C h ap te r IIJ, a m o re d e ta ile d in v e s tig a tio n w ill be m ade in to

m o d e rn A m e ric a n le g a l e d u ca tio n . T h is is done on the b a s is of two

a s su m p tio n s . F i r s t , if a p r im e in flu en ce on the d ire c tio n of the le g a l

46

p ro c e s s in the n a tio n i s p ro fe s s io n a l ed u ca tio n , then a study of the

th e o r ie s u n d e rly in g the p r o c e s s should in c lu d e edu ca tio n . Second, if

th e re i s a c o n s is te n t r h e to r ic a l th e o ry in the p r a c t ic e of law , th en leg a l

e d u c a to rs hav e th e ta s k of s e le c tin g o r id en tify in g i t if they a im to p r e ­

p a re m en fo r p r a c t ic e . A lso , the va lue g iven to r h e to r ic a l th e o ry by

e d u c a to rs w ould c e r ta in ly b e re f le c te d in i t s e m p h a s is in p ra c t ic e by

g rad u a te of th e law sch o o ls . A gain , the fo cu s i s no t to study the pedagogy

of law , b u t to u se i t a s a m e a n s of le a rn in g ab o u t the p ra c t ic e of law .

C h ap te r IV w ill tu rn the in v e s tig a tio n fo r the ex is ten c e and c h a r ­

a c te r of r h e to r ic a l th e o ry in le g a l p r a c t ic e to the r e fe re n c e s f ro m the

p ra c tic in g p ro fe s s io n i ts e lf . T hrough the w ritin g s of la w y e rs , the ta sk s

in le g a l p r a c t ic e w ill be ex am in ed and the rh e to r ic a l con ten t and th eo ry

w ill be o b se rv e d .

C h ap te r V w ill be d evo ted to the q u es tio n of the v a lid a tio n of

rh e to r ic in th e le g a l p r o c e s s . U sing bo th the d a ta f ro m p re c e d in g ch ap ­

t e r s a s w e ll a s m a te r ia ls f ro m law and o th e r s c h o la r ly s o u rc e s d ire c te d

sp e c ific a lly to the v a lid ity of the sy s te m of ju r is p ru d e n c e , the q u estio n

w ill be a sk e d w h e th e r ju d ic ia l d e c is io n -m a k in g and i t s rh e to r ic a l a sp e c ts

h a s p ro v e d to a c co m p lish i t s s ta te d o b je c tiv e s .

F in a lly , C h a p te r VI w ill p ro v id e a su m m a ry and s ta te m e n t of the

co n c lu s io n s of the study.

C H A PTE R n

RHETORICAL IN FLU EN CES IN EARLY

PRO FESSION A L EDUCATION

A study of rh e to r ic a l th e o ry in A m e ric a n le g a l p r a c t ic e should

include su ffic ien t u n d e rs tan d in g of the h is to r ic a l in flu en c es on the p r o ­

fe s s io n to p e rm it an en lig h ten ed study of m o d e rn p r a c t ic e s . Some

d isc u ss io n h a s a lre a d y b een d evo ted to the a n c ie n t th e o r ie s of ju r i s p r u ­

den ce . The rh e to r ic a l th e o r ie s re le v a n t to law , i t h a s b een su g g ested ,

w ere re v e a le d in A r is to t le ’s w o rk s .

Of c lo s e r co n cern to th is study i s the h is to r ic a l in flu en ce of

p ra c t ic e in G re a t B r ita in . T h is w ill be b r ie f ly d is c u s s e d . M ore p a r t i ­

c u la r ly , the in fluence of B r i t i s h le g a l education on A m e ric a n le g a l

education , an d th u s on A m e ric a n le g a l p ra c t ic e w ill be in v e s tig a te d .

F in a lly , w ith the know ledge th a t law is a p ro fe s s io n c o n tro lle d by

p ra c t i t io n e r s , and th a t the th e o r ie s of p r a c t i t io n e r s a r e f i r s t shaped

du rin g p ro fe s s io n a l edu ca tio n , the p a th s to le g a l ed u ca tio n in the U nited

S ta te s w ill be s tud ied . I t i s p a r t ic u la r ly im p o rta n t to d is c u s s the

v a r ia tio n s in leg a l education w hich o c c u r re d in A m e ric a n a s opposed to

47

48

p ra c t ic e s in B r i ta in , S pec ifica lly , the in flu en ce of the law schoo l in

A m e ric a m u s t be u n d e rs to o d b e fo re m o d e rn p ra c t ic e s can be m e an in g ­

fu lly ex p lo red .

T he Influence of G re a t B r ita in

F ro m A r is to t le th rough the p ro d u c tiv e p e r io d of R om an c iv i l i ­

za tio n th e re w as a c lo se a s so c ia tio n b e tw een education in g e n e ra l ,

rh e to r ic a l ed u ca tio n , and le g a l edu ca tio n . To C ice ro and Q u in tilian , the

g re a t R om an w r i te r s on the su b jec t, to be an a d v o c a te - - fo re n s ic o r

o th e rw ise --o n e shou ld be an o r a to r , an d to be an o ra to r one n eed ed a

b ro a d l ib e ra l ed u ca tio n w hich inc lu d ed rh e to r ic a s the cu lm in a tio n of

the p ro c e s s , A lthough G re a t B r ita in ev en tu a lly p ro d u ced n o ted s c h o la rs

of r h e to r ic , i t w as th e re th a t leg a l ed u ca tio n and rh e to r ic a l th e o ry took

se p a ra te p a th s , A fo rm a l sy stem of le g a l education in E n g lan d w as

e s ta b lish e d b e fo re the lead ing w o rk s on r h e to r ic w ere p ro d u c ed in th a t

co u n try , P a u l M , H am lin w r ite s th a t the Inns of C o u rt and C h an cery ,

"v o lu n ta ry , n o n -c o rp o ra te , le g a l s o c ie t i e s ," o r ig in a te d d u rin g the end

of the 13th and the beg inn ing of the 14th c e n tu ry , ^ On the o th e r hand ,

Sandford d is c o v e rs the beg inn ings of rh e to r ic in E ng land to have been

du ring the 16th c e n tu ry w ith the w o rk s of T h o m as Cox, T h o m as W ilson,

^ L e s te r T hons sen . S e lec ted R ead in g s in R h e to ric and P u b lic Speaking {New Y ork: The H, W, W ilson C om pany, 1942), pp , 65 and 99,

2P a u l M, H am lin , I ü E d u c a tio n in C olonial N ew Y ork (New

Y ork: New Y ork U n iv e rs ity Law Q u a r te r ly R eview , 1939), p , 14,

49

and R ic h a rd S h e r ry . ^ When rh e to r ic d id develop , i t w as in the u n iv e rs i ty

and no t in co n n ec tio n w ith le g a l ed u ca tio n . W hile i t i s lik e ly th a t m any

s tu d en ts who s tu d ied rh e to r ic in the u n iv e rs i ty w ent on to the law , th e re

w as no n e c e s s a r y re la t io n b e tw een the tw o .^

The E n g lish in fluence on A m e ric a n le g a l p r a c t ic e w as a n a tu ra l

d ev e lo p m en t of the co lo n ia l re la t io n s h ip . Law p r a c t ic e , and co n seq u en tly

le g a l ed u ca tio n , w as not w ell d eveloped in the e a r ly s ta g e s of co lo n ia l

A m e r ic a . W a rre n , in h is H is to ry of the H a rv a rd Law School, a cco u n ts

fo r th is w ith s ix a rg u m e n ts . F i r s t , he n o te s the r ig id s ta te of the

C om m on Law a t the tim e ; seco n d , la w y e rs a s a c la s s w e re no t a t a l l

p o p u la r w ith the peop le ; th ird , th e re w as a g e n e ra l la c k of p r in te d

m a te r ia ls and e s p e c ia lly a sh o rta g e of le g a l books and r e p o r ts of d e c i­

s ions; fo u r th , in the New E ng lan d m a g is try and the c o u r ts , the c le rg y

w as m o s tly su p rem e and th e re w as l i t t le fo r the law y e r to do; f if th , the

ro y a l g o v e rn o rs ten d ed to in te r f e r e in the ju d ic ia l p ro c e s s ; and s ix th ,

the co lo n ia l ju d g es ten d ed to be g e n e ra lly ig n o ra n t, and p a r t ic u la r ly

lack in g in le g a l t ra in in g . H ow ever, a s the A m e ric a n s began to b eco m e

m o re c o n c e rn e d w ith th e ir re la tio n s w ith G re a t B r i ta in and the su b je c t

of th e ir r ig h ts u n d e r com m on law , the la w y e rs m ad e the com m on law

^W illiam P h il l ip s S andford , E n g lish T h e o r ie s of P u b lic A d d re s s , 1530-1828 (C olum bus, Ohio: H aro ld L . H ed ric k , 1938), p . 22.

^ Ib id . , p . 49.

50

m o re and m o re the o b jec t of study. T h u s , i t b ecam e the c u s to m fo r

5fa m il ie s to sen d th e ir sons to E n g lan d to obtain a le g a l ed u ca tio n .

The s tu d ie s fo llow ed once in E ng land w e re d e te rm in e d by the

Inns of C o u rt and C h an cery , T h ese s tu d ie s w e re p u rsu e d by m e a n s of

R e a d in g s , M o o ts , and B o lts . S ince the la te ,13th and e a r ly 14th c e n tu r ie s

the re a d in g s h a d b een d e liv e re d in the h a lls w ith a g re a t ce rem o n y .

T hey c o n s is te d of one of the lead in g p ra c t i t io n e r s being a s s ig n e d to p r e ­

p a re h im s e lf on an a s p e c t of the law , and during the s e s s io n a t the Inn

to r e a d h is r e p o r t . T h ese re a d in g s w e re re g a rd e d a s a u th o r ita tiv e and

w e re f re q u e n tly c ite d in a rg u m e n t a t W e s tm in s te r , ^ H o w ev er, by the

tim e m o s t of the young A m e ric a n s w e re com ing to E ng lan d fo r a le g a l

ed u ca tio n , a ro u n d 1700 and l a t e r , the re ad in g s h ad c e a s e d to be of m uch

v a lu e , and th e p o s itio n of R ea d e r had becom e a s in e c u re . S im ila r ly ,

the M oots an d B o lts w e re e ith e r p o o rly u sed o r no t u se d by the tim e

A m e r ic a n s a r r iv e d to be ed u ca ted . P re v io u s to the 18th c e n tu ry . M oots

h ad b e e n e x e r c is e s in th e n a tu re of fo rm a l a rg u m e n ts on p o in ts of law

r a is e d by the s tu d e n ts , and w ere fo r m an y y e a r s conducted w ith g re a t

c a re in the H a lls of the Inns u n d er th e su p e rv is io n of a B e n c h e r . Two

b a r r i s t e r s w ould s it a s ju d g es fo r the M oots. B o lts w e re s im i la r to

M oots in p re s e n ta t io n and p u rp o se .

^ C h a r le s W a rre n , H is to ry of th e H a rv a rd Law School and of E a r ly L e g a l C o n d itio n s , I. (New Y ork: L e w is P u b lish in g C o ., 1908), pp . 3 -5 .

^ Ib id . , p . 5* ^H am lin , lo c . c it. ^Ibid .

51

A fte r 1700, the Inns continued to d e te rm in e who should be ad m itte d

to the B a r , b u t tra in in g fo r a d m iss io n w as no lo n g e r th e ir ch ie f c o n c e rn .

' A language s im i la r to th a t w hich w as th en affec ting thec h u rch and the u n iv e r s i t ie s of E ngland g ra d u a lly su p erv en ed .until m e r e s t fo rm s su fficed to con fer the d ign ity of advocate and p le a d e r . A ttendance upon R eadings an d M oots w as no t p r e s c r ib e d , and n e ith e r le c tu re s n o r c o u r s e s of study w ere re g u la r ly g iven . ^

The m e re p h y s ic a l p re s e n c e and the ea ting of so m any d in n e rs in the Inn

w as about the ex te n t of B r i t is h le g a l edu ca tio n .

If the Inns p ro v id e d l i t t le in the way of le g a l education , the

q u estio n re m a in s a s to w hat the A m e ric an le g a l s tu d en t in G re a t B r i ta in

did to le a rn h is ch o sen f ie ld . W a rre n in d ic a te s th a t in add ition to

a tten d an ce a t the In n s , th e se s tu d en ts had a t l e a s t two o th e r v a lu ab le

in flu en ces a v a ila b le to th em in E n g la n d - - f i r s t , the opportun ity to r e a d ,

independen tly , the books tiia t w e re no t so a v a ila b le in A m e r ic a , and

10the opportu n ity to o b se rv e the le g is la tiv e and ju d ic ia l sy s te m s a t w o rk .

Of the l a t t e r , W a rre n say s th is :

The f a c i l i t ie s fo r le g a l study supp lied b y the Inns of C o u rt w e re , h o w ev e r, the le a s t of the o p p o rtu n itie s open to young A m e ric a n b a r r i s t e r s in London a t th is t im e . F o r th e se y e a r s , 1750-1775, fo rm e d a p e r io d of re m a rk a b le b r il l ia n c e in E n g lish h is to ry . S tuden ts of law w e re no t only s tudying a t the Inns side by side w ith fu tu re C hief J u s t ic e s , K enyon and E llen b o ro u g h , and the fu tu re C h a n c e llo rs , T hurlow , E ld o n and E rsk in e ; b u t they w e re a ls o lis te n in g to the lum inous ju d g m en ts of L o rd

^Ib id . ^^W arren , 0£ . c i t . , p . 153.

52

M an sfie ld on King*s B ench , to the com m anding e loquence of P i t t (L ord C hatham ) and the o ra to ry of C h a r le s P r a t t (L o rd Cam den); th ey w ere elbow ing, in the Inns th e m s e lv e s , the b u r ly f ra m e of S am uel Jo h n so n , th e a u to c ra t of l i t e r a tu r e ; and they w e re w itn ess in g D avid G a r r ic k ’s ’p o w ers of a c tin g v a s t and unconfined ,

In the footnote to the above s ta te m e n t, W arren q uo tes the co m ­

m en t by C h a rle s J . In g e rs o il of h is f a th e r J a re d In g e rs o il who w as in

the M iddle T em ple in 1 7 7 4 --"M a n sfie ld , B lack s to n e , C hatham and

G a rr ic k and o th e r lu m in a r ie s of th a t p e r io d w ere o b je c ts of h is co n s tan t

a tte n tio n , and of h is c o rre sp o n d e n c e , and e v e r a f te r am ong the p le a s u re s

12of h is m em o ry , "

In re fe re n c e to independen t study of law s tu d e n ts , th e re w as

som e en co u rag em en t th a t i t should in c lu d e the read in g of m a te r ia ls

d es ig n ed to in c u lc a te som e p r in c ip le s of good speak ing . In A H is to ry of

E d u ca tio n fo r the E n g lish B a r ; w ith S uggestions a s to S u b jec ts and

M ethods of Study (1860), P h ilip A n stie Sm ith ta k e s up the q u e s tio n of

the p lace of o ra to ry in le g a l ed u ca tio n , A student who chose to a d d re s s

h im se lf to the study of o ra to ry . Sm ith sa id , ", , , m ay find h is c o u rse

checked by opposition on two d iffe re n t g ro u n d s, " T h a t i s , he could

ex p ec t to h e a r som e say th a t e loquence is " u se le s s in som e c a s e s , and

m isch iev o u s in o th e rs ; o r , when i t s v a lu e i s a d m itted , m ay find i t

t r e a te d a s a p o w er, w hich i s p o s s e s s e d , indeed , by som e g ifted m in d s .

^^Ibid, l^ Ib id ,

53

b u t i s beyond the re a c h of en d e a v o r, A d m ittin g th a t the b a r r i s t e r

should avo id a p p ea ls to the fe e lin g s and p a s s io n s . Sm ith s t i l l a d v ise s

the law s tu d en t to study o ra to ry . He say s th a t i t i s a s m uch a p a r t of

the a r t of o r a to ry th a t a b a r r i s t e r be ab le to say w hat m u s t be s a id in

the b r ie f e s t and c le a r e s t m a n n e r .

U sing l e t t e r s f ro m e s ta b lis h e d b a r r i s t e r s to s tu d en ts , au th o r

Sm ith goes on to s ta te h is c a s e th a t o ra to ry can be le a rn e d . H is a r g u ­

m e n ts , h o w ev e r, s tro n g ly su g g es t th a t S m ith ’s co n cep t of le a rn in g the

a r t of o ra to ry i s la rg e ly confined to g ra m m a r and sty le :

If i t be a d m itte d th a t e loquence is a d e s ir a b le q u a lifica tio n fo r a b a r r i s t e r , th e re s t i l l r e m a in s the q u e s tio n w h e th e r i t be p o s s ib le to a c q u ire i t . In r e fe re n c e to th is m a t te r , som e e x tr a c ts sh a ll f i r s t be g iven w hich re co m m e n d , in e x p re s s t e r m s , the d ire c tio n of s tu d ie s to such an o b je c t. One of th e se o c c u rs in a le t te r f ro m S ir W illiam , th en M r, Jo n e s , to L o rd A lth o rp e . He te l ls h im th a t, w ith h is know ledge a s w e ll a s ju d g m en t, he w ill e a s ily a c q u ire h a b its of e loquence; *but h a b its th ey a r e , no l e s s th an p lay in g on a m u s ic a l in s tru m e n t o r hand ling a p en c il: and a s the b e s t m u s ic ia n s and f in e s t p a in te r s b eg in w ith p lay ing so m e tim e s o u t of tune and d raw in g out of p ro p o rtio n , so the g r e a te s t o r a to r s m u s t b eg in w ith leav in g som e p e r io d u n fin ish ed , and p e rh a p s w ith s ittin g down in the m id d le of a se n te n ce , . . , I am , . , p e rsu a d e d , th a t a v ir tu o u s and knowing m an , who h a s no n a tu ra l im p ed im en t, m ay b y h a b it a c q u ire p e r fe c t e lo q u en ce , a s c e r ta in ly a s a h ea lth y m an , who h a s the u se of h is m u s c le s , m ay le a r n to sw im o r sk a te . ’

^^P h ilip A n stie S m ith , A H is to ry of E d u c a tio n fo r the E n g lish B a r ; w ith S u ggestions a s to S u b jec ts and M ethods of Study (London: B u tte rw o r th s , 1860), p . 117.

14I b id . , p . 122,

54

T h is book , d e s ig n e d to be u s e d a s a p a r t of the in d ep en d en t study of a

young law s tu d e n t, c o m p le te s the ch a p te r on e loquence w ith a s e r ie s of

p o in te rs on the a r t of rh e to r ic d raw n f ro m the w ritin g s of C ic e ro , Q u in ­

t i l ia n , and the lead ing m e m b e rs of the E n g lish B a r ,

S ig n ifican tly , th is book , w r itte n fo r the u se of law s tu d en ts in

E ng land d u rin g and im m e d ia te ly follow ing the g re a t p e r io d of p ro d u c ­

tiv ity of E n g lish rh e to r ic ia n s (1776-1828) does no t m en tio n any of the

E n g lish w r i te r s on the su b je c t. R a th e r , a f te r p a s s in g r e fe re n c e to the

two R om an rh e to r ic ia n s and le g a l e d u c a to rs , Sm ith p ro c e e d s to d raw

m o s t of h is p r in c ip le s on the p r a c t ic e of le g a l speak ing f ro m the

co m m en ts and e x p e r ie n c e s of p ra c tic in g la w y e rs . T h is , w hich does no t

seem to be uncom m on d u rin g th e t im e , s tro n g ly su g g e s ts a s t r i c t

s e p a ra tio n in E ng land b e tw een the rh e to r ic ia n s and the b a r r i s t e r s .

P a th s to L e g a l E d u ca tio n in A m e ric a

A s th e A m e ric a n c o lo n ie s b ecam e m o re w ealthy and c o m m e r­

c ia lly a c t iv e , the o p p o rtu n ity to ob ta in books in c re a s e d . W ith the

p u b lica tio n of B lackstone*s C o m m e n ta r ie s in 1765, th e re w as a d ec id ed

in c re a s e in the am ount of le g a l study tak ing p lace in A m e r ic a , C h a rle s

W a rre n p ro v id e s th is a n a ly s is of the n a tu re of e a r ly A m e ric a n law and

le g a l ed u ca tio n

W hen the R evo lu tion b ro k e out and the C o lon ies w e re th row n ab so lu te ly on th e ir own r e s o u r c e s , a m o v em en t b eg an in s e v e ra l

55

of th e i r ed u ca tio n a l in s titu tio n s to in tro d u ce the s tudy of law a s a p a r t of the g e n e ra l sy s te m of education; and v a r io u s law p r o fe s s o r s h ip s w ere e s ta b lish e d during the l a s t tw enty y e a rs of the 18th c e n tu ry , though w ith sm all s u c c e ss .

T h en cam e a p e r io d of re a c tio n . The old p re ju d ic e s of the e a r ly 17th C en tu ry w ere re v iv e d ag a in s t la w y e rs in the c lo sing y e a r s of the 18th C en tu ry , A v io len t o p position to anything E n g lish , and e sp e c ia lly to the E n g lish Com m on L aw D o c tr in e s , sw ept o v e r the U nited S tate s - -w hich la s te d w ith v a ry in g fo rce u n til a f te r 1810, Then cam e the W ar of 1812 and the ensuing c o m m e rc ia l d i s t r e s s and p a n ic s , d iv e rtin g a tte n tio n fro m a ll fo rm s of ed u ca tio n . M eanw hile , the e a r ly y e a r s of the 19th C en tu ry w e re the g re a t fo rm a tiv e p e r io d of A m e r ic a n Law; A m e ric a n law re p o r ts w ere be ing in tro d u ce d , an d A m e rica n law b o o k s w r itte n . And i t w as un d er the sp u r of the d e s ire to teach young m en A m e ric a n law sy s te m a tic a lly an d m o re tho­rough ly th an they could be tau g h t in law office th a t the A m eric an Law S chools a ro s e ,

"A s th e re w ere in the C olon ies no co lleg ia te law le c tu re s b e fo re

1780, and no law schoo ls b e fo re 1784, the young m an who a s p ire d to be

a law y e r, " sa y s C h a rle s W a rre n , "had two c o u rse s open to h im , " "T he

f i r s t , " sa y s W a rre n , "w as to p ic k up such s c ra p s of know ledge of p r a c ­

tic e , a s he co u ld , by se rv in g a s a co p y ist o r a s s i s ta n t in the c le r k 's

office of som e in fe r io r c o u rt, and by read ing such b o o k s . Coke ch ie fly ,

a s he could b o r ro w , An exam ple of one who d id th is type of study

who is a lso of in te r e s t to s tu d en ts of public speak ing i s P a t r ic k H enry ,

Som e few young m en of p re -e m in e n t na tiv e a b ility ach ieved d is tin c tio n w ithout tra in in g even in a c le r k ’s o ffice . Thus P a t r ic k H en ry w as ad m itted to the B a r in Sept, 1760 a t the age of 24, a f te r bu t s ix w eek ’s s o lita ry study of Coke upon

^ ^ W a rre n , o£, c i t , , pp , 5 -6 , * I b id , , p , 131,

56

L ittle to n and the V irg in ia S ta tu te s , a lthough one of the th re e e x a m in e rs , G eorge W ythe, re fu s e d to sign h is l ic e n s e , leav ing i t to P ey to n and John R andolph to ad m it. The la t te r s a id they ‘p e rc e iv e d h im to be a young m an of g en iu s, v e ry ig n o ra n t of law b u t d id n o t doubt he w ould soon qualify h im se lf . ‘

The second m eth o d of obtain ing a le g a l education in th o se d ays b e fo re

law sch o o ls w as to e n te r the office of a lead ing m e m b er of the B a r ,

try in g to find one who owned a good l ib r a r y . The o b jec t w as to ab so rb

by read in g and w atch ing a s m uch of the law a s p o ss ib le . O ccas io n a lly ,

the law y er w ould tak e tim e fo r d i r e c t teach in g of h is s tu d e n ts , b u t th is

d oes not a p p e a r to have b een a com m on o r ex ten s iv e p r a c t ic e .

In the o ffic e , the s tuden t h ad a c c e s s to a ll h is s e n io r 's law books fo r study . He p o red o v e r the MSS, v o lu m es of fo rm s , and the a b s t r a c t s , com m onplace b o o k s , and MSS, n o te s of c a s e s , w hich each law y er of th o se days m ade fo r h im se lf ,, , , He w as ex p ec ted to copy out p lead in g s and o th e r d o cu ­m en ts fo r h is s e n io r , and to d ra f t b r ie f s . In r e tu rn , the law y er gave to h is s tuden t such ad v ice , in fo rm a tio n , o r in s tru c tio n a s h is tim e o r h is w h im p e rm itte d .

A s a r u le , the law y er w as too b u sy a m an to pay m uch a tten tio n to h is s tu d en ts ; and the ch ie f advan tage ga in ed by th em w as in p e r s o n a l a s so c ia tio n w ith th e ab le la w y e rs a g a in s t whom he t r ie d h is c a s e s , and in the g e n e ra l in fluence w hich g r e a t c h a r a c te r s h av e on younger m en who com e in co n tac t w ith th em ,

T h is d e sc r ip tio n of law study in the o ffice i s not a s c o m p lim e n ta ry a s i t

m ig h t have b een h ad i t been s ta te d by m any of the p ra c tic in g a tto rn e y s

d u rin g the y e a r s b e fo re the 20th C en tu ry , I t should no t be su g g ested

th a t th e re w as w id e sp re a d d is s a tis fa c tio n w ith law office s tudy . On the

^"^Ibid,, pp , 131-132, IS jb id ,, p . 133.

57

c o n tra ry , th is c o n flic t b e tw een law sch o o l and law office ed u ca tio n p e r ­

s is te d fo r m an y , m any y e a r s , C h a r le s W a rren m ay be fo rg iv en if he

o v e rs ta te d the o b jec tio n ab le f e a tu re s of th is type of le g a l e d u c a tio n - -

h is p r im e o b jec tiv e w as to w rite the h is to ry of the H a rv a rd L aw School,

and fo r y e a r s th e r e w as d ire c t c o n f lic t b e tw een the sch o o ls and the

o ffice s .

T h is c o n flic t in ph ilosophy of ed u ca tio n w ill be d is c u s s e d l a te r ,

b u t fo r the t im e , a t l e a s t one p o s itiv e s ta te m e n t should be re c o rd e d .

B en jam in e F , B u t le r , w ritin g h is P la n fo r the O rg an iza tio n of a Law

F acu lty in the U n iv e rs ity of the C ity of N ew Y o rk , f i r s t p u b lish ed in

1835, sa id th is : "T he g re a t n u m b er of L aw o ffices in th is c ity , in w hich

a v a r ie d and in s tru c t iv e b u s in e ss i s c a r r i e d on, w ill a c c o rd f a c i l i t ie s

fo r the a c q u is itio n of p ra c t ic a l know ledge w hich m ay be tu rn e d to g re a t

19acco u n t, " T h is w as sa id even d u rin g the tim e of the g r e a t d ev e lo p ­

m e n t of the law sch o o ls .

To su m m a riz e the p ro c e s s of le g a l ed ucation p r io r to the grow th

of A m e ric a n law sc h o o ls , the young m a n had , a t f i r s t , the n eed to go to

E ng land to study in the In n s , r e a d the av a ilab le b o o k s, and o b se rv e the

a c tiv e le g a l scen e in G re a t B r i ta in . L a te r , w hen th is fo rm of education

b ecam e im p o ss ib le b e ca u se of the s p li t b e tw een A m e ric a an d E n g lan d , the

^^B en jam ine F , B u tle r , P la n fo r the O rg an iza tio n of a L aw F a c u lty in the U n iv e rs ity of the C ity of N ew Y ork (New Yo rk : Law C en te r F o u n d atio n , 1956), p . 14,

58

stu d en t of law e ith e r in d ep en d en tly re a d w hat w as a v a ila b le , e n te re d the

office of a c le rk , o r r e a d in the office of a p ra c tic in g a tto rn e y . C le a r ly ,

each of th e se fo rm s of le g a l ed u ca tio n p u t the c o n ce n tra tio n upon the

a c q u is itio n of p r a c t ic a l know ledge of the law . The equ ipm ent of a la w ­

y e r th u s t ra in e d w as e x p e r ie n c e in doing and w atch ing the fu n c tio n s of

law p r a c t ic e . M ost of h is a c tu a l know ledge of the law he p ick ed up a s

i t b e c a m e av a ila b le to h im th ro u g h h is l a t e r p r a c t ic e . If such a m an

w as a cq u a in te d w ith the p r in c ip le s of rh e to r ic o r if he had e x p e rie n c e

in sp eak in g , i t w as e i th e r the r e s u l t of o b s e rv a tio n of sp e a k e rs a t w o rk ,

the c a s u a l read in g of the sp e e c h e s of p re v io u s o r a to r s , o r he m ay h ave

h ad som e e x p e rie n c e in h is p re v io u s fo rm a l ed u ca tio n . I t is t r u e , a s

W a rre n n o te s , th a t m o s t of th e law y ers of th e s e e a r ly tim e s cam e f ro m

the a r i s to c r a c y and had b e n e f itte d fro m a co lleg e education . H ow ever,

th e re w as ab so lu te ly no g u a ra n te e th a t a m an a d m itte d to p ra c t ic e a t

th is t im e had any such know ledge o r e x p e r ie n c e .

T he L aw School

The law school d ev e lo p ed along two l i n e s - - f i r s t , p ra c tic in g

a tto rn e y s who w ere v e ry p o p u la r w ith s tu d en ts b egan to a t t r a c t th em in

la rg e n u m b e rs u n til the law office took on a s p e c ts of the law school;

seco n d , u n iv e rs it ie s w e re developed w hich in c lu d ed one o r m o re

^ ^ W a rre n , o£. c i t . , p . 153.

59

p ro fe s s o r s h ip s in law . The f i r s t , and m o s t fam ous law schoo l of the

f i r s t type w as e s ta b lis h e d in L itc h f ie ld , C o n n ec ticu t in 1772 a t the office

of law y er T apping R eeve . R eeve s e ttle d in the s m a ll C on n ec ticu t town to

p ra c tic e law , n o t fo rm a schoo l, b u t a s the R evo lu tion fo rc e d young m en

to seek th e i r le g a l education in the U nited S ta tes r a th e r th an in E ng land ,

m o re and m o re s tu d en ts sought out p ra c tic in g la w y e rs who would p ro v id e

th em w ith the n eed ed education . By the end of the R ev o lu tio n , R eeve

21“ . . . found h im se lf a t the h ead of a fu lly d eveloped law schoo l. "

T h is h a s beco m e known a s the L itch fie ld Law School. O th e r s im ila r

schoo ls d eveloped d u rin g the sam e tim e . E s s e n tia l ly , th is school w as

l i t t le d if fe re n t f ro m office tra in in g w ith two e x c e p tio n s -- th e studen ts

w e re m o re n u m ero u s and had the opportun ity to exchange id e a s and

le a rn f ro m each o th e r , and the law y er a t the h ead of the schoo l devoted

m o re of h is tim e to teach in g th a t w as tru e in m any o ffice s of busy p r a c ­

tic in g a t to rn e y s . R eed m ak es the follow ing g e n e ra liz a tio n about the

su b jec t:

The e a r ly p r iv a te law schoo l w as e s s e n tia l ly a sp e c ia liz e d and e la b o ra te d law office . I t o r ig in a te d in New E n g lan d , w here the a p p re n tic e sh ip sy s tem w as m o s t f irm ly e s ta b lis h e d , sp re ad f ro m th e re in to o th e r s ta te s , and w as ev en tu a lly n o t so m uch d e s tro y e d a s ab so rb ed by the co llege o r u n iv e rs i ty law school, w hose c h a ra c te r i t la rg e ly d e te rm in e d . A s a fu lly developed .

^ ^ A lfred Z an tz in g e r R eed , T ra in in g fo r the P u b lic P ro fe s s io n of the L aw , B u lle tin No. 15 (New Y ork; C arneg ie F o u n d a tio n fo r the A d v ancem en t of T each ing , 1921), p . 128.

60

s e lf -c o n sc io u s in s titu tio n , announcing i ts e lf a s such , i t a p p e a re d s lig h tly l a te r than the e a r ly so u th e rn co lleg e law schoo l. U nlike th is a r t i f ic ia l c re a t io n , h o w ev er, i t developed by im p e rc e p tib le s tep s ou t of a p r a c t i t io n e r 's c la s s and r e p re s e n ts a m o re p r im itiv e type of ed u ca tio n a l o rg a n iz a tio n ,^ ^

A s e a r ly a s the R evolu tion , th e re w as som e ev id en ce of in te r e s t

on the p a r t of c o lle g e s and u n iv e r s i t ie s to e s ta b lish som e teach in g of

law . In 1777, the C onnec ticu t A ssem b ly o ffe red to endow p ro fe s s o r s h ip s

of law , m e d ic in e , and o ra to ry a t Y ale C ollege in r e tu rn fo r a s h a re of

c o n tro l of the c o lle g e . The Y ale C o rp o ra tio n w as unw illing to give up

any s h a re of i t s p o w e r, and so d e c lin ed the o ffe r , "D u rin g the nex t

f ifteen y e a r s the Y ale P re s id e n t , E z r a S tile s , gave an o c c a s io n a l l e c ­

tu re on law , b u t a p p a re n tly only fo r the c u ltu ra l value of th e su b jec t,

A ccord ing to R eed , i t is T hom as J e f f e r s o n who d e s e rv e s c r e d i t fo r

in itia tin g " u n iv e rs i ty in s tru c tio n in p ro fe s s io n a l law in th is co u n try ,

He re o rg a n iz e d the C ollege of W illiam and M ary in 1779 and in c lu d ed

p ro fe s s o r s h ip s of law . One w as P r o f e s s o r of "M o ra l P h ilo so p h y and

the L aw s of N a tu re and of N a tio n s , " and the o th e r , u n d er the d ire c tio n

^^Ib id ,

2 3 ju liu s G oebel, J r . , and the S taff of the F o u n d atio n fo r R e s e a rc h in L eg a l H is to ry , A H is to ry of the L aw School of Law C o lum bia U n iv e r­s ity (New Y ork: M orn ing side H eig h ts: C olum bia U n iv e rs ity P r e s s , 1955), p . 10,

^^Ib id , R eed , 0£ , c i t . , p , 116.

61

of G eorge W ythe, P r o f e s s o r of "L aw and P o lic e , The f i r s t r e c o rd e d

law d e g ree a w a rd e d in the U nited S ta te s w as 1793 a t the C ollege of

W illiam and M ary .

In 1794, J a m e s K ent w as app o in ted P r o f e s s o r of Law a t C olum bia

C ollege la rg e ly a s a r e s u l t of h is p o li t ic a l a s s o c ia t io n s , a lthough K ent

took the job s e r io u s ly . W hat w as p ro p o se d w as d e sc r ib e d in the

pub lic an n o u n cem en t of the ap p o in tm en t.

T h is p ro fe s s o r s h ip i s in ten d ed to c o m p ris e a b r ie f rev iew of the h is to ry , the n a tu re , the s e v e ra l f o rm s , and the ju s t ends of c iv il g o v e rn m e n t- -a sk e tc h of the o r ig in , p r o g r e s s , and f in a l s e tt le m e n t of th e U n ited S ta te s - - a p a r t ic u la r d e ta il of the o rg a n iz a tio n and d u tie s of th e s e v e ra l d e p a r tm e n ts of the g e n e ­r a l g o v e rn m en t, to g e th e r w ith an e x am in a tio n of such p a r t s of the c iv il an d c r im in a l cod es of the f e d e ra l ju r is p ru d e n c e . . . the c o u r ts of th e s e v e ra l s ta te s . . . and the m o re p a r t ic u la r ex am in a tio n of the C o n stitu tio n of the S ta te . The w hole d e ta il of ou r m u n ic ip a l law , w ith re la t io n to the r ig h ts of p ro p e r ty and of p e r s o n s , and th e fo rm s of a d m in is te r in g ju s t ic e , b o th c iv il and c r im in a l , w ill th en be t r e a te d fu lly and a t la rg e . 28

Of p a r t ic u la r i n t e r e s t h e r e is the ph ilo so p h y K en t h e ld re g a rd in g the

ro le of rh e to r ic a l th e o ry in le g a l ed u ca tio n . In h is f i r s t le c tu r e , he

d e m o n s tra te d bo th a f a m il ia r i ty w ith Q u in tilian an d a co n ce rn fo r the

rh e to r ic a l a s p e c ts of le g a l p r a c t ic e .

A la w y e r in a f r e e c o u n try , should have a l l the re q u is i te s of Q u in til ia n 's o r a to r . He should be a p e r s o n of i r r e p ro a c h a b le v ir tu e and g o o d n ess . He should be w e ll r e a d in the whole c ir c le of the a r t s an d s c ie n c e s . He should b e f it fo r the a d m in is ­tra tio n of p u b lic a f f a i r s , and to g o v ern the com m onw ealth by h is

^ Ib id . ^^G oebel, o£. c i t . , p . 14. ^^Ibid .

62

councils s ic . J , estab lish i t by his laws and c o r re c t i t byh is exam ple. . . . [The law yer] ought to be well read in the G reek and Roman c lass ic s ; he ought to have a knowledge of the civil law; he ought to develop his pow ers of close r e a ­soning by study of logic and m athem atics; he ought to be well grounded in the doctrines of m o ra l philosophy; and he ought to have acquired the a r t of public speaking. Upon such a foundation should he e rec ted h is education in the m unicipal law,

This f i r s t s e rie s of lec tu re s in the law a t Columbia is variously

d escrib ed as a " re la tiv e success" and as a "fa ilu re , Before K ent's

second se rie s of lec tu re s was delivered in 1824, the H arvard Law

School, ", , , the f i r s t collegiate school of law now in ex istence, ' was

31founded in M assachusetts in 1817. " However, as A lbert J , Harno

says in h is h isto ry of legal education published as a p a r t of the Survey

of Legal Education of the A m erican B ar A ssociation, "Growth and deve­

lopm ent in these early schools cam e haltingly. The common method of

p rep ara tio n fo r the p ro fession s till was through office apprenticeship,

"Law yers clung tenaciously, " Harno re la te s , "to the notion that legal

education was nothing m ore than the m astering of a c ra ft, the skills for

which had to be p assed on from the p rac titioner to the novice. And that

view was to continue for some y e a rs yet to come, "

^^Ibid, , pp, 14-15, ^®Goebel, og, c i t . , p , 20; Reed, op, c i t , , 120.

^^W arren, o£, c i t , , p , 1,

A lbert J , H arno, Legal Education in the United States (San F ran cisco ; Bancroft-W hitney C o ,, 1953), p, 39,

33lbid,

63

P ro fe s s io n a l a s so c ia tio n s . - - In p a s s in g f ro m a g e n e ra l d isc u ss io n

of the p a th s to a le g a l education in A m e ric a b e fo re th e 20th C en tu ry to

a sp ec ific ex am in a tio n to the a c t iv it ie s of the law sc h o o ls , a b r ie f

co m m en t ought to be m ade co n cern in g e a r ly p ro fe s s io n a l a s so c ia tio n s .

In lie u of the kind of a s so c ia tio n am ong p e rs o n s of s im i la r in te re s ts

w hich w as la te r to com e w ith the co lleg e l i t e r a r y so c ie ty and the law

clubs of the law sch o o ls , the p ra c tic in g a tto rn e y s so m e tim e s fo rm ed

such s o c ie tie s a f te r being a d m itte d to p r a c t ic e . T h e re w as , betw een

1770 and 1774, such an a s so c ia tio n in New Y o rk C ity c a lle d The M oot,

I t w as founded a s a club "to en co u rag e a m o re p ro fo u n d and am ple study

of the c iv il law , h is to r ic a l and p o li t ic a l ju r is p ru d e n c e , and the law of

n a tu re , , , , The C o n stitu tio n of th is club n o te s th a t a t ev e ry

m ee tin g any m e m b e r w as p e rm it te d to p ro p o se a q u es tio n of law to be

debated by the club a t the fo llow ing m e e tin g . If m o re th an one q u estio n

w as p ro p o se d , the p re s id e n t took a vo te of the m e m b e rs ,

A n o th er s im ila r o rg a n iza tio n w as fo rm e d a ro u n d 1768 in New

Y o rk C ity ca lled The D ebating S ocie ty , F ro m i t s C o n s titu tio n , i t is

le a rn e d th a t i t s d eb a te s w e re c o n s tru c te d to co n fo rm to the sty le of the

law c o u r t - - a n a ffirm a tiv e opened the d eb a te , fo llow ed by a s ta te m e n t by

the n e g a tiv e , then th e re w ere r e b u tta ls and c o n c lu s io n s . Q u estio n s

^ ^ W arren , 0£ , c i t , , p , 161,

H am lin , op. c it , , p , 201,

64

w ere cho sen in a m an n e r s im ila r to th o se in The M oot, Som e of the

to p ic s d eb a ted w e re , "W hether in an ab so lu te m o n arch y i t is b e t te r th a t

the C row n should be e lec tiv e th an h e re d i ta ry ;" "W hether the King is

ju s tif ia b le in T o ro C o n scien te fo r r e s e rv in g a y e a r ly Q u itre n t fo r ev e ry

100 a c r e s of land he g ra n ts ;" 'W hether in the C on stitu tio n of G rea t

B r ita in i t w ould be a good p o lit ic a l m ax im th a t the King can do no w rong ;"

"W hether the L aw s ought to co m p el a su b je c t to a c c e p t of a pub lic e m ­

p loym en t, I t i s p o ss ib le th a t th is so c ie ty w as a s s o c ia te d w ith K ing’s

C ollege and th a t i ts p ro p e r nam e w as the K ing’s C ollege D ebating

e . ^ 37 Society.

T h e se o rg an iz a tio n s a r e of p a r t ic u la r in te r e s t in th is study b e ca u se

they w e re , a p p a re n tly , the only a tte m p t d u ring the e a r ly d ay s in A m e ric a

to dup lica te the a n c ien t m o o ts in the Inns of G re a t B r i ta in , and w ere an

o u tle t fo r a fe l t n eed by p ra c tic in g la w y e rs to im p ro v e th e m se lv e s in the

com m unica tion of to p ic s re la te d to law and p o li t ic s . The s im ila r i ty

betw een th e se so c ie tie s and the debate p ro g ra m s w hich w e re la te r to be

developed in A m e ric a n co lleg es and u n iv e rs i t ie s can n o t be e scap ed .

M oot c o u r ts and law c lu b s , - -P ro b a b ly the m o s t p e r s i s te n t way in

w hich A m e ric a n law schoo ls h ave a tte m p te d to p ro v id e the law studen t

w ith p r a c t ic a l tra in in g in rh e to r ic i s the u se of m oo t c o u r ts and law

3 6 ib id ,, p , 204, S=7lbid,

65

c lu b s . G eo rg e W ythe, the f i r s t P r o f e s s o r of L aw in the U nited S ta te s ,

in c lu d ed in h is p ro g ra m a t the C o lleg e of W illiam and M ary m o o t l e g i s ­

la tu r e s and s im ila r p r a c t ic a l a c tiv itie s ,^ ® Ja m e s K en t, w hose w ork

a t C olum bia b eg an sh o rtly a f te r 1777, in s titu te d a "m o o t o r debating

c lu b " d u rin g h is second s e r ie s of le c tu r e s in 1824-1825. K ent m e t

w ith h is p r iv a te s tu d en ts e v e ry S a tu rd a y and they d is c u s s e d in w r itte n

o r s e t sp eech es a th em e w hich had b e e n a ss ig n ed the p re v io u s w eek.

A sa h e l S te a rn s , f i r s t P r o f e s s o r of Law in the H a rv a rd Law

School w hen i t w as founded in 1817, show ed a s im ila r in t e r e s t in the

m o o t c o u r t p ro g ra m and o th e r m e th o d s of p ro v id in g co m m u n ica tio n

tra in in g . A lthough m o s t of the s tu d e n ts du ring th is tim e (1817-1840)

h ad h ad n e a r ly two y e a r s of o ffice s tu d y , and thus w e re ex p ec ted to be

w e ll g ro u n d ed in the te c h n ic a l d e ta ils of p r a c t ic e . P r o f e s s o r S te a rn s

s t i l l fe lt the need fo r devoting a m a jo r i ty of the law s tu d e n ts ’ tim e to

p r a c t ic a l tra in in g . T h is could be in te rp re te d th a t he re c o g n iz e d a

d iffe re n c e b e tw een know ing the fo rm a l p ro c e d u re s and p r a c t ic e s of

c o u r ts and le g a l do cu m en ts and b e in g p re p a re d to engage su c c e ss fu lly

in th e r h e to r ic a l a s p e c ts of law p r a c t ic e . W hile th is m ay seem to be

an obvious d is tin c tio n to som e r e a d e r s , i t h a s p ro v e d to be r e g u la r ly

co n fu sed , a c c e p te d , r e je c te d , e tc . b y A m e ric a n law sch o o ls .

®®Reed, o£. c i t . , p . 117. ^^G oebel, op . c i t . , p . 20.

^ ^ W arren , o£. c i t . , II, p . 333.

66

To em p h a s iz e the im p o rta n c e P r o f e s s o r S te a rn s placed, upon th is

type of e d u ca tio n , of the five p a r t s of the H a rv a rd Law School c u r r ic u ­

lum re p o r te d in 1825, two m en tio n ed le c tu r e s in law and r e c i ta t io n s

and ex am s in law . T he rem a in in g p a r t s w e re a s follows:

A M oot C o u rt in w hich q u es tio n s a r e r e g u la r ly a rg u e d (often a t c o n s id e ra b le leng th ) b e fo re the P r o f e s s o r , who p ro n o u n ces an op in ion . In th e s e f ic ti t io u s a c tio n s the p le a d in g s , b i l l s of e x c e p tio n s , d e m u r r e r s to ev id en ce , sp e c ia l v e rd ic ts and m o tio n s in a r r e s t of ju d g m en t o r fo r a new t r i a l a r e d raw n up in fo rm by the s tu d e n ts . - -D uring the a rg u m e n t th e se s tu d en ts who a r e no t of c o u n se l a r e em ployed in tak in g m in u te s , w ith a v iew to th e a c q u is itio n of fa c ility and a c c u ra c y p r e p a ra to r y to p r a c t ic e . The c a s e s to b e a rg u e d a r e , of c o u r s e , ad ap ted to the p r o g re s s of the re sp e c tiv e s tu d e n ts in th e i r p ro fe s s io n a l s tu d ie s . B u t th ey a r e s tro n g ly u rg e d to engage in th em v e ry soon a f te r th e ir co m m en cem en t; i t hav ing b e en found b y e x p e r ­ie n ce th a t no o th e r e x e rc is e i s so p o w erfu l an e x c ite m e n t to in d u s try and em u la tio n o r so s tro n g ly in te r e s t s the s tu d en ts in th e i r p ro fe s s io n a l p u r s u i ts .

D ebating C lubs inc lud ing a l l the m e m b e rs of the L aw School in w hich som e q u e s tio n (g en e ra lly in m o ra l p h ilo so p h y , p o li­t ic a l econom y, o r c iv il policy) w hich a d m its an ex tended and f r e e d isc u s s io n , is d eb a ted once a w eek w ith a v iew to im p ro v e ­m e n t in e x te m p o re e lo cu tio n .

W ritte n d is s e r ta t io n s by the s tu d en t upon som e t i t le o r b ra n c h of the law o r the h is to ry of som e d e p a r tm e n t of le g a l o r p o li t ic a l sc ie n c e ,

A t C olum bia C o lleg e , sh o rtly a f te r K ent co m p le ted h is second

s e r ie s of le c tu r e s , a new L aw School w as fo rm e d un d er the d ire c tio n of

T h eo d o re W, D w ight, He fo llow ed the p a t te rn s e t by K ent and by S te a rn s

a t H a rv a rd and in h is f i r s t announcem en t he sa id th a t m o o t c o u r ts w ould

42lbid,

67

b e h e ld in the ty p ic a l f a s h i o n . T w o y e a r s la te r h is announcem en t i s

m o re sp e c ific .

Two M oot C o u rts a r e h e ld e v e ry w eek , a t each of w hich a cau se p re v io u s ly a s s ig n e d i s a rg u e d by four s tu d e n ts , two fo r each c la s s . The C o u rt c o n s is ts of the p re s id in g P r o fe s s o r , w ith w hom a r e a s s o c ia te d the two m e m b e rs of the S en io r C la ss who h ad a c te d a s C ounsel in the C ase p re v io u s ly a rg u ed . The a s s o c ia te Ju d g es d e liv e r w r itte n opin ions one w eek a f te r the a rg u m e n t, and the cau se is th en concluded by an opinion d e liv e re d by P r o f e s s o r D w ight. 44

In 1829, Jo se p h S to ry b ecam e Dane P r o fe s s o r of Law a t H a rv a rd

L aw School. In h is opening a d d r e s s . S to ry s e t a p a tte rn in fav o r of

co m m u n ica tio n tra in in g a s s tro n g a s th a t of K ent a t C olum bia, He sa id

th is , a s c ite d in H arn o ,

T he s tu d en t m u s t have a th o ro u g h know ledge of the p r in c ip le s of the law ; b u t th a t in i t s e l f is no t su ffic ien t. He should not im ag in e . . . th a t enough is done, if he h as so f a r m a s te re d the g e n e ra l d o c tr in e s of the com m on law , th a t he m ay e n te r w ith som e confidence pinto p r a c t ic e . T h e re a r e o th e r s tu d ie s , w hich dem and h is a tte n tio n . He should ad d ic t h im se lf to the study of p h ilo so p h y , of r h e to r ic , of h is to ry , and of hum an n a tu re . I t i s f ro m a w ant of th is e n la rg e d v iew of duty , , , th a t th e p ro fe s s io n h a s so m e tim e s b een re p ro a c h e d w ith a so rd id n a r ro w n e s s , w ith a low ch ic an e , w ith a cunning a v a r ic e , and w ith a d efic ien cy in l ib e ra l and en lig h ten ed p o licy . 45

'T h e p o rtio n of the L aw School w ork in w hich S to ry ch iefly d e lig h ted , " says

W a rre n , "w as the M oot C o u rts . "4^

4 ^ G o eb e l, o£. c i t , , p , 38,

4® H arno, 0 £ , c i t , , p , 45,

4^ W a rren , op, c i t , , p , 70,

68

T h ese M oot C o u rts had been one of the p r in c ip a l f e a tu r e s of the Law School u n d e r P r o fe s s o r S te a rn s ; and h is r e p o r ts . . . show how la rg e an am ount of t im e w as devoted to th e m .U nder S to ry and A shm un, h o w ev er, th ey re c e iv e d ev en g r e a te r a tten tio n . T hey w e re h e ld in the le c tu re room once a w eek , g e n e ra lly on F r id a y , in the a fte rn o o n ; a s ta tem en t of f a c ts w as d raw n up by the P r o f e s s o r the w eek b e fo re the a rg u m e n t, and two co u n se l a s s ig n e d to each s id e , one fro m the S en io r c la s s and one f ro m the Ju n io r c la s s e s , e a c h of the studen ts in the School re c e iv in g a c a se in ro ta tio n , a c co rd in g to h is s tan d in g .L a te r , w hen the n u m b e rs of the S chool in c re a s e d so la rg e ly , i t w as found n e c e s s a ry to ho ld two an d even th re e c o u r ts in a w eek,

Two tim e s a y e a r , the Law School h e ld m ock ju ry t r i a l s in w hich

they a tte m p ted a s m u ch a s p o ss ib le to re p ro d u c e an a c tu a l t r i a l . The

s tuden ts d rew lo ts to d e te rm in e who w ould a c t as counse l and the

rem a in in g s tu d en ts s e rv e d a s w itn e s s e s , ju ry , o r took n o te s f ro m the

aud ien ce . A ll the o th e r a c tiv itie s of th e schoo l w ere su sp en d ed fo r the

t r i a l and th e re se e m s to have b een q u ite a fe s tiv e a ir su rro u n d in g the

o ccas io n . To give an id ea of the a tm o sp h e re which p re v a ile d , W arren

quotes f ro m a l e t t e r se n t h im by R ic h a rd H. D ana, J r . c o n ce rn in g the

b e s t sp eech es g iven d u rin g h is s tay a t th e school.

The m o s t s u c c e ss fu l speech m ad e a t the School d u rin g the w hole tim e I w as th e r e , w as m ad e b e fo re a ju ry of u n d e r - g r a - d u a te s . Judge S to ry on the B en ch , b y W m. M. E v a r ts . A law a rg u m e n t w hich he in tro d u ce d in to i t , a d d re sse d ^o the C o u rt, w as the m o s t c o m p le te , s y s te m a tic , p re c is e and e leg a n tly spoken law a rg u m e n t I have e v e r y e t h e a rd , including m an y a rg u m e n ts of o u r m o s t d is tin g u ish e d co u n se l b efo re o u r h ig h e s t c o u r ts . E v a rts* ju ry a rg u m en t w as v e ry w ell done, b u t W m.

^^ ib id . ^® Ib id ., p . 71.

69

D av is of P ly m o u th , who w as h is opponent, did qu ite a s w ell to the ju ry . E v a rts* w as the b e s t law , and D a v is ’ the b e s t ju ry , a rg u m en t I h e a rd in the School, When ch arg in g the ju ry . Judge S to ry sa id he m u s t ru le the law in c e r ta in p o in ts a g a in s t th e d e fen d an t’s c o u n se l (E v a rts ) though they h ad b e e n a rg u e d to h im ’in a m a n n e r to w hich I c h e e rfu lly do h o m ag e . * Judge S to ry a lw ay s co m p lim en ted l ib e ra l ly , b u t n e v e r w en t so f a r a s in th is in s ta n c e . Indeed , E v a r ts h a s b ee n a p e c u lia r young m an a t sch o o l, c o lle g e , and in h is p ro fe s s io n a l s tu d ie s . If he d o es not becom e d is tin g u ish e d , he w ill d isap p o in t m o re p e rs o n s th an any o th e r young m a n whom I have e v e r m e t w ith .

The M oot C o u rts en joyed w ide p o p u la r ity w ith the s tu d en ts u n til

a ro u n d 1848. T hen , the in te r e s t seem ed to d ec lin e o r v a ry . One

su g g estio n w as th a t the in tro d u c tio n of p r iz e s fo r d isp u ta tio n w as the

cau se of lo s s of in te r e s t in M oot C o u rts . T h is w as though t of a ro u n d

1855 .^^ "In 1879, the s tu d en ts h ad lo s t in te r e s t so la rg e ly th a t the

M oot C o u rts w e re su sp en d ed . L a te r , th ey w e re re su m e d , b u t s t i l l ,

a p p a re n tly , w ith nothing n e a r the s u c c e ss known b e fo re 1848. One

p r o fe s s o r , speak ing b e fo re the A m e ric a n B a r A s so c ia tio n , in 1892,

m ade th is o b se rv a tio n :

The M oot C o u rts a r e n o t v e ry su c c e s s fu l . I w ish they w e re m o re so. I t is w e ll fo r the s tu d en ts to a rg u e in a som ew hat m o re fo rm a l m a n n e r a s they w ill b e fo re the fa c u lty , r a th e r th an to confine th e m se lv e s to th e ir c lu b s . M oot c o u r ts u se d to b e co m p u lso ry , b u t th e re w e re so m an y e x c u se s th a t we h ave g iven up the co m p u lsio n . They a r e r a th e r dw indling. We h av e ex p e rim e n te d w ith p r a c t ic e c o u r ts . L a s t y e a r we t r ie d M rs , M ay b rick w ith a ju ry f ro m the u n d e rg ra d u a te s and i t w as

^ 9 ib id , , pp. 7 1 -7 2 . ^O lb id ., p . 218.

S l lb id , , p . 328,

70

qu ite s u c c e s s fu l . B u t to m ake th a t k in d of th ing a s u c c e s s is p r e t ty h a rd w o rk fo r the P r o fe s s o r who h a s to g e t up the ev id en ce on bo th s id e s ,

F in a lly , in 1897, the M oot C o u rts w e re d isco n tin u ed a lto g e th e r ,

though W a rre n n o te s th a t the Law C lubs h ad tak en o v e r the fo rm e r

p o p u la r ity of the M oot C o u rts .

The f i r s t L aw Club se em s to have b een fo rm e d a t H a rv a rd

a ro u n d 1825, h o w ev er r e c o rd s a r e n o t v e ry a c c u ra te and i t is n e c e s s a ry

to r e ly on te s tim o n y of m e m b e rs of the club w ritin g in I860 , The

R e c o rd B ook of th is c lu b - -T h e M a rsh a ll C lu b -- fo r the y e a r s I860 to

1876 h a s b een p r e s e r v e d , and W a rre n u s e s i t to d e s c r ib e the n a tu re

of the c lu b .

The R e c o rd B ook of the M a rsh a ll Club . . . co n ta in s . , , the follow ing s ta te m e n t: ’In o r ab o u t the y e a r A , D, 1825, c e r ta in s tu d en ts of the Dane Law School, d e s iro u s of im p ro v in g th e m se lv e s in th e study of the L aw an d f ittin g th e m se lv e s to b eco m e m o re re a d y in a rg u m en t and m o re tho rough in r e s e a r c h , and a t the sam e t im e , d e s iro u s of cu ltiv a tin g f r ie n d ly i n t e r ­c o u rs e and s o c ia l a m en ity one w ith a n o th e r , o rg a n ize d th e m se lv e s in to a L aw Club o r so c ie ty , and adopted a s th e ir d is tin g u ish e d a p p e lla tio n the nam e of the M a rsh a ll C lub, , . , *

A cco rd in g to o th e r r e c o rd s , the s ta te d p u rp o se of th e se c lubs w as

to d is c u s s c a s e s and p o in ts of law and u se th is p r a c t ic e in con junction

w ith the s tu d ie s of the c u r r ic u lu m . T h is w as e n co u rag ed by the F a c u lty

^^Ibid , ^^Ibid , , p . 321,

^^Ib id . ^ ^ Ib id ,, p . 319.

71

of the School, A s an ex am p le , the a c tiv it ie s of the M a rsh a ll Club

u su a lly w ere h e ld each w eek in the a fte rn o o n . P r i o r to the m e e tin g ,

the C le rk w as to a s s ig n two m e m b e rs to p r e p a re a c a se fo r a rg u m e n t

and a s ta te m e n t of f a c ts of th e c a s e . The C le rk a ls o appoin ted a m e m ­

b e r to a c t a s ju d g e . Once the two m e m b e rs who w e re to a c t a s

co u n se l had co m p le ted the s ta te m e n t of f a c ts , the C le rk pu t i t on f ile

in the l ib r a r y fo r a l l to re a d in advance . A t the m e e tin g , of c o u r s e ,

the c a se w ould be a rg u e d and a d ec is io n re n d e re d by the studen t ju d g e .

By 1873-1874 the College C atalogue cou ld c la im th a t a lm o s t

e v e ry m e m b e r of the School belonged to a c lu b , of w hich th e re w e re

tw elv e . The g row th in n u m b er and ac tiv ity of th e c lu b s is su g g es ted a s

COa s tro n g re a so n fo r the dec lin e of in te r e s t in the M oot C o u rts . The

fa c t th a t a lm o s t a l l the s tu d en ts be longed to a c lu b , and not a l l w as

p ro b ab ly no t a r e s u l t of the ind iv idual students* ch o ice . A lthough the

h is to r ie s of H a rv a rd do no t say so e x p lic itly , th e r e i s s tro n g r e a s o n to

su sp e c t th a t th e so c ia l a s p e c t of the c lubs o ften outw eighed the a c a d e m ic

in te r e s t s . T h e re i s no d en ia l th a t belonging to the " r ig h t" club w as

im p o rta n t, and the b la c k b a ll sy s te m of a d m iss io n of new m e m b e rs w as

in u s e , T h is cou ld have b een a sign of l e s s in te r e s t in the a c tu a l

^ ^ Ib id ., p , 322, ^ '^Ib id ,, pp . 327-328,

58lbid. , p , 322, 5 9 Ib id . , p . 413,

72

p ra c t ic e of c a se s fo r s tu d en t im p ro v em en t. In a r e p o r t of 1878, b y the

V is itin g C o m m ittee , O liv e r W endell H o lm es , J r . a d d re s s e d h im se lf to

th is questio n .

I t i s s ti l l g round fo r r e g r e t th a t M oot C o u rts a t t r a c t le s s a tten tio n than fo rm e r ly . The fa c t i s in p a r t due to the im p ro v ed o rg an iza tio n of the Club C o u rts w h ere i t i s now the p ra c t ic e to have a bench of s e v e ra l judges in s te a d of one a s fo rm e r ly .T h is ad d s to the in te r e s t and th o ro u g h n ess of the d isc u ss io n ; and , a s the s tu d en ts a r e engaged in c a s e s v e ry f re q u e n tly , the Club C o u rts a r e m o re im p o rta n t th an th o se p re s id e d o v e r by the P r o f e s s o r s , w h e re the s u p e r io r ity of the judge is o ffse t by the r a r e r e c u r r e n c e of o p p o rtu n itie s fo r any one p e rso n to be h e a rd .

Y our c o m m ittee a r e of the opin ion th a t the p ra c t ic e of d raw ing counsel by lo t in s te a d of sp e c ia lly a ss ig n in g th e m a s w as fo rm e r ly the p r a c t ic e i s one of the c a u s e s of the l i t t le in te re s t now fe l t . . . .&0

A nother h is to ry of the H a rv a rd L aw School in d ic a te s th a t a t no

tim e did the F ac u lty a tte m p t to in c re a s e the n u m b er of law c lu b s o r to

su p e rv ise thena. I t g o es on to po in t ou t, "T he Pow Wow Club, w hich

w as long the m o s t p ro m in e n t in the School, w as s ta r te d abou t 1870. "

A fte r th is , s e v e ra l o th e r s w ere fo rm e d , sa y s th is au th o r . He go es on

to com m en t on the so c ia l n a tu re of the c lu b s , "T he th re e o r fo u r m o s t

p ro m in en t c lubs s e le c te d the a b le s t m e n in the c la s s , and so m e tim e s

even d rew m en aw ay f ro m the new er and le s s im p o rta n t ones to f i l l

v a c a n c ie s . M em b ersh ip in one of the b e s t c lu b s w as a su b s ta n tia l

^°Ibid.

73

h o n o r . S im ila r co m m en ts could be m ade about the law clubs a t

C olum bia. W hile i t i s d iff ic u lt to d is a g re e w ith O liv e r W endell

H o lm es , J r . , i t i s n o t e a sy to a c c e p t the fa c t th a t s tu d e n t- ru n so c ia l

c lu b s , b a se d upon so c ia l p r e s t ig e , and d raw ing the a b le s t m en in to one

o r two top clubs and leav in g the r e s t fo r the o th e r c lu b s could be a s

e ffec tiv e an in s tru m e n t fo r educating s tu d en ts in the p r a c t ic a l and co m ­

m u n ica tiv e a s p e c ts of le g a l p ra c t ic e a s w ould a s im i la r p ro g ra m u n d er

fa c u lty su p e rv is io n , g u id an ce , and in s tru c tio n , and d es ig n ed to s p re a d

the w o rk and value equally am ong a l l the s tu d en ts . N e v e r th e le s s , th is

w as the s itu a tio n in m o s t of the b e s t law sch o o ls in the U nited S ta tes

d u rin g th is tim e .

P r a c t ic a l A sp e c ts of the L aw C u rr ic u lu m

F i r s t , to b e s u re th a t the m ean ing of the w o rd " p ra c t ic a l" is

u n d e rs to o d in th is co n tex t, le t i t be s a id th a t in the te rm in o lo g y of le g a l

ed u ca tio n , anything d es ig n e d to h e lp a law s tu d en t l e a r n to apply the

le g a l p r in c ip le s he h a s s tu d ied in the a c tu a l p r a c t ic e of law is c a lle d

p ra c t ic a l . O bviously , th en , in th is se c tio n no t a l l p r a c t ic a l a s p e c ts of

the c u rr ic u lu m a r e to be ex am in ed . Only th o se a s p e c ts of the c u r r ic u ­

lum w hich have a v a lu e in re v e a lin g rh e to r ic a l th e o ry w ill b e exam in ed .

^^The C en ten n ia l H is to ry of the H a rv a rd L aw School, 1817- 1917 (C am bridge; The H a rv a rd Law School A s so c ia tio n , 1918), p . 145,

^^G oebel, op. c i t , , p . 38.

74

In H a m lin 's L eg a l E d u c a tio n in C olonial New Y o rk , the f i r s t

u se fu l a t te m p t to p r e s c r ib e a c o u rse of study fo r law s tu d en ts in A m eric a

a p p e a r s . T h is w as w ritte n b y W illiam Sm ith in ab o u t 1756. A lthough

i t w as no t in ten d ed fo r a sp ec ific school of law , i t i s , n e v e r th e le s s , the

f i r s t a tte m p t to s e t fo rth a law c u r r ic u lu m . In i t . Sm ith d iv id es the

tra in in g of a la w y e r in to the s tu d y of s ix s c ie n c e s , in c lu d ed am ong

w hich is "L o g ick and R h e to r ic k . " Sm ith su g g ested rea d in g a book ca lled

th e A r t of Speak ing , w ithou t no ting the a u th o r.

M o re d ire c t ly a s s o c ia te d w ith a law schoo l, b u t s t i l l no t ac tu a lly

a p a r t of a law schoo l c u r r ic u lu m , i s the in fo rm a tio n co n ta in ed in the

f i r s t o ffic ia l an n o u n cem en t of the founding of the H a rv a rd L aw School.

H e re , a g r e a t d e a l of s t r e s s w as la id on the advan tage to be en joyed by

the law s tu d e n ts , " th ro u g h the p r iv ile g e ex tended to th em of a ttend ing

the l e c tu r e s of the co lleg e p r o f e s s o r s . " "A nd i t can n o t be d o u b te d ,"

co n tin u es C h a r le s W a rre n , " th a t th is p r iv ile g e fo rm e d a c o n s id e ra b le

in d u cem en t and a t t r a c t io n to th o se who jo in ed the School. " W a rre n h as

g a th e re d to g e th e r in h is book m uch te s tim o n y of f o rm e r s tu d en ts to the

e x ten t to w hich th ey a v a iled th e m se lv e s of th is o p p o rtu n ity and of the

v a lu e th ey saw in i t . P e rh a p s a s s ig n ifican t a s the fa c t of the p riv ile g e

i s the id en tity of p ro fe s s o r s th a t W a rre n m en tio n s .

^^H am lin , og. c i t . , p . 197.

75

Of the P r o f e s s o r s of the C ollege a t th is t im e , i t h a s b een sa id th a t they fo rm e d 'a g roup of m en u n equalled in A m e r ic a in v a r ie d cu ltiv a tio n and the l i te r a r y s p ir i t . '

Jo h n Q uincy A d am s had b een ap p o in ted B oy lston P r o f e s s o r of R h e to ric and O ra to ry , in 1806, a d is tin c tly adv an ced step in in te l le c tu a l t ra in in g , of w hich h is two v o lu m es of le c tu r e s s t i l l give p ro o f. He w as su cceed ed , in 1809, by Jo sep h M cK ean, w hose p lace in tu rn w as tak en , in 1819, by E d w ard T . C hanning, of w hom i t h a s b een sa id ’no A m e ric a n p ro fe s s o r e v e r e x e r ­c is e d so p ro lo n g ed and unqu estio n ab le a l i t e r a r y in fluence o r tra in e d so m any d is tin g u ish ed a u th o rs .

In 1857, C olum bia U n iv e rs ity e s ta b lis h e d a sy s te m u n d er w hich a

s tu d en t a i t e r th re e y e a r s ' a tten d an ce , cou ld s e le c t one of th re e sch o o ls:

L e t te r s , S c ien ce , and Ju ris p ru d e n c e . In the School of J u r is p ru d e n c e

the s tu d e n ts , then in th e i r fo u rth y e a r , w ould be in s tru c te d in M odern

H is to ry ; P o l i t ic a l E conom y; the P r in c ip le s of N a tu ra l and In te rn a tio n a l

Law ; C iv il and Com m on Law; C icero de L e g ib u s , de O r a to re , de O ffic ii s;

P la to de R upublica; A r is to t le ’s R h e to ric and L ogic; C h e m is try . T h is

w as to be acco m p an ied by a m oot co u rt p ro g ra m .

T h u s , th e re w as som e e ffo rt to p ro v id e law s tu d en ts w ith tra in in g

in the p r in c ip le s of rh e to r ic a p a r t f ro m the p r a c t ic e p ro g ra m s of the

m oo t c o u r ts . H ow ever, in sp ite of H a rv a rd Law S ch o o l's n o tice of the

value of h e a r in g o th e r p ro fe s s o r s in the C o lleg e , and in sp ite of Jo sep h

S to ry 's co m m en ts on the value of rh e to r ic to the law s tu d en t. H a rv a rd

did not develop a s a le a d e r am ong law sch o o ls in p ro v id in g such a

l ib e ra l c u r r ic u lu m . "W hat S tory did fo r the ad v an cem en t of le g a l

6 4 w a r re n , og. c i t , , pp. 329-330. ^^Q ogbel, og, c i t . , p . 27.

76

ed u ca tio n , " says H a rn o , " is < • • a su b jec t fo r d eb a te , " "T h a t he did

no t su b s ta n tia lly l ib e ra l iz e the c o u rse of in s tru c tio n , " th is au th o r co n ­

tin u e s , " is c le a r . L ib e ra l s tu d ie s , if tak en a t a l l w hile the studen t w as

p re p a r in g fo r the b a r , h ad to be p u rsu e d b e fo re he began h is law

s tu d ie s . A d iffe re n c e of ph ilo sophy , w hich w ill be d isc u s se d la t e r ,

Lne x is te d e a r ly b e tw een H a rv a rd and Y ale to w ard le g a l education . Y ale

a tte m p te d to te a ch a m o re p ra c t ic a l co u r se - -de signed to p ro v id e a

c o u rse of study p a t te rn e d a f te r the o ffice w o rk , b u t an im p ro v e m e n t on

i t . In th is ph ilo sophy , i t w as co n ce rn ed w ith developing a rh e to r ic a l

th e o ry of le g a l p r a c t ic e . R e p re se n ta tiv e of th is th e o ry is W illiam C.

R o b in so n ’s F o re n s ic O ra to ry A M anual fo r A d v o ca tes . R obinson,

p r o fe s s o r of law a t Y ale U n iv e rs ity w ritin g in 1893, e x p re s s e s the u n d e r ­

ly ing ph ilosophy of h is book in the P re fa c e .

I have w r itte n th is book in o rd e r to a s s i s t law s tu d en ts and young la w y e rs in p re p a r in g th e m se lv e s to d isc h a rg e in a p ro p e r m a n n e r th e ir d u tie s a s ad v o c a te s . F o r m o re than fo rty y e a r s I have b een a f re q u e n te r of c o u r t- ro o m s , and have stud ied the m o d es in w hich th e t r i a l s of c a u se s a r e conducted f ro m the v a r io u s p o in ts of v iew of a sp e c ta to r , a c o u r t o f f ic e r , a p a r t i c i ­pa tin g co u n se l, an d a ju d g e . The conv iction w as long since fo rc e d upon m y m in d th a t the en o rm o u s w as te of tim e and e n e rg y involved in th e se p ro c ee d in g s i s due to a w ant of m ethod in p re p a r in g and p re se n tin g c a u s e s , w h ereb y the co n flic ts of the fo ru m , w hich should c o n s is t in the co n ce n tra tio n of w ell o rd e re d fo rc e s on the e x ac t p o in ts of a tta c k and d e fen se ,

^^H arno , op. c i t . , p . 47. ^^R eed , o£. c i t . , p . 156.

^®W illiam C. R ob inson , F o re n s ic O ra to ry A M anual fo r A dvo­c a te s (B oston: L i t t le , B row n , and C om pany, 1893),

77

d e g e n e ra te in to a g u e r i lla w a r fa re of in d e fin ite d u ra tio n , c h a ra c te r iz e d by i r r e g u la r and often f ru i t le s s s a ll ie s , s u r ­p r i s e s , and r e t r e a t s . A cting upon th is conv ic tion , and seek ing fo r the m eth o d in w hich a le g a l c o n te s t ought to be conducted ,I w as led to c o m p a re the m o d es of o p e ra tio n , adopted by a d v o ca te s who h a d b eco m e n o ted fo r the c e le r i ty w ith w hich th ey won th e ir c a s e s , w ith the m eth o d and the ru le s p r e s c r ib e d by w r i te r s on th e A r t of F o re n s ic O ra to ry , e sp e c ia lly by C ic e ro and Q u in tilia n , and b ec am e s a tis f ie d th a t, w hh ther co n sc io u s ly to th e m se lv e s o r no t, th e se ad v o ca tes p u rsu e d th a t m eth o d and obeyed th o se r u le s . If th is be tru e , nothing i s m o re d e s ir a b le than th a t young ad v o ca te s should be w ell t r a in e d in the p r in c ip le s and p ra c t ic e of th is a r t , and fo r th a t p u rp o se I have b ro u g h t to g e th e r in th is vo lum e the su b stan ce of w h a tev e r I have found a lre a d y w r itte n on the su b jec t, and of such a d d itio n a l c o n c lu s io n s a s I have d e r iv e d f ro m p e rso n a l o b s e rv ­a tio n and e x p e r ie n c e . T h a t i t m ay h e lp to s e rv e th is p u rp o se , and a lso m e e t w ith som e a p p ro v a l f ro m ad v o ca tes who a r e q u a lified to judge of i ts m e r i t s and d e fe c ts , m o d esty d oes no t fo rb id m e to h o p e .

B ut by no m e a n s would I le a d the s tu d en t to b e liev e th a t h is ex am in a tio n of th e A r t of F o re n s ic O ra to ry should b e confined to the t r e a t is e w ith w hich he i s h e re p re s e n te d . On the co n ­t r a r y , the study of L o g ic , R h e to r ic , and E lo cu tio n , on a f a r m o re ex ten s iv e sc a le th an the l im its of th is volum e p e r m it , I m u s t s tre n u o u s ly reco m m en d . N o r is th e re a w ork on A dvo­c ac y o r on any one of i ts su b o rd in a te to p ic s , n o r any book of T r ia l s , n o r any ab le novel in Ayhich the o p e ra tio n s of sk illfu l a d v o c a te s and d e te c tiv e s a r e d e s c r ib e d , th a t he m ay no t p ro fita b ly re a d a s i l lu s tr a t in g and apply ing the ru le s and m e th o d s w hich th is m an u a l in c u lc a te s and ex p la in s . ^9

R obinson o p e ra te s u n d er the th e s is th a t a lthough som e of the

g r e a t ch a llen g es and m o m en ts of o ra to ry m ay belong to the p a s t , i t i s

s t i l l a b so lu te ly e s s e n t ia l th a t the ad v o ca te know the p r in c ip le s of o ra to ry .

R e g a rd le s s of the n a tiv e ta le n t a young m an m ay h av e , he s a y s , the

p e r fo rm a n c e of le g a l advocacy r e q u ire s the u se of fa c u ltie s "w hose

^ ^ Ib id ,, pp . v -v ii .

78

developm en t d ep en d s a lm o s t e n tire ly upon a r t i f ic ia l tra in in g , " I t is

fo rtu n a te fo r the ad vocate th a t the m e th o d s w hich co n s titu te the a r t of

o ra to ry "have b e e n the su b jec t of in v e s tig a tio n f ro m the dawn of c iv iliz ed

so c ie ty , and m an y of the ru le s in w hich th ey a r e e x p re s se d a r e m o re

v e n e ra b le th an th o se of any o th e r s c ie n c e ." D uring th ese a g e s , he sa y s ,

th e re h as b een no change in hum an n a tu re ; the s tim u li w hich m oved

m en to ac tio n in a n c ie n t G reece a r e s t i l l s im ila r ly e ffec tiv e fo r m o d ern

m an . "A ll the acc u m u la te d know ledge of the p a s t , w ith a l l the i l lu s tr io u s

ex am p les of the ap p lica tio n of th a t know ledge, th u s lie b e fo re the o ra to r

of o u r day fo r h is gu idance and in s tru c tio n . " "He is con fused , " says

R obinson, "by no dil&fersities of th e o ry , m is le d by no con flic ting ru le s

of p r a c t ic e . H is te a c h e r s , an c ie n t and m o d e rn , a re in h a rm o n y bo th a s

to the cond ition of in te l le c t and w ill in to w hich he m u s t en d eav o r to lead

h is h e a r e r , an d a s to the m eth o d s by w hich th a t condition is to be p r o ­

duced . " A ll th a t is lack ing is the d e s ir e and m o tiv a tio n on the p a r t of

the studen t to l e a r n . I t i s conceivab le th a t R ob inson’s g en e ro u s

c la im s a s to the v a lid ity and r e l ia b il i ty of h is th e o r ie s m ig h t h ave con­

tr ib u te d to the re lu c ta n c e of o th e r p r o fe s s o r s of law to b e liev e in th e ir

v a lu e and a g re e to th e i r in c lu sio n in the law school c u r r ic u lu m . B ut

th is i s only c o n je c tu re .

^ ^ Ib id . , pp . 3 -4 .

79

R ob in so n ’s book is d iv ided in to two p a r t s - - th e f i r s t s e ts fo rth

the th eo ry and p ra c t ic e of o ra to ry in g e n e ra l , and the second p a r t seek s

to apply tha t th e o ry to the fo re n s ic s itu a tio n . W hile he g iv es c r e d i t to

C ice ro and Q u in tilian fo r h is in s p ira t io n beyond the le g a l p ro fe s s io n

its e l f , i t is c le a r th a t he w as in flu en ced by the B r i t i s h th e o r ie s of public

speaking of C am p b e ll, B la ir , and W hately . F o r ex am p le , he d iv id es

the a r t of o ra to ry in to two p ro c è s s e s --c o n v ic tio n and p e r s u a s io n , w hich

71is a B r it ish c o n tr ib u tio n to rh e to r ic a l th e o ry . He s ta te s th a t o ra to ry

"m oves the W ill by P re se n tin g the Id e a s C a lcu la ted to E x c ite those

E m otions w hich W ill P ro d u ce the A c t D e s i r e d ," w hich is an o th e r o ff­

sp rin g of fa c u lty psycho logy f ro m the B r i t i s h p e r io d , F ro m Q u in tilian

he ob tains the id e a of the o ra to r b e in g a good m an , and f ro m A r is to t le ,

th rough C ice ro and Q u in tilian , he d iv id es o ra to ry in to ju d ic ia l , d em o n ­

s tra t iv e , and d e lib e ra tiv e , W ith r e g a rd to the d iv is io n s .o f o ra to ry ,

the au tho r d raw s ch ie fly fro m C ic e ro by ca lling th em In v en tio n , E x p r e s ­

sion , A rra n g e m e n t, and D e liv e ry . T h ese a re defin ed e s s e n tia l ly a s

the Rom an r h e to r ic ia n s would h av e , w ith e x p re ss io n tak in g the p la c e of

s ty le , and m e m o ry being o m itted .

In h is ap p lic a tio n of th e se th e o r ie s to the fo re n s ic s itu a tio n ,

R obinson b eg in s w ith inven tion , defin ing i t a s " , , , the a c t by w hich an

'^^Ib id ., p , 18, '^^ ib id ., p , 9,

7 3 l ^ . , pp . 32-46; 17, 7 4 ib jd ,, pp . 56-57 ,

80

o r a to r p ro d u c e s in h is own m ind the id e a s w hich a r e to be em ployed in

h is o ra tio n , A fte r s tr e s s in g the n eed to app ly the id e a s of the

fo re n s ic o ra tio n to the h e a r e r s , the au th o r d is c u s s e s the id e a s s e r v ic e ­

ab le in fo re n s ic o ra to ry . T hey a r i s e , he s a y s , a lw ays f ro m the i s s u e s

in the cau se and a lw ay s include the id ea of a duty to b e p e r fo rm e d , A

7 Agood d ea l of a tte n tio n is devo ted to the d is c o v e ry of the i s s u e s . In

d isc u s s in g a rg u m e n t, the au th o r d ev o tes h is a tte n tio n a lm o s t e n t ire ly

to in a r t i s t ic p ro o fs - - w itn e s s e s , d o cu m en ts , e tc , and to to p ic s o r co m m o n ­

p la c e s , bo th co n cep ts o r ig in a lly a t tr ib u ta b le to A r is to t le , S ig n ifican tly ,

th is book p ro v id e s no m en tio n of the a s p e c t of a rg u m e n t w hich A r is to t le

thought to b e m o s t im p o rta n t: en th y m em es. One page is devo ted to

the sy llo g is tic fo rm , and one exam ple is g iv en , b u t th e re i s l i t t le d i s ­

c u ss io n of the p ro b a b ility fa c to r , no d is c u s s io n of the fo rm s of en thym em e

a s th ey m ay a p p e a r in a rg u m e n t, and no d is c u s s io n of the lo g ic of the

fo rm ,

A fte r speak ing g e n e ra lly on the a r ra n g e m e n t of id ea s and the

o rd e rin g of th em fo r the co m p le te o r a to r ic a l a c t of the c o u r tro o m , a s

i t i s d e s c r ib e d , R obinson d iv id es the fu n c tio n s of the t r i a l in to su b ­

d iv is io n s : q u a lific a tio n s of w itn e sse s ; tra in in g w itn e sse s ; d i r e c t

^^I b id , , p . 59, ^^I b id , , pp , 59-65 ,

^^I b id . , pp , 65 -85 . ^^I b id , , pp , 97-103,

81

ex am in a tio n of w itn e s s e s ; c ro s s -e x a m in a tio n of w itn e s s e s ; r e - d i r e c t

e x am in a tio n . T he r e m a in d e r of the book c o n c e rn s i t s e l f w ith s ty le ,

d e l iv e ry , and som e id e a s on the p a r t s and p re p a ra t io n of an o ra tio n ,

R o b in so n 's F o re n s ic O ra to ry is in fo rm a tiv e to th is study in a

n u m b e r of w ay s . P r im a r i ly , i t s tan d s a s an ex am p le of an e ffo r t to

r e la te fo rm a l le g a l ed u ca tio n and r h e to r ic a l th e o ry in a way th a t had

n o t b e e n done fo r c e n tu r ie s . I t i s of in te r e s t th a t th is s o r t of an e f fo r t

w as m ad e d u rin g the fo rm a tiv e y e a r s of the A m e ric a n law schoo l, an d

one can sp ecu la te w hat ch an g es m ig h t have tak en p la c e had Y ale b eco m e

the lead in g and m o s t in flu e n tia l of the law sch o o ls . H o w ev er, a s R ee d

in d ic a te d , i t w as no t Y ale b u t H a rv a rd th a t b eg an to s e t the exam ple f o r

o th e r law sch o o ls .

W ithin the c u r r ic u lu m of H a rv a rd L aw S chool, h o w ev e r, a

d ev e lo p m en t took p la c e w hich bo th h ad a p ro found e ffe c t upon le g a l e d u ­

c a tio n an d w as a p o te n tia l co n trib u tio n to the co m m u n ica tio n tra in in g of

the law s tu d en ts . T h is w as the d ev e lo p m en t of the c a s e m ethod of

te ac h in g law . The c a s e m eth o d m u s t be d is c u s s e d in two d im e n s io n s - -

how i t w as in ten d ed to b e , and how i t a c tu a lly w a s .

F i r s t , the c a s e m eth o d w as in ten d ed by i t s d e v e lo p e r - - P ro f e s s o r

C h r is to p h e r L an g d e ll of H a rv a rd - - to be a m eth o d of teach in g law by

dev elo p in g the s tu d en t in le g a l th inking and le g a l re a so n in g , r a th e r th an

^% i d . , pp . 128-225. ® °Reed, lo c . c it .

82

m e re ly teach in g p r in c ip le s of law . T h a t i s to say , m any in the law

fe l t th a t " the p r im a r y o b je c t of le g a l in s tru c t io n is to te a c h the s tu d en t

w hat the law is upon a su ffic ien tly la rg e n u m b e r of to p ic s , to give h im

a g e n e ra l know ledge of a l l i ts m o s t im p o rta n t b ra n c h e s , One of the

fo llo w e rs of L a n g d e ll r e a c te d to th a t p o s itio n , "I should in fe r f ro m jjth a t

s ta te m e n t] th a t the a u th o r 's o b je c t w as know ledge. The o b je c t h e ld up

Û Oby u s a t C am b rid g e i s the pow er of le g a l re a so n in g . . . . A s P r o ­

f e s s o r W illiam A . K e e n e r d e sc r ib e d the s y s te m in 1888,

T h is m e th o d of teach in g does n o t c o n s is t in le c tu re s by the in s t r u c to r w ith r e fe re n c e to the c a s e s in su p p o rt of the p ro p o ­s itio n s s ta te d by h im . The e x e rc is e s in the le c tu re ro o m c o n s is t in a s ta te m e n t and d isc u s s io n by the s tu d en ts of the c a s e s s tu d ied by th e m in advan ce . T h is d isc u ss io n is u n d er the d ire c tio n of the in s t r u c to r , who m a k e s such su g g estio n s and e x p r e s s e s such op in ions a s a r e n e c e s s a ry .

The s tu d en t i s r e q u ire d to an a ly ze each c a s e , d is c r im in a te b e tw een the re le v a n t and i r r e le v a n t , b e tw een the a c tu a l and p o s s ib le g ro u n d s of d e c is io n . And a f te r hav ing thus d is c u s s e d a c a s e , he i s p r e p a re d and r e q u ire d to d e a l w ith i t in i t s re la t io n to o th e r c a s e s .

In o th e r w o rd s th e s tuden t i s p r a c t ic a l ly doing, a s a s tu d en t, w hat he w ill be c o n s ta n tly doing a s a la w y e r . By th is m ethod , the s tu d e n t 's re a so n in g p o w ers a r e c o n s ta n tly developed; and w hile he i s gain ing the pow er of le g a l a n a ly s is and sy n th e s is , he i s a lso gain ing th e o th e r o b jec t of le g a l e d u c a tio n --n a m e ly , a know ledge of w hat th e law a c tu a lly i s . 84

H en ry M. H a r t , J r . and A lb e r t M . S ack s , p ro fe s s o r s of law a t

H a rv a rd , p r e s e n t a m o d e rn in te rp re ta t io n of the L angdell m eth o d in the

® ^W arren , 0£ . c i t . , p . 419. ^^Ibid .

^ % i d . , pp . 419-420 . S ^ Ib id ., p . 421.

83

p re fa c e to th e ir book The L eg a l P r o c e s s ; B a s ic P ro b le m s in the M aking

and A pp lica tion of L aw , 1958.

1. Knowledge abou t law , i t se e m s is e a s ie r to a cq u ire and re ta in , and m o re re a d ily a c c e s s ib le fo r e ffective u s e , ifi t can be re la te d to a c o h e re n t and in te llig ib le v iew of the le g a l sy s te m a s a w hole and i ts c h a r a c te r is t ic m o d es of function ing ,

2. A le g a l sy s te m a sy s te m - a co o rd in a ted , function ing w hole m ade up of a s e t of in te r r e la te d , in te r - a c t in g p a r t s . The so lu tion of sp ec ific leg a l p ro b le m s co n s ta n tly re q u ire s an u n d ers tan d in g of the functions and in te r - r e la t io n s h ip s of m o re th an one in s titu tio n a l p ro c e s s and f re q u e n tly s e v e ra l . P ro b le m s a r is in g in a c o u r t c a ll fo r a p e rc e p tiv e a w a re n e s s not only of w hat c o u rts a r e fo r b u t of w hat a le g is la tu re i s fo r and so m e ­tim e s a lso of w hat an a d m in is tra tiv e agen cy is fo r and of w hat m a t te r s can b e s t b e le f t to p r iv a te d e c is io n . P ro b le m s a r is in g in the c o u rse of the le g is la tiv e o r a d m in is tra tiv e p ro c e s s e s c a ll fo r the sam e a w a re n e s s e s . L a w y e rs a t the stage of p r i ­v a te co u n se lin g have ag ain and ag a in to c o n s id e r w hether to invoke the p ro c e d u re s of p r iv a te o r of ju d ic ia l s e ttle m e n t o r , o ften a lte rn a tiv e ly , of le g is la tiv e o r a d m in is tra tiv e se ttle m e n t.The developm en t of th e se a w a re n e s s e s c a l ls fo r study w hich co m es to g r ip s w ith the q u es tio n s of w hat each of th ese v a r io u s p r o c e s s e s of d ec is io n good fo r and how each in te r - r e la te s and in te ra c ts w ith the o th e rs .

3. M any of the tro u b le so m e an d m o s t freq u en tly r e c u r r in g d iff ic u ltie s in the law a re n o t d iff ic u ltie s of the law of c o n tr a c ts , o r to r t s , o r p ro p e r ty , o r c iv il p ro c e d u re , o r co n s titu tio n a l law , o r of any o th e r of the conven tional f ie ld s of su b stan tiv e o r p ro c e d u ra l law . T hey a re d iff ic u ltie s w hich a r e in tr in s ic in the whole e n te rp r is e of o rg an iz in g and m ain ta in in g a so c ie ty w hich w ill e ffec tiv e ly se rv e the p u rp o se s w hich so c ie tie s e x is t to s e rv e . T hey p ose p ro b le m s and im p lic a te concep ts w hich a p p e a r and r e a p p e a r in e v e ry f ie ld of su b stan tiv e law and in e v e ry p ro c e s s of d ec is io n - ju d ic ia l , le g is la t iv e , a d m in is tra t iv e , and p r iv a te . 85

o eH enry M. H a«t, J r . and A lb e r t M, S acks, The L e g a l P r o c e s s ;

B a s ic P ro b le m s in the M aking and A p p lica tio n of Law (C am bridge: T e n ta tiv e E d itio n , 1958), pp. i i i - iv .

84

T h e se a u th o rs , sh o rtly fo llow ing the p re c e d in g s ta te m e n t, say e x p lic itly

th a t th is p ro p o se s noth ing m o re than the c a s e sy s tem of L an g d e ll of the

1870’ s.®^

The second o b lig a tio n involved in an ex am in a tio n of the c a se

m eth o d of teach in g a s i t developed b e fo re th e 20th C en tu ry is an acco u n t

of w hat i t a c tu a lly b e c a m e , H arno d e s c r ib e s th e se two fe a tu re s of the

c a se m ethod a s p a ra d o x ic a l. "L an g d e ll, " sa y s H arno , " in tro d u ce d and

h is e a r ly d is c ip le s p e r fe c te d , a sy s te m of in s tru c t io n w hich in the h an d s

of an ab le and sk illfu l te a c h e r is u n e x ce lled a s an in s tru m e n t of ed u ­

c a tio n . " H ow ever, H arn o p ro c e e d s to say th a t ", , , L an g d e ll a lso

i s re sp o n s ib le m o re th an any o th e r m an fo r confining le g a l ed u ca tio n in

a s tra ig h t m o ld w hich w as fo r y e a r s to d is s o c ia te i t f ro m the liv in g

co n tex t of the w o rld ab o u t i t , " Going on , H arn o sa y s .

The d ic tu m w as th a t a l l the a v a ila b le m a te r ia ls of the law w e re con ta in ed in p r in te d b o oks, and th e p r in te d books f ro m w hich and only f ro m w hich a le g a l ed u ca tio n w as to be had w e re c a se -b o o k s c o n s is tin g of s e le c te d d e c is io n s of the a p p e l­la te c o u r ts on each of the m a in to p ic s of the law . D is re g a rd e d w e re the b ro a d p r e m is e s fo r the study of law conceived by th o se m en who h e ld the in it ia l p ro fe s s o r s h ip s of law . U n reco g ­n ized w as the fa c t th a t p ro sp e c tiv e la w y e rs needed tra in in g in v a r io u s a r e a s of le a rn in g and sk ill,

H arn o n o tes th a t i t c am e to be the no tion th a t the law w as s e lf - su f f ic ie n t

and th a t re ach in g le g a l co n c lu s io n s in v o lv ed nothing m o re than r e c o u rs e

® ^Ibid ,, p , V, ®^Harno, og. c i t , , pp , 59-60 ,

85

to the law i ts e l f and i t s own in te rn a l h is to r y . T h is w as so no t only in

the U nited S ta te s b u t in E n g lan d and E u ro p e a s w e ll.

In conclud ing the co m m en ts on the c a s e m eth o d of in s tru c tio n in

law sc h o o ls , i t can be sa id th a t i t s co n cep tio n invo lved g re a t p o te n tia l

in the d ev e lo p m en t of r h e to r ic a l th eo ry in th e ju d ic ia l p r o c e s s . H ad

the c a s e m eth o d developed a s o r ig in a lly p lan n ed , i t w ould have b ro u g h t

ab o u t e x te n s iv e a n a ly s is of the r h e to r ic a l a s p e c ts of ju r is p ru d e n c e ,

a long w ith the study of le g a l p r in c ip le s . I t could be re a so n e d th a t f ro m

such a study of p r a c t ic e m ig h t have com e d is c u s s io n s of the th e o ry of

law . T h is s ta te m e n t i s a c a d e m ic , h o w e v e r , in lig h t of the d ire c tio n

tak en in th e d ev e lo p m en t of the ca se m e th o d . The c o n ce rn fo r le g a l

p r in c ip le s to the ex c lu s io n of a l l e lse le f t no tim e fo r rh e to r ic a l a n a ly s is .

The above le a d s d ire c tly to a d is c u s s io n of the d iv e rg e n t p h ilo ­

so p h ies of law sch o o ls w ith r e g a rd to p r a c t ic a l a s p e c ts of th e ir p ro g ra m .

W hile th is d iffe re n c e of ph ilosophy h a s a l r e a d y b een su g g ested and

d e s c r ib e d b r ie f ly , a few m o re co m m en ts a r e n e c e s s a ry to g ive a c le a r

p ic tu re . A t the School of L aw a t C o lu m b ia , fo r ex a m p le . D ean H a rla n

F is k Stone s ta te d the ph ilo sophy of h is sch o o l w hen he sa id th a t p r e ­

p a ra t io n fo r the b a r (w hich he re c o g n iz e d a s the p u rp o se of law schoo ls)

invo lved two p r o c e s s e s . " T h e re is f i r s t , " s a id S tone, " the m a s te r y of

88lbid.

86

the p r in c ip le s of the com m on law and equ ity s y s te m s , w hich can be

a cq u ire d only by d ilig en t study, p re fe ra b ly u n d e r co m p éten t g u id an ce ,

of p r in te d b o o k s , p r in c ip a lly th e r e p o r ts of ju d ic ia l d e c is io n s . . . .

The second p r o c e s s w as the p r a c t ic a l e x p e rien ce ". . . by w hich the

s tuden t b e c o m e s f a m il ia r w ith the c o u rse of p ro c e d u re in the law office

and in the c o u r ts and public o ffices ; the m a c h in e ry , in s h o r t , by w hich

the law y er a p p lie s th o se p r in c ip le s to c a s e s ac tu a lly a r is in g in h is

p ro fe s s io n a l p r a c t ic e . "^0 T h is , of c o u rse , would include any a tte m p t

to p re p a re a la w y e r fo r the co m m u n ica tiv e a sp e c ts of law p ra c t ic e .

"L ike W arden D w ight b e fo re h im . D ean Stone fe lt v e ry s tro n g ly th a t i t

w as to the f i r s t of th e se two p h a s e s of le g a l tra in in g th a t the law schoo ls

ought to devo te th e ir a tten tio n . . . . " Stone fe l t th a t any p r a c t ic a l

tra in in g w as n o t p a r t of the b u s in e s s of the law school. He f e l t th a t the

m ech an ic s of p r a c t ic e , a s he c a lle d th e m , could be p ick ed up a f te r

g rad u a tio n . 91

R e tu rn in g to the s ta r t of the S to ry e r a a t H a rv a rd , H arn o r e c a l ls

the in c o n s is te n c y be tw een the id e a l the D ean s e t fo rth in h is in a u g u ra l- -

the d e s ire to b ro a d e n leg a l study to include o th e r a re a s such a s

rh e to r ic - - a n d th e a c tu a lity of the c u r r ic u lu m un d er h is d ire c tio n . "T h is

r a i s e s the o f t - r e c u r r in g q u es tio n , " say s H arn o , "a s to w hat should be

®9ooebel, o£. c i t . , p. 226. 90ibid. ^^Ibid.

87

tau g h t in a law school and w hat should be a ssu m e d to h ave b een taugh t

ad eq u a te ly by o th e r ed u ca tio n a l a g e n c ie s . " H arno r e c a l l s th a t a t th a t

t im e H a rv a rd d id not even re q u ire i ts law s tu d en ts to h ave su ffic ien t

p r e l im in a ry ed u ca tio n a s th a t r e q u ire d fo r a d m iss io n to co lleg e .

How th en could S to ry say th a t th ey Q aw s tu d e n ts ] had had su ff ic ie n t in s tru c tio n in the f ie ld s u n d er d is c u s s io n ? W hat se e m s to be c le a r i s th a t u n d er S to ry , w h e th e r he so v iew ed i t o r n o t, a m o m en to u s step in the developm en t of le g a l ed ucation w as tak en . L e a d e rs b e fo re h im , inc lud ing B la c k - s to n e , J e f fe rs o n , K en t, and H offm an, had conceived of the study of law a s a p a r t of a l ib e ra l education . U nder S tory l ib e ra l and le g a l in s tru c tio n w e re d iv o rc ed , and a s to l ib e ra l education a l l th a t re m a in e d w as the a ssu m p tio n th a t s tu d en ts h a d som ehow gotten i t e lse w h e re .

H arno s tre n g th e n s h is com m en ts by s ta tin g th a t "w hen le g a l

ed ucation in A m e ric a g ra v ita te d to the u n iv e r s i t ie s , the c r i t ic is m of the

lim ite d co n ten t of the c o u rse of in s tru c tio n w as s t i l l v a lid . " He a g re e s

th a t the law sch o o ls o ffe re d a b e t te r ed ucation than d id o ffice study,

b u t, he n o te s , " . . . beyond th a t th ey [ law s c h o o ls ] m e re ly s u b s ti­

tu ted one te c h n ic a l p ro g ra m fo r a n o th e r . " The c a se s y s te m , says

H arn o , w o rk ed no su b s ta n tia l change. "In som e r e s p e c ts c a se in s t r u c ­

tio n confined le g a l ed u ca tio n into an even n a r ro w e r m o ld . "^3 Included

in th is n a r ro w n e s s , a c c o rd in g to H arn o , is the re fu s a l of the co lleg es

of law to sp ec ify the c o n ten t of p re le g a l education .

The q u es tio n re m a in s a s to how th is d iffe re n c e of ph ilosophy in

the few sch o o ls sp e c if ic a lly m en tio n ed thus f a r in flu en ced the g e n e ra l

^^H arn o , og. c i t . , p . 48. p. 9 1 ,

88

p a th of le g a l ed u ca tio n in the U nited S ta te s . A lf re d Z. R eed , in h is

study of A m e ric a n L e g a l E d u ca tio n , d raw s th is co n clu sio n .

The two New E n g lan d sch o o ls [ H a rv a rd and Y ale ] w ere a lik e in seek ing to t r a in only the p ra c tic in g la w y e r , and not the p o lit ic ia n o r le g is la to r a s w e ll. W here th ey d iffe red w as in th e ir e s tim a te of the k ind of tra in in g th a t th e p ra c t i t io n e r re q u ire d . H a rv a rd w as slow to a ssu m e e n t i r e re sp o n s ib ili ty fo r th is ta s k , a s a su b sd tu te fo r the sy s te m of office tra in in g .I ts o r ig in a l co n cep tion of i t s m is s io n w as to leav e to the o ffice w hat the schoo l can n o t do so w e ll. Y ale , on the o th e r hand , f ro m the s t a r t f ra n k ly a tte m p te d n e ith e r m o r e n o r l e s s than an o rd in a ry p r a c t i t io n e r s ' c o u r s e , annexing to i t s e l f w hat w as e s s e n tia l ly a s y s te m a tiz e law o ffice . T r a c e s of th is e a r ly co n flic t of id e a ls m ay a t a l l p e r io d s of o u r h is to ry be found b e tw een schoo l and schoo l, o r in the sam e schoo l a t d iffe re n t p e r io d s ; now a som ew hat g r e a te r e m p h a s is upon a sc h o la rly t re a tm e n t of the b ro a d e r a s p e c ts of the com m on law ; now a g r e a te r a tte n tio n to the m in u tiae of p r a c t ic e , to the d ra ftin g of w r i tte n in s tru m e n ts , to the p u re ly lo c a l law of the j u r i s ­d ic tio n . E a r ly law sch o o ls , h o w ev er, c an n o t be s a tis fa c to r i ly c la s s if ie d f ro m th is p o in t of v iew . A s the p r e s s u r e to se c u re s tu d e n ts , and th e re fo re to give s tu d en ts w h at they dem and, h a s m ade i t s e l f f e l t u n d er a co m p etitiv e r e g im e , few schoo ls have p u rsu e d a c o n s is te n t p o licy in th is r e s p e c t . The v a r ia t io n s sp rin g p a r t ly f ro m the c a lib re o r te m p e ra m e n t of the in s t r u c ­to r s - - th e re la t iv e im p o rta n c e th ey a tta c h to th o ro u g h grounding in fu n d am en ta l p r in c ip le s , a s a g a in s t an ed u ca tio n th a t w ill be of im m ed ia te u s e - - a n d p a r t ly f ro m the n a tu re of the c lie n te le to w hich the schoo l m u s t n a tu ra lly a p p e a l- -w h e th e r to a n a tio n a l o r to a lo c a l s tu d en t body. The m a in s ig n ifican ce of the sh ifting p o licy and g e n e ra l u n c e r ta in ty a s to p re c is e ly w hat su b je c ts sh a ll b e tau g h t i s the ev idence w hich th is a ffo rd s th a t the com m unity d em an d s m o re than a s in g le type of leg a l edu ca tio n . In th e a tte m p t to be a l l th in g s to a l l m en , a s ta n ­d a rd iz e d c u r r ic u lu m h a s b een sought. F a i lu re a f te r a l l th e se y e a r s to a g re e a s to the co n ten t of such a c u r r ic u lu m is a p r e t ty f a i r in d ic a tio n th a t the ta s k is im p o ss ib le . 94

^^R eed , 0£ . c i t . , p . 156.

89

A s w ill be d is c o v e re d la te r in th is study , th is d iffe re n c e h a s n o t b een

re s o lv e d to the p r e s e n t day.

The o b jec tiv e in th is c h a p te r h a s b een to study the dev elo p m en t

of A m e ric a n le g a l edu ca tio n . T he m o v em en t f ro m the a p p re n tic e sh ip

p h ilo so p h y of th e B r i t is h to the fo rm a l p ro fe s s io n a l school in th e U nited

S ta te s h a s b een t r a c e d . In the c o u rse of th is e x a m in a tio n , som e o b s e r ­

v a tio n s have b ee n m ad e w hich w ill h e lp the in v e s tig a tio n y e t to com e.

F o r ex am p le , the change f ro m a p p re n tic e sh ip to law school

ed u ca tio n n e c e s s i ta te d a re -e x a m in a tio n of the p h ilo so p h y of le g a l p r a c ­

t ic e . W h ereas the p re v io u s a ssu m p tio n h ad b e e n th a t the le a rn in g of the

fu n c tio n s of le g a l p ra c t ic e w as of p r im a r y im p o r ta n c e , and a know ledge

of p r in c ip le s of law w ould fo llow in tim e ; in the law sch o o ls the r e v e r s e

w as h e ld . T h a t i s , the law sch o o ls tau g h t p r in c ip le s an d le f t know ledge

of fun c tio n s to gmow in la te r t im e d u rin g p r a c t ic e . A lthough co n flic t

e x is te d am ong the law sch o o ls w ith r e g a rd to th is p h ilo so p h y , n e v e r th e ­

le s s th ro u g h the in flu en ce la rg e ly of H a rv a rd L aw School, the p a t te rn

w as s e t fo r m o s t of the co u n try .

F in a lly , the ex ten s iv e in flu en c e of the law sch o o ls on the d ev e lo p ­

m e n t of le g a l p r a c t ic e h a s b een o b s e rv e d . T h ro u g h the pow er tak en f ro m

the h an d s of the p r a c t i t io n e r s , law sch o o ls beg an to a s s e r t th e ir th e o r ie s

upon the p ro fe s s io n and the ju d ic ia l sy s te m a s a w hole . To the ex ten t th a t

the law sch o o ls su b o rd in a ted an in t e r e s t in the r h e to r ic of law , to th a t

e x te n t i t w as su b o rd in a ted th ro u g h o u t the p ro fe s s io n .

C H A PTER m

CH ARACTER O F RH ETO RICAL THEORY IN

MODERN LEG A L EDUCATION

The im p a c t of the law schoo l on le g a l p ra c t ic e in the U nited

S ta te s can n o t b e e x a g g e ra te d . C h ap te r II show s th is . The th e o re t ic a l

v iew s h e ld by the ed n ca tb n s a r e re f le c te d , th ro u g h th e ir s tu d e n ts , in

the law o ffic e s and c o u r ts of the c o u n try . In a study of the c h a ra c te r

of r h e to r ic a l th e o ry in le g a l p r a c t ic e , th e r e fo re , i t is re a so n a b le to

look to th e law sch o o ls to see w hat th e o re t ic a l v iew s they ho ld on the

su b je c t.

In th is c h a p te r , the m o d e rn p e r io d w ill be tak en to in c lu d e the

p r e s e n t c e n tu ry . A s w ill be d is c o v e re d , f ro m 1900 to th e p r e s e n t the

g r e a te s t g row th and in tro sp e c tio n h a s o c c u r re d am ong th e law sch o o ls ,

and th is p e r io d is th u s the m o s t f ru i tfu l so u rc e of in fo rm a tio n fo r th is

study .

W ith r e g a rd to the d isc o v e ry of e d u c a to r s ’ a tti tu d e s to w ard

rh e to r ic a l th e o ry , and the e ffe c ts of th e se a ttitu d e s in the law c u r r ic u la ,

i t i s u se fu l to d iv ide th e in v e s tig a tio n in to fo u r su b d iv is io n s . F i r s t ,

the im p lic a tio n s of the co n flic t b e tw een law office and law schoo l education

90

91

w ill be d isc u s se d ; second , the p ro p e r fu n c tio n s of a law s c h o o l- -p a r t ic u ­

la r ly w ith r e g a rd to rh e to r ic a l th e o ry - -w il l be exam ined; th i rd , the law

schoo l c u r r ic u la w ill b e s e a rc h e d fo r ev idence of r h e to r ic a l th eo ry ; and

fo u rth , r h e to r ic a l th e o r ie s w ill b e t r a c e d th rough p re - la w re q u ire m e n ts

s e t up by le g a l e d u c a to rs .

Law O ffice v s . L aw School

The a c tu a l co n flic t b e tw een a p p re n tic e sh ip in a law o ffice and

fo rm a l study in a law school i s n o t so im p o rta n t to th is s tudy a s i s the

im p lica tio n of th is co n flic t upon the th e o re t ic a l foundation of le g a l edu ­

ca tio n . C le a r ly , the w ork of an a p p re n tic e in the office of a p ra c t ic in g

a tto rn e y w as of a p r a c t ic a l s o r t . He w as ex p ec ted to le a r n the p ra c t ic e

of law a s any a p p re n tic e le a rn e d any t r a d e . "T he p ra c t ic e of law in

e a r ly t im e s w as the p ra c tic e r a th e r of a tra d e than of an a p p lie d sc ie n ce ;

and a d m iss io n to i t , a s to o th e r t r a d e s , w as th ro u g h a p p re n tic e sh ip .

So sa id Jo sep h H en ry B e a le , R o y all P r o fe s s o r of Law a t H a rv a rd in

1937 . He w en t on to say , "T h is v iew of law p re v a ile d in th is co u n try fo r

a h u n d red y e a r s o r m o re , and the young m an le a rn e d law only by going

abou t w ith a la w y e r , o b se rv in g w hat he d id and th en doing lik e w ise .

W hile P r o f e s s o r B ea le w as a b i t p re m a tu re in suggesting th a t th is fo rm

^Joseph H en ry B ea le , "T he H is to ry of L e g a l E d u ca tio n , " in Law A C en tu ry of P r o g r e s s 1835-1935, I (New Y ork: New Y o rk U n iv e rs ity P r e s s , 1937) , p . 104.

^Ibid .

92

of ed u ca tio n h ad ended a f te r a hundred y e a r s o r m o re in the U nited S ta tes

(in 1964 th e re re m a in som e s ta te s in w hich a p e r io d of study in a law

office i s s a tis fa c to ry q u a lifica tio n to app ly fo r a d m iss io n to th e b a r ) , h is

d e s c r ip tio n of th is type of tra in in g i s u se fu l, and i ts s tre n g th s and w eak ­

n e s s e s b eco m e a p p a re n t. When such an a p p re n tic e g rad u a ted in to h is

own p r a c t ic e , he p ro b ab ly had only the b a r e s t a p p re c ia tio n of the p r in c i ­

p le s and ph ilosophy of the law , b u t he h ad a f a i r ly c le a r id ea of w hat a

law y er w as ex p ec ted to do w ith a c lie n t. He h ad w atched a law y er ta lk

w ith a c lien t; he had p o ss ib ly ta lk ed w ith th em h im se lf . He h ad seen

the le g a l fo rm s p re p a re d and p re p a re d som e h im se lf; he had w a tch ed a

t r i a l and h ad p ick ed up som e id eas on the w ays of an e ffec tiv e t r i a l

la w y e r .

O rig in a lly , p r o fe s s o r s of law in the co lleg es a im e d only a t p r o ­

v id ing a co m p lem en t to the study in an o f f ic e - - th e y w ish ed to f i l l the

e x is tin g gap in the law s tu d e n t’s a p p re c ia tio n of the p r in c ip le s and

ph ilosophy of the law . T h is w as tru e of the f i r s t law school in L itc h fie ld ,

C o n n ec ticu t, w hich w as nothing m o re th an an o rg a n iz e d law office

d ê sig n ed to p ro v id e a m o re sy s te m a tic ed u ca tio n in the p r in c ip le s of the

law . T h ese p o in ts w e re b ro u g h t out in the p rec ed in g c h a p te r .

H ow ever, a s le g a l education e n te re d the 20th C en tu ry , the law

school cam e m o re and m o re to be v iew ed a s a s e lf -su ff ic ie n t in s tru m e n t

93

of tra in in g fo r law s tu d e n ts . In A u g u st of 1900 the A sso c ia tio n of A m e r ­

ic a n Law Schools w as fo rm e d a s a r e s u l t of the in itia tiv e of som e

m e m b e rs of the A m e r ic a n B a r A sso c ia tio n , ^ By the tim e of the seco n d

m ee tin g of the a s s o c ia t io n , the p r e s id e n t , E m lin M cC la in , sa id th is in

h is m a jo r a d d r e s s ;

I th ink we can a g re e th a t the s tu d en t who p u r s u e s h is c o u rse in an office o r by p r iv a te re a d in g does so to h is d isad v a n ta g e , and th a t w h a te v e r m ay be h is in d iv id u a l s u c c e s s in the p r o f e s ­sion , h is law tra in in g a c q u ire d in th e se m e th o d s is le s s th o ro u g h and le s s e f f ic ie n t a s to the m a n h im se lf th an the re g u la r w o rk of a law sch o o l. ^

In 1913 , the E x e cu tiv e C o m m ittee of the A sso c ia tio n of A m e ric a n L aw

Schools r e p o r te d , " . . . we b e lie v e th a t a l l s tu d en ts should have th re e

y e a r s in a law sch o o l of re c o g n iz e d s tand ing . . . . " T hen , they w en t

on to say , in re s p o n s e to a re so lu tio n by W illiam R o g e rs of the U n iv e r ­

s ity of C in c in n a ti, "W e b e lie v e th a t th a t p a r t of th e re so lu tio n w hich

re c o m m e n d s a y e a r of a p p re n tic e sh ip in a law office i s unw ise , in v iew

of ex is tin g co n d itio n s in law o ff ic e s .

^ A sso c ia tio n of A m e ric a n L aw S choo ls, H andbook, V ol. 1,1900- 1901.

^ E m lin M cC la in , "A d d re ss of the P r e s id e n t ," P ro c e e d in g s of th e Second A nnual M eeting of the A sso c ia tio n of A m e ric a n L aw S ch o o ls , V ol. 2, i 9 0 4 p . 38.

^ R ep o rt of th e E x ecu tiv e C o m m ittee , P ro c e e d in g s of the T h i r ­te e n th A nnual M eetin g of the A sso c ia tio n of A m e ric a n L aw S choo ls,V ol. 13 (1913), p . 17.

94

R ee d , in h is 1928 study of law sch o o ls no ted th a t once a p r e s ­

c r ib e d p e r io d of p re p a ra t io n fo r p ra c t ic e h a s b een s e t, " , . . the q u es tio n

of the e x te n t to w hich law schoo l study m ay o r should re p la c e du ring th is

p e r io d th e tra d it io n a l m e th o d of p re p a ra t io n in an a t to rn e y 's office h a s

cau sed th e g r e a te s t p e rp le x ity , I t is co n ce iv ab le , say s R ee d , th a t

law s tudy cou ld have b een r e s t r i c t e d to a r ig o ro u s ly c o n tro lle d a p p re n ­

tic e sh ip p ro g ra m leav in g l i t t l e o r no ro o m fo r a law schoo l ex cep t a s i t

m igh t b e u s e d c o n c u rre n tly w ith o ffice w o rk . T h is i s e s s e n tia l ly how

the s itu a tio n developed in C anada and the U nited K ingdom , In fa c t, say s

R eed , "In c e r ta in of the m id d le A tlan tic s ta te s the d ev e lo p m en t of law

schoo ls w a s , , , r e ta rd e d by i l l ib e r a l b a r a d m iss io n ru le s , " T h is w as

p re v e n te d f ro m becom ing a g e n e ra l p r a c t ic e in the U nited S ta te s by a

lax ity of th e ru le s and a f a i lu r e , g e n e ra lly , "to copy the E n g lish s ta tu ­

to ry p ro v is io n th a t r e s t r i c t e d the n u m b er of c le rk s who m ig h t be tak en

in to one o f f ic e ," "In the ab sen c e of th is r e s t r i c t io n ," say s R eed , "law

sch o o ls d ev e lo p ed out of law o ffices in a p e r fe c tly n a tu ra l w ay . T h u s,

i t w as d if f ic u lt to r e s i s t th e i r c la im to a re c o g n iz e d p la c e in the b a r

a d m iss io n sy s te m , "7

^ A lfred Z a n tz in g e r R eed , P re s e n t-D a y Law S chools in the U nited S ta tes a n d C anada, B u ll, N o, 21 (New Y ork: C arn eg ie F oundation fo r the A d v an cem en t of T each in g , 1928), p , 55,

’ Ibid,

95

A t f i r s t , the law sch o o ls d id not ex p ec t to p ro v id e the e n t ire

ed u ca tio n of the law s tu d en t. A t H a rv a rd , w hich w as the f i r s t law school

to o p e ra te in a s ta te w hich p re s c r ib e d a p e r io d of p re p a ra tio n fo r the

b a r , i t w as only a sk e d th a t the studen ts who ch o se to a tten d the c o u rs e s

be p e rm it te d to coun t the tim e th u s spen t a g a in s t the to ta l am o u n t

p r e s c r ib e d . A t th a t t im e , the com plete law c o u rs e a t H a rv a rd occup ied

only h a lf of the to ta l am o u n t p re s c r ib e d . T h u s , a s tu d en t w ould spend a

y e a r and a h a lf a t schoo l and the sam e am o u n t of tim e in an o ffice , ®

T h is a s s u re d th a t th e s tu d en t w ould re c e iv e som e p ra c t ic a l tra in in g ,

"W hen, h o w ev er, the sch o o ls bo th leng thened and in te n s if ie d th e i r

c o u rs e s of in s tru c tio n , " o b s e rv e s R eed , "w hile a t the sam e tim e the

p e r io d of p re p a ra t io n , if p r e s c r ib e d a t a l l , w as g re a tly red u ced , i t w as

fo re s e e n th a t the ou tcom e m ig h t be th a t the a p p lic a n t would re c e iv e no

office tra in in g a t a l l ,

To avoid th is p o s s ib il i ty , som e p ra c t ic in g a tto rn e y s a tte m p te d to

have law s adop ted to in s i s t th a t som e of the p r e p a ra t io n tim e be sp en t

in an o ffice . By 1928, a c co rd in g to the R eed r e p o r t , only Rhode Is lan d ,

New J e r s e y , V e rm o n t, and New Y ork a c c e p te d th is condition . R eed

continue s.

In a l l the re m a in in g fo rty -f iv e ju r is d ic t io n s , the law sch o o ls have won th e ir f ig h t to be p e rm itte d to occupy if they can ,

® Ibid., p . 55 ^Ibid,

96

a g a in s t the f r e e co m p e titio n of law o ffice s , the e n t ire f ie ld of p ro fe s s io n a l p re p a ra t io n . In ten s ta te s they even occupy a p r iv ile g e d p o s itio n in th is r e s p e c t . The p r e s c r ib e d p e r io d fo r o ffice s tu d en ts in I ll in o is , M ich igan , M in n eso ta , O hio, W ashington (s ta te ) , and W isco n sin i s fo u r y e a r s a s a g a in s t the th re e y e a r s th a t su ffice a t le a s t fo r c e r ta in ty p es of law sch o o ls s tu d en ts ; and v e ry re c e n tly [1 9 2 8 ] W est V irg in ia h a s announced th a t i t w ill g ive no c re d i t fo r o ffice s tudy , and K entucky , C o lo rad o , and W yom ing have d e c re e d th a t a t le a s t one of th e i r two o r th re e p r e s c r ib e d y e a r s m u s t be sp en t in a law schoo l.

The p ro b le m of r e la t io n s b e tw een the law sch o o ls and law office

s tudy i s s ta te d s im p ly - - s in ce the law sch o o ls w e re be ing r e s t r i c t e d by

the p ra c tic in g a t to rn e y s , they fe l t a n eed to em p h a s iz e th e ir s tre n g th s

and avo id th e ir w e a k n e s se s . They c o n c e n tra te d on the aca d em ic and

o v erlo o k ed th e p r a c t ic a l . A s R eed o b se rv e d .

U n w illin g n ess on the p a r t of the p ro fe s s io n a t la rg e to concede th a t law school tra in in g is in d isp e n sab le h a s p ro m o te d u n w ill­in g n e ss on the p a r t of law schoo l m en to concede th a t any o th e r s o r t of tra in in g is d e s ir a b le , and h a s fo s te re d a sy s te m of p r e p a ra t io n in w hich n e ith e r of th e se two m e th o d s re c e iv e s i t s a p p ro p r ia te e m p h a s is ,

The law schoo l m en a lso c o n s is te n tly b e lie v e d th a t law office

tra in in g w as in e ff ic ie n t, and p o o rly m an ag ed . The g e n e ra l fee lin g in

the law sch o o ls , then , w as th a t the s tu d en t could ob ta in a ll of the tru ly

v ita l edu ca tio n in the sch o o l, and any th ing e lse he n eed ed could be p ick ed

up e a r ly in h is c a r e e r . A fte r a l l , th ey sa id , the la w y e r , un like the

p h y s ic ia n , r a r e ly k i l ls h is c l ie n ts ,

lO lb id ,, p , 56, l l l b i d , , p . 213,

97

The P ro p e r F u n c tio n of the Law School

The in e sc a p a b le co n c lu s io n of the p re c e d in g sec tio n i s tlia t law

sch o o ls m o v ed f ro m a c le a r ly defined function of p ro v id in g th e p r in c ip le s

of law to a vague function of p re p a r in g s tu d en ts fo r the p ra c t ic e of law .

T h is co n c lu s io n im p lie s th a t th e r e w as no c a re fu l thought g iven to the

q u es tio n of w hat c o n s titu te s ad eq u a te p re p a ra t io n fo r p ra c t ic e - - r a th e r

the sc h o o ls , la rg e ly in s e lf -d e fe n se ag a in s t the p ra c tic in g la w y e rs ,

cam e to define the p ro v is io n of p r in c ip le s of law a s th e to ta l fu n c tio n of

p re p a r in g s tu d en ts fo r p ra c tic in g law . T h a t they d id no t convince the

p ra c tic in g la w y e rs of th is i s c le a r f ro m the fa c ts show ing the re fu s a l

of the s ta te s im m e d ia te ly to g ive the law schoo ls so le ju r is d ic t io n in

the p re p a ra t io n of la w y e rs . T h is i s shown in the f i r s t sec tio n of th is

c h a p te r .

T h a t the law school r e p re s e n ta t iv e s th e m se lv e s w e re no t u n a n i­

m o u sly co n v in ced of th is c o n c lu s io n w ill b eco m e c le a r in the m a te r ia l to

fo llow . To p u t th e q u estio n in the p e rsp e c tiv e of r h e to r ic a l th e o ry , i t

could b e sa id th a t the law sch o o ls had fo rc e d th e m s e lv e s , in m any c a s e s ,

to b e lie v e th a t education in Inven tio w as su ffic ien t to p r e p a re the fo re n s ic

s p e a k e r o r w r i te r ; and th a t any n eed he m ig h t have fb r the rem a in in g

tra d it io n a l p a r t s of rh e to r ic - - D ispo s itio , E lo c u tio , P ronvu itia tio , and

M e m o r ia - -w ould be s a tis f ie d th ro u g h ac tu a l p r a c t ic e . Some

98

re p re s e n ta t iv e s of the law sch o o ls r e je c te d tills co n c lu s io n . They co n ­

ten d ed th a t know ledge of the p r in c ip le s of the law an d know ledge of how

to find the n e c e s s a ry id e a s in any c a se (th is inc lud ing the lo g ica l p ro o fs )

w as no t enough. T hey a rg u e d th a t such tra in in g w ould leav e the s tu d en t

in ad eq u a te ly p re p a re d to a r ra n g e and p r e s e n t h is id e a s e ith e r to a c lie n t,

a n o th e r a tto rn e y , o r to a c o u r t . T h is i s the e s se n c e of the co n flic t

o v e r the p ro p e r fu n ctio n of the law school.

The annual m e e tin g of the A sso c ia tio n of A m e ric a n Law Schools

p ro v id e d a fo ru m fo r the exchange of id e a s on th is c o n tro v e rsy . In 1910,

John C, T ow nes, speak ing on the "O rg an iza tio n an d O p era tio n of a L aw

School, " c le a r ly in d ic a te d h is p o s itio n in the d eb a te , "A nother m o s t

im p o rta n t p a r t of the w o rk of the law schoo l, " Tow nes sa id , " is teach in g

p ro c e d u re , I su b m it th a t th is i s r e a l ly the tru e c a s e sy s te m , "If

the p u rp o se and u n d e rly in g id e a of th a t sy s tem i s to th ro w the s tu d en t

b a c k upon h im se lf and h is own r e s o u rc e s and t r a in h im in doing ex a c tly

w hat he w ill have to do a f te r h e le a v e s the schoo l, the p re p a ra tio n and

t r i a l of c a s e s m e e ts th is dem and a s no o th e r p a r t of the c u rr ic u lu m

p o ss ib ly can , B eing sp e c if ic , Tow nes a rg u e d th a t in the p ra c t ic e

c o u r t w o rk the s tu d en t is ob liged to an a ly ze fa c ts an d find the com b in atio n

IZ jo h n C, T ow nes, "O rg an iza tio n and O p era tio n of a Law School, " P ro c e e d in g s of the T en th A nnual M eeting of the A sso c ia tio n of A m e ric a n L aw S ch o o ls, V ol. 10 (1910), p , 74,

1 3 ib id ,, pp , 74-75 ,

99

of c irc u m s ta n c e s th a t show a le g a l r ig h t, a v io la tio n of the r ig h t, and

co n seq u en t dam age. If the s tu d en t i s to do th is , the sp e a k e r c la im e d ,

he m u s t app ly ru le s of law to f a c ts , find the a u th o r it ie s , and m ake h is

own ju d g m en ts ah to th e ir re la t iv e im p o rta n c e . A fte r th is , the s tuden t

m u s t p r e p a re h is own p lead in g so a s to m ake c le a r the i s s u e s , and

fin a lly , h e m u s t m ake good h is a rg u m e n ts in the t r i a l . "If th e re i s any

fo rce in th e a rg u m en t, " d e c la re d T ow nes, " th a t the s tu d en t m u s t be

t ra in e d in the law school to do th a t w hich he i s a f te rw a rd to do in the

law o ffice , i t finds p e c u lia r ap p lic a tio n and fo rc e in the teach in g of

p r o c e d u r e ."14

A fte r m aking h is a rg u m e n t in fav o r of a m o re com plete th eo ry

of the fo re n s ic rh e to r ic , T ow nes p ro c e e d s to a t ta c k h is o p p o n en ts’ id e a s .

H is a rg u m e n t sa id s im p ly th a t the study of c a s e s a lre a d y d e c id e d - -a s in

the c a se m e th o d --g a v e the s tu d en t p r e p a ra t io n in one of the p r o c e s s e s he

needed a s a law y er. A n im p o rta n t p ro c e s s i s thus p ro v id e d , Tow nes

g ran te d , b u t only one of m an y . "T he p re p a ra t io n and t r i a l of c a s e s in a

m oot c o u r t , o r by w h a tev er n am e the tr ib u n a l m ay be c a lle d , n e c e s s a r i ly

invo lves th em a l l , " "Y et s tra n g e to s a y ," T ow nes concluded , " a s a

ru le the sch o o ls w hich in s i s t m o s t s tre n u o u s ly on the ca se sy s te m give

le a s t a tte n tio n to the a d je c tiv e law and the t r i a l of c a s e s . I f e a r th e re

1 4 lb id ., p. 75.

100

m u s t be som eth ing w rong w ith m y lo g ic . T h is iro n ic conclusion w as

c le a r ly a im e d a t the ph ilo sophy of the H a rv a rd L aw School, w hich saw

the o rig in a tio n of the c a se m e th o d and w hich le d th o se who opposed the

p r a c t ic a l law c u rr ic u lu m .

In the g e n e ra l d is c u s s io n of the A ddress by P r o f e s s o r T ow nes”,

O liv e r A . M ark e r, th en D ean of the U n iv e rs ity of I llin o is College of L aw

cam e to h is su p p o rt w ith th is com m ent: 'G en tlem en who a r e so f re e to

d e c la re th a t the a tte m p t to te a c h p ra c t ic e and p lead in g in the A m e ric a n

law school h a s b een a fa i lu re h av e had a d if fe re n t e x p e rie n c e fro m som e

of u s . " D ean M ark er m en tio n ed s u c c e s s fu l lp ra c t ic a l c u r r ic u la both a t

the U n iv e rs ity of M ichigan and the U n iv e rs ity of I ll in o is .

T hese w ere only the opening argum ents in a debate destined to

em erge annually for m any m ore y e a r s . In 1911, Marian F isk Stone,

speaking a s the P resid en t of the A sso cia tio n , a d d ressed h im self to the

question of the function of the law school. In answ ering that question,

he sa id , ”, . . it should be borne in m ind that the en tire h istory of leg a l

education teach es us that the law school i s p ecu lia r ly the p lace for the

student to becom e the m a ster of the p rin cip les of law from the sch olarly

IS lb id .

^ '^Oliver A . M a rk e r , "D isc u ss io n , ” P ro c e e d in g s of the T en th A nnual M eeting of the A sso c ia tio n of A m e ric a n L aw S chools, Vol. 10,(1910), p . 10.

101

and th e o re t ic a l p o in t of v iew . "1? It w as th is , he c la im e d , th a t h ad p e r ­

m it te d the law schoo l to su cceed in co m p e titio n w ith th e law o ffice a s

an in s tru m e n t of le g a l edu ca tio n .

Two a s p e c ts of the p r a c t ic a l c u r r ic u lu m m e t p a r t ic u la r ly w ith

S to n e’ s d isa p p ro v a l: le g a l a id " d is p e n s a ry s " a s he c a lle d th e m , and

m o o t c o u r t p ro g ra m s . " It m ay be q u e s tio n ed , " he sa id , "w h e th e r th e se

e x p e r im e n ts , ju d g ed fro m the v iew po in t of the p r o p e r fu n c tio n of the

law sch o o l, w ill p ro v e to b e p ro f ita b le . H is a rg u m e n t w as th a t the

th re e y e a r s a llow ed fo r the law school p ro g ra m w e re so s h o r t th a t only

th o se s tu d ie s w hich w ould w o rk to the b e s t p o s s ib le ad v an tag e of the

s tu d e n t cou ld be c o n s id e re d . "T he com m on e x p e r ie n c e is th a t the s tu ­

d e n t’s w ork ing tim e d u rin g the th re e y e a r s of the law c o u rse is co m p le te ly

o ccu p ied in the study of the p r in c ip le s of the law , " s ta te d S tone.

Stone d id no t r e je c t the s tu d e n ts ’ n eed fo r w o rk in m a te r ia ls

o th e r than th e p r in c ip le s of law ; r a th e r he a rg u e d th a t once ou t of school

the s tu d en t w ould have no fu r th e r o p p o rtu n ity to study th e se p r in c ip le s

u n d e r the gu idance of the p r o fe s s o r . On the o th e r h an d . Stone a rg u e d ,

upon e n te r in g p ra c t ic e the s tu d en t does hav e an o p p o rtu n ity to conduct

a " le g a l a id d is p e n s a ry . " I t d o es no t m a t te r , a c c o rd in g to S tone,

^^H arlan F . Stone, "T he F u n c tio n of the A m e ric a n U n iv e rs ity L aw School, " P ro c e e d in g s of the E lev en th A nnual M eeting of the A s s o c i­a tio n of A m e ric a n L aw S choo ls, V ol. 11 (1911), p . 61.

IS lb id . , p . 68. l^ ib id .

102

w h e th e r o r n o t th e young a tto rn e y a v a ils h im se lf of the o p p o rtu n ity to

le a r n th e se ad d itio n a l m a te r ia ls of law p ra c t ic e , i t i s s t i l l t ru e th a t th is

o p p o rtu n ity i s b e t te r than anything the law school cou ld develop to a p p ro ­

x im ate the co n d itio n s of p r a c t ic e . "How, th en , " a sk e d S tone, "can th e r e

be any q u e s tio n b u t th a t the ’leg a l a id d is p e n s a ry ’ and the m o o t c o u r t,

w hen they d isp la c e any su b s ta n tia l p a r t of the c u r r ic u lu m , d ea lin g s c ie n ­

t if ic a lly w ith le g a l p r in c ip le s o r w ith le g a l th e o r ie s , c o s t m o re than

they a r e w o rth ?

S to n e 's co n c lu s io n w as th a t law sch o o ls should a d v ise th e i r s tu ­

d en ts to o b ta in th is type of e x p e rie n c e in v aca tio n tim e and a f te r the

co m p le tio n of the law c o u rse . He a lso w as w illing to p e r m it s tu d e n t-

o rg a n iz e d c lu b s fo r p r a c t ic e , a s long a s " . . , the le g a l a id d isp e n s a ry

fe a tu re of the c u r r ic u lu m is su b o rd in a te d , a s i t should b e , to the m ain

b u s in e s s of the law sch o o l, w hich is : sound, th e o re tic a l tra in in g by

21co m p eten t in s t r u c to r s of p ra c t ic a l e x p e r ie n c e , "

In 1913, H en ry M . B a te s speak ing in h is p r e s id e n tia l a d d re s s to

the A sso c ia tio n of A m e ric a n L aw Schools re p lie d to S tone. F i r s t , B a te s

ta lk ed abou t the p o p u la r c r i t ic is m s of ju d ic ia l p ro c e d u re s , the in e ff i­

c ien cy and d e lay in the c o u r ts . He added th a t inadequate g e n e ra l

ed u ca tio n p ro d u c e d " , . . n a r ro w n e s s of v is io n , p ro fe s s io n a l in e ffic ien cy

20 Ib id . 2 1 ib id ., p . 69.

103

and n eg le c t of e th ic a l c o n s id e ra tio n s , . . . "^2 E ven though m o s t law ­

y e r s re m a in ab le and u p r ig h t. B a te s sa id , th e se in ad eq u ac ie s h av e

se rio u s ly im p a ire d the " , , , u s e fu ln e s s , the in flu en ce and the p re s t ig e

of the B a r a s a w hole , "

To h e lp re m e d y the cond itions giving r i s e to th e se c r i t i c i s m s .

B a te s p ro p o se d th a t law sch o o ls should in c r e a s e the am ount of w o rk in

t r i a l p ra c t ic e and p ro c e d u re . He no ted th a t th e p ro c e s s of d e c is io n ­

m aking w hich ta k e s p la c e in c o u r t h a s c e r ta in b a s ic th e o r ie s and p r in c ip le s .

He fe lt th a t the teach in g of th e se to the law s tu d en ts w ould f a c i l i ta te the

n eeded r e fo rm s .

It i s n e c e s s a r y to look m o re c lo se ly a t th is speech to see w hat

the 1913 A A IjS P r e s id e n t m e a n t w hen he spoke of teach in g p r a c t ic e and

p ro c e d u re . S p ec ific a lly , he d id no t m ean the teach in g of e lo cu tio n w hich

w as p o p u la r a t the tim e . T h is i s w hat he sa id in th a t r e s p e c t .

H e re in l i e s one of the ch ie f b e n e f its of & p ro p e r ly conducted p ra c t ic e c o u r t , one conducted n o t fo r th e tra in in g in fo re n s ic speak ing , n o r fo r a m e re advance r e h e a r s a l of t r i a l in c o u r t , b u t a s th e c ro w n in g , v iv ify ing s tep in a c a re fu l study of the b a s ic p r in c ip le s of t r i a l ,

T h is s ta te m e n t sa y s a s w e ll a s any th u s f a r p re s e n te d w hat w as the d is ­

tin c tio n in the m in d s of the le g a l e d u c a to rs b e tw een speech tra in in g and

^^H en ry M , B a te s , "A d d re ss of the P r e s id e n t , " P ro c e e d in g s of the T h ir te e n th A nnual M eeting of the A sso c ia tio n of A m e ric a n L aw S chools, V ol. 13 (1913), p . 36.

2 3 ib id ., p . 37,

104

the study of the t r i a l d e c is io n -m ak in g p r o c e s s . Q uite freq u e n tly such a

s ta te m e n t is m ade in w hich the im p lie d m ean ing i s th a t tra in in g fo r

sp eech involved only v o ic e , d ic tio n , and g e s tu r e - - th e tra d itio n a l c o n c e rn s

of e locu tion . T h e se m en a s s o c ia te d th is type of tra in in g w ith the so p h is t

o r s h y s te r , and a c c o rd in g ly re je c te d i t w h e re v e r p o s s ib le . On the o th e r

hand , they re c o g n iz e d a n eed fo r stu d y , im p ro v em e n t, and tra in in g in

the ju d ic ia l p r o c e s s i t s e l f , w hich c a lle d fo r an a n a ly s is of a co m p le te

rh e to r ic a l th e o ry .

No o th e r sch o o l r e p re s e n ts the ph ilosophy of le g a l education

w hich in c lu d es the function of s o -c a l le d p r a c t ic a l tra in in g a s w e ll a s the

U n iv e rs ity of M ich igan Law School. F ro m i t s beg inn ing in 1859, the

school

. . . faced the n eed to p ro v id e tra in in g in the sk ills of an ad v o ca te , and the co n seq u en t p ro b le m of d e te rm in in g w hat m ean s w ould b e s t in c u lc a te such s k il ls . The c le rk -a p p re n t ic e - ship in the o ffice of a p ra c tic in g a tto rn e y (w hatever i t s o th e r d e fic ie n c ie s) h a d s a tis fa c to r i ly su p p lied th is p o r tio n of the la w y e r’s p r e p a ra t io n fo r p r a c t ic e , and m uch thought w as given to the p ro b le m of how to a c co m p lish the sam e r e s u l t w ith in a u n iv e rs i ty . The s te p s tak en to p re p a re s tu d en ts fo r the r e a l i t ie s of a c tu a l p ra c t ic e le d to the c h a ra c te r iz a tio n of M ichigan a s a " p ra c t ic a l" law sch o o l. T h e se s tep s inc luded ex ten s iv e c o u rs e w o rk in p lead in g and p ro c e d u re . . . and the e s ta b lish m e n t of p r a c t ic e t r ib u n a ls , known o r ig in a lly a s M oot C o u rts and Club C o u rts and la te r a s P r a c t ic e C o u rts and C ase C lubs, w h e re s tu d en ts could gain e x p e rie n c e in both t r i a l and ap p e lla te p r a c t ic e . In ad d itio n , b e tw een 1887 and 1916,

105

c o u rs e s in E lo cu tio n and O ra to ry w e re o ffe re d in the Law D e p a rtm e n t and the an n u a l A nnouncem ent n o te d v a r io u s o r a to r ic a l a s so c ia tio n s an d co m p e titio n s b e tw een 1897 and 1927.24

What m o st sch ools e ith er d iscouraged , or perm itted the students

to do on their own tim e, the U n iversity of M ichigan Law School required

from its start. Both appellate argum ents b efore ju d ges, and jury

tr ia ls in which the case w as ca rr ied from its beginning, through the

p lead in gs, obtaining of a ju ry , exam ination of w itn e ss e s , statem ents

and argum ents w ere required of students at M ichigan. 25 The students

at M ichigan w ere encouraged in th eir in te r e st in liter a ry and o ra to r ica l

a sso c ia tio n s; the Announcem ent of the Law School in the 1888-1889

sch oo l year stated th is philosophy.

I t is im p o r ta n t fo r th o se who study the la w w ith the v iew of beco m in g a d v o ca te s , th a t th ey should give a tte n tio n to the su b je c t of fo re n s ic e lo q u en ce , the b e t te r to equip th em fo r the p e rfo rm a n c e of th e ir d u tie s a s a d v o c a te s . I t i s a m is ta k e to suppose th a t ex ce llen cy in speak ing is s im p ly a g ift of n a tu re , and no t the r e s u l t of p a tie n t and p e r s i s te n t la b o r and study. In s tru c tio n in e lo cu tio n an d o ra to ry is th e r e fo re n e c e s s a ry to law s tu d en ts . The ju n io r c la s s re c e iv e in s tru c t io n in v o ca l c u ltu re , a r t ic u la tio n and p ro n u n c ia tio n ; p o s itio n and g e s tu re ; q u a lity and fo rc e of v o ic e . Aj i advanced c o u rs e in o ra to ry h a s b een a r ra n g e d fo r the s e n io r c la s s . . . .2&

24Elizabeth Caspar Brow n, L egal Education at M ichigan 1859- 1959 (Ann Arbor: The U n iversity of M ichigan Law School, 1959), p . 266.

25lb id . , p p . 234-235 .

Z6"U n iv e rs ity of M ich igan L aw School, A nnounc em en t, 1888-1889, in B ro w n , o£, c i t . , p . 232.

106

T h e se c o u r s e s w e re o ffe red u n til 1916; a f te r th a t , i t w as reco m m en d ed

th a t the s tu d en t o b ta in the tra in in g p r io r to e n te r in g law schoo l,

E d so n R . S underland w as the m an m o s t c lo se ly a s s o c ia te d w ith

the p ra c tic e c o u r s e s a t M ich igan d u rin g the e a r ly p a r t of the 20th C en­

tu ry , W riting in 1903, he e m p h a s iz e d th a t the ch ief function of the law

schoo l i s to f it m en fo r the p r a c t ic e of the law . He c la im ed th a t an

a tte m p t to m ak e the law school c u r r ic u lu m a s p r a c t ic a l a s p o s s ib le did

n o t ten d to n a r ro w i t , but r a th e r such an a tte m p t he c o n s id e re d in a c c o rd

w ith the l ib e ra liz in g ten d en c ie s of u n iv e rs ity c u ltu re , He m ade a

d i r e c t ch a llen g e to th o se who b e lie v e d the fu n ctio n of the law schoo l

len d ed w ith the teach in g of p r in c ip le s . N oting th a t m o s t of the s tu d en ts

in law schoo l a r e th e re to le a r n how to p ra c t ic e law , he sa id " , , , i t

i s no t uncom m on fo r a m an to be v e ry w ell in fo rm ed about the law , and

a t the sam e tim e be a com plete fa i lu re a s a la w y e r , , , , S underland ,

a ls o , a d m itte d th a t know ledge of the p r in c ip le s w as in d isp e n sa b le , and

th a t a b ili ty in p ro c e d u re d id no t a lone allow fo r s u c c e ss e i th e r . H is

co n c lu s io n is obv ious: the only p ro p e r function of a law schoo l is to p r o ­

v ide ed u ca tio n fo r the p ra c tic e of law , and such ed u ca tio n n e c e s s a r i ly

^^E d so n R , S underland , "T he P ra c t ic e C o u r t ," M ich igan A lu m ­n u s , V ol, 9 (1903), p , 295.

28 ib id ,

107

in c lu d ed both the teach in g of p r in c ip le s and the p ro v is io n of a "know ­

led g e of the m e a n s w h ereb y the p r in c ip le s of the law a r e a p p lied to

p a r t ic u la r c o n tro v e rs ie s ,

W riting ag a in in 1912, S underland again a d d re s s e d h im se lf to

th is d iffe ren ce of opinion. He c la im e d th a t th e re could only be two

r e a s o n s fo r exclud ing the teach ing of p r a c t ic e f ro m the law c u r r ic u lu m - -

e i th e r i t canno t be su c c e ss fu lly tau g h t o r i t does no t b e long to the p ro p e r

fu n c tio n of the law school, He d is m is s e d the f i r s t re a s o n by a s s e r t in g

th a t p ra c tic e h ad b een su c ce ss fu lly tau g h t fo r y e a r s . He c la im e d the

s u c c e s s w as u n q u es tio n ed , b u t co m m en ts by o th e r le g a l e d u c a to rs

re p e a te d ly show th a t th e re w as s e r io u s q u estio n a s to the su c c e ss w ith

w hich p r a c t ic e cou ld be taugh t,

S u n d e rla n d 's co m m en ts , though , w e re d ire c te d to w ard p ro v in g

th a t p ra c t ic e w as a p ro p e r p a r t of th e fu n ctio n of the law sch o o l. He

d iv id ed th is o b jec tio n in to two p a r ts : e i th e r p ra c tic e w as of no im p o r t­

an ce in i ts e lf , o r the teach in g of p ra c t ic e would d im in ish the tim e

a v a ila b le fo r o th e r m o re im p o rta n t s u b je c ts ,

In in tro d u c in g h is a rg u m e n ts , S underland m a k e s the follow ing

c o m p a riso n w hich te l ls som ething abou t h is u n d ers tan d in g of rh e to r ic

2 9 lb id ,, p , 296,

^^E dson R , S underland , "T h e A r t of L eg a l P r a c t ic e , " M ichigan A lu m n u s, V ol. 18 (1912), p , 252,

^^I b id . , p , 253,

108

a s w ell: " T h e re is no e s s e n t ia l d iffe ren ce in the re la t io n w hich p ra c t ic e

b e a r s to the study of law and th a t w hich co m p o sitio n b e a r s to the s tudy

of l i t e r a r y s ty le , . . . A know ledge of rh e to r ic w ill n e v e r m ake a w r i te r ;

a know ledge of the p r in c ip le s of law w ill n e v e r m a Ü a la w y e r. T h is

s ta te m e n t b e a r s c lo s e r ex am in a tio n in lig h t of a c u r io s ity about the

a u th o r 's u n d e rs tan d in g of the th e o r ie s of rh e to r ic . In co m p a riso n w ith

a c la s s ic a l d e fin itio n of r h e to r ic , S underland h a s co m m itted two e r r o r s .

F i r s t , he h a s concluded th a t rh e to r ic d e a ls so le ly w ith m ethod of c o m ­

p o s itio n , p ro b ab ly im p ly in g s ty le and a r ra n g e m e n t only . T h u s, he le a v e s

in v en tio n unm en tio n ed . T h is i s im p o rta n t to u n d e rs ta n d in g the second

e r r o r . Second, he h a s a s su m e d the re la t io n b e tw een know ledge of le g a l

p r in c ip le s and the p r a c t ic e of law is the sam e a s th a t be tw een know ledge

of r h e to r ic a l th e o ry and th e p ra c t ic e of co m m u n ica tio n . H ere he m a k e s

an e r r o r com m on to le g a l e d u c a to r s - -h e d iv id es le g a l ed ucation in to

tw o p a r t s - - th e o r y and p r a c t ic e - - a n d a s su m e s th a t the th e o ry p ro v id e s

in fo rm a tio n a s to how the s tu d en t should behave in p r a c t ic e . He a s s u m e s

th a t knowing the re a so n in g tak en by ju d g es in p re v io u s c a s e s i s su ff ic ie n t

fo r the s tuden t in le a rn in g the re a so n in g of p e rs u a s io n n e c e s s a ry to

in fluence fu tu re ju d g e s .

If th is a s su m p tio n i s a c ce p ted , then i t i s n e c e s s a ry to a g re e w ith

S underland th a t a l l th a t r e m a in s is to p ro v id e the s tu d en t w ith an

^ ^ Ib id ., p . 254.

109

o p p o rtu n ity to t r y - o u t the re a so n in g and fa c ts th u s le a rn e d . B u t r h e to r ­

ic a l th e o ry w ould r e je c t the a s su m p tio n . A r is to t le , and th o se who hav e

fo llow ed h im h av e a g re e d th a t p ro o f r e q u ire s m o re th an f a c ts and

rea so n in g ; i t i s a lso n e c e s s a r y to study the o th e r m o d es of p r o o f - - e th o s

and p a th o s - -a n d the th e o r ie s of app ly ing th e se m o d es of p ro o f to the

p a r t ic u la r s itu a tio n , ju d g e , and sp e a k e r . T h u s, if S u n d erlan d is to

a rg u e th a t th e fu n c tio n of the law schoo l " . . . ought to b e to develop

good la w y e rs so f a r a s . . . m e a n s w ill a l lo w ," th en he should inc lude

n o t only the s tu d y of th e p r in c ip le s of the law , b u t he should a lso add a

study of the th e o r ie s of how Üie p r in c ip le s m ay m o s t e ffec tiv e ly be

ap p lied in the p a r t ic u la r s itu a tio n . T h u s , S u n d erlan d ’s co n cep tio n of

the fun ctio n of th e law school i s c o n s is te n t w ith c la s s ic a l th e o r ie s of

r h e to r ic , b u t h is u n d e rs tan d in g of rh e to r ic i ts e lf i s in ad eq u a te .

W ithout re a liz in g i t , S u n d erlan d s tre n g th e n e d the c a se fo r the

teach in g of r h e to r ic in the sam e a r t ic le . He a s s e r t s th a t the c a se s y s ­

tem i s only a h a lf-w a y p o in t in le g a l ed u ca tio n . T h ro u g h the study of

c a s e s , the s tu d e n t i s m oved f ro m the a b s t r a c t r e a lm of le g a l th e o ry in to

the c o n c re te a r e n a of a c tu a l l i t ig a tio n . B ut i t s t i l l on ly te l l s the

s tu d en t how o th e r s have ap p lied th e law , and i t could b e added p a r e n ­

th e tic a lly th a t i t te l l s h im la rg e ly how only a p p e lla te ju d g e s h av e ap p lied

the law , and ig n o re s fo r the m o s t p a r t the e f fo r ts of th e la w y e rs , ju ry ,

33ibid.

110

and judge in the c o u r t of o r ig in a l ju r is d ic t io n . The c a s e sy s te m , say s

S u n d erlan d , p ro v e s to the s tu d en t th a t the law i s an a p p lied sc ien ce

w ithout p e rm it t in g h im in s tru c tio n in the ap p lica tio n of i t . The key

a rg u m e n t in fa v o r of in s tru c tio n in the a p p lica tio n of p r in c ip le s i s given

in th is p a ra g ra p h .

The m e re sc h o la r i s d ish e a r te n e d o v er the u n c e r ta in tie s of the law . F o r h im they m ak k im p e rfe c tio n and in c o m p le te ­n e s s , and he looks fo rw a rd to the tim e when le g a l s ta n d a rd s w ill be so f a r p e r fe c te d th a t the a n s w e rs to leg a l p ro b le m s m ay be w o rk ed out w ith a c c u ra c y and p re c is io n . He w ould app ly the c lo se lo g ic of the m a th e m a tic ia n to the fa c ts and law of the c a s e , and w ould h ave the c o r r e c t r e s u l t follow in v a r ia b ly f ro m c o r r e c t p r e m is e s . The la w y e r know s b e t te r . He u n d e rs ta n d s th a t th e r e i s no ab so lu te s ta n d a rd p o ss ib le ; th a t r e v e r s e d c a s e s and d isse n tin g op in ions only e m p h a s iz e the hum an e le m e n t in le g a l c o n tro v e rs ie s ; th a t two ju d g es m ay d iffe r d ia m e tr ic a lly and n e ith e r be w rong; th a t r ig h t and w rong , a s ap p lied to the so lu tio n of le g a l p ro b le m s , a r e p u re ly re la tiv e t e r m s .

In e s s e n c e , he i s say ing th a t the s tu d en t m u s t be b ro u g h t to

r e a l iz e th a t law d ea ls in p ro b a b ili t ie s and th a t the s tu d en t m u s t have an

o p p o rtu n ity to le a rn how to d ea l w ith the p r in c ip le s le a rn e d f ro m the

c a se m eth o d in the a c tu a l and u n c e r ta in s itu a tio n . T h is , of c o u rse , is

one of th e m o s t a n c ie n t of r h e to r ic a l th e o r ie s .

T h u s , S underland w ould see a s a m a jo r function of the law school

the p ro v is io n of te a ch in g , p r a c t ic e , and c r i t ic is m in the ap p lica tio n of

the law . T he c r i t ic i s m w ould no t b e d ire c te d to w ard the p ro p e r u se of

3 4 ib id ,, p , 255,

I l l

the p r in c ip le s in a rg u m e n t, and the ap p lic a tio n of the a rg u m e n t to a given

au d ien ce . He s u m m a r iz e s h is opinion of th e function of the law schoo l

w ith th e se w o rd s.

The law y er . . . i s a p ro fe s s io n a l m an w ith w hom know ­ledge is bu t a m e a n s to a p r a c t ic a l end . If he canno t u se h is know ledge i t i s of no value to h im . He can n e v e r a p p re c ia te w hat he knows u n til he le a rn s how to u se it; he can n ev e r know how to a c q u ire know ledge u n til he u n d e rs ta n d s how h is know ledge is to be em ployed . It is to ro u n d ou t the law schoo l c u r r ic u lu m in to a p r a c t ic a l a s w ell a s a th e o re t ic a l c o u rse , to supp lem en t th e c a s e sy s te m in m ak in g the law c o n c re te , and to develop the study of law a s a sc ie n ce w hich i s p r im a r i ly to be app lied to th e n ee d s of a co m plex so c ie ty , th a t the teach in g of p r a c t ic e h a s taken a p ro m in e n t p lace in the L aw D ep a rtm en t of th e U n iv e rs ity of M ich igan .

A lfred Z. R eed , in h is re v iew of le g a l ed u ca tio n fo r 1929, p o in ts

ou t th a t the figh t b e tw een p ra c t i t io n e r s and e d u c a to rs i s m o re em o tio n a l

th an n e c e s s a ry , a good d e a l of the a rg u m e n t a r is in g f ro m se n tim e n t

r a th e r than lo g ic . R eed , re s p e c te d a s a n e u tra l o b s e rv e r (being

n e ith e r a law y er n o r a law te a c h e r) re a s o n s th a t i t i s the duty of th e law

school to look a f te r the p r a c t ic a l tra in in g of the s tu d en ts , b u t h e i s su re

th a t the p o p u la r m eth o d of the m o o t c o u r t i s u n s a tis fa c to ry . He c o n ­

c lu d es th a t only th ro u g h a c tu a l c o n tac t w ith r e a l c lie n ts could a la w y e r

le a rn the ap p lica tio n of th e leg a l p r in c ip le s . T h u s, R eed su g g es te d the

^^I b id . , p . 260,

3^A lfred Z , R eed , R eview of L e g a l E d u ca tio n in the U n ited S ta tes and C anada fo r the Y e a r 1929 (New Y ork: C arn eg ie F o u n d a tio n fo r the A dvancem ent of T e ach in g , 1930), p . 3,

112

d ev e lo p m en t of le g a l a id c lin ic s such a s a r e now in e x is te n c e . H is

r e a s o n fo r ob jec ting to m o o t c o u r ts w as th a t law schoo ls m ay th u s . .

be en co u rag ed to devote to th e se a c t iv i t ie s a g r e a te r p ro p o rtio n of th e ir

s tu d e n ts ’ tim e than ought to b e d iv e r te d f ro m th e ir p r im a ry r e s p o n s i ­

b i l i ty —in cu lca tio n of a sc ie n tif ic know ledge of the law .

The p ro b le m of d e te rm in in g a rh e to r ic of A m e ric a n le g a l p r o c e s s e s

i s f ru s t r a te d , th e r e fo re , f ro m the s ta r t b y a fundam en tal d is a g re e m e n t

a s to the function of a law school. In h is 1921 r e p o r t on le g a l ed u ca tio n ,

R eed s ta te d the p ro b le m e ffec tiv e ly . He sa id th a t the f i r s t p ro b le m

fac in g the law school w as a d e c is io n on th e am oun t and type of n o n -th e o -

r e t ic a l education they ought to p ro v id e ; b u t second , R eed a s s e r te d th a t

th e r e a l p ro b le m w as th e d e te rm in a tio n an d co o rd in a tio n of r o le s to be

d iv id ed am ong the u n d e rg ra d u a te c o lle g e s , the law sch o o ls , and the

a s so c ia tio n s of p ra c tic in g la w y e rs , and th e b a r e x a m in e rs . T he ty p ic a l

p a t te rn , acco rd in g to R eed , i s fo r each of th e se th re e u n its to ig n o re

the w o rk of the o th e r s , the r e s u l t be in g th a t each a tte m p ts to tak e a s

m uch of the e d u ca tio n a l p ro c e s s in to i t s own p ro g ra m a s p o s s ib le , w ith ­

ou t r e g a rd to the ex p e n se . "T he f in a l s tag e in ed u ca tio n a l dev elo p m en t

i s a t ta in e d ," co n c lu d es R eed , "when the th re e c e n tre s le a r n to co o p e ra te

in s te a d of to co m p e te . " "A sing le l a r g e r o rg an iz a tio n , " he co n tinued ,

3 7 ib id . , p. 10.

3® A lfred Z . R e e d , T ra in in g fo r th e P u b lic P r o f e s s io n o f th e L a w , op . c i t . , p . 280.

l is

" th e s e v e ra l p a r t s of w hich a r e m u tu a lly su p p o rtin g in a s p i r i t of su b o r­

d ination to the com m on w hole, i s the go a l to w ard w hich A m e r ic a n le g a l

education i s m o v in g , "39

The d ia lo g u e on the p ro p e r fu n c tio n of the law school p ro d u ce d ,

o v e r the y e a r s , a good d ea l m o re ta lk th an ac tio n . The law sch o o ls co n ­

tin u ed to o p e ra te on the p a t te rn s e t b y the H a rv a rd L aw School and thus

pu t in o s t of th e i r e f fo r ts to w ard the study of le g a l p r in c ip le s th ro u g h the

c a se m ethod . T h is d id no t, h o w e v e r, p re v e n t som e law schoo l le a d e r s

fro m continuing th e i r p ro te s t .

A fte r so m e y e a r s of q u ie t, th e p r o te s t s cam e ag a in d u rin g and

im m ed ia te ly fo llow ing W orld W ar II. In a 1943 r e p o r t of the C o m m ittee

on A im s and O b je c tiv e s of L eg a l E d u c a tio n , A lb e r t J . H arn o su b m itte d

a m in o rity op in ion b la s tin g h is c o lle a g u e s fo r th e ir f a i lu re to ch an g e .

"I w ish to u rg e upon the schoo ls and th e b a r th a t th ey engage in an even

m o re s ig n if ic a n t an d sea rc h in g a n a ly s is of th e m se lv e s . . . sa id

H arn o . He c la im e d th a t th e re h a d b e e n a fa i lu re to define c le a r ly

the ro le of the la w y e r in the a f f a ir s of the na tio n . T h e re w as no q u es tio n

^^Ibid .

A lb e r t J . H a rn o , "S e p a ra te S ta tem en t in R e p o rt of C o m m ittee on A im s and O b je c tiv e s of L eg a l E d u c a tio n , " H andbook of the A sso c ia tio n of A m e ric a n L aw S choo ls, V ol. 41 (1943), p . 139.

114

in H arn o ’ s m in d th a t la w y e rs occup ied p o s it io n s of le a d e rsh ip , "B u t th a t

they m ake fu ll u se of the p o w ers of le a d e r s h ip w hich a r e th e i r s by v ir tu e

of the s tra te g ic p o s itio n they occupy in o u r so c ie ty m any w ill q u estio n ,

W hat w as n eed ed , sa id H arno , w as an ex tensive study of the

ta s k s of a law y er and w hat w as needed to fu lf il l them . A s a s ta r t , H arno

in d ica ted th a t he could c ite c e r ta in b a s ic an d e s se n tia l to o ls of a law y er.

T he law y er shou ld be p ro f ic ie n t in read in g . He should be ab le to re a d f a i r ly ra p id ly and w ith co m p reh en sio n of d iff i­cu lt p a s s a g e s . He should , in d eed , b e a m a s te r of w o rd s and te rm in o lo g y . He should be ad ep t in e3q> ression--in speak in g , w ritin g , and d ra f tin g . He need n o t b e an o ra to r , b u t a law y er who canno t e x p re s s h im se lf w ell o ra l ly i s only h a lf a one.A b ility to w rite c le a r ly and cogen tly i s a sine qua non. He should be ab le to th in k and be cap ab le of su sta in ed th ink ing ,

H arno concluded h is d is s e n tin g opinion b y ca llin g fo r a re v is io n of the

law school c u r r ic u la , even to the po in t of m o d ifica tio n of the c a s e

m ethod , to acc o m p lish the education in som e of the a r e a s m en tio n ed .

A t about the sam e tim e th a t H arn o w as e x p re ss in g h im se lf . The

Ohio S tate U n iv e rs ity C ollege of Law w as engaged in such a s tudy a s he

w as ca llin g fo r . S ta rtin g in 1939, a new c u rr ic u lu m w as adop ted a t

Ohio S tate a r is in g f ro m the th e s is th a t

, , , the im p a rtin g of in fo rm a tio n concern ing co n tro llin g le g a l co n cep ts an d p ro c e d u re s , w hile im p o rta n t, should n o t be the so le o b jec tiv e of le g a l education ; th a t pedagog ical e ffo r t should a t the sam e tim e be d ire c te d to w a rd (1) the cu ltiv a tio n of ad equate p ro fe s s io n a l, so c ia l, s c ie n tif ic and sc h o la s tic a tt i tu d e s .

4 1 lb id ,, pp, 139-140, ^^Tbid,, p , 140,

115

(2) the developm en t of such te c h n ic a l s k ills a s e ffec tiv e e x p re s s io n and office and co u rt p r a c t ic e , and (3) the s tim ­u la tio n of p o w ers of a n a ly s is and sy n th e s is , n o t only w ith r e s p e c t to s tr ic t ly ‘legal* m a te r ia ls b u t a lso a s to so c ia l, p o l i t ic a l , and econom ic m a t te r , . . .^ 3

In lig h t of the study of c u rr ic u lu m , s ta te d the r e p o r t of Dean

F ra n k R . S trong of the O .S .U . C ollege of L aw , the c a s e m ethod of

teach in g w as exposed to be no tab ly in ad eq u a te w ith r e g a rd to the teach in g

of s ta tu to ry c o n s tru c tio n , advo cacy , co u n se llin g , an d d ra ftin g , ^ A fte r

ten y e a r s of e x p e rim e n t. S tro n g re p o rte d , " E x p e r ie n c e w ith th e se c u r ­

r ic u la r innovations h a s com bined w ith a decade of a c tiv e fe rm e n t in

p ed ag o g ica l in q u iry to su g g e s t the g r e a t d e s ir a b i l i ty , if n o t u rg en t

n e c e s s i ty , of fu r th e r im p ro v e m e n t of the law schoo l c u r r ic u lu m along

the lin e s en v isag ed ten y e a r s ago , In lin e w ith th is b e lie f , Ohio

State p r e p a re d an in v e n to ry of m a jo r le g a l c a p a c it ie s . Included in the

in v en to ry u n d er the h ead in g of d iffe re n tia l c a p a c it ie s w as study in le g a l

m ethod . The ob jec tive of th is w as to im p a r t a w o rk in g u n d ers tan d in g of

the ", , , f lu id ity of lan g u ag e , , , the p r in c ip le s of sy llo g is tic and

inductive lo g ic ; of the p r in c ip le s of re a so n in g by an a lo g y and analyzing

by c la s s if ic a tio n , , , ,

^ ^ F ra n k R, S trong , "A New C u rric u lu m fo r th e C ollege of Law of The Ohio State U n iv e r s i ty ," Ohio State L aw J o u rn a l , V ol, 11, No, 1 (W in te r, 1950), p, 44,

"^^Ibid,, p, 45, ^ % id ., p. 44, ^% i d . , p, 46,

116

Included w ith in a c a te g o ry c a lle d le g a l s k ills w e re the su b d iv is io n s

"D ia le c tic a l, " and "T ec h n ic a l, " W ithin the fo rm e r c a te g o ry w as inc lu d ed

fa c t d isc r im in a tio n , c a se a n a ly s is , s ta tu te a n a ly s is , le g a l sy n th e s is ,

and is s u e d isp o s itio n . In the l a t t e r w as le g a l advocacy : ad jec tiv e

w hich a im ed a t p ro v id in g te c h n ic a l c a p a c itie s fo r the co m p e ten t p r e s e n ­

ta tio n of is s u e s b e fo re le g is la tiv e and ad ju d ica tiv e b o d ie s ; and leg a l

advocacy : a rg u m e n ta tiv e , w hich p ro p o se d to develop a cap ac ity fo r

p e rs u a s iv e a rg u m e n ta tio n of i s s u e s b e fo re le g is la tiv e and ad ju d ica tiv e

b o d ie s . L e g a l d ra f tsm a n sh ip , r e s e a r c h , and w ritin g w e re o th e r sk ills

in c lu d ed ,

A s opposed to d iffe re n tia l c a p a c it ie s , the O .S . U. r e p o r t inc luded

th o se ca lle d " In te g ra l. " W ithin th is group w e re the su b d iv is io n s of

le g a l co u n se llin g , le g a l n eg o tia tio n , le g a l c o n te s ta tio n , and le g a l p la n ­

n ing . The d e s c r ip tio n of the o b jec tiv e of le g a l n eg o tia tio n w as " . . .

to develop c a p a c ity in bo th a d je c tiv e and su b stan tiv e re p re s e n ta t io n of

in te r e s ts th ro u g h in fo rm a l, n o n - lit ig io u s p ro c e d u re s ,

D ean S trong re p o r te d in 1950 th a t h is co lleg e of law then o ffe red

c u r r ic u la r w o rk in a l l the a r e a s d is c u s s e d above w ith the excep tion of

leg a l advocacy: a rg u m e n ta tiv e , w hich he fe l t w as p ro v id e d th rough the

m oot c o u r t p ro g ra m . He in d ic a te d th a t the school h a d even e x p e r i­

m en ted w ith a c o u rse in le g a l n eg o tia tio n ,

4% Ibid,, pp . 4 6 -47 . ^® Ibid ,, p . 48,

117

In 1944 the C om m ittee on C u rr ic u lu m of the A sso c ia tio n of

A m e ric a n L aw S chools c a lle d fo r a change in the w ay c a s ë - teach in g w as

p e rfo rm e d . T he tra d it io n a l a p p ro a c h to the c a se m e th o d , a s d e riv e d

f ro m A m es , fo cu se d on only one le v e l of the c a s e s : w h at i s the r ig h t

o r b e s t re a d in g of the opinion a t the ju d ic ia l le v e l? T h a t i s , in the

c la s s the in s t r u c to r d is c u s s e d the m ean in g of the ju d ic ia l d e c is io n in

lig h t of h is (the in s t r u c to r ’s) o p in io n s, The C o m m ittee r e p o r t id en ­

tif ie d two ad d itio n a l le v e ls p o s s ib le in c a s e - te a c h in g . F i r s t , the

a d v o c a te ’s le v e l, "W hat read in g w ill the c a se o r c a s e s b e a r , in te rm s

of o u r c o r r e c t d o c tr in a l te c h n iq u es , and can th a t rea d in g b e m ade n o t

m e re ly c o lo ra b le b u t re a l ly p e r s u a s iv e (to a p a r t ic u la r tr ib u n a l)?

The study of th e a rg u m e n ts a c tu a lly m ad e by co u n se l o r th o se w hich

m ig h t have b e e n m ad e fo r the p la in tiff and then the d e fen d an t, sa id the

r e p o r t , once m ad e up a la rg e p a r t of the c a s e - te a c h in g of L an g d e ll a t

H a rv a rd , " T h is ad v o c a te ’s a p p ro a c h ," co n tin u es the r e p o r t , " is a v i ta l

ad d itio n to the ju d ic ia l o r law p r o f e s s o r ’s le v e l of d is c u s s io n . I t is

w o rth s e p a ra te study and d r i l l , T he C o m m ittee on C u rr ic u lu m p r o ­

p o se d to devo te an e n tire s e m e s te r ’s w o rk to th is side of c a s e study,

^ '^"R ep o rt of the C o m m ittee on C u rric u lu m !' H andbook of A s s o c ­ia tio n of A m e ric a n L aw Schools and P ro c e e d in g s of the F o r ty - s e c o n d M eetin g , V ol, 42 (1944), p , 173,

3®’l b i d . , p , 174, 5 'llb id ,

118

”, . . w ith the ju d ic ia l le v e l th e re t r e a te d ch ie fly a s the fa c to r w hich

l im its and g u id es ad v o cacy , a s being the le v e l to w hich advocacy m u s t

ap p ea l and on w hich p e rs u a s io n m u s t p ro v e e ffec tiv e , , , , "W hen

C ardozo s p o k e ,” co n c lu d es the r e p o r t , "of m o s t ap p ea ls a s fo red o o m ed

in th e i r o u tco m e , h e spoke f ro m the s tan d p o in t of one w orking on th e

ju d ic ia l le v e l, ” B u t, th ey co n tin u e , he a lso spoke a s a judge fac ed w ith

law y e r a f te r la w y e r who cam e b e fo re h im who h ad n o t ", , , le a rn e d in

sch o o l th a t the c a s e s o ffe r m any d o c tr in a l p o s s ib i l i t ie s on the a d v o c a te ’s

le v e l , b u t th a t i t i s the c o u r t 's job to r e a d a s the so le c o r r e c t p o s s i ­

b il i ty som e one of the te c h n ic a l p o s s ib i l i t ie s w hich m ak es fo r s e n se and

ju s t ic e ,

The c o m m itte e spoke out a g a in s t the th e o ry th a t the le a rn in g th a t

m ig h t com e f ro m such an a p p ro ach to le g a l ed ucation a s m en tioned

above ought to b e le f t a t th e le v e l of b y -p ro d u c t of the study of p r in c ip le s

a lo n e , "T he d e s ir e d v a lu e s , , , , m u s t u n d e r p r e s e n t cond itions be

m ad e in to p ro d u c ts c o n sc io u s ly sought, a t the expense of su b s tan tiv e

c o v e rag e and by c o n ce n tra tio n upon one o r a few s k il ls a t a t im e , , , .

To i l lu s t r a te w hat k ind of study they p ro p o se d , the c o m m itte e

m en tio n ed a p p e lla te advocacy . The p h a se of le g a l p r a c t ic e , they s a id ,

^^Ib id . ^ % i d , , pp , 174-175. ^ % i d . , p , 176,

119

w hich in v o lv es the p re p a ra t io n of the ap p e lla te b r ie f and p re se n tin g the

o ra l a rg u m e n t, . . i s a d is tin c tiv e a r e a w hich does no t depend upon

p e c u lia r e x p e r tn e ss in any g iven le g a l s u b je c t-m a tte r , . . , ” 55 "T h e re

should be no doubt, " say s the C o m m ittee on C u rr ic u lu m , " th a t advocacy

is an a r t capab le of co m m u n ica tio n ; bo th the G re ek s and the S c h o la s tic s

in th e i r day d e m o n s tra te d th a t i t i s , T h is i s a s c lo se a s th e co m m ittee

cam e to ca llin g fo r th a n c ie n t rh e to r ic a l th e o ry to a s s i s t th em in th e i r

s e a rc h fo r im p ro v em en ts in le g a l education .

The value of th is r e p o r t to the p r e s e n t study is no t so m u ch in the

id e a s fo r im p ro v em e n t in law teach in g a s i t i s in the re p re s e n ta t io n of

the s ta tu s of th inking on rh e to r ic a l th e o ry a s a p a r t of the p r o c e s s of law .

The r e p o r t s e rv e s b o th a s a c r itiq u e of com m on p ra c t ic e in law sch o o ls

in fa ilin g to re co g n ize the r h e to r ic a l a sp e c ts of le g a l p ra c t ic e and th u s

to fo rm u la te a r h e to r ic a l th e o ry to m e e t the n e e d s , and i t s e rv e s a s an

i l lu s tr a t io n of the re c o g n itio n of th is fa c to r by som e le g a l e d u c a to rs . A s

w ill be seen in the fo llow ing sec tio n , th e re is no ev idence of a substcin tia l

e f fo r t to fu lf ill th is d e s i r e . On the c o n tra ry , a l l the ev idence su g g es ts

th a t in the c u rr ic u lu m m o s t of th e co n cen tra tio n re m a in s on p r in c ip le s

of law , and the p r a c t ic a l a s p e c ts (tha t i s , the rh e to r ic a l a s p e c ts , am ong

o th e rs ) a r e le f t to an o c c a s io n a l c o u rse o r e x t r a - c u r r ic u la r a c tiv ity .

S ^ ib id ., p . 185, 56ibid.

120

R ecogn ition of L eg a l R h e to ric in

L aw School C u rr ic u la

In lig h t of the p re c e d in g d isc u s s io n of the p ro p e r function of the

law sch o o l, the in v e s tig a tio n m ay now tu rn to a m o re sp ec ific ex am in a tio n

of the c u r r ic u la of the sch o o ls . A s s ta te d b e fo re , the e x ten t of r e c o g ­

n itio n of the c h a ra c te r of rh e to r ic a l th e o ry invo lved in the le g a l p ro c e s s ,

on the p a r t of le g a l e d u c a to rs , should be ev id en ced in the developm en t

of law schoo l c u r r ic u la . I t h a s a lre a d y b een s ta te d th a t the rh e to r ic a l

fu n c tio n s of law a r e ty p ic a lly c la s s if ie d w ith o th e r fu n c tio n s involved in

the a p p lic a tio n of le g a l p r in c ip le s u n d er the t i t le of p r a c t ic a l c o u rs e s ,

o r p ro c e d u ra l c o u rse s . T h u s , i t i s to th is a r e a of law schoo l in s tru c tio n

th a t one m u s t go to see ev id en ce of r h e to r ic a l th e o ry .

T h is ex am in atio n of c u r r ic u la w ill be d iv id ed in to two p a r ts .

F i r s t , the s ta ted o b je c tiv e s of p r a c t ic a l w o rk in law sch o o ls w ill be

exam in ed . Second, the co n ten t of th e se c o u r s e s w ill b e d isc u s s e d . V a r ­

ia tio n s e x is tin g o v er the y e a r s fro m sch o o l to school w ill b e esqposed b y

r e fe re n c e to r e p re s e n ta tiv e law schoo ls f ro m m o s t p a r t s of the nation .

The f i r s t q u es tio n p o sed , th e n , i s w hat i s the o b jec tiv e of p ra c t ic a l w o rk

in law sch o o ls?

O b jec tiv es of p r a c t ic a l w o rk in law sch o o ls

One of the s ta te d r e a s o n s fo r p r a c t ic a l o r r h e to r ic a l education in

the law sch o o ls is to p ro v id e fo r the im p ro v e m e n t of the ju d ic ia l p ro c e s s

121

I ts e lf . The p o in t w as s ta te d in 1912 by E d w ard W, H in ton , D ean of the

U n iv e rs ity of M isso u ri L aw School: "I th ink i t m ig h t be sa id th a t the

v e ry g e n e ra l n eg le c t of p ro c e d u re in the law sch o o l i s one of the c a u s e s

th a t h av e led to the u n s a tis fa c to ry condition of o u r p ra c t ic e a t th is

t im e , "We have tu rn e d o u t a g en e ra tio n of la w y e rs , " he co n tin u ed ,

" sp len d id ly equipped in su b s ta n tiv e law , b u t w ith l i t t le tra in in g in p r o ­

c e d u re , They have b e e n le f t to p ick up th e ir p ro c e d u re h a p h a z a rd , and

th ey seem to have done i t r a th e r b ad ly , H in to n 's co n c lu sio n w as th a t

law sch o o ls should a im p ro c e d u re c o u rse s to w ard the c o r re c t io n of th is

p ro b le m .

One y e a r l a t e r , H e n ry M , B a te s of the U n iv e rs ity of M ich igan

L aw School spoke a s the P r e s id e n t of the A , A, L , S, and cam e to a

s im i la r co n c lu sio n . He n o ted th a t one of the g ro u n d s of p o p u la r d isc o n te n t

w ith th e le g a l sy s te m a ro s e f ro m the fa ilu re to in s i s t upon adequate

ed u ca tio n . He c la im e d th a t th is la c k p ro d u ced " , . , n a r ro w n e s s of

v is io n , p ro fe s s io n a l in e ffic ie n c y and n e g lec t of e th ic a l c o n s id e ra tio n s ,

w hich d e sp ite a m a jo r i ty of ab le and u p rig h t la w y e rs , [ h a s ] s e r io u s ly

im p a ire d the u s e fu ln e s s , the in fluence and the p r e s t ig e of the B a r a s a

5?E dw ard W, H in ton , "D iscu ss io n of th e A d d re s s of the P r e s i ­d en t, " P ro c e e d in g s of the T w elfth A nnual M eetin g of the A sso c ia tio n of A m e ric a n L aw S chools, V ol, 12 (1912), p , 17,

58ibid ,

122

w h o le , "59 A gain , a s h ad the o th e r s , B a tes fe l t th a t a n e c e s s a ry

o b je c tiv e of p ra c t ic a l tra in in g in law schoo ls w as to h e lp a m e lio ra te the

p ro b le m s w ith in the le g a l sy s te m ,

E dson R , S u n derland , a lso speaking a t th e 1913 m eetin g of the

A , A . L , S , , m ade a th o ro u g h a n a ly s is of th is o b jec tiv e of p ra c t ic a l le g a l

ed u ca tio n . He began b y speak ing of the g e n e ra l in d ic tm e n t of pub lic

op in ion of a ll so c ia l in s ti tu tio n s , and noting th a t the law w as c e r ta in ly

am o n g th o se u n d e r c r i t ic i s m . H ow ever, he sa id , i t w as not the law

i t s e l f b u t le g a l a d m in is tra tio n th a t w as being o b je c ted to . The s ta tu to ry

poB tion of the law a d ju s ts to pub lic opinion, he n o te d , th rough the m ed iu m

of p o p u la rly e le c te d r e p re s e n ta t iv e s in le g is la tu r e s . H ow ever, th e ad m in ­

is t r a t io n of the law is u n d e r the c o n tro l of the la w y e rs , who a r e no t

re sp o n s ib le to the p u b lic , " D is c re t io n ," S un d erlan d com m en ted , " n e c e s ­

s a r i ly p lay s so la rg e a p a r t in ju d ic ia l a d m in is tra tio n , and p e rso n a l

c a p a c ity and sk ill a r e such d e te rm in in g f a c to rs in the com plex p ro b le m s

of p ro fe s s io n a l w o rk of a l l k in d s , , , " th a t th e re i s l i t t le the le g is la tu r e s

c an do to c o n tro l i t , B ut w hile the a d m in is tra tio n of ju s tic e m ay no t

b e a s w e ll c o n tro lle d by le g is la tu r e s , i t do es fa ll u n d e r the in fluence of

^9H enry M, B a te s , "A d d re ss of the P r e s id e n t ," P ro c e e d in g s of th e T h ir te e n th A nnual M eeting of the A sso c ia tio n of A m ericcin L aw Schools^ V ol, 13 (1913), p , 36,

^^E dson R , S u n d erlan d , "T each ing P r a c t ic e , " P ro c e e d in g s of th e T h ir te e n th , op, c i t , , p , 48,

123

the p u b lic . T ha t i s , th ro u g h the p ro c e s s of co m p e titio n am ong la w y e rs

th o se who o ffe r w hat th e p u b lic w ill no t have m u s t change th e ir w ays o r

find th e m se lv e s unem ployed , "T he pub lic h a s b eco m e convinced , " s ta te d

S u n d erlan d , " th a t th e re i s g ro s s in effic ien cy in the a d m in is tra tio n of the

law . . . . T h e re is too m u ch de lay , ex p en se and u n c e r ta in ty abou t i t ,

Sunderland , too p ro p o se d th a t an o b jec tiv e of p r a c t ic a l le g a l

ed u ca tio n be the im p ro v e m e n t of the a d m in is tra tio n of the law . C e r ta in ly ,

n o t a l l th e im p ro v e m en ts th u s ca lled fo r can be c la im e d a s be ing rh e to ­

r ic a l in n a tu re , bu t th e s p e a k e rs a t no tim e a tte m p te d to d isc r im in a te

th e rh e to r ic a l f ro m th e n o n - rh e to r ic a l r e fo rm s sought. The only co n c lu ­

s io n s th a t m ay be d raw n f ro m th is evidence a r e th e se : the le g a l sy s te m

i s , am ong o th e r th ings an o rg an iza tio n fo r co m m u n ica tio n . The p ro c e s s

of co m m u n ica tio n flow s f ro m the counsel to the c o u r t (judge o r ju ry ) and

f ro m w itn e sse s to the c o u r t th rough co u n se l, and f ro m p re c e d e n t d e c is io n s

and a u th o r ity th rough the la w y e rs to the c o u r t . If th e re i s c r i t ic is m of

the e n t i re p ro c e s s of a d m in is tra t io n of th e law , then education fo r the

c o r r e c t io n of the tro u b le m u s t in som e w ay be d ire c te d a t the co m m u n i­

c a tio n p ro c e s s . To th e e x te n t, th en , th a t law schoo l le a d e rs s e t a s a

goal of p r a c t ic a l edu ca tio n the in c re a s in g e ffic ien cy of the a d m in is tra tio n

of ju s t ic e , to th a t ex ten t th ey p ro p o sed , a t le a s t p a r t ia l ly , a rh e to r ic a l

o b je c tiv e .

6 l lb id . , pp. 4 8 -4 9 .

124

A second m a jo r o b jec tiv e of p r a c t ic a l le g a l education p ro p o se d by

th e law schoo ls w as the p ro te c tio n and c o n tro l of the ju ry sy s te m . The

n eed fo r the ex ten s iv e c o n tro l of w hat can be a d m itted in ev idence and

sa id by co u n se l co m es f ro m th e pow er given to th e ju ry in le g a l d e c is io n ­

m ak in g . The a ssu m p tio n m ad e c o n c e rn s th e re la t iv e c a p a b ili t ie s and

p o w e rs of the t r i a l judge an d the ju ry . A s the ju ry is g iven in c re a s e d

p o w e r, w ithout any co m m e n su ra te in c re a s e in know ledge o r c a p a b ility ,

i t i s n e c e s s a ry to add m o re and m o re c o n tro ls to the ju d ic ia l p r o c e s s to

a s s u r e th a t the ju r y 's d e c is io n is guided a s m u ch a s p o ss ib le to w ard a

sound b a s is . T h e re fo re , t r i a l p ro c e d u re a c ts a s a type of m o n ito r o v e r

the com m unica tion b e tw een co u n se l, w itn e s s e s , a u th o r it ie s , and the

c o u r t , includ ing the in s tru c t io n s f ro m the ju d g e to the ju ry . I t i s th u s

a s su m e d th a t if the ju ry re c e iv e s only sound co m m u n ica tio n s i t s d e c is io n

m u s t n e c e s s a r i ly r e s t on m o re sound r e a s o n s ,

R oscoe P ound of the H a rv a rd Law School u se d th is lin e of r e a ­

soning to a rg u e a g a in s t e m p h a s is upon te ac h in g p ro c e d u re - -h e lo o k ed

fo rw a rd to the tim e w hen the pow er of the ju ry w ill d im in ish and th u s

th e n eed fo r the e la b o ra te c o n tro ls w ill do lik e w ise . The re a so n A m e ric a n

law sch o o ls h ad n eg lec ted t r i a l p ra c t ic e . P o u n d sa id , w as h is to r ic a l in

th a t m o s t of i t s p r in c ip le s h a d b ecom e com m on to A m e rica n L aw éifter

th e e s ta b lish m e n t of the law sch o o ls , "We m u s t r e m e m b e r , " he sa id .

125

" th a t o u r A m e ric a n law re a lly b eg in s a t the R e v o lu tio n -- in fa c t, n o t u n til

som e tim e a f te r , " C om m on law , he r e c a l le d , w as adopted q u ite la te

in A m e ric a n h is to r y . P ound continued;

E v id en ce w as d ev elo p ed in the f i r s t q u a r te r of the n in e teen th c e n tu ry p r e t ty th o ro u g h ly . B u t t r i a l p ra c t ic e , , , w as developed in the U nited S ta te s a f te r 1850, I t re a c h e d i ts z en ith abou t 1875; i t b egan to d ec lin e abou t 1900, and I u n d e r ­tak e to say i t w ill b e s tead ily of l e s s im p o rta n c e in the d ev e lo p m en t of o u r law in th e fu tu re . Now, why i s th a t? I t i s b ecau se we m ad e the g re a t m is ta k e in m o s t of o u r ju r is d ic t io n s of tak ing aw ay fro m the t r i a l judge h is com m on law p o w e rs . C onsequen tly , a l l th is tech n iq u e of in s tru c tio n of ju r i e s b ecam e of v e ry g r e a t im p o rta n c e - -m o re so in som e s ta te s than in o th e rs . Then

r f ro m 1851 on w e took aw ay the independence of the ju d g es . We m ad e th em e le c tiv e p ra c t ic a l ly a l l o v e r the co u n try . W h ereas a judge w as f o rm e r ly the c e n te r of the c o u r t ro o m , now c o u n se l b e c am e the a l l im p o rta n t f a c to r in the t r i a l and the judge b e c a m e a s o r t of w ooden In d ian who s a t up th e r e d ig n ified , b u t of v e ry l i t t le p r a c t ic a l co n seq u en ce .

T h e re w as w h e re th is su b jec t of t r i a l p ra c t ic e began , , , ,A ll [ o f t h i s ] • . • developed b e c a u se we h ad tu rn e d ju r ie s lo o se by cu ttin g off the com m on law p o w e rs of the t r i a l judge and we h ad to d e v ise som e m e a n s of ge ttin g aw ay f ro m the v e rd ic t w hich r e s u l te d u n d er such c irc u m s ta n c e s . So we d e v e ­loped a ll th is m in u tia of t r i a l p r a c t ic e w hich h a s a ssu m e d a tre m e n d o u s im p o rta n c e in the b o o k s ,

P o u n d ’s co n c lu sio n w as th a t p ro c e d u re should b e tau g h t, b u t h e f e l t i t

p o s s ib le to o v e re m p h a s iz e t r i a l p r a c t ic e , and , he con tinued , . if

we a r e p a tie n t we m a y find th a t we can g e t a long in an o th e r decad e p re t ty

w ell in the p a th s in w hich we h ave b e e n going, He m ean t th a t he

62R oscoe P o u n d , "D isc u ss io n of the S underland S p e e c h ," P r o ­c eed in g s of the T h ir te e n th , op, c i t , , p p , 7 -8 ,

63ibid ,, pp, 8 -9 , ^"^Ibid,, p, 9,

126

fa v o red giving in c re a s in g d is c re tio n to the judge and thus avo id the

n e c e s s ity to te a c h t r i a l p ra c t ic e in tlie law school. Speaking a y e a r

b e fo re , E d w ard W, H inton had tak en an opposing v iew . He reco g n ized

th a t som e of the p ro fe s s o r s r e je c te d the id ea of teach in g p ra c t ic e and

p ro c e d u re b e c a u se i t w as thought to be soon o b so le te , o r a t le a s t becom ing

th a t w ay. He n o ted th a t som e of h is co lleag u es b e lie v e d " . . . th a t when

we ge t done re fo rm in g i t [ t r i a l p r a c t ic e and p ro c e d u re ] , and to the

id e a l s im p lif ic a tio n of i t , th e re w ill be nothing le f t to te a c h . H inton

re je c te d th is p o s itio n w hich w as l a t e r to be defended by Hound: " P e r s o n ­

a lly , I do not b e lie v e th a t we w ill a r r iv e a t th a t cond ition fo r som e y e a rs

to com e, " H is re a s o n s fo r say ing so w e re th e se : "So long a s w e have

the com m on law ju ry we w ill h av e so m e d ifficu lty in w ork ing w ith th a t

ju ry , and we w ill have need fo r m o re o r le s s law of p ro c e d u re , and the

su c c e ss fu l p r a c t i t io n e r m u s t u n d e rs ta n d th a t b ra n c h of the law .

S u n d erlan d spoke a t g r e a te r len g th on the su b jec t. He w as con­

c e rn e d th a t t r i a l p r a c t ic e , w hich he b e lie v e d to be the end and e sse n c e

of p ro c e d u re , w as la rg e ly ig n o re d b y law schoo ls . "T he t r i a l , " he

sa id , " is the h e a r t of p ro c e d u re . " H is a rg u m e n t w as th is ,

A g lan ce a t the function of th e ju ry in the m o d e rn t r i a l a t law w ill m ak e the po in t c le a r . I t i s the ju ry w hich i s the c h a r a c te r is t ic fe a tu re of the t r i a l , co lo rin g a l l i ts p h a se s and

^^H inton , lo c . c it . ^^Ib id .

6 ?E dson R . S underland , "T each in g P r a c t ic e , " o£. c i t . , p . 54.

127

d e te rm in in g m o s t of i t s ru le s . T h is i s the in s titu tio n w hich h a s m ade com m on law p ro c e d u re w hat i t i s . T h e re i s s c a rc e ly any th ing ab o u t the t r i a l , f ro m the p lead in g s to the w r i t of e r r o r , w hich does not r e f le c t th e in fluence of th is unique fe a tu re of E n g lish and A m e ric a n le g a l developm ent.

To e la b o ra te , S u n d erlan d sa id th a t the p u rp o se of p lead in g s w as to p r o ­

duce is s u e s t r ia b le to a ju ry ; a m a jo r p o r tio n of the f i r s t p a r t of the

t r i a l i s devoted to the se le c tio n of the ju ry ; the w ay in w hich the law y e rs

handle th e m se lv e s and p re s e n t th e ir c a s e s f ro m opening s ta te m e n t to

f in a l a rg u m e n t is re g u la te d b ecause of the p re s e n c e of a ju ry ; the p r o ­

b le m of in s tru c tio n s to the ju ry r e s t s upon the ju ry ; and , he concluded ,

, , , sp e c ia l in te r ro g a to r ie s and sp e c ia l v e rd ic ts a r e m e re ly d ev ices fo r p e n e tra tin g in to the co n sc ie n c e of the ju ry ; new t r i a l s , w ith th e ir v a s tly co m p lica ted r u le s , w ere d ev ise d and a re g ra n ted a s a sa feg u ard a g a in s t p e rv e r s e v e rd ic ts of ju r ie s ; the v e rd ic t i s the f in a l d e c is io n of th e ju ry and i t f ix e s the c h a ra c te r of the judgm ent; and the w r i t of e r r o r i s sued ou t o r the a p p ea l i s tak en in m o s t c a s e s b ecau se the ap p e llan t b e lie v e s he can conv ince the c o u r t th a t som e e r r o r w as c o m ­m itte d in the p re s e n c e of the ju ry w hich p re ju d ic ia lly in flu en ced i ts v e rd ic t , and he p ra y s fo r a r e v e r s a l and an o th e r t r i a l b e fo re a n o th e r ju ry , ^8

The second o b jec tiv e of p r a c t ic a l c o u rs e s in law sch o o ls , then ,

h a s b ee n co n cern ed w ith the ro le of the ju r y in le g a l d ec is io n -m a k in g .

The r u le s w hich a r e to be taugh t and p e r fe c te d , a r e d esig n ed to co n tro l

the co m m u n ica tio n s re c e iv e d and the n a tu re of the p e rsu a s io n w hich

ta k e s p lace in the m in d of the ju ry . O bv iously , the ru le s th e m se lv e s

^ ^ Ib id ,, pp , 54 -5 5 ,

128

a r e c o n s tru c te d and tau g h t on the a ssu m p tio n th a t th o se who m ake and

te a c h th em know w hat e ffe c t c e r ta in m e s s a g e s have on the m in d s of th e

ju r o r s . A lso , th e re i s a s tro n g sug g estio n by som e of the s p e a k e rs ,

th a t know ledge of the u se of the p r a c t ic e s and p ro c e d u re s w ill p e rm it a

d e g re e of s e le c tiv ity on the p a r t of the law y er in c o u r t to the end th a t

he m ay in fluence the d e c is io n of the ju ry .

In any ev en t, in so f a r a s the ju ry i s a fo ca l p o in t of p ra c t ic a l

tra in in g in law sch o o ls such tra in in g m u s t n e c e s s a r i ly be c o n s id e re d a s

m uch r h e to r ic a l a s le g a l , if n o t m o re so. F o r in fa c t , th e se ru le s

re la te d to the ju ry a r e n o t co n ce rn ed w ith p r in c ip le s of law n o r w ith the

ap p lica tio n of law to th e end of so c ia l c o n tro l, r a th e r they beg in and end

w ith an a tte m p t to c o n tro l the d ec is io n -m aJd n g p r o c e s s of a g roup of

le g a lly u n tra in e d p e r s o n s a s they re sp o n d to m e s s a g e s bo th p e rs u a s iv e

and , a lleg e d ly , in fo rm a tiv e . P o u n d ’s a rg u m e n t th a t a s the d e c is io n ­

m ak ing d is c re tio n of the ju ry i s d im in ish ed the n eed to study the t r i a l

sy s te m in law school w ill a lso d im in ish is p re d ic a te d upon the a s s u m p ­

tio n th a t the t r i a l ju d g e , be ing t ra in e d in law , d oes no t n eed to be

p ro te c te d a g a in s t p o s s ib ly p re ju d ic ia l co m m u n ica tio n s . T h is a rg u m e n t

is i t s e l f su b jec t to s e r io u s doubt.

The th ird o b jec tiv e of p r a c t ic a l ed ucation in law sch o o ls , a s

s ta te d by le g a l e d u c a to rs , i s in d iv id u a l su c c e ss in advocacy . I t i s th is

o b jec tiv e w hich s e e m s to be le a s t p o p u la r w ith the law school p r o f e s s o r s .

129

and i t i s th is o b jec tiv e th a t they m o s t fre q u e n tly a s s o c ia te w ith rh e to r ic .

The m o s t com m on r e a s o n g iven fo r d e -e m p h a s iz in g s u c c e ss in advocacy

a t th is t im e w as a fee lin g th a t i t should be tau g h t e ls e w h e re . T h is im ­

p lie d th a t th e r e p re s e n ta t iv e s of the law sch o o ls re c o g n iz e d the d e s ir a b i l i ty

of a young la w y e r le a rn in g the p r in c ip le s of ad v o cacy , b u t th ey s im p ly

f e l t th a t i t could b e t te r be tau g h t e i th e r b e fo re o r a f te r law sch o o l. How­

e v e r , th is r e a s o n does n o t fu lly ex p la in the a ttitu d e of the law sch o o ls

to w ard th is o b jec tiv e of p r a c t ic a l education . A fu r th e r b a s is of re je c tio n

a p p e a r s , m o re by im p lic a tio n th an d ir e c t s ta te m e n t- - th e teach in g of

ad v o cacy i s no t a c a d e m ic a lly re s p e c ta b le . T h e re i s a v e ry s tro n g sug ­

g es tio n th a t the le a d e r s of th e law schoo ls a s s o c ia te d advocacy w ith

ta le n ts and k n ac k s , the h ig h -so u n d in g p h r a s e s and em pty o ra to ry w hich

C h ap te r I d is c u s s e d a s b e in g am ong the p o p u la r d e fin itio n s of rh e to r ic ,

S u n d erlan d , the lead in g exponen t of p ra c t ic a l law schoo l c o u r s e s , and a

re p re s e n ta t iv e of the sch o o l (M ichigan) m o s t open ly in fav o r of such

c o u r s e s , a tte m p ts to m ak e the d is tin c tio n in th is w ay.

The teach in g of t r i a l p r a c t ic e h a s s c a rc e ly b e en a tte m p te d in m o s t of the law sc h o o ls of th is c o u n try . A nd the re a so n p ro b a b ly l ie s in the f a i lu re to c le a r ly d is tin g u ish b e tw een t r i a l p r a c t ic e a s a body of w e ll-d e fin e d and a c c u ra te ly developed p r in c ip le s of p ro c e d u re and t r i a l p ra c t ic e a s a vague and shadow y d isc o u rs e on s u c c e s s in ad v o cacy . The law sch o o ls can n o t u n d e rtak e to te a c h m en how to r e a d c h a ra c te r ; how to cu ltiv a te an im p re s s iv e m a n n e r; how to sk illfu lly in te r ro g a te a w itn e ss ; how and w hen to ap p ea l to the em o tio n s of the ju ry ; how to d e lic a te ly f la t t e r o r s e v e re ly a r r a ig n . T hey canno t

130

te a c h re so u rc e fu ln e s s and ta c t . The a r t of e x p re s s io n and the sk ill of s tra te g y a r e o u ts id e the p ro p e r scope of the sc h o o ls of law . A ll of th e se th in g s a r e a s n e c e s s a ry in s e llin g goods o r teach ing schoo l a s in p ra c tic in g law . The a r t of advocacy is the a r t of l i fe , and only life can te a c h w hat l ife i s .

A lthough he im p lie s th a t h is only ob jec tio n is th a t advocacy m u st

b e tau g h t "by l i f e , " h is d e sc r ip tio n of p ra c t ic e a s "vague an d shadowy

d is c o u rs e on su c c e ss in a d v o c a c y ," s tro n g ly su g g ests an acad em ic con­

d em n a tio n of the p ro c e s s . T h is co n c lu sio n i s s tre n g th en ed when he

p ro c e e d s to co m p are th is w ith " , , . t r i a l p r a c t ic e , , , v iew ed a s the

k ey s to n e of a sy s te m a tic sch em e of p ro c e d u re , co n cern in g i ts e lf w ith

th e p r in c ip le s by w hich the p ro b le m s p e r ta in in g to the conduct of the t r i a l

a r e a n a ly ze d and solved, , , , " He d e s c r ib e s c o u rse s in th is to be

" , , . a c c u ra te , lo g ica l, and p ro fe s s io n a lly te c h n ic a l. They co n cern

. . . t h e v e r y e s s e n c e o f p r o c e d u r e , a n d C a r e 3 a s s o l i d l y i n t e l l e c t u a l70

a s any o th e r b ra n c h of the law . " S underland thus s tro n g ly su g g ests th a t

h e d o es n o t f e e l the study of adv o cacy to be in te lle c tu a lly so lid ,

E p a p h ro d itu s P e ck , a re p re s e n ta t iv e of Y ale L aw School w hich

w as one of the f i r s t schools to em p h a s iz e p r a c t ic a l law tra in in g , a ttem p ted

a s im i la r d is tin c tio n betw een the law of p ro c e d u re , c o v e rin g such sub­

j e c t s a s the ju r is d ic tio n of c o u r ts , the m ode of obtain ing ju r is d ic tio n o v er

th e p e r s o n by s e rv ic e , the m ode of ob tain ing p o s se s s io n of the p e rso n s ,

^9ibid,, pp , 5 5 - 5 6 , ^ Ibid., p , 56 .

131

o r p ro p e r ty by a r r e s t o r by a tta ch m en t, e tc , , and the study of t r i a l

p r a c t ic e . Of th is he s a id , " It seem s to m e th a t th e re is a group of

su b je c ts th e re C those ju s t m en tio n ed ] th a t c o v e r w hat one m ay c a ll

th e com m on law of ju d ic ia l p ro c e d u re , " Of t r i a l p ra c tic e he sa id , "It

s e e m s to m e th a t the te a c h in g of t r i a l p r a c t ic e p r e t ty n e a r ly am o u n ts to

teach in g the a r t of ad v o cacy , w hich P r o f e s s o r S underland sa id cannot

be tau g h t, A s f a r a s the teach ing of ad v o cacy w as co n cern ed . P r o ­

f e s s o r P e c k noted th a t in the ten or e lev en y e a r s he had b een in co m p le te

c h a rg e of the p ro c e d u re c o u rs e s a t Y ale he h a d n e v e r b een ab le " , , ,

to conduct p ra c tic e c o u r ts w ith anything lik e the d eg ree of su c c e ss and

of u se fu ln e s s th a t se e m s to have Bsuen found in som e o th e r sch o o ls ,

The tes tim o n y so f a r p re se n te d su g g e s ts th a t advocacy m ay be an

o b jec tiv e of p ra c t ic a l c o u r s e s in law schoo l, b u t th a t the p r o fe s s o r s of

law r e je c t i t a s a le g itim a te o b jec tiv e . T h is i s n o t u n iv e rsa lly the

c a s e - -d u r in g the sam e tim e o th e r r e p re s e n ta t iv e s of law sch o o ls w ent

on r e c o rd a s fav o rin g the teach in g of ad v o cacy , W alte r C, C lephane of

G eorge W ashington U n iv e rs ity Law School spoke out in opposition to the

S underland ph ilosophy . He s ta te d th a t he con d u c ted h is t r i a l p r a c t ic e

c la s s e s in a way to a p p ro x im a te w hat a c tu a lly h ap p en s in a c o u r t a s

n e a r ly a s p o ss ib le . He a g re e d th a t i t w as im p o rta n t to le a rn to fo llow

^^E paphrod itu s P e c k , "D iscu ssio n of the S underland S peech , " P ro c e e d in g s of the T h ir te e n th , op, c i t , , p , 11,

72lbid,

132

the ru le s of p ro ced u re# b u t he w as a lso anx ious to te a c h the s tu d en ts

the b e s t m e th o d s of ap p ro ach in g the ju ry , the w itn e s s (including c r o s s -

exam ination ) and the s tra te g y of t r i a l . He e m p h a s iz e d th a t follow ing

e v e ry p ra c t ic e t r i a l tim e i s tak en fo r the p r o fe s s o r to c r i t ic iz e the

p e rfo rm a n c e of the s tu d e n ts , te llin g them w hat th ey did w ell, and w hat

they should change o r o m it, He m ade i t c le a r th a t he w as speak ing

of som eth ing o th e r than in s tru c t io n in le g a l p r in c ip le s .

Of c o u r s e , w e have o u r r e g u la r co u rse on e v id en ce , and o u r c o u rse on p lead in g , and o u r co u rse on p r a c t ic e and our c o u rse on c r im in a l p ro c e d u re , and on le g a l e th ic s , in w hich th eo ­r e t ic a l in s tru c tio n i s g iven in the c la s s ro o m ; b u t when it co m es to the c o u rt ro o m i t i s a l l done in e x a c t acco rd an ce w ith the a c tu a l ru le s of p r a c t ic e ,

I th in k th is p r a c t ic e c o u rse i s m o s t v a lu a b le , I know o u r own u n iv e rs ity i s d e lig h ted w ith i t , fo r i t h a s w o rk ed w ell,

F ro m th is s ta te m e n t i t can re a d ily be concluded th a t C lephane a im ed a t

teach in g som eth ing m o re th an the p r in c ip le s of la w --h e w as anx ious to

he lp the s tu d en ts le a r n the m o s t e ffec tiv e way to u se the p r in c ip le s to

a cc o m p lish th e ir o b jec tiv e in c o u rt. T h is cou ld b e d e sc rib e d a s teach in g

su c c e ss in advocacy (w ithout n eg a tiv e ly toned lan g u ag e), O liv er A,

H a rk e r of the U n iv e rs ity of I llin o is C ollege of L aw re f le c te d a s im ila r

ph ilo sophy w hen he sa id , " I fe e l , , , so f a r a s th is [ p ro c ed u re ]

^^W alte r C, C lephane , "D iscu ss io n of th e S underland S p e e c h ," P ro c e e d in g s of the T h ir te e n th , op, c i t . , p . 13,

74lb id .

133

b ra n c h is co n c e rn e d , th a t the p re p a ra t io n of the s tu d en t is in ad eq u ate

if i t g o es no fu r th e r th an th e a c q u ire m e n t of a know ledge of the ru le s

by w hich p ro c e d u re is g o v ern ed and the h is to r ic a l d ev e lo p m en t of p r o -

c e d u re . " W hile he re c o g n iz e d th a t th e law sch o o l canno t tu rn out a

f in ish e d p ro d u c t, he sa id . . the law school can fu rn is h such tra in in g

th a t w ill enab le a s tu d en t to m ake th e p ro p e r s e le c tio n of th e to o ls th a t

a r e a p p ro p r ia te to the m a t te r in h and , and to m ak e in te ll ig e n t use of

7 Ath e m . " The p la c e to do th is type of te a c h in g , H a rk e r sa id , w as in

the m o o t o r p ra c t ic e c o u r t p ro v id e d i t w as co n d u c ted w ith the sam e

c a r e and p re p a ra t io n a s w as given to a l l the o th e r c o u r s e s .

T h u s , a su b s ta n tia l co n flic t of p h ilo so p h ie s d ev e lo p s o v er the

te a ch in g of ad v o cacy . T h e re i s v i r tu a l a g re e m e n t (som e re lu c ta n t) th a t

e ffec tiv e advocacy i s an o b jec tiv e of le g a l ed u c a tio n , b u t a f te r th a t,

th e re i s co n flic t o v e r w h e th e r ad v o cacy can be tau g h t in sc h o o ls , w h e th e r

ad v o cacy i s a c a d e m ic a lly re sp e c ta b le enough to be tau g h t in sch o o ls ,

and w h e th e r advocacy should n o t be tau g h t in sch o o ls o th e r than law

sc h o o ls . W ith r e g a rd to th is o b je c tiv e , h o w e v e r, th e r e i s no q u es tio n

ab o u t i t be ing a rh e to r ic a l o b jec tiv e a s opposed to a s t r ic t ly leg a l

o b je c tiv e .

75 O liv e r A . H a rk e r , "D isc u ss io n of the H a s tin g s S p e e c h ," P r o ­c ee d in g s of the T w elfth , op. c i t . , p . 20.

76ibid.

134

To th e se th re e b ro a d o b je c tiv e s of p r a c t ic a l law schoo l education

m u s t be ad d ed th o se o b jec tiv es w hich have no a p p a re n t r e la t io n to the

study of r h e to r ic . T h a t is to sa y , the suggestion m u s t no t be le f t th a t

a l l of the p r a c t ic a l o b je c tiv e s c an e a s ily be r e la te d to rh e to r ic a l th e o ry ,

A g re a t p o r tio n of the p r a c t ic a l law school c u rr ic u lu m h a s b ee n re g u la r ly

a im e d a t the tra in in g of law s tu d e n ts to p e r fo rm the v a r io u s ta s k s of

la w y e rs su ch a s re sp o n d in g to a sum m o n s, se a rc h in g a d eed , and so

fo r th .

H o w ev er, once the r h e to r ic a l o b jec tiv es of p r a c t ic a l law school

tra in in g h av e b e en d is c u s s e d , a f u r th e r avenue of in q u iry l ie s in the

in v e s tig a tio n of the w ays in w hich th e se educational id e a ls have been

t r a n s la te d in to sp ec ific c o u r s e s .

C onten t of p r a c t ic a l c o u rse s

T he d isc u s s io n of th e co n te n t of the p ra c t ic a l law schoo l c o u rs e s

w ill be d iv id ed in to two p a r t s ; f i r s t , the p ro fe sso rW id e a ls of w hat

should be in c lu d ed in the c o u r s e s w ill be exam ined , and second , som e

re p re s e n ta t iv e sc h o o ls ’ a c tu a l p r a c t ic e s w ill be d is c u s s e d .

T he id e a l p r a c t ic a l c o u r s e , - -A s suggested in the s ta te m e n t of

o b je c tiv e s , the d iffe re n c e s of op in ion am ong the law schoo l r e p r e s e n ­

ta t iv e s w ith r e g a rd to co n ten t of p ra c t ic a l c o u rse s ra n g e s a ll the way

fro m the m in im u m in s tru c tio n in s tr ic t ly le g a l p ro c e d u re s to the

135

co m p le te d u p lica tio n of th e p re p a ra t io n and t r i a l of c a s e s . R e p re se n tin g

the fo rm e r end of the con tinuum , W illiam P . R o g e rs of the U n iv e rs ity

of C incinnati L aw Schools sa id , "I th ink the sch o o ls should r e q u ire th a t -

s tu d en ts who a r e going in to p r a c t ic e should know how to d raw a l l n e c e s ­

s a ry p a p e r s and p le a d in g s , should know the m ean in g of a d e m u r re r , and

77should know w hen and how to maJce n e c e s s a ry m o tio n s and am en d m en ts ,"

R o g e rs w as in doubt w h e th e r the c o u rs e s should go fu r th e r . He u s e d a

com m on a rg u m e n t, su g g estin g th a t if the sch o o ls could no t p r e p a re an

e x p e r t p ra c t i t io n e r th en they should no t a tte m p t th e p re p a ra tio n a t a l l

beyond w hat he h ad su g g ested . He a sk ed if any of the o th e r law schoo l

re p re s e n ta t iv e s could te l l h im why they d id n o t ap p ro v e of a r ic h e r

p r a c t ic a l c o u rse so th a t " , , , we can give to s tu d e n ts who a sk u s why

they sh a ll not h av e m o re c o u r t p ra c t ic e in th e i r c o u r s e , a re a so n w hich

w ill b e s a tis fa c to ry to th e m , '^^W illiam E , H igg ins of the U n iv e rs ity of

K an sas School of Law re p re s e n te d the o th e r end of the con tinuum , H ig ­

g ins c la im ed p r a c t ic a l le g a l esqperience fo r h im s e lf , and p ro c e e d e d to

give a fu ll a n a ly s is of w hat should b e in c lu d ed in the p ra c t ic a l c o u r s e .

F ro m m y e :q )e rien ce in th e se c o u r ts th e r e a re th re e th in g s w hich we ought to te a c h by p ra c t ic e c o u r ts : F i r s t , w here to fin d the law ; and , second , how to find it; an d th ird , how to

77 W illiam P , R o g e rs , "D isc u ss io n of th e H astin g s S peech , " P r o ­ceed in g s of the T w elfth , op, c i t , ,. p , 23,

'^®Ibid.

136

p re p a re and p re s e n t i t . F o llow ing th ese th e r e a r e a lso th re e th ings th a t a young m an shou ld le a rn a s the fu n d am en ta ls of p r a c t ic e , and , by the v a y , one does no t have to c o v e r the d e ta ils of p ra c t ic e in the d if fe re n t s ta te s e i th e r . One can take h is own p ra c t ic e and te a c h i t fu n d am en ta lly a f te r the f i r s t o r F re s h m a n y e a r . N ow , th e se , in m y op in ion , a r e the fu n d am en ta ls : f i r s t , w hat i s a conclusion of law , and how to re co g n iz e it; second , w hat i s an u ltim a te o r o p e ra tiv e fa c t, and how to reco g n ize it; th i rd , w hat i s the ev id en ce to su s ta in such a fa c t . B r ie f ly , in th o se th re e fu n d am en ta ls is the id e a l w hich we a im to give in the p ra c t ic e c o u rts of o u r law school.I do .no t b e lie v e in le c tu r e s a lo n e , and I do n o t b e liev e in c o u r ts of p ra c t ic e m e re ly a s a c o u rse e ith e r f ro m the te x t­book, if we should have o n e , o r f ro m the c a se -b o o k ; I do not b e liev e th ey alone w ill b e s u c c e ss fu l. You m u s t have a d v e r ­s a ry p ro c e e d in g s .

E d w ard W. H inton f e l t th a t th e re w ere c e r ta in th in g s to be

ob tained in the p r a c t ic e c o u r t w hich the s tuden t cou ld no t le a r n e l s e ­

w h ere . T h is w as , in H inton’s op in ion , the e x p e rie n c e w ith the raw

m a te r ia l of a c a s e . A s he p u t i t , " . . . the ta le of woe such a s a c lie n t

b r in g s in to th e o ffice , w hich i s qu ite a d iffe ren t th ing f ro m the re c o rd

AOth a t we find in the r e p o r ts . " The s tuden t, he f e l t , n eed ed and could

get e x p e rie n c e in dealing w ith th e s to ry of the c l ie n t , " . . . in dealing

w ith the raw f a c ts , in m ak ing up h is m ind as to th e r e a l fa c ts of the

c a s e , and apply ing the p ro p e r le g a l a n a ly s is to w h at you m ig h t c a ll the

81o p e ra tiv e f a c ts . " In the p r a c t ic e w ork , H inton b e lie v e d , the s tuden t

^9W illiam E . H igg ins, "D isc u ss io n of the H a s tin g s S p e e c h ," P r o ­ceed in g s of the T w elfth , op. c i t . , p . 25.

®®Hinton, 0£ . c i t . , p . 18. ^^Ib id . , pp . 18-19.

137

could become im p ressed ", . . with the necessity»’ not m e re ly of stating

a cause of action, but of stating h is cause of action, because in the

p rac tice court he will run into difficulties of pleading a situation which

h is proof does not support. " F inally , Hinton sought to provide in the

p rac tice course an opportunity fo r the student to gain ", . . p rac tica l

e3q>erience in form ulating the charge o r in struction to the t r i e r s of

fact; in seeing the necessity for conform ing the questions subm itted . , ,

to the issu es made by the pleadings, , , ,

C harles M, Hepburn of Indiana U niversity School of Law added

the thought ", , , that a p rac tice court should look m ore to the scientific

b as is of pleading than to a m ere copying of co rre c t fo rm s.

Jam es B, Brooks of Syracuse U niversity College of Law

attem pted to state the case fo r those who have le ss reg a rd fo r the value

of p rac tice co u rses. He fe lt that too m uch attention can be given to

studying the t r ia l of questions of fac t, fo r he said ", , , only a sm all

percentage of the law yers ever try questions of fac t to any g rea t extent,

He went on to state what he would include in the p rac tice co u rse ,

8 2 lb id ., p , 19,

®^Charles M, Hepburn, "D iscussion of the H astings Speech," P ro ­ceedings of the Twelfth, op, c it. -, p . 27.

®^James B. B rooks, "D iscussion of the H astings Speech ," P r o ­ceedings of the Twelfth, op, c it, , p , 30,

138

I do n o t c o n s id e r th a t m y s tu d en ts a r e be ing tra in e d to go in to c o u r t and t r y c a s e s b e fo re a ju ry sp e c ia lly . B u t w hât I r o s e to say is th is : The m o o t c o u r t w hich p r e s e n ts q u estio n s of law , p u ts the s tu d en t on h is m e tt le to find the law and the a u th o r i t ie s , and d e te rm in e s the fo rm of ac tio n a s a ru le .T h is a ls o g iv es the in s t r u c to r an o p p o rtu n ity of tra in in g the s tu d e n t in the th in g s th a t he ought to b e tra in e d in , such a s h is a d d re s s to the c o u r t, h is a ttitu d e and h is language b e fo re the c o u rt; the lo g ica l a r ra n g e m e n t of h is p o in ts in h is b r ie f ; the p ro p e r c itin g of a u th o r it ie s ; th e back ing of h is p a p e r s , an d a l l the l i t t le d e ta ils so n eed fu l to be know n. The young m en a r e g ra te fu l fo r th is k ind of t ra in in g w hich th ey g e t only in a c o u r t th a t is o rg a n ize d fo r p re se n tin g and d isc u ss in g q u e s tio n s of law .

1 h ave an abiding fa ith th a t if a m an i s m ade fo r a la w y e r , he w ill h ave no s e r io u s d ifficu lty w ith the p ra c t ic e if he know s the law . So I w ould cu t out a l l th is ro u tin e of try in g to fash io n a m o ck c o u r t fo r the t r i a l of q u e s tio n s of fa c t.

T h e se co m m en ts r e p re s e n t the m a jo r g ra d a tio n s along the co n ­

tinuum of in c lu s io n of con ten t in the p r a c t ic a l c o u rse w o rk . F ro m

th e se s ta te m e n ts of id e a l c o u rse c o n te n t ,ia g e n e ra l p ic tu re of the

a ttitu d e to w a rd a r h e to r ic a l o r ie n ta tio n in p ra c t ic e c o u r s e s can be

d raw n . The n ex t s tep is to exam ine som e sp ec ific p r a c t ic a l c o u r s e s to

see how th ey w e re s e t up and ru n .

T he conduct of re p re s e n ta t iv e p r a c t ic e c o u r s e s . - -T h e n a tu re of

m o o t c o u r t and law club w o rk in the e a r ly sch o o ls h a s b een d e s c r ib e d in

C h ap te r II . Som e co n c lu sio n s can be d raw n co n cern in g the d ev e lo p m en t

of le g a l rh e to r ic by co m p arin g th e se p r a c t ic e s w ith th o se of the law

sch o o ls of abou t 100 y e a r s la te r .

^ ^ Ib id . , pp . 30-31 .

139

The U n iv e rs ity of M ich igan Law School, las h a s b een no ted

b e fo re , ran k ed a s the le a d e r am ong law sch o o ls in p ro v id in g a p ra c t ic a l

c u r r ic u lu m . Both in the c u r r ic u lu m and in the v o lu n ta ry s o c ie tie s

im p ro v e m en t in speak ing an d debating w as an ob jec tiv e of law school

w o rk . F ro m the tim e the school w as opened in 1859 u n til the e a r ly p a r t

of the 20th C en tu ry , l i t e r a r y so c ie tie s w e re ac tiv e am ong law s tu d en ts .

B row n , in h e r h is to ry of the school, r e f e r s to an 1894 c la s s annual

w hich su g g es ts the p u rp o se of the s o c ie tie s to be the c u ltiv a tio n of f o r ­

e n s ic e loquence , and to fa n ", , , the dying e m b e rs of the w e ll nigh lo s t

a r t of speech m ak ing , B row n n o tes v a r io u s l i t e r a r y and debating

s o c ie tie s in o p e ra tio n a s la te a s 1919-1920, W hile the e a r l i e r d e s c r ip ­

tio n s of th e se s o c ie tie s h a d s ta ted th e ir p u rp o se a s the d ev e lo p m en t of

l i t e r a r y c u ltu re , in 1911-1912 the d e s c r ip tio n w as changed to the

R7se c u rin g of tra in in g in p u b lic speak ing an d debating . L a te r , B row n

r e f e r s to a m im eo g ra p h e d p am p h le t e n tit le d "C ase Club C om petition"

w hich w as a p p a re n tly d is tr ib u te d to the s tu d en ts in 1938-1939, The

f i r s t p a r t .o f the p am p h le t g ives th is d e s c r ip tio n of the c a s e club a c tiv ity

and h is to ry .

A s the C ase Club e n te r s upon i t s s ix teen th y e a r of a c tiv ity i t m ig h t be w e ll to p a u se and c o n s id e r i t s h is to ry , , , The f i r s t r e c o rd s a v a ila b le a re fo r the y e a r s 1923 and 1924, A t

^^To W it (U n iv e rs ity of M ich igan School of L aw , 1894) c ited in B row n , o£, c i t , , p , 230,

87B row n, o£, c i t , , p , 231,

140

th a t tim e P a u l L e id y w as the se n io r a d v is e r fo r the Cooley C lub , w hich a p p e a rs to have b ee n the only club in ex is te n c e , an d hence the n u c leu s a ro u n d w hich the p re s e n t co m p etitio n h as b e e n b u ilt , . . . T he c a s e s , d u rin g the f i r s t few y e a r s , w ere a rg u e d b e fo re j u r i e s of s tu d en ts ; the q u es tio n s of fa c t being a rg u e d , a s w ell a s q u e s tio n s of law . . . . In the C ooley Club th e re w ere s ix te en m e m b e r s - - a s co m p ared w ith the 330 m e m ­b e r s of the five f i r s t - y e a r and fo u r s e c o n d -y e a r c lu b s today [ 1 9 3 8 ] . In 1924 the m e m b e rsh ip in c re a s e d to tw e n ty -fo u r.A nd in 1925 the c a se club s y s te m , a s i t e x is ts to d ay , w as f o r ­m a l ly o rg an ized by P r o f e s s o r s H o lb ro o k , S taso n , and D urfee ,In th a t y e a r the M a rs h a ll , K en t, S to ry , and H o lm es C lubs w ere o rg a n ize d ,

T he sam e p am p h le t m ad e r e fe re n c e to a s ta te m e n t w hich gave the p u r ­

p o se of the c lubs a s be in g an e x t r a c u r r ic u la r o p p o rtu n ity fo r the

p re p a ra t io n and a rg u m e n t of law c a s e s . B y 1933 th e facu lty reco g n ized

the v a lu e of the c lu b s by ex cu sin g s e n io r s tu d en ts f ro m the p o rtio n s of

the p r a c t ic e c o u r t r e q u ire d of s e n io rs w hich had to do w ith the p r e p a r ­

a tio n of b r ie f s and o r a l a rg u m en t,® ^ A nd, by 1940-41 , " , , , C ase

C lubs w e re a re co g n iz ed though v o lu n ta ry p a r t of the L aw School’s

p ro g ra m of tra in in g fo r ad v o cacy . S tudent p a r t ic ip a tio n had continued

90to show a stead y in c r e a s e ,"

B efo re ending the d isc u s s io n of the teach in g of p ra c tic e a t the

U n iv e rs ity of M ich igan School of L aw , the id e a s of E d so n R , S underland

once ag a in need to b e ex am in ed . H is sp eech b e fo re th e A sso c ia tio n of

A m e r ic a n L aw Schools in 1913 w as re m a rk a b le fo r a t le a s t one r e a s o n - -

Q Q

"C ase Club C om p etitio n " (U n iv e rs ity of M ich igan School of L aw , 1938-1939), c i te d in B ro w n , og, c i t , , p , 240,

® ^Ibid,, p , 243, ^°Ib id ,

141

he p ro p o se d a m eth o d of teach in g t r i a l p r a c t ic e w h ich , though r id ic u le d

by h is c o lle a g u e s a t the t im e , ev en tu a lly p ro v e d to be the m o s t m o d e rn

in co n cep tio n of a l l m e th o d s . "To p ro d u ce a la w -sc h o o l t r i a l w hich

sh a ll s e rv e a u se fu l e d u c a tio n a l p u rp o se , " he to ld the m e m b e rs of the

A . A , L . S . , " th e re m u s t b e two th ings;

f i r s t , a u se fu l s e t of f a c ts m u s t be developed analogous to the fa c ts in a l i t ig a te d c o n tro v e rs y , and , seco n d , th e re m u s t b e a th o ro u g h and te c h n ic a l p re p a ra t io n of those fa c ts in a ll th e i r le g a l p o s s ib i l i t ie s , b y s tu d en ts r e p re s e n tin g both s id es of the c o n tro v e rsy .

H is p ro p o se d m ethod of a c c o m p lish in g the f i r s t o b jec tiv e w as to a s s ig n

v a r io u s tra n s a c t io n s to d if fe re n t s tu d e n ts . E a ch of the s tu d en ts a s su m e d

the ro le of a p a r ty in the r e a l c o n tro v e rs y . If h is c h a ra c te r w ro te a

th re a te n in g l e t t e r to a n o th e r p a r t ic ip a n t, the s tu d en t w ro te such a

l e t t e r . If the c h a ra c te r m ad e a te lephone c a l l , o r h ad a c o n v e rsa tio n ,

o r s ig n ed a c o n tra c t , o r b o rro w e d m oney , e t c . , th e n the s tu d en t d id

the sa m e . Once the s tu d e n t-a c to r h ad p e r fo rm e d h is a ss ig n e d d e e d s ,

i t w as a s m uch a p a r t of h is p a s t ex p e rie n c e a s if he h ad b e e n the o r ig in a l

p a r ty in the c o n tro v e rsy . T h u s , w hen p u t on the w itn e ss s tan d to be

q u es tio n ed about h is a c tio n s , the s tu d en t cou ld te l l w hat he d id , saw ,

sa id , o r w h a tev e r i t w as ju s t a s a r e a l w itn e s s . E q u a lly , he cou ld be

S underland , "T ea ch in g P r a c t ic e , " P ro c e e d in g s of the Thirteenth^ op. c i t . , p . 58.

142

su b je c te d to c ro s s -e x a m in a tio n reg a rd in g h is r e p o r t of e x p e r ie n c e s ,

and r e a l d isc re p a n c ie s cou ld b e d isco v e re d .

T h is m ethod , c la im e d S u n derland , had the advan tage of r e a l i ty

and c o n s is te n c y o v er the com m on m ethod of giving a s tu d e n t-w itn e ss a

sh e e t of p a p e r saying w hat he know s re le v a n t to the t r i a l . It w as com m on

te s tim o n y th a t in the l a t t e r m e th o d , c ro s s -e x a m in a tio n w as v ir tu a lly

im p o ss ib le ; u n d er the S u n d erlan d m ethod , i t a t l e a s t a p p ro x im a te s the

r e a l e:q)erience«

W hile the m eth o d of the s tu d e n ts ' p re p a ra t io n u n d er the S u n d er­

lan d p la n i s e s se n tia lly the sam e a s th a t u se d in o th e r sch o o ls , the

s p e a k e r d id p re s e n t a p h ilo so p h y of handling the a c tu a l t r i a l w hich d if­

f e r e d f ro m the com m on p r a c t ic e . The t r i a l , he s a id , " , . . should no t

be looked upon a s a m e re im ita tio n of an ac tu a l la w su it. A s an im ita tio n

92i t am o u n ts to noth ing , " T he o b jec t, he c la im e d , w as n o t s im ply to

a llo w the s tu d en ts to go th ro u g h the m o tio n s of a t r i a l , b u t r a th e r to

in s t r u c t them ; to p e rm it th e m to le a rn the ap p lica tio n of the p r in c ip le s

they h ad le a rn e d in c la s s . "T o th a t end, " he co n tin u ed , "the in s tru c to r

who p re s id e s in the c o u r t shou ld n o t fo rg e t th a t he i s in s tru c tin g , n o t

im p e rso n a tin g a ju d g e . . . . He should c r i t ic iz e an d c o r r e c t f re e ly .

S u n d erlan d would have h is in s tru c to r - ju d g e in te r r u p t a t any tim e he fe l t

^^Ibid., p . 60, ^^Ibid., pp. 60-61.

143

a c o n tr ib u tio n to the le a rn in g p ro c e s s m ig h t be m ad e ; he a lso en co u rag ed

s e r io u s d is c u s s io n s a f te r th e t r i a l to co m m en t on good and b ad w o rk

done b y the s tu d en ts .

"A p ra c t ic e c o u r t conducted along th e se l i n e s , " S underland con ­

c lu d ed , " is no t an a p p ea l to th e sp e c ta c u la r , b u t a s e r io u s education

in s titu tio n . " " It i s the only m eth o d so f a r d ev ise d fo r teach in g the te c h -

94nique of the p ro fe s s io n in a c o n c re te w ay. "

T urn ing to the p r a c t ic e s of a n o th e r of the lead in g s c h o o ls - - th e

U n iv e rs ity of C hicago L aw S c h o o l--H e rm an O liphan t re p o r te d on h is

c o u rse in b r ie f m ak ing and le g a l a rg u m en t to the A s so c ia tio n of A m e ric a n

L aw Schools in 1916. He re p o r te d th a t the w o rk in h is su b jec t w as an

o u tg row th of the v o lu n ta ry c lu b s w ith som e m o d ific a tio n . The c lu b s h ad ,

fo r a n u m b er of y e a r s , b e e n e ffec tiv e ly o rg a n iz e d by the s tu d en ts .

D u rin g the 1913-1914 sch o o l y e a r the c lubs w e re co n so lid a te d . "An

in s t r u c to r , who e x e rc is e d g e n e ra l su p e rv is io n , p r e p a re d q u es tio n s fo r

a rg u m e n t, and chose s ix u p p e r c la s s -m e n on b a s is of m e r i t to a c t a s

ch ie f j u s t i c e s . " T h ese s ix s tu d en ts , a cco m p an ied by two o th e r m e m b e rs

of th e c la s s who s e rv e d a s a s s o c ia te ju s t ic e s , h e a rd a rg u m e n ts in a

s y s te m of ro ta tio n and g ra d e d the p a r t ic ip a n ts . T h is fo rm a t d rew a

9 4 lb id ., p . 61.

^ ^ H erm an O lip h an t, "A C o u rse in B r ie f M aking and L eg a l A rg u ­m e n t, " H andbook of the A sso c ia tio n of A m e ric a n L aw S choo ls and P ro c e e d in g s of the S ix teen th A nnual M eeting (C hicago , I l l in o is , D e c em ­b e r 2 8 -2 9 , 1916), V ol. 16, pp . 156-159.

144

n u m b er of c r i t ic i s m s : 1) th e re w as a la c k of u n ifo rm ity in the judging

s ta n d a rd s of the v a r io u s ju s t ic e s ; 2) c a s e s w e re too fre q u e n tly p o o rly

p re p a re d by the p a r t ic ip a n ts ; 3) s tu d en t a tto rn e y s w ere o ften d isc o u ra g e d

by the la c k of p re p a ra t io n of the ju s t ic e s ; 4) th e re w as o ften a g re a t

d ea l of tim e w a s te d b e c a u se s tu d en t c o u n s e lo rs devoted th e m s e lv e s to

i r r e le v a n t p o in ts of a r e s u l t of no g u id an ce .

A s a r e s u l t of th e se c r i t ic i s m s , a new c o u rse in b r ie f in g and

a rg u m en ta tio n w as c re a te d . P r o fe s s o r O liphan t d e s c r ib e d h is c o u rse

in th is w ay: "A fte r te n le c tu r e s and e x e r c is e s upon the u se of law bo o k s,

a m ee tin g of a l l m en in the f i r s t y e a r c la s s i s ca lled , " In th is m e e tin g ,

the s tu d en ts w e re g iven d ire c tio n on p r e p a ra t io n of c a s e s , w ritin g

b r ie f s , and m ak in g o r a l a rg u m e n ts , in ad d itio n to being g iven w ritte n

in s tru c tio n s h e e ts . E a c h s tu d en t th en a rg u e s a t le a s t two c a s e s a s

a tto rn e y and h e a r s two c a s e s a s an a s s o c ia te ju s t ic e , A t each c a s e ,

the a s so c ia te ju s t ic e co m es a lre a d y hav ing r e a d the b r ie f s and acq u a in ted

w ith th e ir c o n te n ts . T he o ra l a rg u m e n ts ru n fo r tw en ty -fiv e to fo r ty -

five m in u te s fo r each s id e , v a ry in g w ith th e n a tu re of the q u es tio n

u n d er in v e s tig a tio n , " E n tire s e r io u s n e s s ," sa id O liphan t, "an d m uch

in te r e s t is m a n ife s te d . The a tto rn e y s d isp la y no t only e a r n e s tn e s s bu t

o ften w a rm th . T hey a r e q u estio n ed c lo se ly , and u su a lly e f fe c ­

tiv e ly , , , . A cco rd in g to O liphan t, a l l the f i r s t y e a r m en w ere

^^Ibid, , p . 156. ^’ Ibid. ^^Ibid., p . 157,

145

r e q u ire d to do th is w o rk u n le ss ex cu sed fo r som e sp ec ific c a u s e , and

w h ile no c re d it to w a rd a d e g re e w as g iven fo r th is w o rk , e a ch s tu d en t

re c e iv e d a g rad e w hich in c lu d ed , am ong o th e r th in g s , h is w o rk in o ra l

a rg u m e n t.

A m ong the v a lu e s w hich O liphan t re c o g n iz e d f ro m h is c o u rs e w as

the opportun ity to m ove on f ro m the u n d e rg ra d u a te E n g lish w o rk in

a rg u m e n ta tio n w hich the s tu d en ts h ad and c o o rd in a te i t w ith the law w ork.

U nlike M ich ig an , H a rv a rd L aw School d id n o t see any v a lu e in

hav in g the s tu d en ts p r e s e n t c a s e s b e fo re ju r i e s . A s the C e n ten n ia l H is ­

to ry of the H a rv a rd L aw School (pub lished in 1917) p u t i t - - " . . . i t h a s

b e e n a so u rce of s a tis fa c tio n th a t the fa sc in a tio n of c o u r t p r a c t ic e h a s

n o t le d s tu d en ts to se e k m o re h a lf -e f fe c tiv e tra in in g in the p r a c t ic e side

of the law a t the ex p en se of the la s tin g b e n e f its of a th o ro u g h g rounding

in le g a l th ink ing . H ow ever, th is book n o ted th a t "v e ry g r e a t b e n e fits

h av e b een d e r iv e d . . . f ro m e x p e r ie n c e in the p re p a ra t io n of b r ie f s

and the p re s e n ta tio n of o r a l a rg u m e n ts b e fo re a judge o r a c o u r t of

a p p e a l, and i t i s h e r e th a t e f fo r ts have b een m ad e and r e s u l t s ach iev ed ,

The s tu d e n t- ru n c lu b s w hich w e re d e s c r ib e d in C h ap te r II co n tin u ed to

o p e ra te in m uch the sétme fa sh io n . On M arch 8 , 1910, the F a c u lty

^^C en ten n ia l H is to ry of the H a rv a rd L aw School, op. c i t . , p . 143.

^ ° ° Ib id ., pp . 143-144.

146

re c o g n iz e d the va lue of the c lubs by e s ta b lish in g a B o a rd of S tudent

A d v is e rs , The p u rp o se of th is B o a rd -Wras to enco u rag e " , , , am ong

f i r s t y e a r s tu d en ts e a r ly and in te ll ig e n t u se of the law l ib r a r y and a lso

fo r re n d e r in g the w o rk of the law c lu b s e ffic ie n t. . . . T h ese

a d v is e r s h e lp ed the new s tu d en ts in the p re p a ra t io n of th e ir b r ie f s and

s a t a s ju s t ic e s to h e a r th e i r a rg u m e n ts . In 1911» the F a c u lty e s ta b lish e d

p r iz e s of $200 and $100 fo r the two w in n e rs of the co m p etitio n am ong the

c lu b s .

T he v a lu e of th is w o rk w as in d ire c tly su g g ested by the C en ten n ia l

H is to ry w hen i t o b s e rv e d th a t in te r e s t in the c lu b s w as s tro n g in the

f i r s t y e a r and then d im in ish e d s ig n ifican tly in the second and th ird y e a r s .

The re a s o n g iven fo r th is w as the f a c t th a t the s tu d en ts who d id p o o rly

in the c la s s w o rk b e c a m e d isc o u ra g e d an d d ropped out of the v o lu n ta ry

c lu b s to c o n c en tra te on th e i r s tu d ie s . T h u s , the conclusion su g g ested

w as th a t only the s u p e r io r s tu d en ts con tinued w ith the c lu b s - - th o s e who

n eed ed the e x tra w o rk le a s t w e re the o n e s who re c e iv e d i t , w hile th o se

who h ad the g r e a te s t n e e d re c e iv e d none a f te r th e ir f i r s t y e a r ,

T he co m p e titio n am ong the c lu b s w as d e sc r ib e d in th is p a s sa g e

f ro m the C en tenn ia l H is to r y :

T he co m p e titio n i t s e l f w as an e lim in a tio n to u rn a m e n t. The a d v is e r s , su b je c t to the ap p ro v a l of the F a cu lty , f ra m e d m o o t

^Q^Ibid,, p, 145, ^Q^Ibid,, p, 146,

147

c a s e s fo r a rg u m e n t. A t each a rg u m e n t tw o re p re s e n ta t iv e s of one club w e re opposed by two re p re s e n ta t iv e s of an o th e r c lub .No re p re s e n ta tiv e of a club could a rg u e m o re than once, u n til a t le a s t s ix m en f ro m the club had a rg u e d . The ju d g es w e re to be s e le c te d by the com peting c lu b s , o r to be a s s ig n e d by the a d v is e r s . In the f in a l ro u n d th e re w e re to be no t le s s than th re e ju d g es . The ju d g e s in m aking th e i r a w a rd s w ere to co n ­s id e r the ab ility shown in the p re p a ra t io n of b r ie f s , in p re se n tin g a rg u m e n ts , in a c c u ra te ly and su cc in c tly s ta tin g the a u th o r it ie s c ite d , and in m ee tin g q u es tio n s pu t by th e c o u r t du ring a r g u ­m en t. The a d v is e r s w e re to reg u la te th e co m p etitio n in a l l m a t te r s no t sp e c ific a lly p ro v id e d fo r in th e re g u la tio n s .

T h is fo rm of co m p e titio n w as con tin u ed w ith no change th ro u g h

the 1913-1914 school y e a r , in sp ite of som e obvious o b je c tio n s - - in the

f i r s t p la c e , one d e fea t e lim in a te d an e n tire c lu b , and , second ly , i t w as

lik e ly th a t only two m en f ro m the club w ould h av e an opportu n ity to

a rg u e . To c o r r e c t th is , in 1914 the re g u la tio n s w ere changed to p ro v id e

fo r a ro u n d -ro b in co m p etitio n of s ix ro u n d s b e fo re the e lim in a tio n began .

The e n tire to u rn a m e n t took two y e a r s - - th e qualify ing rounds b e in g h e ld

d u rin g a s tu d en t’s second y e a r , and the e lim in a tio n s com ing the follow ing

y e a r .

At the School of L aw a t C olum bia U n iv e rs ity , the o p e ra tio n of

p r a c t ic a l w o rk w as e s se n tia lly the sam e a s a t H a rv a rd . The s tu d en ts

fo rm e d into v o lu n ta ry c lubs and o v er a p e r io d of two y e a r s engaged in

an e lim in a tio n co m p etitio n . In -1937 the F a c u lty gave som e re co g n itio n

of the value of th is w ork by o ffe rin g c re d it f o r m oo t c o u r t b r ie f s

lO ^ibid. , p . 147. p . 150.

148

su b m itted in lie u of r e g u la r ly a s s ig n e d e s s a y s , and by in c re a s in g the

s ta tu s of the s tu d en t m o o t c o u r t co m m ittee . A t C olum bia, h o w ev er,

som e d ifficu lty w as e n c o u n te re d fro m s tu d en t o b jec tio n s o v e r the

so c ia lly se g re g a te d n a tu re of the c lu b s . T h is ten d ed to w eaken the

a c tiv ity of the c lu b s.

A t the G eorge W ashing ton U n iv e rs ity L aw School the m oot c o u r t

p ro g ra m w as u n d er g r e a te r facu lty su p e rv is io n than a t e i th e r H a rv a rd

o r C olum bia. W alter C lep h an e , in ch a rg e of the p ro g ra m in 1913,.

n o ted th a t he had had ” . . . no d ifficu lty a t a l l in conducting a tho rough ly

o rg an iz ed m oo t c o u r t w ith w hat I b e liev e to b e e x c e lle n t r e s u l t s , upon

p r in te d s ta te m e n ts of fa c t . . . . H is m e th o d w as to hand the

stu d en ts a s ta te m en t of a c a se w hich h ad a r i s e n in som e c o u r t, and

ou tline to the s tuden ts som e of the fa c ts and su g g e s t c e r ta in lin e s of

a tta c k and defence . T hen the s tu d en ts w e re to fo rm u la te th e ir own lin e s

of a rg u m e n t, and p r e p a re th e i r c a s e s f ro m p lea d in g s to ev idence . The

p ro c e d u re w as to be the sam e a s a c tu a lly done in the c o u r ts ; i t d id not

m a t te r w hich ju r is d ic t io n the m a n n e r of p ro c e d u re w as d raw n fro m ,

b u t w h ich ev er one w as ch o sen , i t w as fo llow ed c lo se ly . "We t r y to

m ak e the m o o t c o u r t a s c lo se ly ak in to a r e a l c o u r t a s i t i s p o ss ib le to

lO^Goebel, o£. c i t . , pp. 340-342.

lO ^c iep h an e , "D isc u ss io n of the S u n d erlan d S peech , " P ro c e e d in g s of the T h ir te e n th , op. c i t . , p . 11.

149

m ak e i t , " C lephane s ta te d . "We have the ju d g e , th e c le rk , the c r ie r ;

w e have enough c o u r ts to d iv ide the c la s s e s up in to j u r i e s , each studen t

107h av in g som e d efin ite p a r t in the w o rk a s s ig n e d to h im . " In follow ing

h is c a s e , the s tu d en t law y e r w as to ap p ro ach the ju r y a s in a r e a l c a s e - -

in tro d u c in g w itn e s s e s (p re p a re d to r e la te f ic ti t io u s f a c ts ) , and even

a llow ing fo r c ro s s -e x a m in a tio n - -w h ic h n e c e s s a r i ly m u s t be u n sa tis fa c to ry .

H o w ev er, sa id C lephane , " s ix - te n th s of the a r t of c ro s s -e x a m in a tio n . .

. c o n s is ts in know ing w hen to s to p . The s tu d en t v e ry qu ick ly f in d s out

w hen to stop h is c ro s s -e x a m in a tio n of th e se w itn e s s e s on th e se f ic titio u s

f a c ts . In h is p ro c e e d in g s , C lephane d id n o t p e r m it the judge to

in te r r u p t the p ro c e e d in g s w hen h e fe l t i t n e c e s s a r y to co m m en t o r c r i ­

t ic iz e w hat the s tu d en ts w ere do ing . The c a se w as co m p le te d w ith the

a rg u m e n ts to the ju ry , the in s tru c t io n s of the judge to the ju ry , and

th en the v e rd ic t , and a f te r a ll w a s f in ish e d , the ju d g e took tim e to m ake

h is co m m en ts .

John D. F le m in g of the U n iv e rs ity of C o lo rad o in d ic a te d th a t h is

sch o o l’s m o o t c o u r t w o rk w as s im i la r to th a t a t G eo rg e W ash ing ton , but

he fe l t i t h ad an advan tage in a s m a ll s tu d en t body. He a rg u e d th a t in

sch o o ls w ith a la rg e e n ro llm e n t, i t w ould be qu ite d iff ic u lt to m a in ta in

the o rg a n iz a tio n n e c e s s a r y to su p p o rt auch a lo t of a c tiv ity .

1 0 7 lb id ., p . 12. ^Q ^Ib id ., pp . 12-13 .

109John D. F lem in g , "D isc u ss io n of the S u n d erlan d S p e e c h ," P ro c e e d in g s of the T h ir te e n th , op . c i t . , p . 14.

150

In h is P r e s id e n t ia l A d d re ss to the A sso c ia tio n of A m e ric a n L aw

S chools in 1912, D ean W illiam G. H a s tin g s of the U n iv e rs ity of N e b ra sk a

Law School n o t only d e s c r ib e d h is s c h o o l's p ro g ra m b u t a lso c r i t ic iz e d

the p r a c t ic e a t som e o th e r sch o o ls . He ch a rg e d m o s t of the sch o o ls

w ith te a ch in g the law and no t i ts ap p lica tio n . He sa id they o p e ra te u n d er

the a s su m p tio n th a t the s tu d en t h a s a life tim e to le a r n the a p p lic a tio n

and only th re e y e a r s to le a rn the p r in c ip le s . B u t he s ta ted th a t the

su b s ta n tiv e p r in c ip le s a ro s e out of the tr ib u n a ls and " . . . w e re fo rm e d

and o rg a n iz e d fo r the sake of such p r a c t ic e , in o rd e r to p e r f e c t the w ork

of th o se t r ib u n a ls , and have no o th e r ex cu se fo r th e ir e x is te n c e , "HO

"Any in s t r u c to r on any su b je c t, " con tinued H a s tin g s , "m u s t h av e le a rn e d

a t th e v e ry b eg in n in g of h is e x p e r ie n c e , th a t w hile id e a s can b e conveyed

and e m o tio n s a ro u se d d , by in d ire c t m eth o d s and su g g estio n , h a b its a r e

only re a c h e d by d i r e c t in s is ta n c e and p e r s is te n c e , a im ed im m e d ia te ly

a t the sought fo r p ro fic ie n c y . " H I D e sc rib in g h is s c h o o l's m e th o d s , he

sa id th a t " . . . w h e re we w ant p r a c t ic e , we w ant p ra c t ic e , and n o t

so m eth ing ab o u t p r a c t ic e , and we w ant i t a s a b so lu te an im ita tio n of the

genuine a r t ic le a s can . . . be o b ta in ed , " E x c e p t, he n o ted , in th o se

p la c e s w h e re the p ra c t ic e can b e m ade m o re e ffec tiv e a s a te ac h in g

110-yyilliam G, H a s tin g s , " P ra c t ic e C o u rts , " P ro c e e d in g s of the T w elfth A nnual M eeting of the A sso c ia tio n of A m e ric a n Law S choo ls, op. c i t . , p p . 90 and 97.

^ “ ib id . , p . 97.

151

dev ice by som e change f ro m the m o d e l. H as tin g s m ad e th is com m en t

abou t the m a jo r i ty of the sch o o ls of the A .A , L , S. , of w hich he w as

P re s id e n t a t the tim e .

I t i s b e lie v e d th a t genuine im p ro v e m en t in o u r schoo ls in th is r e s p e c t w ill co m m en ce a s soon as a d ep p e r a p p re c ia tio n of the p o s s ib i l i t ie s of the w o rk in th is d ire c tio n i s re a c h e d by the in s t r u c to r s . To a la rg e ex te n t, w ork along th is line in the sch o o ls of the A sso c ia tio n se e m s to be le f t to the in itia tiv e of the s tu d en t. He is in v ite d to fo rm law c lu b s , an d by a lm o s t w holly v o lu n ta ry e f fo r ts th ro u g h them to g e t f a m il ia r i ty w ith c o u rt p r a c t ic e , som ew hat a f te r the m a n n e r of th e v o lu n ta ry l i t e r a r y an d debating s o c ie tie s of the c o lle g e s of a r t s , w hich w ere s tro n g e r in th o se c o lle g e s in y e a r s gone by th an they a r e now. In th o se s o c ie tie s e n e rg e tic and a m b itio u s s tu d en ts d id m uch to qu a lify th e m se lv e s fo r the a c tu a l w o rk of the h u s tin g s and the fo ru m . D o u b tle ss , such v o lu n ta ry w ork i s va luab le in the law sch o o l, and fo r th a t p o r tio n of the s tu d e n ts who thus v o lu n ta rily engage in i t w ith e n e rg y , i t m ig h t e a s i ly p ro v e m o re va luab le th an w ould any r e q u ire d e x e r c is e s . T he b ro ad en in g and ex tend ing of the c o u r s e s in the a r t s , the e n la rg in g of c la s s e s , and the m u ltip ly in g of in te r e s t s fo r the s tuden t in those in s titu tio n s h a s undoubted ly w eakened the l i t e r a r y s o c ie tie s , ju s t a s the b ro ad en in g and s tren g th en in g of the c u r r ic u lu m of the law sch o o l h a s too o ften d raw n a tten tio n aw ay f ro m the p ra c tic e c o u r ts .

It should be e m p h a s iz e d th a t th is w as a sw eeping in d ic tm en t of

the p ra c t ic e s in m o s t law sch o o ls in the U nited S ta te s a t the tim e . He

h ad , in s h o r t o r d e r , o b se rv e d th a t the schoo ls gave l ip - s e r v ic e to the

d e s ira b il i ty o f p r a c t ic e w o rk , b u t a t the sam e tim e w eakened i ts p o te n tia l

v a lue to the s tu d en ts by p e rm itt in g i t to be o rg a n iz e d and ru n by the

s tu d en ts , u n d e r s tu d en t d ire c tio n , and on a v o lu n ta ry b a s is .

H a s tin g s re c a l le d th a t a t the U n iv e rs ity of N e b ra sk a Law School,

a t f i r s t p r a c t ic e w as a v o lu n ta ry p ro g ra m , the schoo l i ts e l f having

^ Ib id ,, pp . 97-98 .

152

o r ig in a te d a s a v o lu n ta ry a s so c ia tio n of law c le rk s who cam e to g e th e r

to study w ith each o th e r . L a te r , H as tin g s n o ted , the p ra c t ic e c o u r ts

w e re m ade a co m p u lso ry p a r t of the c u r r ic u lu m , w ith in s t r u c to r s in

a tten d an ce a t a l l s e s s io n s . In 1910, a n o th e r change w as m ad e so th a t

only in s t r u c to r s w e re the ju d g es in the t r i a l c o u r ts . A law p r o fe s s o r

w as a lso p la c e d a t the h ea d of a su p re m e c o u r t , a s s i s te d by a n u m b er

of s tu d en ts , to h e a r a p p e a ls . T h is re o rg a n iz a tio n , he sa id , w as n e c e s ­

s a ry to g u a ran te e th a t the s tu d en ts d id in fa c t o b ta in the p ra c t ic a l

e x p e rie n c e rec o m m e n d e d . H ow ever, he n o ted , " . . . th e re a r e s t i l l

too m any s tu d en ts who do i t p e r fu n c to r ily , o r find g ro u n d s fo r avoiding

i t a lto g e th e r . Qne c r i t ic i s m of h is own sc h o o l's p ro g ra m w hich

H as tin g s m en tio n ed w as th e la c k of e x a m in a tio n s o r o th e r m e a s u re s

to a s s u re in cen tiv e to w o rk on the p a r t of th e s tu d en t.

O liv e r A . H a rk e r , in 1912, d e s c r ib e d the p r a c t ic e a t the U n iv e r­

s ity of I llin o is C ollege of L aw . When th e schoo l w as f i r s t s ta r te d th e re

w as no facu lty su p e rv is io n . T he P r e s id e n t of the u n iv e rs ity h ad m ade

an a r ra n g e m e n t w ith the ju d g es who w e re th en on the B ench to su b m it

c a s e s to the s tu d en ts to be t r i e d on a g re e d s ta te m e n ts of f a c t . The th re e

A p p ella te Ju d g es of the T h ird D is tr ic t of the s ta te c o o p e ra ted .

p . 98. ^ ^ % i d . , p . 108.

^ O liv er A , H a rk e r , "D isc u ss io n of the H a s tin g s S p e e c h ," P r o ­ceed in g s of th e .T w e lf th , op. c i t . , p . 20.

153

By 1912 , H a rk e r s a id , the p ro g ra m w as a r e q u ire d c o u rse w ith

a p r o fe s s o r in c h a rg e to c r i t ic iz e the w o rk of the in d iv id u a l s tu d e n ts .

"A ll s tu d en ts a r e r e q u ire d to d r a f t the in i t ia l p le a d in g - -n o t m e re ly

th o se s tu d en ts who a r e engaged in the c a s e , b u t e v e ry s tu d en t. "If

in tr ic a te q u e s tio n s of defense a r i s e , " con tin u ed H a rk e r , " th en a l l s tu ­

d en ts a r e r e q u ire d to d ra f t s p e c ia l p le a s . A ll p a p e r s a r e p a s s e d to

the p ro fe s s o r fo r ex am in a tio n . " The p r o fe s s o r c o r re c te d th e p a p e r s

and c a lle d the a tte n tio n of the c la s s to d e fe c ts in a p p ro a ch and p ro c e d u re .

"I do no t th in k , " H a rk e r sa id , d ire c tin g a n o th e r a t ta c k a t th e H a rv a rd

sy s te m , "m uch c a n b e ac c o m p lish e d b y the club c o u r t a lo n e . " He

s tro n g ly b e lie v e d th a t a school n eed ed bo th v o lu n ta ry c lu b s and p ra c tic e

c o u r ts u n d er the su p e rv is io n of the fa c u lty . ^

A t the U n iv e rs ity of W isco n sin L aw School, a cc o rd in g to John B .

S anborn , the p r o fe s s o r in c h a rg e , th e r e w as no a tte m p t to r e c r e a te an

a c tu a l t r i a l w ith ex am in a tio n of w itn e s s e s . R a th e r , a t W isco n sin the

a tte m p t to te a c h p ra c t ic e w as m ad e th ro u g h a g e n e ra l c o u rse in the

fu n d am en ta ls of p r a c t ic e , w hich w as su p p lem en ted by a p r a c t ic e c o u rt

in w hich the in s t r u c to r i l lu s t r a te d som e of the id e a s p r e s e n te d in the

c la s s . "You can n o t co v e r the th ing c o m p le te ly , o r you can n o t co v e r the

sam e ground w ith any two s e ts of s tu d en ts in d if fe re n t c a s e s u n le s s you

^ l % i d . . p . 22. l l^ Ib id .

154

t e l l th em w hat to do. . , , "^18 s tu d en ts w ere given a s ta te m e n t of

fa c ts and w e re a ss ig n e d to d isco v e r who th e p a r t ie s w ere know ing only

who w as to be c o n s id e re d th e ir c lie n t b u t u n aw are of who should be the

p la in tiff and who the defendan t. They w e re a lso a ss ig n ed to d isc o v e r

how they should g e t the c a s e into c o u r t. To do a com ple te t r i a l , even

u s in g the s h o r te s t c a se a v a ila b le , w as s t i l l too long fo r a m o o t c o u r t.

"We t r y to give s tu d en ts a chance to p r e p a r e a c a s e , to m ake th e ir

p ro o f of s e rv ic e , and th en the studen t a p p e a r in g fo r the defendan t com es

in and d e m u rs o r a n s w e rs o r m oves to s tr ik e out; then m o tio n s a r e

m a d e , and f in a lly , we com e down to the a c tu a l t r i a l . " R a th e r th an t ry

the c a s e , i t i s a r ra n g e d fo r a sp ec ia l v e r d ic t , the ju d g m en t i s e n te re d ,

and the d efea ted p a r ty ta k e s h is ap p ea l.

F ra n k M. P o r te r of the U n iv e rs ity of S outhern C a lifo rn ia C ollege

of L aw a d d re s s e d the A , A , L . S, w ith r e g a r d to h is p ra c t ic e p ro g ra m .

" F o r e ig h t y e a r s , " he s a id , "I have b e e n co n n ected w ith a schoo l in

w hich th e re h a s b een g rad u a lly developed an e la b o ra te m o o t c o u r t s y s ­

te m . T h is schoo l r e q u ire d two and a h a lf y e a r s of a c tu a l m o o t

c o u r t e x p e r ie n c e , and P o r te r te s tif ie d th a t the s tuden ts n eed ed no u rg ing .

l lS jo h n B . S anborn , "D iscu ssio n of the H astin g s S peech , " P r o ­c ee d in g s of the T w elfth , op. c i t . , p . 29.

1 1 9 ib id ., p . 30.

^^O prank M. P o r t e r , "D isc u ss io n of the H astin g s S peech , " P r o - c eed in g s of the T w elfth , op. c i t . , p . 32.

155

In re sp o n s e to the f re q u e n t o b jec tio n th a t p ra c t ic e w o rk tak es tim e th a t

cou ld b e t te r be spen t in o th e r s tu d ie s . P o r te r s a id , " . . . I th ink the

tim e i s w ell spen t, "^21 th e ir f re sh m a n y e a r , th e s tuden ts w e re g iven

le c tu r e s upon the duty of an a tto rn e y to h is c l ie n t , h is duty to the c o u r t

and to the s ta te , and le c tu r e s on the e le m e n ta ry p r in c ip le s of p r a c t ic e .

A t th e sam e tim e , the s tu d e n ts w ere re q u ire d to f ile two com p la in ts

and two a n sw e rs . D u rin g the second and th i rd y e a r s , the s tu d en ts

w e re re q u ire d to t r y fo u r c a s e s p e r y e a r , and a p p e a l two c a s e s . "T h ey

m u s t p re p a re th e ir p lead in g and t r i a l b r ie f s ju s t a s an a tto rn e y w ould in

an a c tu a l c o u r t. " The s tu d en ts w ere g rad ed and g iven ra tin g s on prom pt*

n e s s , p lead ing p re p a ra t io n and conduct in c o u r t. The studen t w as

e3q>ected to ob tain a t l e a s t the p a s s in g g rad e a s r e q u ire d in o th e r su b ­

je c t s . Inadequate p a p e r s w e re re tu rn e d to the s tu d e n t fo r c o r re c tio n .

" F in a lly , they com e to th e a c tu a l try in g of the c a se w hen they m u s t

1 2 s t r ik e ju ry , exam ine w itn e s s e s , e tc . . . . E v e ry T uesday n ig h t

w as s e t a s id e a t th is schoo l fo r the p u rp o se of m o o t c o u r t c a s e s . T hey

h ad tw elve la w y e rs on th e pay ro l l fo r the p u rp o se of ac ting a s ju d g es a t

th e se t r i a l s . In conclud ing h is r e m a rk s . P o r te r m ad e th is ev a lu a tio n

of the p ra c t ic e w o rk a t S o u th e rn C a lifo rn ia .

I t c o s ts m oney , ta k e s tim e , and r e q u ire s c a re fu l a tten tio n and su p e rv is io n , b u t I b e lie v e th a t i t p ay s . I t g iv e s the s tuden ts en th u s ia sm fo r th e i r life w o rk , b e s id e s g iving th em the n e c e s s a ry

IS ljb id ., pp. 32-33, 122ibid., p. 33. 123ibid,

156

in s tru c t io n , I do no t b e lie v e th a t i t is im p o ss ib le to teach p r a c t ic e . Of c o u rse , the te a c h e r m u s t know how to p ra c t ic e h im s e lf , if he is going to te a c h o th e r s , and i t i s n o t a t a ll d iff icu lt to fin d such te a c h e r s ,

In th is sec tio n , the m e th o d s of teach ing p r a c t ic e have b een

exam in ed in r e p re s e n ta tiv e sch o b ls th roughout the U n ited S ta te s , V a r ­

ia tio n s in teach in g p ro c e d u re an d ph ilosophy have b e en reco g n ized .

B efo re m oving on, th e re a r e th re e add itio n al r e fe r e n c e s w hich p re s e n t

som e g e n e ra l id e a s a s to the e x te n t and v a r ia tio n of p ra c t ic e c o u rs e s

w hich should be included . In 1902, Jo sep h H. B e a le , J r . w as a s s ig n e d

by the A s so c ia tio n of A m e ric a n L aw Schools to stuâjfythe f i r s t y e a r

c u r r ic u la of r e p re s e n ta tiv e law sc h o o ls , and r e p o r t h is find ings to the

A sso c ia tio n , A m ong o th e r c o n c lu s io n s , B eale o b s e rv e d th a t w hile

c o u rse s in p lead in g w ere o ffe re d to f i r s t y e a r s tu d e n ts , he could find

no school th a t a ttem p ted to te a c h p ra c t ic e o r the co m m u n ica tiv e a s p e c t

of p ra c t ic e to th e se s tu d en ts . W hile no p a r t ic u la r ph ilo so p h y w as d i s ­

co v e red , i t w as ap p a ren tly the c o n se n su s of law sc h o o ls th a t th is type

of tra in in g , if i t w as to be in c lu d e d a t a l l , should be r e s e r v e d to the

second and th ird y e a r s tu d en ts ,

Second, in 1921 John H , W igm ore p re s e n te d a m in o rity r e p o r t

of the C o m m ittee on C u rr ic u lu m of the A, A, L , S, w hich c a lled fo r m o re

124ibid ,

^^^Jo sep h H, B e a le , J r . , "T he F i r s t Y e a r C u rr ic u lu m of Law Schoo ls, " P ro c e e d in g s of th e S econd A nnual M eeting of the A sso c ia tio n of A m e ric a n L aw Schools, V ol. 2 (1902), pp. 4 2 -5 1 ,

157

study and im p ro v e m e n t of th e c u r r ic u la of law sc h o o ls . He sa id , "In

th e p a s t 20 y e a r s the c u r r ic u lu m of the f i r s t - c l a s s law sch o o l h as no t

1 ? Ap r o g re s s e d . I t i s s tand ing s t i l l , " W igm ore m ad e th is fu r th e r

o b se rv a tio n .

D uring the l a s t d o zen y e a r s , som e tw elve su b je c ts h av e b e en u rg e d a s re q u ir in g a p la c e in the c u r r ic u lu m . T h o se p ro p o sa ls have com e f ro m re s p e c ta b le and even a u th o r ita tiv e q u a r te r s , and e v e ry one of th em i s re c o g n iz e d in the c u r r i ­cu lum of a t le a s t two sch o o ls . If any p e rc e p tib le p ro g re s s iv e ten d en cy e x is te d , a l l o r som e of th o se p ro p o s a ls w ould have re c e iv e d re c o g n itio n in a la rg e n u m b e r of sc h o o ls . The f ig u re s show th a t such rec o g n itio n h a s b e e n lack in g ,

A m ong the c o u r s e s to w hich W igm ore r e f e r r e d w as one e n ti t le d " P r o ­

fe s s io n a l S peech o r F o re n s ic V oice T ra in in g and D e liv e ry , " In the

A s s o c ia t io n 's su rv e y of the f if ty m e m b e rs of the A , A , L , S, , s ta te d

QW igm ore , i t w as d is c o v e re d th a t fiv e o ffe re d a c o u rse of th is type,

W ig m o re , who w as one of the le a d e r s in the founding of the A sso c ia tio n ,

an d who w as and i s re c o g n iz e d a s one of the le a d e r s in the developm ent

of orgsm ized study of ev idence and ju d ic ia l p ro o f , m ad e a p le a fo r the

study and p o s s ib le adop tion of som e of th e se c o u r s e s . T he evidence

g a th e re d in th is s tudy su g g e s ts th a t he w as u n s u c c e ss fu l.

F in a lly , a r e p o r t of q u es tio n ab le v a lu e , b u t one w hich should be

in c lu d ed n e v e r th e le s s , w as m ade by W illiam E , H igg ins of th e U n iv er­

s ity of K an sas School of L aw in 1912, H is co m m en t w as th is ,

^^^John H , W igm ore , "M in o rity R e p o rt of the C o m m ittee on C u r­r ic u lu m , " P ro c e e d in g s of the N in e teen th A nnual M eeting of th e A sso c ia tio n of A m e ric a n L aw S choo ls, V ol. 19 (1919), p , 34,

^27lbid,, p, 36, 128ibid ,, p, 37,

158

A n u m b er of y e a r s ago I h ad the p le a s u re of m aking a to u r of som e of the co lleg e s of th is co u n try to a s c e r ta in how they a r r iv e d a t c o n c re te p ro b le m s to b e p re s e n te d in th e ir p ra c t ic e c o u r s e s . I found th a t the p r a c t ic e c o u r ts w ere m a t te r s of p u b lic a tio n in th e i r ca ta lo g u es and th a t they d id n o t e x is t a s a fa c t,

C om bining the s ta te m e n ts of id e a l and o b jec tiv e s re g a rd in g the

p h ilo sophy of p r a c t ic a l le g a l ed u ca tio n w ith the r e p o r ts of a c tu a l p r a c ­

t ic e s in re p re s e n ta t iv e schoo ls p ro v id e s an u n d e rs tan d in g of the th e o r ie s

of le g a l rh e to r ic in A m e ric a n law sch o o ls . One conclusion b e c o m e s

p re d o m in a n t- - la w schoo l le a d e r s a r e la rg e ly un ited in the b e lie f th a t a

p r a c t i t io n e r of law n eed s to l e a r n the rh e to r ic a s w ell a s the p ro c e d u re

of le g a l p ra c t ic e ; b u t the sam e m e n have been n o ticeab ly d iv ided in

th e i r a ttitu d e re g a rd in g w hat th is am oun ted to and how to te a c h i t , A

com m on b e lie f h a s b een to the e ffe c t th a t p r a c t ic a l ed ucation should be

o b ta in ed b e fo re o r a f te r law sch o o l. If th is i s in d eed the c a s e , th en i t

m ig h t be ex p ec ted th a t the law sch o o ls w ould lak e the in itia tiv e in se ttin g

up re q u ire m e n ts fo r p r e - la w s tudy and B a r a d m iss io n w hich w ould

a s s u r e the ob ta in ing of th is ed u ca tio n . T h is i s the su b jec t of the n ex t

se c tio n ,

P r e -L a w R e q u ire m e n ts

The h is to ry of p re - la w and a d m iss io n re q u ire m e n ts i s a d is c o u r ­

ag ing study in g e n e ra l , and p a r t ic u la r ly so w ith r e g a rd to rh e to r ic a l

129'W illiam E , H ig g in s , " D isc u s s io n o f the H a s tin g s S p e e c h , " P r o c e e d in g s o f th e T w e lfth , op , c i t . , p , 25,

159

th e o ry . I t could be c h a ra c te r iz e d a s d e s ire fo r h igh s ta n d a rd s o v e rco m e

by doubt lead in g to in ac tio n . A lthough the H a rv a rd L aw School fo rm a lly

opened in 1817, and law sch o o ls w ere an e s ta b lis h e d in s titu tio n by the

m id d le of th e 19th C en tu ry , b e fo re 1876 no law sch o o l in the U nited

S ta te s r e q u ire d th a t a p p lic a n ts f o r ad m iss io n d e m o n s tra te any g e n e ra l

ed u ca tio n . By 1890, th i r ty p e r cen t of the law sch o o ls had adopted

som e e n tra n c e r e q u ire m e n ts , b u t in no c a se d id th e se c a ll fo r m o re

than a h igh schoo l ed u ca tio n , and sh o rtly th e r e a f te r , the b e s t the C om ­

m itte e on L e g a l E ducation of th e A m e rica n B a r A sso c ia tio n could do

131w as to céill fo r b e t te r p r e l im in a ry tra in in g w h ere i t w as p ra c tic a b le .

The A sso c ia tio n of A m e ric a n Law Schools cam e into e x is te n c e in

1900, and im m e d ia te ly c o n c e rn e d i ts e lf w ith the q u e s tio n of p r e - la w

re q u ire m e n ts . F ro m the d is c u s s io n s th a t took p la c e in the y e a r ly

m e e tin g s of th is g ro u p , a good b i t can be le a rn e d ab o u t the s ta tu s of

rh e to r ic a l tra in in g in the m in d s of the le a d e r s of the law sch o o ls , and

the ex ten t to w hich they w ould go to se c u re i t . A t th e i r f i r s t m ee tin g

in A ugust, 1900, the A sso c ia tio n m e m b e rs a g re e d to dem and a h igh

schoo l ed u ca tio n o r i t s eq u iv a len t of a s tu d en t b e fo re a d m iss io n to any

schoo l in th e A .A ^ L . S. No com m en t w as m ad e co n cern in g the con ten t

Alfred Z. Reed, P resent-D ay Law Schools, op. c it. , p. 130.

13 1 lb id .

160

o r q u a lity of the education ; a l l th a t w as r e q u ire d w as c e r tif ic a tio n of a

h igh schoo l edu ca tio n . Two y e a r s l a t e r , i t w as d isc o v e re d th a t

s ig n if ic an t v io la tio n s of th is r e q u ire m e n t w e re b e in g co m m itted by m e m ­

b e r s of the A sso c ia tio n , an d the q u es tio n of e:q>ulsion f ro m the

133o rg a n iz a tio n w as r a i s e d a s a p o s s ib le m e a n s of e n fo rc e m e n t.

In 1904, a m a jo r a d d re s s w as p r e s e n te d by H a r ry S. R ic h a rd s ,

D ean of the U n iv e rs ity of .W isconsin C o llege of L aw co n cern in g the

q u e s tio n of the q u a lity of p r e - le g a l t ra in in g . R ic h a rd s po in ted out th a t

the re q u ire m e n t of a h igh schoo l ed u ca tio n w as m is le a d in g due to the

g r e a t d iffe re n c e am ong h igh sch o o ls . Som e, he s a id , h ad s ta n d a rd s no

h ig h e r th an th e seven th and e ig h th g ra d e s in o th e r schoo l d i s t r ic t s .

In o th e r c a s e s , he o b se rv e d , law sch o o ls w hich a r e la x in a d m in is te r in g

th e i r e n tra n c e r e q u ire m e n ts s im p ly a d m it s tu d en ts who do not p o s s e s s

th e n e c e s s a r y ed u ca tio n a l r e q u ire m e n ts . A d d itio n a lly , acco rd in g to

R ic h a rd s , s tu d en ts b e tw een ag es 16 and 18 a r e s im p ly no t m a tu re enough

fo r law study.

^^^P ro c e e d in g s of the F i r s t A nnual M eeting of the A sso c ia tio n of A m e ric a n L aw S choo ls, V ol. 1 (1900-1901), p . 10.

133p ro c e e d in g s of the T h ird A nnual M eeting of the A sso c ia tio n of A m e r ic a n L aw S choo ls, V ol. 3 (1903), pp. 5 -2 0 .

^ ^ ^ a r r y S. R ic h a rd s , "E n tra n c e R e q u ire m e n ts fo r Law S ch o o ls , " P ro c e e d in g s of the F o u r th A nnual M eetin g of the A sso c ia tio n of A m e ric a n L aw S choo ls, V ol. 4 (1904), p . 29.

161

T u rn in g to th o se law sch o o ls re q u ir in g a co lleg e education p r io r

to law school a d m iss io n , R ic h a rd s m ade the sam e o b se rv a tio n a s he had

ab o u t h igh sch o o ls ; c o lle g e s v a r ie d s ig n if ic a n tly in th e q u a lity of th e ir

p r o g ra m s . On the o th e r h an d , th e sp e a k e r f e l t th a t fo u r y e a r s of co lleg e

p lu s law schoo l w as too long to ex p ec t a s tu d en t to devo te to h is p r e p a ­

ra t io n fo r the B a r . H is r a th e r vague co n c lu s io n w as th a t s ta n d a rd s

n e ed ed to be r a i s e d g ra d u a lly ; he did no t su g g e s t a m e a n s of a s s u r in g

q u a lity and he d id n o t su g g e s t the l im it to be p la c e d on quan tity of p r e -

le g a l ed u ca tio n , o th e r th an to su g g e s t th a t tw o y e a r s of co llege should be

1 OCa r e q u is i te .

In 1905, the A . A , L . S. adop ted a ru le th a t m e m b e rs m u s t r e q u ire

a t l e a s t fo u r y e a r s of h igh schoo l of s tu d en ts p r io r to a d m iss io n .

A nd, in 1906, the A s so c ia tio n adop ted the fo llow ing re so lu tio n : "R e so lv ed ,

T h a t any schoo l w hich g iv e s a d e g re e to a s tu d e n t who h a s s tu d ied law

fo r l e s s th an th re e y e a r s i s n o t com plying w ith A r t ic le VI of the A r t ic le s

of th e A sso c ia tio n . T h is w as s e r io u s ly o b je c te d tq by som e m e m ­

b e r s , and th e p a s sa g e of the re so lu tio n r e s u l te d in th e w ith d raw al of the

U n iv e rs ity of M aine School of L aw fro m the A sso c ia tio n . T h u s, i t w as

no t u n til th is tim e th a t any co m p le te a tte m p t to p r e s c r ib e the e n t ire

^35ibid.

136p r o c e e d in g s of the F if th A nnual M eeting of th e A sso c ia tio n of A m e r ic a n ;Law S c h o o ls . V o l . 5 (1905), p . 11.

137p r o c e e d in g s o f th e S ix th A nnual M e e tin g o f the A s s o c ia t io n of A m e r ic a n L aw S c h o o ls , V o l. 6 (1906), p . 7.

162

p e r io d of p r e - la w an d law school ed u ca tio n w as m ad e , and th is did not

a ffec t th o se sch o o ls n o t belonging to the A .A , L . S.

The d ev e lo p m en t of ru le s g o v ern in g p re - la w study w e re rev iew ed

by W illiam P , R o g e rs in h is P r e s id e n t ia l a d d re s s of 1907. "Only a

s h o r t tim e ago , " he r e c a l le d , " s tu d e n ts w e re p e rm itte d to e n te r m o st

of o u r law sch o o ls w ithou t any p re l im in a ry q u a lifica tio n . On th is su b ­

je c t th e re w e re no fix ed ru le s . "138 The r e s u l t , he sa id , w as the

a ccep tan ce of young m e n s tra ig h t f ro m the fa rm o r f ro m c le rk in g in a

s to re w ithou t even a g ra m m a r schoo l ed u ca tio n in m any c a s e s . "We

have a l l o b se rv e d , " s a id R o g e rs , " . . . how th o se w ith d e f ic ie n t p r e p a ­

ra tio n have s tu m b led th ro u g h l ife , c a r ry in g the p ro fe s s io n a s a b u rd en ,

w ith a p e rp e tu a l apology fo r a la c k of an ed u ca tio n . . . . "139

T u rn in g h is a tte n tio n to the q u e s tio n of the con ten t of the p re - la w

c o u rse of stu d y , R o g e rs no ted , "We shou ld a g re e th a t one canno t take too

m uch of w hat is d e s ig n a te d a s the c o u rse in E n g lish ; fo r the law y er who

can u se w ith flu en cy an d a c c u ra c y the w o rd s of the E n g lish language is

in th is r e s p e c t equ ip p ed fo r the law . . , ."1 4 0 "Too m uch e m p h a s is , "

he sa id , "can n o t b e la id upon a w e l l - s e le c te d c o u rse of th is k ind . "

^^^WiHjLam P . R o g e rs , "A tiàiress of the P re s id e n t , " P ro c e e d in g s of the Seventh A nnual M eeting of the A sso c ia tio n of A m e ric a n Law S choo ls, V ol. 7 (1907), p . 73,

^^^Ibid. l^ O jb id ., p . 77.

163

Speaking m o re sp ec ific a lly of o r a l u se of lan g u ag e , R o g e rs m ad e the

fo llow ing s ta tem en t:

Of la te y e a r s the a r t of p u b lic speak ing h a s b e en som ew hat s n e e re d a t . We a r e to ld th a t th is i s the age of s c ie n c e , and th a t e loquence and w e ll - r ounde d sen te n c es do n o t c o m p o rt w ith sc ie n tif ic study of any k ind; th a t the u n iv e r s a l i ty w ith w hich m a g a z in e s and n e w sp a p e rs a re re a d , th u s k eep in g the g e n e ra l p u b lic w ell in fo rm ed on a l l to p ic s , h a s sw ep t f ro m th e o ra to r h is b a se of in flu en ce , an d th a t he h a s , th e ré fo rp , lo s t h is p o s itio n of le a d e rsh ip av long m e n , and .;a s y ie ld e d h is p la c e a t the B a r to the q u ie t, u n im p as sioned lo g ic ia n who w ins the c o u r t by the fo rc e of h is p la in b u t lo g ic a l s ta te m e n ts . I am w illin g to a d m it th a t m e r e ly rounded s e n te n c e s , th a t lo fty p h r a s e s coup led to g e th e r w ithout thought, a r e now , if they h ave no t a lw ays b een , w o rse th an u s e le s s . B u t I do n o t a d m it th a t th e tim e h a s p a s s e d w hen th e a b ility to s tan d on o n e ’s fe e t and th ink w ell and ra p id ly , and to c lo th e one ' s thoughts in good E n g lish , i s a p p re c ia te d by the g e n e ra l p u b lic . I doubt if th e r e h a s ev e r b e en a tim e w hen such a b ili ty w as so m uch a p p re c ia te d o r so h ig h ly v a lu ed a s the p r e s e n t . The pow er of th e genuine o ra to r to g a in h is p o in t, h is a b ili ty no t only to c a r r y w ith h im the c ro w d , b u t to w in ju r i e s and c o u r ts , w as n e v e r g r e a te r than to d ay . The g ra c e fu l a r t of pub lic speak ing m ay have lo s t som e of i ts ad v o c a te s and d e v o tees , b u t he who h a s i t p e r fe c te d p o s s e s s e s a g ift w hich i s in v a lu ab le .And to e v e ry young m a n w ho c o n tem p la te s a l ife a t th e B a r , I w ould say m is s no o p p o rtu n ity to c u ltiv a te th is a r t ; tak e ad v an ­tag e of e v e ry o ccas io n w hich g iv es you a chance to th ink and ta lk in p u b lic , b u t r e m e m b e r n e v e r to do so u n le s s you have som e thoughtful m e ss a g e to p re s e n t .

In th is , the f i r s t p ro n o u n cem en t on the co n ten t of p r e - le g a l ed u ­

c a tio n by an o ffic ia lly d e s ig n a te d r e p re s e n ta t iv e of A m e ric a n law sch o o ls ,

i t i s of in te r e s t th a t th is s tro n g a s ta te m e n t in b eh a lf of sp eech tra in in g

^"^^Ibid., pp. 77-78.

164

w as in c lu d ed . H o w ever, no fo rm a l a c tio n e ith e r a c ce p tin g o r m odify ing

the p ro p o sa l w as tak en ,

SpeéLking in 1915, H a r ry S, R ic h a rd s ag ain r a i s e d the q u es tio n of

p r e - le g a l e d u ca tio n a l r e q u ire m e n ts . He o b se rv e d f i r s t th a t the p re c e d in g

te n y e a r s h ad seen a dec id ed change of a tti tu d e , so th a t law school

le a d e r s g e n e ra lly re co g n iz ed th a t a law s tuden t shou ld have som e u n iv e r ­

s ity tra in in g f i r s t . He rem in d e d the m e m b e rs of the A , A . L , S, th a t the

o rg a n iza tio n reco m m en d ed , b u t d id not r e q u ire , th a t two fu ll y e a r s of

co llege p re c e d e law school e n try , " J u s t w hat the c h a ra c te r of th is w o rk

should b e , " R ichard sco o n tin u ed , " is a m a t te r of c o n tro v e rs y . I s i t

enough th a t a s tu d en t have two y e a r s of any kind of w o rk o ffe re d in

c o lleg e , " the sp e a k e r in q u ired , " o r should th is w o rk b e p r e s c r ib e d w ith

re fe re n c e to the subsequen t le g a l s tu d y ? ipj^g s p e a k e r - - P r e s id e n t

of the A , A , L , S, - -p ro c e e d e d to m ak e the follow ing o b se rv a tio n .

The ten d en cy of the s tu d en t, if a llow ed to choose w ithout r e s t r ic t io n , is to tak e p ub lic speak ing and the p ro p h e tic o r sp ecu la tiv e sc ie n c e s of p o li t ic a l econom y and socio logy; b u t the m o re obvious n eed of the s tu d en t f r e s h f ro m the h igh sch o o ls i s d isc ip lin e , the p u r s u i t of su b jec ts th a t re q u ire fo r th e i r m a s te ry c lo se a tte n tio n and e x a c tn e s s . S ubjects th a t a r e to a c o n s id e ra b le e x te n t sp ecu la tiv e a r e m o re p r o ­fitab ly r e s e r v e d to the l a s t two y e a r s of a co lleg e c o u rse ,

In h is reco m m en d a tio n , R ic h a rd s p ro p o sed th a t the s tu d en t tak e

in the f i r s t two y e a r s of co llege E n g lish , L a tin o r G re e k , G erm an o r

^"^^Harry 8, R ic h a rd s , "A d d re ss of the P r e s id e n t ," P ro c e e d in g s of the F ifte e n th A nnual M eeting of th e A sso c ia tio n of A m e ric a n Law Schools, V ol, 15 (1915), p , 66.

143ibid.

165

F re n c h , m a th o r n a tu ra l s c ie n c e , h is to ry (E n g lish o r A m e r ic a n C o n s ti­

tu tio n a l) , p sy ch o lo g y . If m o re co lleg e i s d e s ir e d , he su g g e s te d th a t

the s tu d en t th en take p o li t ic a l s c ie n c e , p o li t ic a l eco n o m y , and soc io logy .

He m ad e no fu r th e r m en tio n of pub lic speak ing .

A s la te a s 1924 the A s so c ia tio n w as s t i l l a sk in g th e q u e s tio n s

r e la te d to p r e - le g a l ed u ca tio n and tak ing no a c tio n . In a r e p o r t of the

C o m m ittee on C u rr ic u lu m fo r th a t y e a r a su rv ey w as in c lu d ed r e p o r tin g

the o p in ions of v a r io u s law sch o o ls on the m a t te r . A sk ed f i r s t if any

c o u rse should be r e q u ire d fo r law schoo l a d m iss io n , 31 law sch o o ls

gave an u n q u a lified n eg a tiv e a n sw e r; 12 a n sw e re d a f f irm a tiv e ly . Of

th o se in fav o r of re q u ir in g a c o u r s e , five w ould d em an d only E n g lish

b e s tu d ied ; no o th e r s in g le su b je c t o r c o u rse r e c e iv e d m o re th an one

v o te . Of the 31 o th e r sch o o ls , 14 w ould be in fa v o r o f reco m m en d in g

c o u rs e s to be tak en w ithout m ak in g th em a r e q u ire m e n t. If the sch o o ls

d e s ir in g to re q u ire a c o u rse a r e com bined w ith th o se w illin g to r e c o m ­

m en d , an d a tab u la tio n is m ad e of the su b je c ts m e n tio n e d , 7 p ro p o se d

the tak in g of a c o u rse in p u b lic speak ing and 18 m e n tio n e d com positionf'^ '^

P re s e n t in g a m o re g e n e ra l p ic tu re of the p r e - la w r e q u ire m e n ts ,

R eed re p o r te d in h is 1928 s u rv e y th a t the q u es tio n of w h a t su b je c ts the

144iiR eport of the C o m m ittee on C u rr ic u lu m , " H andbook of the A s so c ia tio n of A m e ric a n L aw S chools and P ro c e e d in g s of the T w en ty - Second M eetin g , V ol. 22 (1924), p , 36,

166

s tu d en t s tu d ied d u rin g h is u n d e rg ra d u a te o r p re - la w y e a r s w as u su a lly

le f t to the in d iv id u a l s tu d en t to d e c id e , su b jec t to the g e n e ra l re g u la tio n s

of the co lleg e he a tten d ed . "A study of the A nnouncem ents fo r 1925-26 , "

R eed n o ted , " re v e a ls th a t of s ix ty -fiv e th r e e -y e a r fu ll- t im e law sch o o ls ,

re q u ir in g a t l e a s t two c o lleg e y e a r s fo r a d m iss io n , only n ine in s i s t th a t

a p p lic a n ts who p r e s e n t the m in im u m re q u ire m e n ts sh a ll have s tu d ied

c e r ta in su b je c ts in ad d itio n to th o se p r e s c r ib e d fo r co lleg e s tu d en ts in

g e n e ra l, In a l l th e sc h o o ls , acco rd in g to R eed , an a p p lic a n t w as

a c c e p te d if he h ad co m p le ted the co llege d e g re e , r e g a rd le s s of the

c o u rs e s ta k e n . R eed a lso re p o r te d th a t d u rin g in v e s tig a tio n in the

1922-23 schoo l y e a r , he d is c o v e re d the fo llow ing c o u rse s fa v o re d by

law sch o o ls fo r p r e - la w study ; h is to ry , eco n o m ics , and E n g lish , in ­

cluding bo th w r itte n co m p o sitio n and pub lic speak ing .

In h is own a n a ly s is of the p ro b le m of p r e - le g a l ed u ca tio n , R eed

a sk e d w h e th e r the function of such tra in in g w as to p re p a re fo r the study

of law , o r to p ro v id e the s tu d en t w ith th a t p o r tio n of h is ed u ca tio n w hich

the law schoo l w ould be u nab le to p ro v id e in v iew of the m any b u rd e n s

and l im ite d tim e i t h a d a v a ila b le . R eed p ro c e e d e d th is w ay.

145Aifred Z. Reed, P resent-D ay Law Schools, op. c i t . , p. 201.

^'^^Ibid., p. 203.

%

167

If a tte n tio n i s d ire c te d p r in c ip a lly to p re p a ra t io n fo r the law schoo l, th en the tra in in g of the s tu d e n t's m in d w ill seem to m any m o re im p o rta n t th an the in fo rm a tio n a l a sp e c t of h is w o rk , A know ledge of h is to ry , of g o v e rn m e n t, and of eco n o ­m ic s m ay b e of som e im m e d ia te b en e fit to the law studen t, in enab ling h im to do ju s t ic e to the w ork of the schoo l, b u t i t i s doubtful w h e th e r i t i s of g r e a t b en efit, p a r t ic u la r ly in v iew of the fa c t th a t the in s tru c t io n p ro v id ed in th e s e su b jec ts i s no t d ire c t ly k ey ed to h is fu tu re n eed s . The dev elo p m en t of h is rea so n in g p o w e rs , on the o th e r hand, is of im m ed ia te b e n e f it to h im ; and th is end can n o t u su a lly be so re a d ily a tta in e d in th e se su b jec ts a s in o th e rs in w hich m o re p r e c is e th inking i s r e q u ire d . If , h o w e v e r, w e s ta r t f ro m a d if fe re n t p re m is e , and r e g a rd the co lleg e y e a r s a s p a r t of the p re p a ra t io n of the s tu ­d en t fo r h is p ro fe s s io n , th en we a re m o re lik e ly to reco g n ize the im p o rta n c e of g iv ing h im in fo rm a tio n , and in te r e s ts , th a t w ill be of v a lu e to h im d u rin g h is e n tire c a r e e r . T h is in fo rm ­a tio n can b e s e c u re d , and th e se in te r e s t s c a n be s tim u la ted , d u rin g h is C oliege y e a r s b e t te r than a t any o th e r tim e . F ro m th is po in t of v iew i t w ould even seem p re fe r a b le - - s h o u ld th is p ro v e n e c e s s a r y - - to a d ap t the w ork of the law school to the re a so n in g c a p a c ity of the b ro a d ly ed u ca ted s tu d en t, and t r u s t to the d isc ip lin e of the law w o rk to sh a rp e n h is m ind to a k e e n e r edge, r a th e r th an to ru n the r is k of s a c r if ic in g to a single a im o th e rs of eq u a l im p o rta n c e .

To the w r i te r the seco n d of th ese two av en u es of ap p ro ach to the p ro b le m se e m s c le a r ly the one th a t should be fo llow ed,, , , A c u r r ic u lu m th a t i s to be of the g r e a te s t p o ssib le b e n e ­f i t to the fu tu re p r a c t i t io n e r should in c lu d e n o t only su b je c ts th a t a re in tim a te ly co n n ec ted w ith h is te c h n ic a l s tu d ies and m ay be s a id to fo rm p a r t of "the law , " in th e b ro a d e s t s e n se .Of th is s o r t a r e p o li t ic a l h is to ry and g o v e rn m en t (p o litica l sc ien ce ). I t shou ld a lso inc lude o th e r s u b je c ts th a t cannot b e b ro u g h t u n d e r any such d efin itio n , h o w ev er b ro a d , and y e t m a y b e u sefu l to the la w y e r in h is p ro fe s s io n a l c ap ac ity . Of th is s o r t a r e c o u r s e s th a t give h im a know ledge of b ra n c h e s of sc ien ce o r of b u s in e s s (econom ics) w hich h is law p ra c tic e m a y touch . Of th is s o r t a lso a r e c o u rse s th a t develop p ro fic ien cy in the u se of c e r ta in im p o r ta n t too ls th a t a r e not p e c u lia r to the la w y e r 's a r t , and y e t a r e co n stan tly em p lo y ed by h im . Such a r e E n g lish e x p re s s io n , both w ritte n and o r a l , and accounting ,

^^■^Ibid., pp. 203-204,

168

A p p aren tly R eed i s w illin g to iden tify s e p a ra te fu n c tio n s a s of

va lue to the p o te n tia l law s tu d en t, bo th a k een m in d and a b ility to th ink

and the " to o ls" of E n g lish e x p re s s io n , w r itte n and spoken. A s d id

m o s t of the le g a l e d u c a to rs , R ee d th e o r iz e d th a t co m m u n ica tio n and

p e rsu a s io n e x is te d a s s e p a ra te f ro m the m e n ta l p r o c e s s e s . T h is r e l e ­

g a te s rh e to r ic a l th e o ry to the p o s it io n i t o ccu p ied in m any of the

M edieval s c h o o ls . C h a r le s S e a r s B aldw in co m m en ts th a t any ju d g m en t

of r h e to r ic a l th e o ry m u s t be m ad e in lig h t of i t s re la tio n to g ra m m a r

an one hand and log ic on the o th e r . "L og ic m ay be u sed fo r a n a ly s is

w ithout p re s e n ta tio n , " say s B aldw in . He c o n tin u e s , "T h is , indeed , is

a b s tr a c t ly i t s p ro p e r fu n c tio n , and in d ic a te s i t s re la tio n to ph ilosophy .

. . . " B ut B aldw in n o te s , in p r a c t ic e log ic b e c o m e s r e la te d to rh e to r ic ,

" . . . and c o n v e rse ly r h e to r ic , b y y ie ld ing i t s f ie ld of inven tio to lo g ic ,

148m ay be red u c e d to the study of s ty le . R eed p ro b ab ly w ould have

a g re e d w ith the c h a ra c te r iz a tio n of rh e to r ic a l th e o ry includ ing only

s ty le and d e liv e ry .

In the 1950*s th e re w as a f lu r r y of in te r e s t in p re le g a l education

beginning w ith the a s s ig n m e n t of A r th u r T , V a n d e rb ilt to p r e p a re an

C h a r le s S e a rs B ald w in , M ed iev al R h e to ric and P o e tic (G lou- c e s te r , M a ssa c h u se tts : P e t e r S m ith , 1959), p . 91.

169

ex h au stiv e r e p o r t on the su b jec t. He s ta r te d by rem o v in g the hyphen.

In se ttin g out on h is s e a rc h , V a n d e rb ilt s a id he ex p ec te d to find a " m a ss"

of l i t e r a tu r e on the su b jec t of p r e le g a l ed u ca tio n . " . . . To m y s u r ­

p r i s e , " he sa id , "I found th a t r e la t iv e ly l i t t l e h ad b e e n w r i tte n on the

su b je c t and th a t m o s t of i t , m o re o v e r , w as c a su a l and s u p e rf ic ia l . . .

V a n d e rb ilt a lso d isc o v e re d im m e d ia te ly th a t th e re w as u n an im ous

op p o sitio n to the se ttin g -u p of a l i s t of sp e c ific c o u r s e s to be re q u ire d

fo r e n try in to law sch o o l.

In re sp o n s e s to q u e s tio n n a ire s se n t to law sc h o o ls , V an d erb ilt

le a rn e d of the c r i t i c i s m s being m a d e of s tu d en ts e n te r in g law school.

M ore ac u te th an the co m p la in ts a s to in a c c u ra te o r hazy know ledge o r even e n tire la c k of in fo rm a tio n c o n ce rn in g th e ir in te lle c tu a l and so c ia l en v iro n m e n t i s the w e ll-n ig h u n iv e rs a l c r i t ic is m re sp e c tin g the in a b il i ty of law s tu d en ts to th in k s tra ig h t and to w r ite and speak in c le a r , fo rc e fu l, a t t r a c t iv e E n g lish .A lm o st ev ery o n e who d is c u s s e s law sch o o l s tu d e n ts - - o r even , i t m u s t b e added , young law sch o o l g r a d u a te s - -h a s an unkind w ord to say abou t th e ir la c k of ad eq u a te p o w e rs of o r a l and w r itte n e3q>ression in th e ir n a tiv e tongue . Such c r i t i c i s m , on a n a ly s is , g e n e ra lly r e la te s a s m u ch to d e fe c ts in th ink ing a s to fa u lts of e x p re s s io n ,

^ ^^A rth u r T. V a n d e rb ilt, "A R e p o r t on P r e le g a l E d u ca tio n , "N ew Y ork U n iv e rs ity L aw R ev iew , XXV, 2 (A p ril, 1950), p . 200. V a n d e rb ilt u se d the com m on sp e llin g " p re - le g a l" a s a n i l lu s tr a t io n of the la c k of a tte n tio n w hich had b e e n d ev o ted to the su b je c t. He said " p re m e d ic a l" h ad b eco m e com m on, b u t " p re le g a l" h ad n o t. V a n d e rb ilt’s sp e llin g w ill be ad o p ted fo r the re m a in d e r of th is s tu d y ,

^^°Ibid. ^ ^ % id ., p. 203. ^^^Ibid., pp. 209-210.

170

The l a s t sen te n ce shows a g lim m e rin g a w a re n e s s th a t th e re i s a

n e c e s s a r y re la t io n b e tw een w hat i s c a lle d th ink ing and e x p re ss io n . A

re la t io n w hich R eed , a s n o ted above, w as unw illing to m ak e . B u t the

p ro b le m th a t R eed fo u n d -- th e in a b ility to a g re e on w hat the c o lle g e s

should b e a sk ed to do fo r the p o te n tia l law s tu d e n t—w as s t i l l ev id en t in

V a n d e rb il t 's s tudy . T he q u estio n s t i l l rev o lv ed a ro u n d the p ro v is io n of

sp e c ific in fo rm a tio n to a s s i s t the s tu d en t in h is le g a l s tu d ie s o r the

tra in in g of the s tu d e n t 's fa c u ltie s in a n tic ip a tio n of the ta sk s of le g a l

p r a c t ic e , o r should the s tuden t s im p ly be e n co u rag ed to ob ta in a b ro a d

l ib e r a l education .

T hroughou t h is in q u iry , V a n d e rb ilt d is c o v e re d the value g iven to

c ap a c ity to d ea l in language fo r one e n te r in g law . A lthough the co m m en ts

con tin u ed to d is c u s s language fro m the p e rs p e c t iv e of g ra m m a r and

l i t e r a tu r e , the fo llow ing s ta te m en t re sp e c tin g the study of lo g ic , s c ie n -

t i f iç m eth o d , and p sy ch o lo g y shows a f u r th e r a w a re n e s s of the re la t io n

of th e se d isc ip lin e s to r h e to r ic a l th e o ry .

To som e m en who have n o t h ad the good fortkm e of having h a d a g re a t te a c h e r , log ic se e m s lik e no th ing m o re th an a s e r i e s of m e n ta l c a r d t r ic k s , b u t w ith an in s p ir e d guide i t m a y becom e th e k ey th a t un locks th e w o rld of re a so n in g . To study lo g ic a s th e sc ie n ce and a r t of in q u iry , to o b se rv e how i t s p r in c ip le s h av e b een ap p lied to the p h y s ic a l s c ie n c e s in b ro ad en in g out s p h e re s of know ledge and e n r ich in g o u r l iv e s ,

153ib id ., p . 210.

171

to p e rc e iv e how f a r the m eth o d s of n a tu ra l sc ie n ce can be ad ap ted to the study of so c ie ty in i t s v a r io u s a s p e c ts , to le a rn how th e se p r in c ip le s of log ic a r e p u t to w ork in the a s c e r ta in ­m e n t of t ru th in ju d ic ia l p ro c e e d in g s , i s to give the s tu d en t new p o w er o v e r h im se lf and h is en v iro n m en t. L og ic a s the sc ie n ce an d a r t of ex p lan a tio n can a lso teach h im m uch about the a r ra n g e m e n t and c la s s if ic a tio n of know ledge and h e lp h im to p u t h is though ts in the b e s t p o s s ib le fo rm fo r com m unica tion to o th e r s . I t c an te a c h h im how to avo id com m on f a l la c ie s on h is own p a r t and how to d e te c t th em in o th e rs . W ith the a id of p sych o lo g y i t c an p u t h im on g u a rd a s to p itfa lls of p ro p ag an d a .A n ed u ca ted m an h a s b een defin ed a s one who h a s the ab ility to a c t on a ll the a v a ilab le ev idence a t the m o m en t w hen ac tio n b e c o m e s n e c e s s a ry . If th is d e fin itio n i s t r u e , i t w ould then a p p e a r th a t the ab ility to ev a lu a te ev idence is a p r a c t ic a l m a t te r of tre m e n d o u s im p o rta n c e no t only fo r the law studen t b u t fo r e v e ry m an .

P sy ch o lo g y , like lo g ic , depends upon the teach in g . . . .W ith th is equ ipm ent of log ic an d psycho logy , the a r t of w ritin gta k e s on new m e a n ii^ and debating b ec o m e s som eth ing m o re ..........—th an a 'talk* f e s t . ^

In r e fe re n c e to the ta lk f e s t ch a llen g e a g a in s t d eb atin g , V a n d e r­

b i l t q u o tes J e ro m e P o u n d 's ch a rg e th a t debating u n d e r G eorge P ie rc e

B a k e r a t H a rv a rd invo lved a th o ro u g h -g o in g c r i t ic a l and lo g ic a l a rg u ­

m e n t, w h e re a s m o d e rn debating te n d s to give too m uch a tten tio n to

w inning a vo te of the au d ien ce . S til l , th e re fo re , the co m m en ta to r

sp eak s of co m m u n ica tio n , logic and psycho logy , and p e rs u a s io n a s

som ehow d iffe re n t and in d iv id u a l e n t i t ie s . And y e t, V an d e rb ilt looks

fo rw a rd to th e com bining of th e se e le m e n ts in w r itte n and spoken c o m ­

m u n ica tio n . T h ese o b se rv a tio n s a r e qu ite rev ea lin g w ith r e g a rd to the

r h e to r ic a l th e o r ie s of le g a l e d u c a to rs .

154 ib id ., pp. 254-255.

172

M uch of the v a lu e to th is study in the ex am in a tio n of the p r e le g a l

r e q u ire m e n ts r e s t s in the e f fo r ts to c h a r a c te r iz e the ro le s o r ta sk s

w hich face a p ra c t ic in g a tto rn e y . In h is 1950 r e p o r t V a n d e rb ilt g iv es

s tro n g e m p h a s is to the ro le of ad v o ca te . "In the f in a l a n a ly s is , " he

s a y s , " . . . bo th the d ev e lo p m en t of the law and the p ro fe s s io n a l w o rk

of e v e ry law y er depend upon the w o rk of the ad v o ca te , re p re s e n tin g h is

c lie n t in c o u r t , o r b e fo re an a d m in is tra tiv e tr ib u n a l o r a le g is la tiv e

body . . . . ''1 5 5 I t i s in th e se s itu a tio n s , the au th o r d e c la r e s , th a t the

law is u ltim a te ly te s te d and re je c te d o r v in d ic a te d . I t i s the a d v o c a te 's

w o rk th a t d e te rm in e s how an office la w y e r a d v ise s h is c lie n t. Involved

in the w o rk of the a d v o ca te , a c co rd in g to V a n d e rb ilt , a r e the ta sk s

of u n d er s tand ing fa c ts and law , h um an n a tu re , the so c ia l en v iro n m en t

of p a r t ic u la r l i t ig a tio n , and the c ap ac ity to re a s o n the com m unique. 156

E la b o ra tin g upon th e s e , he s a y s .

The a d v o c a te 's g ra sp of f a c ts , h is co m p reh en sio n of the law , h is know ledge of hum an n a tu re , and h is u n d e rs ta n d in g of h is en v iro n m e n t a ll s e rv e m e re ly to supply the raw m a te r ia l fo r the e x e rc is e of h is p o w ers of re a so n in g , n o t in the a b s tr a c t b u t w ith r e la t io n to h is sp ec ific c a s e . The so lv ing of p ro b le m s i s the la w y e r 's ta s k w h e th e r i t be in the t r i a l of c a s e s o r in g iv ing sound ad v ice in h is o ffice . G en e ra lly th ey a r e c r i t ic a l p ro b le m s in the l iv e s of h is c lie n ts and n o t m e re m a t te r s of ro u tin e .

1 5 5 ib id ., pp . 265-266 . ^56^^^^^ p , 267.

173

R easo n in g is a step in the p re p a ra t io n fo r the t r i a l of a c a s e and i t i s w orthw hile only to the d e g re e th a t he i s a b le to e3q>ress h im se lf in w o rd s o ra l ly and in w ritin g .

F o llow ing the V a n d e rb ilt r e p o r t , the A sso c ia tio n of A m e ric a n L aw

Schools to o k som e a c tio n . In 1951, the C o m m ittee on P r e le g a l E ducation

reco m m en d ed th e e s ta b lis h m e n t of a l i s t of d e s ir e d s k ills an d in s ig h ts .

T h e ir re c o m m e n d a tio n s in c lu d ed , am ong s k il ls , co m m u n ica tio n , fac t

em p lo y m en t, re a so n in g , and th ink ing . A s in s ig h ts , the c o m m itte e

158in c lu d ed sem a n tic - -lan g u ag e and l i t e r a tu r e . The fo llow ing y e a r the

A sso c ia tio n ad o p ted a s p o licy the follow ing s ta te m e n t.

B u t w hile i t c o n s id e rs the p r e s c r ip t io n of p a r t ic u la r c o u r s e s u n w ise , the A sso c ia tio n can p ro p e r ly c a ll a tte n tio n to the q u a lity of u n d e r -g ra d u a te in s tru c t io n w hich i t b e lie v e s fu n d a ­m e n ta l to th e l a t e r a tta in m e n t of le g a l co m p eten ce . T h a t q u a lity of ed u ca tio n i s c o n c e rn e d w ith the d ev e lo p m en t in p r e ­law s tu d en ts of b a s ic s k il ls and in s ig h ts . I t th u s in v o lv es ed u ca tio n fo r :

A . C o m p reh en s io n an d e x p re s s io n in w o rd s;B . C r i t ic a l u n d e rs ta n d in g of the h um an in s titu tio n s an d

v a lu e s w ith w hich the law d e a ls ; andC. C re a tiv e p o w er in th ink ing .

S h o rtly s ta te d , w hat th e law sch o o ls seek in th e ir e n te r in g s tu d e n ts i s n o t a cc o m p lish m e n t in m e r e m e m o riz a tio n b u t a c c o m p lish m e n t in u n d e rs ta n d in g , the cap ac ity to th ink fo r th e m s e lv e s , and the a b ility to e x p re s s th e i r though ts w ith c la r i ty and fo rc e .

ISTib id . , pp . 280 an d 282.

158iip^eport of the C om m ittee on P r e le g a l Education, " Handbook of the A sso c ia tio n of A m erican Law Schools and P ro ceed in g s of the F orty-n inth M eeting, V ol. 49 (1951), pp. 150-165.

159iii^eport of the C o m m ittee on P r e - L e g a l E d u c a tio n , " H andbook of th e A s so c ia tio n of A m e ric a n L aw S chools and P ro c e e d in g s of the F if t ie th A nnual M eetin g , V ol. 50 (1952), pp . 99-114.

174

W ith th e se s ta te m e n ts the law sch o o ls r e s te d th e ir c a s e . T hey would

re fu s e to te l l the co lleg e s o r s tu d e n ts w hat c o u rse s to take in p re p a ra tio n

fo r law schoo l. T hey w ould u rg e th a t a good college ed u ca tio n be

o b ta in ed , and th ey w ould s t r e s s the v a lu e of language and though t to the

la w y e r .

In th is c h a p te r le g a l ed u ca tio n h a s b een p ro b ed fo r ev idence of

e d u c a to r s ’ v iew s of rh e to r ic a l th e o ry in le g a l p ra c t ic e . I t h a s been

d isc o v e re d th a t th e a ttitu d e of th e se e d u c a to rs h a s b een s tro n g ly in fluenced

by th e ir s tru g g le fo r id en tity and p o w er w ith the p ra c tic in g p ro fe s s io n .

T h a t i s , in th e i r e f fo r t fo r p o s itio n , they em p h asized th e ir s tre n g th in

the teach in g of le g a l p r in c ip le s a lm o s t to the ex clusion o f a l l e ls e .

T h is h a s le d to e x te n s iv e in q u iry in to the p ro p e r ro le of the law school

w ith in the p ro fe s s io n , and am ong o th e r e d u c a to rs . A nd f ro m th is in q u iry

h a s com e a f ra g m e n te d view of th e ju d ic ia l p ro c e s s . By iso la tin g know ­

ledge of le g a l p r in c ip le s , the e d u c a to rs have com e to in d iv id u a lize th e ir

a p p ro a c h to g ra m m a r , s ty le , in v en tio n , a r ra n g e m e n t, and e x p re ss io n .

In the le g a l c u r r ic u la and in the d is c u s s io n s of p re le g a l r e q u ire m e n ts ,

th e re is ev id en ce of a tendency to s e p a ra te sk ills and in s ig h ts involved

in th e le g a l p r o c e s s and a tta c k th em ind iv idually .

T h is s e p a ra tio n of m e n ta l p r o c e s s e s on one hand and com m unicative

p r o c e s s e s on the o th e r leav es a r h e to r ic a l th e o ry s im ila r to th a t com m on

in the M iddle A g es and e a r ly R e n a is sa n c e , a s d isc u s se d by B aldw in . In

175

such a th e o ry - -w ith s ty le and d e liv e ry s e p a ra te d f ro m th ink ing and con ­

t e n t - - i t i s only to be ex p ec ted th a t a c e r ta in co n tem p t should o ccu r

re g a rd in g the em p ty n ess of pu b lic speak ing , ju s t a s i t d id in the c a se of

the so p h is ts . In the law sch o o ls such a con tem pt is m a n ife s t. C once iv ­

ab ly in d i r e c t re a c tio n to the u l t r a - p r a c t ic a l i ty of the law o ffice , in

w hich a s tu d en t w as tau g h t how to w in a c a s e , the law sch o o ls s tud iously

avo ided teach in g anything th a t m ig h t be c o n s tru e d a s s tr a te g y fo r t r i a l s .

P r a c t ic a l c o u rse s tend to include the study of p ro p e r p ro c e d u re , fo rm s ,

r u le s , and o th e r te c h n ic a l i t ie s , and avoid any d isc u s s io n of m eth o d s by

w hich a sp ec ific c a se m ig h t be won. The th e o ry s tro n g ly su g g es ted by

such d a ta i s th a t if the law y er d is c o v e rs the f a c ts , a r r a n g e s th em lo g i­

c a lly , p ro p e r ly know s the p r in c ip le s of law a p p lic a b le , and obeys the

ru le s of p ro c e d u re , he w ill be su c c e ss fu l if h is c a se i s m o re d ese rv in g

of the ap p ro v a l of the law than h is o p p o n en ts '.

Such a s ta te m e n t a s th a t above r a i s e s a q u es tio n . I s such a

th e o ry su p p o rted by th o se m e m b e rs of the p ra c tic in g p ro fe s s io n whose

d a ily o b jec t is the w inning of sp ec ific c a s e s ? T h a t q u es tio n w ill b e p u r ­

sued in the n ex t c h a p te r .

C H A PTE R IV

A LEG A L RH ETORIC O F PRA C TITIO N ERS

A s s ta te d in C h ap te r I , i t i s the p u rp o se of th is study to in v e s tig a te

the q u es tio n s (I) D oes a r h e to r ic a l th e o ry u n d e rlie m o d e rn A m e ric a n

le g a l d ec is io n -m ak in g ; and if so , w hat c h a r a c te r iz e s the th e o ry ; and

fin a lly , (3) if a th e o ry o r th e o r ie s i s found, does the ap p lica tio n a p p e a r

to be v a l id a te d / The ex am in a tio n of A m e ric a n le g a l ed u ca tio n in the l a s t

two c h a p te rs p ro v id e s s tro n g ev id en ce of the e x is te n c e of a rh e to r ic a l

th e o ry . F u r th e r , in th o se c h a p te r s the c h a ra c te r of the th e o ry w as

d is c u s s e d f ro m the p e rsp e c tiv e of the le g a l s c h o la r . In th is c h a p te r , the

c h a r a c te r is t ic s of r h e to r ic a l th e o ry in A m e ric a n le g a l d e c is io n -m a k in g

w ill be in v e s tig a te d f ro m the v iew po in t of the p r a c t i t io n e r .

F i r s t , i t i s u se fu l to u n d e rs ta n d the value in looking a t le g a l

rh e to r ic a s a p ra c tic in g a tto rn e y w ould u n d e rs ta n d i t . The sc h o la r o b ­

s e rv e s the le g a l sy s te m a s i t i s d e s ig n ed to p ro v id e the m e c h a n ism of

ra tio n a l ju d g m en t in the a p p lic a tio n of law . The p r a c t i t io n e r lo o k s upon

the sy s tem a s an advocate - -one d e d ica te d to advancing the cau se of h is

c lie n t by w h a te v e r m e an s the sy s te m w ill a llo w . The a tto rn e y is e j e c t e d

176

177

to p lay two ro le s : he i s bo th an o ff ic e r of the c o u r t and an a d v e r s a ry

b e fo re the c o u r t. W ith th e ad d itio n of the l a t t e r r o le , the p r a c t i t io n e r

ten d s to v iew the r h e to r ic a l th e o ry involved in th e ju d ic ia l sy s te m in a

d iffe re n t se n se than w ould the sc h o la r .

A su g g estio n of the d iffe rin g a ttitu d e s of s c h o la r and p ra c t i t io n e r

w as g iven in the l a s t c h a p te r . B r ie f ly , i t in v o lv ed a co n flic t in p ed ag o ­

g ica l a p p ro a c h . The s c h o la r ten d ed to p u t m o s t e m p h a s is upon the

p r in c ip le s of law u n d e r th e a ssu m p tio n th a t if p r in c ip le s w e re u n d e rs to o d ,

th e ir ju s t a p p lic a tio n w ould e a s ily fo llow . T he p r a c t i t io n e r , on the o th e r

h and , w as in c lin e d to fa v o r the a p p re n tic e sh ip m e th o d of le g a l edu ca tio n ,

w h ere le g a l p r in c ip le s w e re c e r ta in ly h e ld to b e im p o r ta n t, b u t g re a t

a tten tio n w as g iven to the p ro c e s s of ad ju d ica tio n a s w e ll. The p r a c t i ­

t io n e r s , b e in g d a ily in v o lv ed in th is p r o c e s s , su g g e s te d th a t w ithout an

u n d e rs tan d in g of r h e to r ic a l th e o r ie s invo lved in a d ju d ica tio n , the p r in c ip le s

of law w ould la c k the s tre n g th of e ffec tiv e ap p lic a tio n . T he a tto rn e y who

knew p r in c ip le s b u t la c k e d e3q>erience in the c o u r ts s t i l l h ad a good d ea l

to le a r n .

S u ccessfu l a t to rn e y s have w r itte n e x te n s iv e ly on the, su b jec t of the

p ro c e s s and th e o ry of the a p p lica tio n of law . P o s s ib ly th ey have done

th is to f i l l the gap le f t by the v i r tu a l r e fu s a l of th e law sch o o ls to study

the su b je c t in a w ay the p r a c t i t io n e r s deem n e c e s s a r y . P o s s ib ly the

178

su c c e ss fu l a t to rn e y s w rite about th e ir s u c c e s s e s f ro m the com m on

m o tiv e of s e lf -g lo r if ic a tio n . T he re a so n s a r e not im p o rta n t. I t i s the

o b je c t of th is c h a p te r to exam ine the id e a s of p ra c tic in g a tto rn e y s with

the p u rp o se of d isc o v e rin g th e ir a tt i tu d e s to w ard rh e to r ic a l th e o ry in

le g a l p r a c t ic e . In it ia l ly , th re e p ro b le m s p re s e n t th e m se lv e s .

F i r s t a d e c is io n m u s t be m ad e in te r m s of the o rg a n iz a tio n of

the c h a p te r . I t w ould be p o ss ib le to o rg a n ize th is d isc u ss io n a ro u n d the

c la s s ic a l p a t te rn of rh e to r ic - - in v e n tio n , a r ra n g e m e n t, s ty le , d e liv e ry ,

and m e m o ry . H o w ev er, th a t a p p ro ac h h a s b een re je c te d in fav o r of an

o rg an iz a tio n in t e r m s of the rh e to r ic a l ta s k s of the p ra c tic in g a t to rn e y - -

(1) la wye r - c l ie n t in te rv ie w s ; (2) p re p a ra t io n of p lead in g s; (3) obtaining

in fo rm a tio n ; (4) s e le c tio n of the ju ry ; (5) p re se n tin g an opening s ta tem en t;

(6) d ire c t ex am in a tio n of w itn e sse s ; (7) c ro ss -e x a m in a tio n of w itn e sse s ;

(8) p re se n tin g c lo s in g a rg u m en t; and 9) advocacy b e fo re c o u r ts of appeal.

T he d isc u s s io n of the ta sk s w ill be p re c e d e d by a b r ie f ex am in a tio n of

the p r e r e q u is i te s f e l t n e c e s s a ry to the su c c e ss fu l p ra c tic e of law . T his

o rg a n iz a tio n h a s b e e n se le c te d b e c a u se i t a llow s fo r a m o re c le a r ex am i­

n a tio n of r h e to r ic a l th eo ry in law and i t i s the s tru c tu re g e n e ra lly u sed

by the w r i te r s th e m se lv e s ,

A second p ro b le m inv o lv es the d ec is io n a s to the sp ec ific ity

r e q u ire d in p re s e n tin g a m ean ing fu l le g a l r h e to r ic . The w r i te r s tend to

179

show a w ide ran g e f ro m g e n e ra l th e o ry to sp e c ific su g g estio n s fo r

b e h a v io r . H e re the d e c is io n h a s b een to p r e s e n t fa ith fu lly the g e n e ra l

th e o r ie s and a s m any sp e c ific s a s seem n e c e s s a ry to m ake fo r a r e a s o n ­

ab le u n d e rs tan d in g of the w hole r h e to r ic .

F in a lly , a th i rd p ro b le m is th a t of d e te rm in in g how m an y op in ions

should be in c lu d ed to p ro v id e a r e p re s e n ta t iv e r e p o r t of the a t ti tu d e s of

p ra c tic in g a tto rn e y s . F i r s t , the s e le c tio n is c le a r ly lim ite d to th o se who

have w r itte n on the su b je c t. Second, w hile a g re a t m any op in ions have

b e e n rev iew ed , i t h a s b een d isc o v e re d th a t the po in t is soon re a c h e d éifter

w hich the add itio n of m o re does no t s ig n if ic a n tly change the o u tco m e.

T h e re fo re , th o se a u th o rs sp ec ific a lly r e f e r r e d to in th is c h a p te r have

b e en se le c te d on the b a s is of r e p re s e n ta t io n r a th e r than ex h au s tio n of the

supply .

The P r e r e q u is i te s of the S u c c e ss fu l A tto rney

B efo re d isc u s s in g the ta s k s of an a tto rn e y , w r i te r s on the su b jec t

a r e in c lin ed to ta lk ab o u t the in d iv id u al t r a i t s n e c e s s a ry to b eco m e a

su c c e ss fu l la w y e r. T h is i s c o n s is te n t w ith the p a t te rn s e ÿ by C ic e ro - -

one of the f i r s t p ra c tic in g a tto rn e y s to w r i te r h e to r ic a l t r e a t is e s - - w h e n

he d isc u s se d the p r e r e q u is i te s of the id e a l o r a to r a s includ ing n a tu ra l

g ifts a s w e ll a s b ro a d know ledge and p r a c t ic e , A d h eren ce is th u s g iven

^J, S, W atson (T ra n s , ) , C ice ro on O ra to ry and O ra to rs ; w ith H is L e t te r s to Q u in tus an d B ru tu s (London; H en ry G, Bohn, 1855), pp . 171- 220,

180

to w hat som e w ould c a ll a t r a i t - th e o r y of law y er b e h a v io r - - th e a s s u m p ­

tio n of value in studying p e rs o n a l t r a i t s n e c e s s a ry to p e r fo rm c e r ta in

ta s k s .

Speaking of th e se n a tu ra l g ifts o r t r a i t s , m o d e rn w r i te r s have

sa id an in d iv id u a l, to b eco m e a la w y e r , should h ave good s e n se , sound

u n d er stand ing , sub tle g en iu s , be f r e e f ro m fa u lts of in d ec is io n , tim id ity ,

fa ls e sh am e , h a s te , and n o n ch a lan ce . The law y e r should be ab le to

2co n tro l h is te m p e r . He should have a h ea lth y fra m e capab le of en d u rin g

the lo n g -co n tin u ed e x e r tio n of m ind and body w hich com es w ith the

ex c item en t of the c o u r tro o m and pub lic speah ing . F in a lly , a s tro n g

v o ice is re q u ire d . One is n o t ex p ec ted to be a su c c e ss fu l ad v o ca te w ith

a s m a ll, th in v o ice o r one w om an ish o r w e a k . G e n e r a l l y , a la w y e r is

ex p ec ted to have an a t tra c t iv e p e rs o n a li ty , p e rc e p tio n , k ee n n ess of

o b se rv a tio n , c le a rn e s s and q u ick n ess of c o m p re h e n sio n , the fa cu lty of

sound and p ro m p t ju d g m en t, and the p o w er of im ag in a tio n . ^

T h is l i s t of t r a i t s se e m s to d e s c r ib e a su p e r-h u m an in d iv id u a l.

T h e re a re som e th e o r is ts today who fe e l th a t such an a n a ly s is in t e r m s

of t r a i t s is no t p a r t ic u la r ly u se fu l. They w ould p r e f e r an a n a ly s is f ro m

^H enry H ard w ick e , The A r t of W inning C a se s o r M odern A dvocacy , A P r a c t ic a l T re a t is e on P re p a ra t io n fo r T r ia l , an d the Conduct of C a se s in C o u rt (2d ed«3 A lbany , New Y ork: B anks & C o . , 1920), p . i i i ,

3F ra n c is L , W ellm an , D ay in C o u rt o r The Subtle A r ts of G re a t

A dvocates (New Y ork : The M acm illan C om pany, 1914), p . 25,^ Ib id . , p . 26. ® Ibid., pp . 28; 33; 34; 35.

181

the ta s k s w hich m u s t be p e r fo rm e d . P ro b a b ly the w r i te r s on le g a l r h e ­

to r ic w ould a g re e th a t few , if any , su c c e ss fu l a t to rn e y s can be found in

p o s s e s s io n of a l l the t r a i t s l i s te d above, n o r do a l l the ta s k s of the

a tto rn e y r e q u ire th a t such a com b in atio n of t r a i t s b e b ro u g h t to b e a r a t

once.

S till in a g re e m e n t w ith the an c ien t w r i te r C ic e ro , the m o d ern

p r a c t i t io n e r s ex p ec ted the ad v o ca te to have b ro a d know ledge. W hile no t

going so f a r to sp ec ify c o u r s e s to be tak en in sc h o o l, th e se w r i te r s

e m p h as iz ed ag a in and ag a in the n e c e s s ity fo r the a tto rn e y to follow the

p a t te rn of B acon and take a l l know ledge fo r h is d o m ain . He m u st not

only u n d e rs ta n d fu lly the p r in c ip le s of the law , b u t a lso r e a d ex ten s iv e ly

in a l l o th e r f ie ld s . M ost f re q u e n tly m en tio n ed w as a tho ro u g h study of

the c la s s ic s , l i t e r a tu r e in g e n e ra l and the B ib le in p a r t ic u la r , ^ W hat i s

c a lle d the study of hum an n a tu re is g iven h ig h im p o rta n c e w ithin the

r e a lm of b ro a d know ledge. The p ra c t ic e of law d ep en d s upon dealing

w ith o th e r s so m e tim e s th ro u g h the exchange of in fo rm a tio n , so m e tim es

to p e rsu a d e th e m . To do th is e ffec tiv e ly , the la w y e r w as e:jq)6Cted to

study o th e r m en to le a rn w hat m e an s w e re a v a ila b le . The b e s t m e a n s

of le a rn in g ab o u t hum an n a tu re , acco rd in g to one w r i te r , " , , , i s c a r e ­

fu lly to in te r ro g a te your own e x p e r ie n c e , and see how you a r e y o u rse lf

^H enry H ard w ick e , o£, c i t , , p . 25,

182

a ffe c te d , The b ro a d f e a tu re s of b e h a v io r , th is w r i te r con tinued , a re

s im i la r am ong a l l m en re g a rd le s s of e x te rn a l d iffe re n c e s . T h u s , if one

know s h im s e lf , he know s m u ch about o th e rs as w ell. T h is s ta tem en t

th e o r iz e s g re a t value to com e f ro m such a p ro je c tiv e p r o c e s s a s a s su m ­

ing c h a r a c te r is t ic s ex is tin g in o n ese lf to re s id e in m o s t o th e r s . L a te r

s ta te m e n ts by su c c e ss fu l a t to rn e y s w ill em phasize the v a lu e in re a liz in g

in d iv id u a l and group d iffe re n c e s w hich m ay be a lto g e th e r d iffe re n t f ro m

e3q>eriences o r c h a r a c te r is t ic s known to the a tto rn e y . Som e m o d ern

c o m m e n ta to rs on com m unica tion w ould r a is e se r io u s doubt a s to theQ

e ffe c tiv e n e s s of the fo rm e r p ro je c tiv e th e o ry .

Im p o rta n t am ong the p r e r e q u is i te s of the s u c c e ss fu l a tto rn e y w as

the study of the th e o r ie s of rh e to r ic and o ra to ry and the s tudy and c r i t i ­

c is m of g r e a t s p e a k e rs of the p a s t, H en ry H ardw icke, a m e m b e r of the

N ew Y o rk B a r and the au th o r of The A r t of Winning C a s e s o r M odern

A dv o cacy , devoted a g re a t p o rtio n of h is book to the d isc u s s io n of the

a n c ie n t c o u r t p ro c e d u re s in E g y p t, G re e c e , and Rom e a s w e ll a s the

m e th o d s of speak ing u se d in the v a r io u s c o u rts . The v a lu e of speaking

to th e s e ad v o ca te s is e x p re s s e d in th is s ta tem en t.

U n d er som e nam e o r o th e r la w y e rs have ex is ted in a l l c iv ilized s o c ie tie s , and alw ays w ill n e c e s s a r i ly e x is t a s long a s hum an

^I b id , , p . 56,

®See D avid K, B e r io , The P r o c e s s of C om m unication (New Y ork: H o lt, R in e h a r t and W inston, I n c , , I960 ), pp. 122-131,

183

n a tu re re m a in s im p e rfe c t , and i t b ec o m e s n e c e s s a ry to a d m in is te r the law . They have a lw ays cham pioned the c au se of the innocen t and the w eak a g a in s t ty ran n y and in ju s tic e ; th ey have alw ays b een am ong the m o s t en ligh tened , c o u rag eo u s and p a tr io t ic m e m b e rs of so c ie ty .

T he o rd e r of ad v o ca te s w ould n e v e r have b een in flu e n tia l b u t fo r the fa c t th a t i ts m o s t i l lu s tr io u s m e m b e rs have a s s id u o u s ly cu ltiv a ted the a r t of speak ing w ell, ^

W ith r e g a rd to the study of the rh e to r ic a l th e o r ie s of the a n c ie n ts ,

th e re is f re q u e n t m en tion of C ice ro ; le s s f re q u en t m en tio n of Q u in tilian ;

and v e ry r a r e ly is A r is to t le reco m m en d ed a s good read in g fo r the

p o te n tia l ad v o ca te . The w r i te r s of e a r ly tw en tie th cen tu ry le g a l rh e to r ic s

w e re c o n c e rn e d th a t th e studen t ad ju s t h is th e o r ie s to (he c u r r e n t tim e ,

H ard w ick e p u t h is p o in t th is way:

W hile we do not ad v ise a s e rv ile im ita tio n of the m eth o d s p u r ­sued by C ic e ro , f o r , in fa c t , t im e s have changed to such an e x te n t and the m o d es of in s tru c tio n a r e now so ra d ic a lly d if fe re n t f ro m th o se in C ic e ro ’s day , th a t i t w ould be im p o ss ib le , y e t , n o tw ithstand ing a l l th is , m u ch p ro f i t m ay be d e r iv e d f ro m a c a re fu l su rv ey of h is life ,

A long w ith the study of th e o r ie s of o ra to ry and r h e to r ic , the young

law y er w as en co u rag ed to study the l iv e s of g re a t la w y e rs to l e a r n w hat

he could of the so u rce of th e ir g re a tn e s s . H ow ever, one w r i te r cau tioned

the s tu d en t to g u ard a g a in s t the lik e lih o o d th a t in such r e p o r ts on the

life of g r e a t m e n th e re i s a tendency to s t r e s s the sp e c ta c u la r an d leav e

u n m en tioned m uch of th e p lodding, h a rd w o rk w hich i s n e c e s s a ry to the

^H enry H ard w ick e , 0£ , c i t , , pp , 250-251 , ^^Ib id . , p p . 266-267,

184

ad v o ca te b u t w hich do es n o t m ak e fo r good rea d in g , I t w as f e l t by

som e th a t the p r im e m e th o d of teach in g eloquence w as by exam ple ; th a t

th e study of the lead in g c h a r a c te r is t ic s of g re a t o r a to r s and th e i r sp e e ch es

w as a s v a lu ab le to the p o te n tia l sp e a k e r a s the study of g r e a t m a s te r -

12p ie c e s of a r t w as to the s tu d en t a r t i s t , H ardw icke p re s e n te d h is l i s t

of the g re a t a d v o c a te s who d e s e rv e d study , and in c lu d ed b r ie f rh e to r ic a l

c r i t ic is m s fo r each one. The l i s t in c lu d ed P e r ic le s , D em o sth e n es ,

C ic e ro , a l l the A ttic o r a to ry . L o rd E rskL ne, W illiam M , E v a r ts , R ufus

C hoate , D an ie l W e b s te r , S ir J a m e s S c a r le t t , P a t r ic k H e n ry , H en ry C lay

and W illiam P in ck n ey ,

To b eco m e acq u a in ted w ith the c u r re n t p r a c t ic e s and m eth o d s of

s u c c e ss fu l la w y e rs , the s tu d en t w as to ld to go to c o u r t and w atch the

le a d e r s of the p ro fe s s io n in a c tio n . H e re , c le a r ly , i s an ap p ea l fo r the

v a lu e s to be o b ta in ed th ro u g h th e o ld a p p re n tic e sy s te m . B e tte r even

th an w atch ing the good la w y e rs in c o u r t w as the a s s is t in g of h im so a s

to be acq u a in ted w ith the p la n s and s tr a te g y w hich a r e n o t m en tio n ed in

open c o u rt, F r a n c is L , W ellm an , a su c c e s s fu l a tto rn e y h im se lf and a

^^W m, S co tt S te w a rt, S te w a rt on T r ia l S tra te g y , P r a c t ic a l Sug­g e s tio n s to the Young L a w y er on How to O btain and H old C lie n ts , How to P r e p a r e and T ry L a w su its (Chicago: The F lo o d C o ,, 1940), p , 2,

l^ H e n ry H ard w ick e , og. c i t , , p , 324,

l^ lb id , , pp , 254; 256-257; 283; 299-300; 303,

185

fre q u e n t c o n tr ib u to r to the l i t e r a tu r e of le g a l r h e to r ic , m ad e th is p r o ­

p o sa l to com bine the v a lu e s of a p p re n tic e sh ip w ith law schoo l ed ucation ,

I have often though t th a t one of the b e s t m e th o d s of in s tru c tio n fo r s tu d e n ts , p e rh a p s in th e ir l a s t y e a r a t the law schoo l, w ould be to tak e the c la s s in a body to the c o u r t-h o u s e , w here a d v o c a te s of e x p e r ie n c e w e re conducting a c tu a l t r i a l s , and then r e tu rn to the le c tu re ro o m and d is c u s s in d e ta il the t r ia l and th e w hys éind w h e re fo re s fo r e v e ry m ove m ad e b y counsel on e i th e r s id e .

Som e day p e rh a p s th is w ill be done,

In su m m a ry , the p r e r e q u is i te s of the s u c c e s s fu l a tto rn e y , a s

n am ed by the p ra c tic in g a d v o c a te s of th is p e r io d , a r e no t su b stan tia lly

changed f ro m those d is c u s s e d by C ice ro and o th e r c la s s ic a l rh e to r ic ia n s .

I t w as s t i l l ex pected th a t th e s tu d en t m u s t b r in g to h is p re p a ra tio n c e r ta in

n a tu ra l g if ts , w ithout vdiich he could n o t ex p ec t to su c ce e d and w hich

could no t be p ro v id e d b y the le a rn in g s itu a tio n . He w as expected to

a c q u ire b ro a d know ledge beyond a fu ll u n d e rs tan d in g of le g a l p r in c ip le s ,

and h e w as e n co u rag ed to m ak e an e x ten s iv e study of th e th e o ry of r h e to r ic

and o ra to ry and the o u ts tan d in g p ra c t i t io n e r s . F in a lly , i t w as u n iv e rsa lly

f e l t th a t th e fu ll d ev e lo p m en t of an ad vocate could n o t com e un til a f te r

long p r a c t ic e , n o t only a s an a s s i s ta n t b u t a lso in th e com ple te d ire c tio n

of a t r i a l .

L , W ellm an , og. c i t , , p , 101,

S, S te w a rt, og, c i t , , p , 5; F , L , W ellm an , og, c i t , , p , 102,

186

In te rv ie w s w ith a C lien t

T he la w y e r’s f i r s t a cq u a in tan ce w ith a cau se o r p ro b le m , and

h is p r im a r y in fo rm atio n about i t co m es fro m h is c lie n t. T h u s , th is

co m m u n ica tiv e s itu a tio n b e c o m e s a v e ry im p o rta n t p a r t of the rh e to r ic

of law . T h is v a lu e w as re c o g n iz e d by Q u in tilian w hen he sa id , "V ery

im p o rta n t a r e in te rv ie w s b e tw een law y er and l i t ig a n ts , fo r in such in t e r ­

v iew s the o r a to r w ill d isc o v e r the r e a l is s u e s . . . ," 1 6 The la w y e r-c lie n t

in te rv ie w i s th e re fo re an im p o r ta n t rh e to r ic a l ta s k fo r two re a so n s . In

the f i r s t p la c e , the obtaining of in fo rm a tio n w hich w ill u ltim a te ly fo rm

p a r t of a p e rs u a s iv e ap p ea l i s a tra d it io n a l function of the rh e to r ic a l

canon of Inven tion . Second, the v e ry a c t of ob ta in ing the in fo rm a tio n

th ro u g h com m unication b e tw een law y er and c lie n t in v o lv es rh e to r ic a l

th e o ry . The follow ing d is c u s s io n of p r a c t i t io n e r s ’ though ts on the i n te r ­

v iew w ill s tro n g ly suggest th e ir concep tion of the u n d e rly in g rh e to r ic a l

th eo ry .

T he m a jo r d iv is io n s of in te r e s t w ithin the in te rv ie w s itu a tio n a r e

f i r s t , the p ro b le m of getting the c lie n t into the o ffice and in a f ra m e of

m in d to say w hat he h as on h is m in d . N ext, i s the q u e s tio n of how the

law y er i s to o b ta in a ll the in fo rm a tio n he p o ss ib ly can d u rin g the in t e r ­

view ; th i rd , the law yer m u s t be co n ce rn ed w ith the ro le s he and the

^ ^ C h a rle s E d g a r L it t le ( tr a n s . and ed . ) Q u in tilian the School M a s te r The In stitu tio O ra to r ia of M arcu s F a b iu s Q u in tilin au s (2 V o ls . ; N a sh v ille ; F o r G eorge P eab o d y C ollege fo r T e a c h e rs , 1951), p . 322,

I

187

c lie n t p la y d u rin g the in te rv iew ; and f in a lly , th e re i s the q u es tio n of th e '

tim in g and freq u en cy of in te rv ie w s .

A ctually g e ttin g a c lie n t in to h is o ffice i s n o t u s u a lly a p ro b lem

fo r a l& yyer (u n le ss the law y er i s young and unknown), fo r the c lien t is

m oved to seek a s s is ta n c e f ro m an a tto rn e y b e ca u se of a re c o g n iz e d d iff i­

cu lty . P ro fe s s io n a l e th ic s c a re fu lly r e s t r i c t the la w y e r f ro m going out

to peop le and convincing th em they n e e d h is h e lp . H o w ev er, once the

c lie n t a r r iv e s i t m ay n o t be a s easy to s ta r t h im ta lk in g a s i t m ay seem .

The f i r s t co n fro n ta tio n be tw een la w y e r and c lie n t se em to b e c r u c ia l - - i t

i s im p o rta n t th a t the a tto rn e y co m m u n ica te an im p re s s io n of n a tu ra l ,

con fiden t, cap ab ility and n o t be in too b ig a h u r ry to d is c u s s h is fe e . If

a c lie n t h a s b een k ep t w aiting in the o u te r o ffice , the c o u n se lo r should

s tep ou t and e s c o r t h im in to the in n e r office r a th e r th an h av e the c lien t

s en t in to h im . The office i ts e lf should be a r ra n g e d in a m a n n e r condu­

c ive to c o n v e rsa tio n w ithou t being so co m fo rtab le th a t th e c lie n t re la x e s

17to the p o in t th a t h e fo rg e ts he i s in a b u s in e s s c o n fe re n c e .

Some c lie n ts a r e qu ite n e rv o u s and find i t d iff ic u lt to beg in to ta lk

abou t th e i r p ro b le m . In th is ca se i t m ay be n e c e s s a ry fo r the a tto rn e y to

tak e th e in itia tiv e and say w hat m ay be n e c e s s a ry to s e t the p e rso n a t

18e a s e . I t should be sa id p a re n th e tic a lly th a t none of th e w r i te r s exam ined

S. S tew art, og. c i t . , p . 18. ^^I b id . , p . 19.

188

devo ted m uch a tte n tio n to the type of co m m en ts th a t m ig h t s e rv e to s e t

c l ie n ts a t e a s e . One w ent only so f a r a s to su g g est such q u es tio n s a s

th e se :: "Now, w hat is y ou r tro u b le ? Now, how can we he lp you?

F o r o th e r c l ie n ts , i t i s n e c e s s a ry only fo r the law y er to s it b ack and

l is te n .

O nce the in te rv ie w h a s begun , the u ltim a te p u rp o se is to d raw f ro m

the c lie n t e v e ry p o ss ib le b i t of in fo rm a tio n - - th is o b jec tiv e is a g re e d upon

by a l l the w r i te r s . The th e o ry of how th is goal is to b e acco m p lish e d

se e m s a lso to be u n iv e rsa lly adop ted . If th e re a r e to b e in s tru c tio n s a s

to the te llin g of the s to ry o r s tru c tu r in g of the in te rv ie w in any w ay, th is

should be done a t f i r s t . Once the c lie n t h a s begun ta lk in g , he should no t

b e in te r ru p te d fo r such th in g s . H ard w ick e , in w ritin g about The A r t

of W inning C a s e s , r e c a l ls th a t C ic e ro in s is te d upon ta lk in g a t fu ll len g th

w ith e v e ry c lie n t who co n su lted h im , and m ad e su re th a t no o th e r p e rs o n

w as p r e s e n t o r th a t any o th e r d is tra c t io n cou ld a r i s e to h a m p e r the

te llin g of the s to ry . ^

D uring the in te rv ie w , i t i s im p o r ta n t th a t the la w y e r no t le a d the

w itn e ss o r m ak e su g g estio n s a s to the re la t io n of fa c ts to r e c e n t d e c is io n s .

The c lie n t m u s t be p e rm it te d to te l l the s to ry , p r e s e n t h is a rg u m e n ts ,

ex p la in why he ought to win the c a se in h is own w ay. " . . . The la y m a n 's

19lbid.

John C. R eed , Conduct of L a w su its (Boston: L i t t le , B row n , and C om pany, 1912), p . 38.

2 iR e n ry H ard w ick e , o£. c i t . , p . 33.

189

c o m m o n -sen se v iew of h is own c a se i s o ften b e t te r than any le g a l opinion

on the subject» E v en if the c lie n t in s i s t s upon in q u irin g abou t the

le g a l a p p lic a tio n s to h is c a s e , he should b e p u t off fo r th e t im e . E v en a s

the law y er h e a r s the s to ry and b e c o m e s c o n c e rn e d w ith w hat he i s h e a r in g

in t e r m s of the r u le s of ev idence and the v a lu e of som e of the in fo rm a tio n

2 3being g iven , he shou ld r e s i s t any in te r ru p t io n to c o r re c t o r m od ify .

If the c a se is a c r im in a l one, the a tto rn e y m u s t n o t sco ld the

c lie n t o r m ake a p a r t ic u la r po in t to in s i s t upon the tru th . The c lie n t

should b e a sk e d s im p ly w hat i t i s the p o lic e a c c u se h im of, and then he

should be a llow ed to te l l h is b to ry , t ru e o r f a ls e , w ithout in te r ru p tio n o r

in te rp re ta t io n by the co u n se lo r. If the s to ry i s no t t ru e , i t w ill b e d i s ­

co v e re d by check ing w ith o th e r s o u rc e s of in fo rm a tio n ,^ ^

The law y e r m u s t c o n s tan tly give the im p re s s io n of -w illingness to

l is te n . He m u s t n o t h u r ry the s to ry a long although th e re se em to be

u n n e c e s sa ry d ig re s s io n s and u n lim ited , i r r e le v a n t d e ta il . M any a tto rn e y s

d isco u rag e a c lie n t f ro m the s ta r t by h av ing a c lu tte re d d e sk and an a i r

of b e in g v e ry b u sy . The c lie n t ta k e s th is a s a sign th a t th e re i s l im ite d

tim e fo r h im to te l l w hat he h as on h is m in d ,

22f , L , W ellm an, og. c i t , , p , 75 ,

23w , S, Stew art, og. c i t , , pp, 35 and 39,

2 4 lb id ,, p . 35, 2 5 ib id ., p. 29,

190

One w r i te r su m m a riz e d the th e o ry of the in te rv ie w by using the

w o rd s of Q uin tilian ; h is in tro d u c tio n to the quo ta tion w as th is ; "We now

ad d a quo ta tion f ro m Q u in tilian , w hich i s m o re d e ta ile d in i ts d ire c tio n s ,

and w hich re a d s a s if i t w e re w r itte n by an e x p e r ie n c e d counsel of o u r

t im e . . . . The co m m en ts of Q u in tilian com e f ro m h is In s titu te s of

O ra to ry , Book VIII:

L e t u s a llow p len ty of tim e . . . and a p la c e of in te rv ie w f re e f ro m in te r ru p tio n to th o se who sh a ll have o cc a s io n to c o n su lt u s , and le t u s e a rn e s t ly e x h o rt them to s ta te ev e ry p a r t ic u la r o ff-h an d , how ever v e rb o se ly o r h o w ev er f a r they m ay w ish to go back ; fo r i t i s le s s inconven ience to l is te n to w hat i s su p erflu o u s th an to be le f t ig n o ran t of w h at i s e s se n tia l . F re q u e n tly , to o , the o r a to r w ill find both th e e v il and the re m ed y in p a r t ic u la r s w hich to the c lie n t a p p e a re d to have no w eigh t on e ith e r side of the q u es tio n ,

W hile th e re i s no c le a r a g re e m e n t, i t g en e ra lly s e e m s reco m m en d ed th a t

th e above p ro c e s s take p la c e a t the f i r s t in te rv ie w b e tw een law y er and

c lie n t.

The in te rv ie w s w hich follow the f i r s t a r e eq u a lly im p o rta n t, and

a p p a re n tly none h a s sa id why b e t te r than Q u in tilian fo r two of the m o d ern

a u th o rs u se h is w o rd s (although only one p ro p e r ly g iv e s c re d it to Q u in ­

t i l ia n ) .

N o r should he b e co n ten t w ith h e a r in g only once: the c lien t should be r e q u ire d to re p e a t th e sam e th ings ag a in and again;

C, R eed , og. c i t . , p . 39.

27lb id . The s ig n ifican ce of th is quotation i s p r im a r i ly th a t R eed s e le c te d th is p a r t ic u la r p a s sa g e to quote in a m o d e rn book on advocacy . F o r the fu ll te x t of th is co m m en t by Q u in tilian , see L i t t le , og. c i t . , p p . 322-323.

191

no t only b e c a u se som e th in g s m ig h t have e sc a p e d h is m em o ry a t the f i r s t r e c i ta l , e sp e c ia lly if he b e , a s is o ften the c a s e , an i l l i t e r a te p e rso n ; b u t a ls o th a t we m ay see w h eth er he te l ls ex ac tly the sam e s to ry ; fo r m any s ta te w hat i s f a ls e , an d , a s if they w e re no t s ta ting th e i r c a s e , b u t p lead in g i t , a d d re s s th e m se lv e s n o t a s to an a d v o c a te , b u t a s to a judge .

T h u s, the a tto rn e y h as two g e n e ra l o b jec tiv es in h is ta lk s w ith h is c l ie n t-

he w ish es to l e a r n a s m uch a s p o s s ib le of the fa c ts of the com ing c a s e ,

and he w ish e s to le a rn a s m uch a s p o ss ib le of the v e ra c i ty of h is c lien t.

He seek s to ac c o m p lish th e se ends f i r s t by e s ta b lish in g an im ag e of

re c e p tiv ity and le ttin g the c lie n t ta lk fo r a s long a s he is w illing .

W hen the c lie n t h as f in a lly sa id a l l th a t co m es to h is m ind , the

co u n se lo r i s to tak e the in it ia t iv e and , by m e a n s of the tech n iq u es of the

c o u r tro o m , d raw even m o re in fo rm a tio n f ro m the c lie n t. T h u s , the

a tto rn e y p ro c e e d s to t ry the c a s e in h is o ffice; he w ill engage in d ire c t

ex am in a tio n and c ro s s -e x a m in a tio n of h is c lie n t, he w ill a s su m e the

ro le of the opponent and ch a llen g e p ro o f a t e v e ry p o ss ib le p o in t, he w ill

s e a rc h and p ro b e h is c lie n t u n til he is s a tis f ie d th a t he h a s le a rn e d a ll

he p o ss ib ly can . O ften , he w ill d isc o v e r th a t the c lie n t h a s no r e a l

c a se and p u t a stop to the p ro c e e d in g s a t once . O th er t im e s i t m ay be

d isc o v e re d th a t th e p a r ty who is to be sued h a s no m oney to pay dam ages

J , C. R eed , c i t . , p . 39; H ard w ick e , o£. c i t . , p . 9. H a rd ­w icke u s e s e s s e n tia lly the sam e w o rd s b u t g iv es no c r e d i t to Q u in tilian , F o r the L a tin te x t f ro m Q u in tilian , see L i t t le , op. c i t . , pp . 322-323.

^^H en ry H ard w ick e , og, c i t . , p . 3.

192

even if the c o u r t d ec id es a g a in s t h im . A fu r th e r b e n e f it of c r o s s -

e x am in a tio n of the c lie n t in the a t to rn e y ’s office i s th e avo idance of

s u rp r is e a t the t r i a l . If the law y er a s k s the q u e s tio n s of the c lien t w hich

m ay b e ex p ec ted f ro m the opponent, the c lie n t’s a n s w e rs w ill be h e a rd

fo r the f i r s t tim e in a s itu a tio n allow ing fo r c o r re c t io n and p lanning.

The u n ex p ec ted an sw er in the c o u rtro o m can be fa ta l to a c a se .

C le a r ly , the p ro b le m s of m o s t c lie n ts can be d e a lt w ith sh o rt of

going to co u rt; the ta s k of the a tto rn e y i s to d isc o v e r w hat the law can

te l l ab o u t the p a r t ic u la r p ro b le m , app ly h is own ju d g m e n t, and com e

fo r th w ith an opinion a s to the b e s t way of ap p ro ach in g the p ro b le m . The

co m m u n ica tio n ta sk co m es in b rin g in g c lie n t and op in ion to g e th e r - - th a t

i s , the c lie n t m u s t bo th u n d e rs ta n d w hat the a tto rn e y sa y s and be w illing

to fo llow h is ad v ice . A com m on p ro b le m to la w y e rs i s getting c lie n ts to

tak e th e i r ad v ice . So m any peop le w an t to m ake d e c is io n s fo r th e m se lv e s ,

they fin d i t d iff icu lt, p a r t ic u la r ly in the ca se of young la w y e rs , to tak e

the ad v ice of a n o th e r , T h is p r e s e n ts an unusual p ro b le m in p e rsu a s io n

to the c o u n se lo r: h is f i r s t re sp o n s ib ili ty i s to se rv e th e b e s t in te re s ts

of h is c lie n t, b u t i t i s no t a lw ays c le a r to w hat ex ten t th a t re sp o n s ib ili ty

d em an d s th a t the a tto rn e y in s is t th a t h is opinion i s in the c l ie n t 's b e s t

S. S tew art, o£. c i t . , p . 34.

^^I b id . , p . 38. ^ ^ Ib id ., pp. 36-37 .

193

i n t e r e s t s . The q u es tio n m a y be th is ; to w hat l im its and by w hat m ean s

shou ld th e a tto rn e y seek to convince h is c lie n t to fo llow h is adv ice? T he

l i t e r a tu r e of the p r a c t i t io n e r s does no t re a l ly a d d re s s i t s e l f to th is

q u es tio n ; i t s e e m s to a s su m e only th a t the la w y e r 's ad v ice should a lw ay s

be ta k e n .

In a r e c e n t study of the p o ten tia l co m m u n ica tio n p ro b le m s w hich

m ay a r i s e b e tw een a tto rn e y and c lien t som e in s ig h t w as g a ined into th is

s itu a tio n , In a r e p re s e n ta t iv e sam ple of la w y e rs in th e Chicago a r e a ,

a q u e s tio n n a ire a sk ed the a t to rn e y s to in d ic a te th e p o s s ib le so u rc e s of

co m m u n ica tio n b reak d o w n s. In the o r a l co m m u n ica tio n f ro m law y er to

c l ie n t , th e a tto rn e y s re p o r te d a b e lie f th a t a " la c k of t im e to go over

id e a s th o ro u g h ly , " and "em o tio n a l p ro b le m s of the c l ie n t w hich p re v e n t

c a re fu l l is te n in g and c le a r th in k in g , " w e re the ch ie f p ro b le m a r e a s ,

T he m o s t s e r io u s co m m u n ica tio n p ro b le m s in w r itte n com m unication

w e re "m isco n c e p tio n s of the c lie n t abou t the p o in ts y o u 'r e m ak ing" and

' 'u n fa m ilia r i ty of c lie n t w ith y o u r te rm in o lo g y ,

In a m o re sp ec ific a n a ly s is of the b a r r i e r s , th e follow ing l i s t w as

d ev e lo p ed . F i r s t , an o v e r - a l l d is tu rb e d em o tio n a l s ta te of the c lien t

a c ts a s a b a r r i e r to co m m u n ica tio n b e tw een h is la w y e r and h im se lf;

W ayne N, T hom pson and S, Jo h n In s a la ta , "C om m unication f ro m A tto rn e y to C lien t, " T he Jo u rn a l of C o m m u n ica tio n , XIV (M arch , 1964), pp , 22 -3 3 ,

3 3 lb id ,, p , 24, ^ % i d , , pp , 24 -2 5 ,

194

seco n d , em o tio n a l b lo c k s on a p a r t ic u la r p o in t m ay a r i s e . A m ong such

b lo ck s w as l i s te d se lf -d e c e p tio n , fee lin g s of g u ilt, and d e s ir e fo r s ta tu s .

T h ird , p re c o n c e iv e d n o tio n s b locked co m m unica tion . An exam ple of

th is w ould be a p r e -e s ta b l is h e d id e a on the n a tu re of the p ro b le m

in v o lv ed o r an e x a g g e ra te d idea of the m e r i t of a c a s e . F o u r th , d iv e r ­

g en t v iew s a s to the ro le of the a tto rn e y w ere d isc o v e re d .

W h ereas the a t to rn e y v isu a liz e d h im se lf a s a qua s i- ju d ic ia l a d v ic e -g iv e r who i s se rv in g so c ie ty by function ing a s an e x te n s io n of th e c o u r t s y s te m , the c l ie n t v iew s h im a s an ad v o ca te o r a p a r t i s a n w hose job is to ’f ig u re a w ay ou t' w ith ­o u t r e g a rd to w hat i s r ig h t and re a so n a b le . The r e s u l t of th is d iv e rg en c y i s th a t th e f ra m e of re fe re n c e w hich the c lie n t a p p lie s to w hat he h e a r s is n o t the sam e a s th a t w hich the a tto rn e y a p p lie s to w h at he is saying .

A f u r th e r p ro b le m in the a r e a of u n d e rs tan d in g of ro le s is a ten d en cy fo r

a c lie n t to o v e rs im p lify the w ork of an a tto rn e y . It i s com m on to v iew

the law a s p r e c is e and p re d ic ta b le . T h is le a v e s the c lie n t u n p re p a re d

to l i s te n to th e co m p lex d isc u s s io n of p ro b a b ili t ie s and ap p ro a ch es w hich

the a t to rn e y p r e s e n ts . A fifth b a r r i e r found w as an in ad eq u ate r e in fo r c e ­

m e n t and in su ff ic ie n t t im e fo r g ra sp in g th o u g h ts . In lig h t of th e

c o m p le x itie s of the law , th e p rev a len ce of em otioned p ro b le m s w hich

ten d to in te r f e r e w ith decod ing , and the eco n o m ics of the A m e ric a n le g a l

s y s te m , th is i s a p a r t ic u la r ly s e v e re b a r r i e r . B ec au se an a tto rn e y m u s t

3 5 ib id ., p . 27.

195

e i th e r c h a rg e a v e ry h igh fee o r keep m any c lie n ts u n d e r h is c a r e ,

th e re is r a r e ly tim e fo r an adequate co n fe ren ce b e tw een la w y e r and

c lie n t. The s ix th b a r r i e r d isc o v e re d w as in a c c u ra te and inadequate

r e f e r e n t ia l m e a n in g s . Q u ite s im p ly , c lie n ts often do n o t u n d e rs ta n d

le g a l te rm in o lo g y .^ ^ T h e se w e re the ch ie f co m m u n ica tio n p ro b le m s

found in the C hicago study.

The P re p a ra t io n of P lea d in g s

If the p ro b le m of a c l ie n t i s to r e q u ire ap p ea l to the ju d ic ia l s y s ­

te m , i t i s n e c e s s a ry to p r e s e n t to the p ro p e r a u th o r it ie s a fo rm a l

s ta te m e n t of the p ro b le m and th e sp ec ific q u es tio n s th a t d iv ide the

p a r t ie s to the su it. "P le ad in g i s th a t b ra n c h of le g a l s c ie n c e w hich d ea ls

w ith the p r in c ip le s go v ern in g the fo rm a l w r itte n s ta te m e n ts m ade to the

c o u r t by the p a r t ie s to a su it of th e ir re sp e c tiv e c la im s and d e fen ses a s

to the su it. B efo re any d isp u te can be dec ided i t i s n e c e s s a ry to

d e te rm in e the issu es* T h is can be done in v a r io u s w ay s such a s the

d i r e c t q u estio n in g of the p a r t ie s c o n ce rn ed by the judge o r by the exchange

of w r itte n s ta te m e n ts in advance of a d ir e c t h e a r in g of th e p a r t ie s .

"U n d er o u r A n g lo -A m eric an sy s te m of le g a l p ro c e d u re we a r e co m m itted

by t ra d it io n an d , . . , p ro b a b ly , by g e n e ra l in c lin a tio n , ex c ep t in

^^Ib id . The e n tire l i s t of co m m u n ica tio n b a r r i e r s a p p e a rs on pp . 25 -2 8 .

C h a r le s E . C la rk , H andbook of the Law of Code P le ad in g (St. P a u l , M inneso ta : W est P u b lish in g C o ., 1947, 2d ed . ), p . 1.

196

ex cep tio n a l c a s e s , to the la t te r m eth o d . In th e e a r ly p e r io d of le g a l

d ev e lo p m en t, p lead in g w as done o ra l ly , b u t fo r s e v e ra l h u n d red y e a r s

the p ra c t ic e of exchanging w r i t te n , te c h n ic a l le g a l docum ents h a s b een

39accep ted .

I t i s in the p lead in g s th a t the th e o r ie s of the p r a c t i t io n e r s ten d to

b eg in th e ir c la s h w ith the le g a l p h ilo so p h e rs , fo r i t is h e re th a t the dual

ro le of o ff ic e r of the c o u r t and ad v o ca te fo r a c l ie n t’s cau se f i r s t com e

in to co n flic t. The function of th e p lea d in g s a s a p a r t of the ju d ic ia l

p ro c e s s is to c la r ify the c o n tro v e rs y so a s to m ak e the u ltim a te d e c is io n

r e s t upon the a c tu a l p o in ts in c o n flic t and no t upon ir r e le v a n c ie s . The

th e o ry i s , th e r e fo re , th a t the d e c is io n w ill b e m o re ra tio n a l to the ex ten t

th a t the p r e c is e is s u e s of the c a s e a r e s e t out b e fo re the s ta r t of th e t r i a l .

H o w ev er, the th e o ry of the p ra c t i t io n e r i s not a lw ays in a c c o rd

w ith th is o b je c t. In the f i r s t p la c e , the a tto rn e y is co n ce rn ed w ith s e t ­

ting out the is s u e s in such a w ay a s to enhance the lik e lih o o d of the judge

o r ju ry dec id in g w ith h is s id e . T h e re fo re , he reco m m en d s th a t th e

is s u e s should n o t s ta te h is c a se in fu ll fo r f e a r th a t in the a c tu a l t r i a l he

m ay fa ll s h o r t of th a t goal and b e judged m o re h a rs h ly a s a r e s u l t . I t

w ould be b e t t e r , he re a s o n s , fo r the c o u r t to b e p le a sa n tly s u rp r is e d th a t

he i s p ro v in g m o re than he sa id h e w ould than to be d isap p o in ted in h is

fa i lu re to com e up to ex p ecta tio n s.^®

3 8 lb id ,, p . 2, 39ibid .

A lex an d e r H , R obb ins, A T re a t is e on A m e ric a n A dvocacy (St, L o u is : C e n tr a l L aw Jo u rn a l C om pany , 1913), p , 44,

197

Second, th e a tto rn e y is in co m p e titio n w ith an o th e r a tto rn e y and

each is d e s iro u s of gain ing an u p p e r h an d a t th e v e ry s ta r t of l i t ig a tio n .

T h u s , th e la w y e r i s cau tio n ed no t to d is c u s s h is p ro p o sed p ro o fs w ith

h is opponent and n o t to p o in t out any e r r o r s o r w ea k n esse s a t the tim e of

p lead in g s fo r f e a r the opponent w ill h av e tim e to c o r r e c t th em b e fo re the

tim e of t r i a l . ^

T h u s , a c u r io u s d icho tom y is d is c o v e re d in th is p hase of the

ju d ic ia l p ro c e s s ; one w hich w ill o c c u r th ro u g h o u t. T he ju d ic ia l sy s te m

is s e t up to e n fo rc e a p r o c e s s of r a t io n a l decision-m éik ing and in c lu d e s ,

a s one e s s e n t ia l , the s tep of c le a r ly s ta tin g the p o in ts of d iffe re n c e w hich

b r in g the p a r t ie s to the c o u r t. H o w ev er, the ju d ic ia l sy s tem a lso em p lo y s

the a d v e r s a ry m eth o d w hich ten d s to le a d the ad v o ca te s to d e s ir e th a t the

e x a c t n a tu re of the co n flic t re m a in co n fu sed o r only p a r t ly re v e a le d u n til

the l a s t p o ss ib le m in u te . The le g a l p r o c e s s s e e m s to b e fo s te r in g two

opposing rh e to r ic a l th e o r ie s .

G a th e rin g and A rra n g in g E v id en c e B e fo re T r ia l

P ra c t ic in g t r i a l la w y e rs u n an im o u sly u rg e ex ten siv e p re p a ra t io n

b e fo re the s t a r t of c o u r t w ork . In the f re q u e n t c r i t ic is m s of the w ay in

w hich li t ig a tio n i s h a n d led in c o u r ts , la c k of ad eq u a te p re p a ra tio n i s c ite d

S. S te w a rt, o£. c i t . , p . 84.

198

a s one of the m o s t ou tstand ing e r r o r s . 42 It i s on th is b a s is , a s w ell a s

o th e r s , th a t th e re have b een f re q u e n t c a lls fo r an a r e a of sp e c ia liz a tio n

am ong a tto rn e y s who engage ex c lu s iv e ly in t r i a l w ork , 43 The th e o re tic a l

a s su m p tio n of litig a tio n u n d er the a d v e r s a ry sy s tem is th a t two equally

sk illed ad v o ca te s who a re equally in fo rm ed of the c a se a t hand a r e m o re

lik e ly to expose the n e c e s s a ry in g re d ie n ts of a ra tio n a l d e c is io n than any

o th e r p ro c e d u re . C le a r ly , if one of the ad v o ca tes f a i ls to p r e p a re h im ­

se lf a s ex te n s iv e ly a s p o s s ib le , the ju d ic ia l p ro c e s s te n d s to b e f ru s tr a te d .

If, fo r ex am p le , one a d v e rs a ry u n d e re s tim a te s the s tre n g th of h is oppo­

n en t, and p r e p a re s acco rd in g ly , the re su ltin g d ec is io n is lik e ly to be

a ffec ted , 44

The d e s ir e of the le g a l p ro c e s s to avoid the b a s in g of i t s d e c is io n s

on the p e r s o n a l i t ie s of the ad v o ca tes i s g e n e ra lly accep ted ,45 The fo l­

low ing s ta te m e n t by a p ra c tic in g a tto rn e y c le a r ly a r t ic u la te s the th eo ry

th a t in a c o n te s t betw een the n o n - ra tio n a l d e s ir e on the p a r t of the judge

42]_,eonard B , S lo sso n , "T he N eed fo r T ra in in g in A dvocacy , " J o u rn a l of the A m e ric an J u d ic a tu re S ocie ty , V ol. 16 (June, 1932), p , 83.

4 3 lb id ,, p, 84,

4 4 w a lte r P a r k e r S tacy , "T he L a w y er, H is C lien t and h is A d v e r- s a ry , " The N o rth C aro lin a L aw R ev iew , V ol. 4 (F e b ru a ry , 1926), p , 22,

45 ib id ,, p. 21,

199

o r ju r o r to r e je c t the p e r s o n of the ad vocate and the ra tio n a l d e s ir e to

a c c e p t the a d v o c a te 's a rg u m e n ts , the l a t t e r w ill be se le c te d .

L a w su its a r e n o t won in the c o u r t ro o m . P re p a ra t io n , in d u s try , a r e w hat count in the long ru n of the p ro fe s s io n .W itn esses m u s t b e in te r ro g a te d , p le a d in g s an a ly zed , c o n s id ­e ra tio n g iven to the o rd e r of p re s e n ta tio n of te s tim o n y , the law , then the f a c ts , m u s t be b r ie fe d . N othing m u s t be le f t undone. F o r i t m ay happen th a t th e re a r e s ittin g on the ju ry m en o r w om en to whom your p e rso n a li ty d o es not ap p ea l. If you know y o u r c a se you m ay o v e rco m e th a t te m p o ra ry h an d icap .B ut if you d o n 't know y o u r c a s e , you a r e lo s t .

An ad d itio n a l p o in t i s r a is e d w ith r e g a rd to p re p a ra t io n of c a s e s

b e fo re t r i a l . I t i s , only a sm a ll p e r cen t of the to ta l c a s e s e n te re d into

litig a tio n e v e r a c tu a lly com e to t r i a l . T he p o in t i s th e re fo re b ro u g h t up

th a t if the p ro b a b ili t ie s of the case n e v e r b e in g t r ie d a re v e ry h ig h , why

should the law y er spend tim e and m oney in e x ten s iv e p re p a ra tio n ? The

q u estio n is a n sw e re d by ex p e rie n c e d t r i a l la w y e rs to the e ffe c t th a t

n eg o tia tio n is a k ey fu n c tio n of the a tto rn e y . He is ex p ec ted to do h is

b e s t to p re v e n t a c a s e f ro m going a l l the w ay to the c o u rt fo r th is invo lves

g r e a t expense in tim e and m oney . T h e re fo re , a t ev e ry s tep the a tto rn e y

m u s t be p r e p a re d to e n te r into n e g o tia tio n s w ith h is o p p o n en t--b u t only

w ith the goal of se c u rin g the m o s t fa v o ra b le p o ss ib le se ttle m e n t fo r h is

c lie n t. The a tto rn e y m u s t be p re p a re d to m ak e a judgm ent a s to w hether

a g iven sum o ffe red in s e ttle m e n t, fo r ex a m p le , is b e t te r th an w hat he is

$ ^ A lb e rt H . M i l l e r , "A L a w y e r 's T re a tm e n t of h is C lien t, " A m e r­ic a n B a r A sso c ia tio n J o u rn a l , V ol. 13 (Ja n u a ry , 1927), p . 32.

200

lik e ly to o b ta in a s a ju d g m en t f ro m the c o u r t , tak ing in to acco u n t the

va lue of e a r ly se ttle m e n t. The a rg u m e n t of the p ra c t i t io n e r s is th a t

u n le s s a la w y e r i s fu lly p r e p a re d and re a d y to go into t r i a l he is not

re a d y to e n te r in to n eg o tia tio n s n o r can he m ak e a ju d g m en t a s to w hat

w ill happen should he end up in c o u rt,

N eg o tia tio n ty p ica lly o c c u rs d u rin g the tim e of p re p a ra t io n fo r

t r i a l , and i t c o n s titu te s the m eth o d fo r decid ing m o s t of the c a s e s th a t

a r i s e . C e r ta in ly m o re li tig a tio n is d ec id ed by the p ro c e s s of n eg o tia tio n

than by the ju d ic ia l sy s te m . W ith th is b e in g the c a s e , one w ould ex p ec t

th a t p r a c t i t io n e r s would have developed an ex ten s iv e th e o ry of le g a l neg o ­

tia tio n along w ith w e ll-d ev e lo p ed s y s te m s fo r c a r ry in g out the th e o ry .

H ow ever, th is does no t seem to be the c a s e . W ith the ex cep tio n of the

p rec e d in g d is c u s s io n of the va lue of p re p a ra t io n to n eg o tia tio n a s w e ll a s

som e m en tio n th a t la w y e rs known to be w eak t r i a l a tto rn e y s ten d to be

le s s e ffec tiv e in n eg o tia tio n b e ca u se th ey la c k the pow er to th re a te n con­

tin u ed c o u r t a c tio n , th e re i s a lm o s t no d isc u s s io n by p ra c tic in g a tto rn e y s

of the p ro c e s s of n eg o tia tio n .

To p ro c e e d m o re sp ec ific a lly in to the s te p s of p re p a ra t io n su g ­

g es te d by the p r a c t i t io n e r s , the p r im a r y m ea n s of in fo rm a tio n -g a th e rin g

is by in te rv ie w . The in te rv ie w w ith the c lie n t h a s a lre a d y b een d isc u s s e d ,

^^W , S, S tew art, o£, c i t , , pp . 120-122,

201

In te rv ie w s w ith ad d itio n a l p o te n tia l w itn e s s e s p o se ad d itio n a l p ro b le m s .

The p ro b le m i s sp e c if ic a lly one of seek in g the g re a te s t p o s s ib le am o u n t

of re lia b le in fo rm a tio n th ro u g h the re c o lle c tio n of a p e rso n w ith f i r s t ­

hand in v o lv em en t in the c a se b u t who m ay h av e no d e s ir e to c o o p e ra te in

the litig a tio n . T h a t i s , the p o ten tia l w itn e ss could be p laced a t som e

p o in t along a continuum ran g in g fro m a c tiv e d e s ire to help the c l ie n t w in

the ca se th rough le th a rg y to an open h o s ti l i ty to w ard the cau se of one

p a r t ic ip a n t. Not only do es a fee lin g to w a rd the li t ig a n ts in flu en ce the

b eh av io r of w itn e s s e s b u t a lso a g e n e ra l d is in c lin a tio n to tak e p a r t in

le g a l m a t te r s ten d s to d isc o u ra g e c o o p e ra tio n w ith a t r i a l a tto rn ey .^ ®

U nder th e se c i r c u m s ta n c e s , the p ra c t i t io n e r s have d ev elo p ed upon

the b a s ic th eo ry of in te rv ie w e x p re s s e d e a r l i e r in th is sec tio n . T h a t

th e o ry w a s , i t w ill be r e c a l le d , th a t th e in d iv id u a l w ill tend to p r e s e n t

the m o s ^ a c c u ra te p o s s ib le acco u n t of w hat he know s if he i s p e rm it te d

to te l l the s to ry in h is own w o rd s in a s itu a tio n a s u n s tru c tu re d b y the

in te rv ie w e r a s p o s s ib le , b ecau se the in te rv ie w e r , n o t be ing a w a re of

w hat in fo rm a tio n is a v a ila b le , m ay a c tu a lly s u p p re s s som e of i t in h is

a tte m p t to o rg an ize the re c ita t io n . H o w ev er, in th is ca se the la w y e r i s

no t dea ling w ith a c l ie n t who is h ig h ly m o tiv a te d to help the c a se ach iev e

s u c c e s s . T h u s, th e f i r s t s tep w hich m u s t b e tak en b y the a t to rn e y w ith

r e g a rd to the w itn e ss in te rv ie w i s to d is c o v e r w hat fa c ts a r e av a ila b le

^®Ibid., p . 94.

202

re le v a n t to the a ttitu d e of the p o te n tia l w itn e ss to w ard the c a s e . I t i s

th u s a ssu m e d th a t know ledge of h o s til i ty on the p a r t of the w itn e ss w ill

p e r m it the law y er to a d ju s t h is ap p ro ach so a s to obtain m ax im um

4 9in fo rm a tio n . I t is su g g ested by one p ra c t i t io n e r th a t an ap p ea l to the

c au se of ju s t ic e m ay o v erco m e an u n w illin g n ess to d isc u ss a c a se w ith

the law y er.

A n e c e s s a ry p a r t of the rh e to r ic a l th e o ry of the ju d ic ia l p ro c e s s

i s invo lved w ith the f re e d o m of opposing a tto rn e y s to d isco v e r the

m a te r ia ls w hich th e ir opponent in ten d s to u se a g a in s t them . T h a t is to

say , a s long a s d ebate i s c o n s id e re d a c o n te s t o r gam e in the sam e sen se

w a r i s , the e le m en t of s u rp r is e i s a va lu ab le w eapon. The m ytho logy of

law in c lu d es re g u la r ly the s itu a tio n in w hich a lo s t cause i s saved a t the

l a s t m inu te by the un ex p ec ted a p p ea ran ce of a s u rp r is e w itn ess w hose

te s tim o n y th ro w s the o pposition off b a lan ce an d sw eeps th rough th e

im ag in a tio n of the ju ry . The p ro b le m th is p o s e s to the ju d ic ia l sy s te m

is th a t u n d er such c irc u m s ta n c e s i t seem s lik e ly th a t the d ec is io n i s m o re

n e a r ly the p ro d u c t of n o n -ra tio n a l s tim u li. T h a t i s , in the f i r s t p la c e

th e re is an a s su m e d s tre n g th p sy ch o lo g ica lly in the influence such a s u r ­

p r i s e h as upon a judge o r ju ry . In the second p la c e , if i t i s a tru e

s u rp r is e the opposition w ill n o t have h ad tim e to study the te s tim o n y and

^ % id ., pp. 94-95. SOjbid.

203

p re p a re to co u n te ra c t i ts im p a c t. T hus the re su ltin g d e c is io n m ay give

m o re w eig h t to the te s tim o n y than w ould have b een the c a se had th e re

b een no s u rp r is e .

If th e th eo ry of the v a lu e of s u rp r is e is a c c e p te d , then i t is to be

ex p ec ted th a t opposing a tto rn e y s w ould seek to d isc o v e r a s m uch as

p o ss ib le of the p ro o fs to be u se d by the o th e r side w hile a t the sam e tim e

guard ing c a re fu lly th e ir own p ro o fs . T h u s, one of the p re su m e d v a lu es

of the a d v e r s a ry sy stem of ju d ic ia l d ec is io n -m ak in g is th a t the opponents

a re m o re lik e ly to d isc o v e r a l l re le v a n t in fo rm a tio n and avo id s u rp r is e s

m o re e ffec tiv e ly than w ould b e done in an o th e r sy s te m . To give e n co u r­

ag em en t to th is o b jec t, the law in m o s t of the U nited S ta te s p ro v id e s fo r

the ex te n s iv e in te rv iew in g by one a tto rn e y of the c lie n t and p o ten tia l

w itn e s se s of the o th e r a tto rn e y . T h is i s fe l t by p ra c tic in g t r i a l law y ers

to be a v a lu ab le add ition to th e p re p a ra t io n fo r t r i a l ,

The n ex t step in p re p a ra t io n fo r t r i a l in v o lv es w hat i s ca lled the

o rg a n iz a tio n of a th e o ry of th e c a s e . O nce th e law y er h a s g a th e red

to g e th e r the in fo rm atio n a v a ila b le (and i t should no t be a s su m e d th a t

b e c a u se th is study h a s d is c u s s e d only in te rv iew in g of w itn e s s e s th e re is

no o th e r so u rc e of in fo rm a tio n ), i t is n e c e s s a ry to d e te rm in e how i t w ill

b e p u t to g e th e r to fo rm an a rg u m en ta tiv e c a s e . The d e c is io n b e fo re the

a tto rn e y i s the one of se le c tin g th e c o u rse of a c t io n - - th e em p h as is and

L , W ellm an, c i t , , p , 92,

204

n a tu re of p ro o f—m o s t lik e ly to w in the c a s e . A s th is s tep is no t d isc u s se d

fu lly by p r a c t i t io n e r s in te r m s of sp ec ific th e o ry b u t r a th e r s e e m s to r e s t

upon the in tu itio n of the law y e r in the c a s e , som e i l lu s t r a t io n is n e c e s s a ry

to ex p la in w hat i s m e a n t. In any p a r t ic u la r c a se th e re a re lik e ly to be

s e v e ra l p o te n tia l i s s u e s a ro u n d w hich the c o n tro v e rs y m ig h t m o v e . In a

m u rd e r c a s e , fo r ex a m p le , th e key q u es tio n m ig h t be th e c irc u m s ta n c e s

a ro u n d w hich the d ea th o c c u r re d th u s in q u irin g w h e th e r the d ea th w as a

p re m e d ita te d k illin g o r n o t. On th e o th e r hand , the q u es tio n of the san ity

of the a lle g e d k i l le r m ig h t be the c e n tra l is s u e . I t i s u ltim a te ly tiie

d e c is io n of the a tto rn e y s in v o lv ed w h e th e r the f i r s t , the second , b o th , o r

an o th e r is s u e b e c o m e s th e tu rn in g p o in t of the c a s e . T h e ir d e c is io n m u s t

b e m ad e on the b a s is of w hich cho ice w ill p ro d u ce the s tro n g e s t p ro b a ­

b ility of v ic to ry . T h u s , the d e fen se a tto rn e y m ig h t choose to c e n te r h is

e n tire a tte n tio n on the q u es tio n of san ity ig n o rin g a lto g e th e r the q u es tio n

of p re m e d ita tio n , know ing th a t if he lo s e s tlie d e c is io n of the ju ry h is

c lie n t w ill d ie bu t if he w ins th e c lie n t goes f r e e . On the o th e r hand , the

q u es tio n of p re m e d ita tio n m ig h t be e a s ie r to w in th e ju ry w ith , b u t r e g a r d ­

le s s of th e d e c is io n , the c l ie n t m u s t go to j a i l an d he m ig h t be ex ecu ted .

The d e c is io n , to b e s u re , i s b a s e d to som e e x ten t upon the la w y e r 's

ju d g m en t of w hat the law i s p re s u m e d to say upon the g iven s e t of f a c ts ,

S. S tew art, o£ . c i t . , pp . 101-102; 107. See a lso J . C.R eed , og. c i t . , pp . 53; 149; 157-159.

205

b u t the law is am biguous and could conceivab ly su p p o rt e ith e r p o s itio n .

T h u s , the la w y e r f in a lly m u s t dec ide w hat p ro o f w ill p roduce w h at e ffec t

upon the judge o r ju ry . T h is is c le a r ly a r h e to r ic a l d ec is ion .

The w ritin g s of th e p ra c tic in g a tto rn e y s r e g u la r ly in d ica te th a t

such a d e c is io n m u s t be m a d e . They fu r th e r in d ic a te th a t it i s qu ite

p o s s ib le th a t the c a se m ay b e won o r lo s t on the s tre n g th of th is ty p e ofC O

d e c is io n by the la w y e r . B ut the p r a c t i t io n e r s have l i t t le to say r e g a r d ­

ing the th e o ry o r m eth o d to be ap p lied . They re c o g n iz e th a t i t i s n e c e s s a ry

to be fu lly in fo rm e d and to study the p o te n tia l i s s u e s w ith c a r e , an d th en

to s e le c t the " s tro n g e s t" p o s itio n , Why one p o s itio n is s tro n g e r than

a n o th e r , o r how i t i s to be d e te rm in e d i s no t w e ll developed.

One ad d itio n a l a s p e c t of p re p a ra t io n fo r t r i a l should be d is c u s s e d

b e ca u se of i t s im p lic a tio n s to le g a l rh e to r ic : b e fo re pu tting w itn e s s e s

b e fo re the c o u r t an a tto rn e y is ex h o rted to co ach th em re g a rd in g th e i r

fo rth co m in g p e r fo rm a n c e , A foundation fo r th is can be la id by no ting the

e m p h a s is g iven in the c o u r t to the c re d ib ili ty of a w itn e ss in d e te rm in in g

f a c ts , and the im p o rta n c e p la ce d on the d e m ea n o r of the w itn ess in d e te r ­

m in ing c re d ib ili ty , John H, W igm ore , a r e s p e c te d sc h o la r of ju d ic ia l

p ro o f and ev id en ce , n o ted th re e fo re n s ic m e th o d s of d e te rm in in g the

53 W, S, S tew art, og. c i t , , p , 107,

C , R eed , op, c i t , , p , 162,

206

c re d ib ili ty of a w itn e s s , the f i r s t m en tioned w as the b eh av io r of the w it­

n e s s w hile speak ing to th e c o u r t .

The d a ta th a t m ay p o ss ib ly a ffe c t p ro b a tiv e value of t e s t i ­m o n ia l e v id en ce , v iz . the g e n e ric hum an t r a i t s , and the te s tim o n ia l e lem e n ts of p e rc e p tio n , re c o lle c tio n , and n a r ra t io n , have b e e n su rv ey ed in C h a p te rs XLX-XXIV. W hether any one o r m o re of th e m i s so p r e s e n t , in a g iven w itn e s s , i s the p ro ­b lem fo r the ad v o ca te and the judge . How d oes he get a t them , in t ra d it io n a l fo re n s ic p ra c t ic e ?

(a) Some of the m o re p e rc e iv a b le by au to p tic p re fe re n c e . . . i . e . f ro m the d e m e a n o r of the w itn e ss d u ring te s t im o n y -- a m e n ta l d e ra n g e m e n t, f ro m h is in c o h e re n t u t te ra n c e s , —a d e a fn e ss , f ro m h is f a i lu r e to h e a r q u e s tio n s , - - a n h o n e s t o r d ish o n e s t d isp o s itio n , f ro m h is ev a s iv e o r s tra ig h tfo rw a rd m ode of e a g re s s io n , - - a b ia s , f ro m h is in to n a tio n s o r h is fa c ia l m o v e m en ts .

T h e re fo re , i t can b e re a so n a b ly a ssu m e d th a t the b eh av io r of a w itn e ss

w hile te s tify in g i s a t l e a s t f e l t to be a s ig n ifican t f a c to r in judging c r e d i ­

b ili ty w h e th e r i t ac tu a lly e n te r s into the a c tu a l p ro c e s s o r no t, and

r e g a rd le s s of i t s a c tu a l e ffic a cy a s a c r i te r io n of c re d ib ili ty . F ollow ing

fro m th is p r e m is e , the p ra c t ic in g a tto rn e y th e o r iz e s th a t to the ex ten t he

can a s s u r e th a t h is w itn e s s e s behave in a m a n n e r designed to se c u re

b e lie f , to th a t ex ten t th ey w ill be b e liev ed by judge and ju ry . T h e re fo re ,

the law y e r ta k e s tim e in h is o f f ic e - -b e fo re the t r i a l - - to ta lk w ith a

w itn e ss abou t the com ing p e r fo rm a n c e . The w itn e ss m u st be e^diorted

to te l l the t ru th in a l l m a t t e r s g re a t and s m a ll , fo r th e re se em s to b e a

s tro n g tendency fo r w itn e s s e s to becom e co n sc io u s of the c o u r t s itu a tio n

^^John H en ry W ig m o re , The S cience of Ju d ic ia l P ro o f (3d ed , ;B oston: L it t le , B row n, an d Com pany, 1937), p . 721.

207

and b eco m e d e fe n s iv e . F o r ex a m p le , th e re i s a t r i c k th a t i s p lay ed by

one a tto rn e y ask in g a w itn ess if he h a s ta lk ed w ith the opposing a tto rn e y

about h is te s t im o n y - - th e w itn e ss know s he h a s so ta lk ed b u t is le a d to

b e liev e he should n o t have ta lk ed w ith the law y er and p ro c e e d s to lie and

say he h a s ta lk e d w ith no one. T he opposing a tto rn e y p o u n ces on th is

fa lseh o o d to su g g e s t th a t one lie m ay be a sign of o th e rs in the te s tim o n y

and th a t i t a l l should be d isb e lie v e d . T h is r e s u l t could have been p r e -

56ven ted by p ro p e r coaching of the w itn e s s . The d r e s s , the h e s ita n c y

o r a s s u ra n c e of a n sw e r , the f a c ia l e x p re s s io n , the p ro p e r em o tio n al

a ttitu d e to w ard a c ro s s -e x a m in in g a tto rn e y , a s w ell a s o th e r i te m s a re

su g g ested a s su itab le o b jec ts fo r p r io r coach ing fo r w itn e s s e s . Such

coaching i s of in te r e s t b ecau se of the rh e to r ic a l th e o ry i t im p lie s . F o r

the a tto rn e y to p r a c t ic e h is w itn e s s e s so th a t th e i r v e rb a l m e ssa g e and

n o n -v e rb a l m e s s a g e s of v o ca l tone and v isu a l cu es w ill b e c o n s is te n t is a

reco g n itio n of a b e lie f th a t the au d ien ce w ill ob ta in m ean ing f ro m a ll

th re e . T he le g a l sy s te m re c o g n iz e s th is and c a lls fo r th e ju ry o r judge

to d raw c o n c lu s io n s a s to the c re d ib ili ty of a w itn e ss on the b a s is of a ll

th re e co d es . H o w ever, the coach ing of w itn e s se s a lso su g g es ts a p o ss ib le

n o n -ra tio n a l in g re d ie n t. T h a t i s , to the ex ten t the law y er p r e p a re s h is

w itn e ss to co m m u n ica te cu es of c re d ib i li ty to the ju ry w hen none a re

S, S tew art, o£, c i t , , pp, 172-173,

208

w a rra n te d ; o r w hen he co ach es a w itn e ss to avo id cu es of n o n -c re d ib ili ty

w hich w ould o rd in a r i ly o c cu r in the w itn e s s , to th a t ex ten t he i s d isto rtin g

the a ssu m e d ra t io n a l co n tex t of the c o u r t a s m uch a s if he w e re to

in s tru c t the w itn e ss to te s t ify fa ls e ly . The ju d ic ia l sy s te m e la b o ra te ly

c o n tro ls the v e rb a l co n ten t of te s tim o n y , b u t p la c e s no b a r r i e r s to the

a d m iss io n of m e s s a g e s th ro u g h to n a l and v isu a l co d es .

W hile th e se fu n c tio n s e m p h a s iz e the im p o rta n c e of s tru c tu r in g a

le g a l c a s e , ev id en ce su g g e s ts th a t i t i s n o t a com m on p ra c t ic e in the

U nited S ta te s fo r t r i a l a t to rn e y s to p r e p a re fo rm a l t r i a l b r ie f s . T h is is

c o n tra s te d w ith the cu sto m in the U nited K ingdom in w hich a s o lic ito r

g e n e ra lly p r e p a r e s a co m p le te b r ie f so th a t the b a r r i s t e r who ev en tu a lly

m u s t a rg u e the c a se in c o u r t can b e in fo rm e d a s w ell a s p o ss ib le of the

m a te r ia ls of the p ro c e e d in g s . T h o se p ra c tic in g la w y e rs who w rite on

the su b jec t, h o w e v e r, tend to en co u rag e the p r a c t ic e of b r ie f w ritin g .

The p u rp o se of th e b r ie f is to o rg a n iz e a l l the m a te r ia ls to b e u se d in

p re se n tin g the c a s e to the c o u r t in the m o s t e ffec tiv e m an n e r p o s s ib le .

The a tto rn e y a im s a t se ttin g out the fa c ts c le a r ly and re la tin g th em to the

is s u e s e s ta b lis h e d in the p le a d in g s . I t i s in the b r ie f th a t the o rd e r of

p re se n tin g w itn e s s e s i s e s ta b lish e d . To i l lu s t r a te , a b r ie f fo r a c iv il

H en ry H ard w ick e , 0£ . c i t . , p . 12.

C . R ee d , o£. c i t . , p . 215.

209

a c tio n should in c lu d e (acco rd in g to a b o o k a u th o r iz e d by the A m e ric a n

L aw In s titu te and the A m e ric a n B a r A sso c ia tio n ) f i r s t a s ta te m e n t of the

a c tio n , o r such p ro c e d u ra l d a ta a s the type of su it and th e tim e of i ts

o r ig in a tio n . N ex t, a s ta te m e n t of f a c ts shou ld be in c lu d ed . P re s u m a b ly ,

th is sec tio n should co n ta in in fo rm a tio n --w h a t one side b e lie v e s to be

f a c t - - a n d should n o t b e a rg u m e n ta tiv e . H o w ev er, " , , , th e o r d e r in

w hich the fa c ts a r e to b e p re s e n te d i s a m a t te r of s tra te g y to be d ec id ed

d iffe re n tly in d iffe re n t c a s e s , T he f a c ts can be a r ra n g e d ch ro n o lo g i­

c a lly , o r in the o r d e r in w hich the c a s e i s to be p re s e n te d , o r in som e

o th e r w ay. The s ta te m e n t of fa c ts shou ld in c lu d e a c le a r in d ic a tio n of

w hat i s d e s ir e d f ro m th e c o u rt, F o llow ing the s ta te m e n t of f a c ts

should be a c le a r in d ica tio n of the i s s u e s a r is in g u n d er th e li t ig a tio n and

th en a sec tio n w ith the a tto rn e y ’s a rg u m e n t of the i s s u e s . In m an y c a s e s

i t i s n e c e s s a ry to in c lu d e a sec tio n s e ttin g fo r th the f a c ts r e la tin g to the

am oun t of dam age in v o lv e d -- lo s s e s due to im p a irm e n t of fu tu re ea rn in g

p o w er, a s c r ib e d v a lu e of pa in and s u ffe r in g , d is f ig u re m e n t, h u m ilia tio n ,

and lo s s of l i f e 's p le a s u re s , The f in a l s tep in the t r i a l b r ie f i s a

co n c lu sio n w hich p o in ts ou t the p re s e n c e of a l l the n e c e s s a ry and im p o r t­

a n t e le m e n ts of the c a se and the ju s t if ic a t io n fo r an ad eq u a te ly s u b s ta n tia l

a w a rd fo r the c lie n t,

5 9 w ilfo rd R . L o r r y , .A C iv il A c tio n - - The T r ia l , A m e r ic a n Law In s ti tu te and the A m e r ic a n B a r A s so c ia tio n (P h ilad e lp h ia : A . L aw In s titu te , O c to b e r , 1959), pp . 16-17,

6 0 ib id ,, p , 17. 6 l ib id . 62 ibid ,

210

T h e re a r e a s su m e d s tra te g ic c o n s id e ra tio n s involved in the

se le c tio n of the o rd e r of p re se n tin g w itn e s s e s . T hat i s , i t i s a s su m e d

th a t f a c to rs o th e r th an the con ten t of the te s tim o n y m ay o p e ra te on the

decision-m éik ing p r o c e s s , W ilford R , L o r ry , w ritin g in the a u th o r iz e d

v e r s io n , su g g es ts som e of the co n s id e ra tio n s .

In d e te rm in in g the o rd e r of appeareince of w itn e sse s , th e re a r e o th e r c o n s id e ra tio n s in add ition to the n a tu re of th e ir te s tim o n y . F o r in s ta n c e , the a p p ea ra n c e of the w itn ess w ill have a b e a r in g on the e ffec t of h is te s tim o n y ; h is ab ility to p r e s e n t fa c ts c le a r ly and in a p e rsu a s iv e fa sh io n m u s t be co n s id e red ; h is g e n e ra l in te llig en ce éind a b ility to handle the sk illfu l c ro s s -e x a m in a tio n of opposing co u n se l m u st be w eighed so th a t h is e f fe c tiv e n e s s m ay n o t be d e s tro y e d and y o u r c a se w eakened by a d ra m a tic co llap se u n d er c ro s s -e x a m in a tio n .L ead f ro m s tre n g th so th a t the p ro p e r im p re s s io n w ill be m ad e w hile y o u r fa c t f in d e rs a r e s t i l l im p re s s io n a b le . J u r o r s a r e a v e ra g e hum an b e e in g s . They a r e su b jec t to fa tigue in the c o u rse of a long t r i a l , and a m onotonous p re se n ta tio n ten d s to du ll th e ir s e n s e s .

W ith r e g a rd to fa c tu a l a d m iss io n s e l ic i te d fro m your opponent, obv iously , i t w ould no t be d e s ira b le to r e a d into the re c o rd a d m iss io n s a t such an e a r ly stage of the c a se th a t the ju ry w ould n o t co m p reh en d the meeining of o r the e ffe c t of such a d m iss io n s and th e ir p u rp o r t w ould be e n tire ly lo s t ex cep t fo r the fa c t th a t you h ad th em on the r e c o rd . You m ig h t d eem i t m o re e ffec tiv e to o ffe r r e c o rd a d m iss io n s m ade by y o u r opponent follow ing the te s tim o n y of one of yo u r w eak er of le s s co lo rfu l w itn e sse s . I t m ig h t even be d e te rm in e d by you th a t a c e r ta in few a d m iss io n s m ig h t be w ithheld , if no t needed in the d i r e c t p re se n ta tio n of yo u r c a s e , fo r u se in c ro s s -e x a m in a tio n of d efen d an t's w itn e s s e s o r even fo r re b u tta l upon the conclusion of the d e fen d an t's c a s e . N ev er save fo r rebutté il an e s s e n tia l p ie c e of ev idence n eed ed to e s ta b lis h a n e c e s s a ry e lem en t of y ou r c a s e in ch ief. You m a y n e v e r re a c h the p o in t w here you can f la sh th is s u rp r is e on o p p o s­ing co u n se l. C o m p le te ly e s ta b lis h y ou r c a se f i r s t .

^ ^ Ib id ., pp . 2 4 -2 5 .

211

W ith the co m p le tio n of the t r i a l b r ie f , an a tto rn e y h a s a t h and a

r e c o rd of the a v a ilab le m a te r ia ls he w ill u se in the c a s e , a r ra n g e d in

the o rd e r he h as d e te rm in e d b e s t fo r the p a r t ic u la r c irc u m s ta n c e s . The

n ex t s tep in the ju d ic ia l p r o c e s s h a s to do w ith the ju ry .

T he S e lec tio n of the J u ry

T r ia l by ju ry i s a r ig h t, no t a re sp o n s ib il i ty , and th e re fo re the

d e c is io n w h eth er o r no t to tak e a c a se to a ju ry r a th e r than only a judge

is a fa c to r in the d e c is io n -m a k in g p ro c e s s o v e r w hich each a tto rn e y h a s

som e c o n tro l. T h is d e c is io n , a s w ell a s the th e o ry of u ltim a te s e le c tio n

of th e ju ry ,, i s a s ig n if ic a n t rh e to r ic a l function in th a t i t in v o lv es a sp e a k e r

re la tin g h im se lf and h is su b je c t to the au d ien ce . I t fu r th e r in v o lv es an

a lm o s t unique rh e to r ic a l p r o c e s s of a sp e a k e r g iven the pow er to p a r t i ­

c ip a te in the s tru c tu r in g of h is a u d ien ce . An a tto rn e y h a s only l im ite d

c o n tro l in the sen se th a t one m ay d ecid e to tak e the c a se to a judge alone

b u t the opponent s t i l l m ay s e le c t a ju r y t r i a l . The d ec is io n is c le a r ly

b a s e d upon the q u e s tio n of w hich of the two a l te rn a t iv e s o ffe rs the

g r e a te r p ro b a b ility of a fa v o ra b le d e c is io n fo r the law y er m ak ing the

d ec is io n . T h is a s s u m e s a p o s s ib il i ty (in t ru th , a p ro b ab ility ) th a t the

sam e c a se when p re s e n te d to a judge s ittin g alone w ill p ro d u ce a d iffe re n t

d e c is io n th an when p re s e n te d to judge and ju ry . If th is i s the a ssu m p tio n

of la w y e rs , then w hat f a c to r s e n te r in to th e ir d ec is io n to p r e s e n t a c a se

to one a r b i t r a to r r a th e r than th e o th e r?

212

If i t i s know n w hat judge w ill h e a r the c a se , th en i t i s p o ss ib le to

study the p a s t ju d ic ia l b e h av io r of the judge and p re d ic t how he is like ly

to re sp o n d to the fo rth co m in g c a s e . O ver the y e a rs a judge co m es to

be rep u ted to fa v o r p la in tiffs o r d e fen d an ts , and th is can b e checked by

an ex am in atio n of the c o u r t r e c o rd s . M ost freq u en tly i t i s the defendant

who a s su m e s a fa v o ra b le a ttitu d e f ro m the judge . I t i s w idely h e ld th a t

in the c o u rse of y e a r s a judge w ill b eco m e cyn ica l and fre q u e n tly no t

v e ry to le ra n t of the fo ib le s , p e c u l ia r i t ie s , and w e ak n e sse s of hum an

b e in g s . The judge i s a s su m e d to be in flu en ced by h is en v iro n m e n t and

th e re fo re g e n e ra lly in c lin e d to w ard the va lue of p ro p e r ty and a b a s ic

c o n se rv a tism .

A judge is lik e ly to be p r e f e r r e d by a le s s e3q>erienced law y er

b e cau se the p ro c e e d in g s a r e m uch l e s s co m p lica ted , and i t is th e re fo re

le s s lik e ly th a t th e d e c is io n w ill be in flu en ced by in e x p e r ie n c e . I t i s a lso

a ssu m e d th a t a ju d g e i s m o re lik e ly to b a se the d ec is io n upon the fa c ts

and law of the c a s e r a th e r than a n o n -lo g ic a l re sp o n se to th e p e rso n a l

e ffec tiv en ess of in e ffe c tiv e n e ss of the co u n se l.

C o n v e rse ly , i t i s the p la in tiff who u su a lly ch o o ses a ju ry t r i a l .

The re a so n fo r th is r e s t s upon an a lm o s t u n iv e rsa l a s su m p tio n th a t a ju ry

^^H ubert H ick am and T hom as M . Scanlon, P r e p a ra t io n fo r T r ia l , Jo in t C om m ittee on C ontinuing L e g a l E d u ca tio n of the A m e ric a n L aw I n s t i ­tu te and the A m e ric a n B a r A sso c ia tio n (P h iladelph ia : A . L aw I n s t . , 1963),p . 288.

R . L o r r y , o£. c i t . , p . 30. ^% ick am and S can lon , op .c i t . , p .289 .

213

is m o re lik e ly th an a judge to d ecide on e m o tio n a l, sy m p a th e tic , o r

o th e rw ise i r r e le v a n t g ro u n d s. F o r e x a m p le , one w r i te r ex p la in s th a t

the p la in tiff c le a r ly h a s the m o re d iff icu lt ta s k in the t r i a l , fo r he h as

f i r s t the b u rd e n of p ro o f. T h a t i s , he m u s t convince a s tr a n g e r (or

s tra n g e rs ) th a t th ey " , . . should e n r ic h h im by tak in g m oney fro m

a n o th e r , and he m u s t do th is by a p re p o n d e ra n c e of the ev id en ce . "

T h is dem and fo r m oney is u su a lly b a s e d upon c irc u m s ta n c e s w hich o c c u r re d

m on ths o r even y e a r s ago , and the m ed iu m b y w hich the p la in tif f ’s a tto rn e y

m u s t co m m u n ica te the d ra m a and m e r i t of h is s ide of the c irc u m s ta n c e s

is u n tra in e d and fre q u e n tly f r ig h te n e d w itn e s s e s . A d d itio n a lly , the

w itn e s se s m u s t r e p o r t th e ir f i r s t - h a n d know ledge w ith in a co n tex t of

e la b o ra te r u le s w ith w hich th ey a r e u n fa m il ia r , and p ro b ab ly w h ile in a

s ta te of r e s e n tm e n t o v e r the in te r ru p tio n in th e ir o rd in a ry w ay of life ,

In the fa c e of th is d iff ic u lt ta s k , the p la in tif f ’s a tto rn e y i s expected

to seek any f a c to r w hich w ill ten d to w o rk in h is fa v o r and h e lp o v erco m e

the a s su m e d d isad v an tag e w ith w hich he b e g in s . C le a r ly , i t i s a s su m e d ,

w ith a judge a l l the dem an d s of b u rd e n of p ro o f and ru le s of ev id en ce and

p ro c e d u re w ill be e n fo rc e d upon the p la in tiff ; the ju ry , h o w ev er, is

exp ec ted to ta k e the hum an e le m e n t in to c o n s id e ra tio n . T h u s, th e one

lev e lin g fa c to r fo r the p la in tiff i s the a s su m e d sy m p a th e tic c o n s id e ra tio n

of tw elve le g a lly u n tra in e d c it iz e n s .

67W. R , L o r r y , og. c i t . , p . 30. ^^I b id . , p . 30. ^^Ib id .

214

I t should be n o te d , how ever, th a t the sy m p ath e tic re sp o n se of the

ju ry is no t r e s t r i c te d to the p la in tiff . W hile i t i s u su a lly he who h a s

su ffe red in som e w ay (o r c la im s to have su ffe red ), th e re a r e s itu a tio n s

in w hich the defendan t h a s a lso su ffe red and is thus an o b jec t of the ju r y 's

sym pathy . F o r e x a m p le , if a c a r ow ned by M r, A b u t d riv e n by h is son

w e re to c ra s h in to a n o th e r c a r , the son b e in g k ille d in the acc id e n t

although the p ro p e r ty dam age re su ltin g w as c le a r ly h is fa u lt, i t i s

p o ss ib le th a t a lthough a su it a r is in g f ro m th is a c t w ould p lace the fa th e r

(M r, A) a s the d e fen d an t, h is g rie f o v e r the death of h is son m ig h t b rin g

ju ry sym pathy to p lay in h is fav o r. In th is in s ta n c e , i t i s p o ss ib le th a t

70co u n se l fo r the d e fen d an t m igh t r e q u e s t a ju ry t r i a l . The assu m p tio n

in th is case would b e th a t the defense w ould have bo th the p re su m p tio n

fav o rin g the side n o t h av ing the b u rd en of p ro o f a s w ell a s the b e n e fit of

the so -c a lle d hum an e le m e n t fro m the ju ry .

A ssum ing th a t i t h a s been d ec id ed to p r e s e n t a ca se to a ju ry , i t

i s n ex t reco m m en d ed th a t the a tto rn e y s p e r fo rm an a n a ly s is of th e ir

p o te n tia l a u d ie n c e -- th e ju ry . P re su m a b ly , the a tto rn e y h a s s tu d ied h is

own ca se and is f a m il ia r w ith i t s s tre n g th s and w ea k n e sse s in fa c ts ,

a rg u m e n ts , law , and th e c h a ra c te r of h is c lie n t. H is opponent h a s done

lik ew ise . Now, the ch a llen g e to bo th i s to find ju r o r s who a t le a s t a re

n o t p re ju d ic e d a g a in s t th e i r case and a t b e s t in c lin ed to a c c e p t i t a p r io r i .

^°Ibid,, p, 29,

215

The th e o ry of the ju d ic ia l p ro c e s s is th a t th ro u g h the e ffo rts of the

a d v e r s a ry s the ju r o r s in c lin ed to p re ju d ic e to w ard e ith e r side w ill thus

be re je c te d and the p an e l f in a lly se le c te d the m o s t ob jective p o ss ib le

g roup f ro m th o se av a ila b le . T h is is a im ed a t fu r th e r in su rin g th a t the

d e c is io n w ill b e a ra t io n a l one b ecau se th o se tending to decide n o n - ra t io n -

71a lly have b een excluded .

Such a th e o ry r e s t s upon a t le a s t two a s su m p tio n s . F i r s t , i t is

a s su m e d th a t i t is p o ss ib le to d isc o v e r a m ean in g fu l continuum of te n ­

d e n c ie s to w ard ra tio n a l and n o n -ra tio n a l d e c is io n -m ak in g w ith r e g a rd

to the sp ec ific c a se a t hand so a s to p e rm it the ran k in g of j u r o r s a c c o rd ­

ing ly and the re je c tio n of th o se a t the one e x tre m e . Second, i t i s a s su m e d

th a t the p a r tic ip a tin g la w y e rs a r e ab le to d isc o v e r the in fo rm a tio n

n e c e s s a ry to p e r fo rm the f i r s t ta sk . E ven m o re , the ju d ic ia l p ro c e s s

a s s u m e s th a t bo th p a r t ic ip a tin g s id e s in a c a se do an equally e ffec tiv e

job in ju ry se le c tio n , fo r s u c c e ss by one side and re la tiv e fa i lu re by the

o th e r would c le a r ly s e t up a condition fo s te r in g a n o n -ra tio n a l d ec is io n

in b eh a lf of the side doing the e ffec tiv e w o rk .

In the in fo rm a tio n g a th e rin g step of ju ry se le c tio n , the a tto rn e y

is ex p ec ted to g a th e r in fo rm a tio n p r io r to the t r i a l . I t i s c o n s id e re d a

m is ta k e to b e liev e th a t the a sk in g of s tan d a rd q u es tio n s to p o te n tia l ju r o r s

S. S te v ^ r t , og. c i t . , p . 142,

216

on the day of the t r i a l w ill r e v e a l enough in fo rm a tio n to a c cep t o r r e je c t

the p an e l m e m b e rs . On the c o n tra ry , a s the n am es of the p o te n tia l

ju r o r s a r e av a ilab le in advance of the t r i a l i t i s now the p ra c t ic e to

p e r fo rm a fu ll in v e s tig a tio n upon th em . In som e c i t ie s , in v es tig a tiv e

s e rv ic e s e x is t w hich s e c u re a com plete r e p o r t on each m e m b e r of the

g roup of p ro sp e c tiv e j u r o r s co v erin g such i te m s a s d o m estic s itu a tio n ,

p r e s e n t and p re v io u s em p loym en t, p o lit ic a l a ffilia tio n , econom ic s ta tu s ,

club m e m b e rsh ip s , p re v io u s e3qperience w ith l itig a tio n o r ju r ie s , and so

fo rth . T h ese ag e n c ie s o p e ra te fo r a fee and in m any c a s e s g a th e r a l l

in fo rm a tio n w ithou t m ak in g ac tu a l p e rso n a l c o n ta c t w ith the in d iv id u a ls .

T h is in fo rm a tio n , along w ith anything e lse known about the ju r o r s , i s

freq u e n tly p lac e d in a m a s te r f ile w hich then i s u se d to p re p a re the

q u e s tio n s to b e a sk e d of the p an e l during the v o ir d ire o r se le c tio n p ro c e s s ? ^

To s ta te m o re sp ec ific a lly w hat in fo rm a tio n is sought th rough

th e se in v e s tig a tio n s ,

i t i s conven ien t fo r a law y er who is to t r y a ju ry c a se to know a s m uch a s can b e re a d ily and p ro p e r ly a s c e r ta in e d about the s o c ia l, f in a n c ia l and p o lit ic a l back g ro u n d of p e rso n s who m ay be ca lle d in to th e ju ry box fo r ex am in a tio n . T h e ir f r a te rn a l so c ie ty and re lig io u s a ff ilia tio n s , w h e th e r they a r e em p lo y e rs o r em p lo y ees , w h e th e r they a re m e m b e rs of unions and , if so , w hat u n io n s , w h e th e r th ey have even h ad tro u b le w ith the law ,

R , L o r r y , o£, c it. , p . 35. ^^I b id . , p . 38.

^'^Hickam and S can lon , 0£ . c i t . , p . 35.

217

o r b e e n engaged in li t ig a tio n an d , if so , w hat l itig a tio n , w h e th e r th ey a r e m a r r ie d o r s in g le , and w hat th e i r sp ouses do fo r a liv in g , -wiiether th ey a r e in te ll ig e n t o r s tu p id , educated o r i l l i t e r a t e , o p in io n a ted , o r e a s ily p e rsu a d e d , fo rc e fu l o r w eak in c h a r a c te r , and a dozen o th e r m a t te r s , m ay in fluence an a t to rn e y 's ju d g m en t in challeng ing ta le s m e n fo r cau se o r o th e rw ise .

T he w r i te r s do no t d is c u s s th e in v e s tig a tiv e m e th o d u se d in ob ta in ing

su ch in fo rm a tio n , b u t f ro m th e e m p h a s is upon avo id ing co n tac t i t m a y be

a s su m e d th a t l i t t le o r no u se i s c u r re n tly be ing m ad e of p sy ch o lo g ica l

te s t in g m e th o d s .

The f in a l p ro c e s s of s e le c tio n in the c o u r tro o m v a r ie s am ong

ju r is d ic t io n s w ith in the U nited S ta te s . In the f i r s t p la c e , th e re i s no

d is a g re e m e n t th a t the o p p o rtu n ity to see the p o te n tia l ju r o r s w ill p ro v id e

m u ch ad d itio n a l in fo rm a tio n c o n ce rn in g th e ir v a lu e to a p a r t ic u la r a t t o r ­

n ey . T he w ise t r i a l law y e r w ill w atch the g roup c a re fu lly s ta r tin g a t th e

f i r s t m o m en t p o s s ib le , and h e w ill d raw c e r ta in in fe re n c e s ab o u t th e i r

lik e ly re sp o n s e to a rg u m e n t f ro m h is o b se rv a tio n . In any c a s e , th e

f in a l ta s k of p ick in g tw elve j u r o r s (few er in som e s itu a tio n s) in v o lv es

v isu a l o b se rv a tio n and q u estio n in g e i th e r by the a tto rn e y s th e m se lv e s o r

b y the judge u s in g a s e r ie s of q u e s tio n s su b m itted by the a t to rn e y s . I t

i s a s su m e d th a t the p re v io u s ly g a th e re d in fo rm a tio n coupled w itli w hat

^ E u s tac e C ullinan , P r e p a ra t io n fo r T r ia l of C iv il A c tio n s , A m e ric a n L aw In s titu te and C o m m ittee on C ontinuing L eg a l E d u ca tio n an d the A m e ric a n B a r A sso c ia tio n (P h ilad e lp h ia : 1951), p . 50.

^^L loyd P a u l S try k e r , The A r t of A dvocacy (New Y ork: Sim on an d S c h u s te r , 1954), p . 54.

218

is re v e a le d d u rin g the v o ir d i r e ex am in a tio n w ill su ffice to expose those

p e rs o n s m o s t lik e ly to d ec id e n o n -ra tio n a lly in one d ire c tio n o r an o th er.

T he co n sen su s of p ra c tic in g a tto rn e y s fa v o rs allow ing the t r i a l

la w y e rs th e m se lv e s to a sk q u es tio n s of the p ro sp e c tiv e j u r o r s . The

a tto rn e y s , no t the judge, hav e s tu d ied th e ir c a s e s and know w hat em o ­

tio n a l, m o ra l and econom ic f o rc e s a re involved in the f a c ts . They a re

f a m il ia r w ith tlie w itn e sse s they ex p ec t to ca ll and th e re fo re should be

in a b e t te r p o s itio n to a n tic ip a te th e i r im p ac t upon v a r io u s ty p e s of

77p eo p le . One su c c e ss fu l t r i a l la w y e r s ta te s , fu r th e r , th a t h is chance

to q u es tio n the ju r o r s is an " , , , in v alu ab le opportun ity to m ake p e rso n a l

c o n tac t w ith the ju ro r and gauge h is p e rso n a lity and m in d , " F a c e - to -fa c e

sp eech , he co n tin u es , p e rm its one to " , . , ge t beh ind the f a c e 's m a sk .

S o m etim es a h a rd face lig h ts up in a w a rm sm ile , o r a k ind ly face

b e co m e s fo rb id d in g a s the l ip s c u rv e du rin g an a n sw e r, In such

p e rs o n a l q u es tio n in g , he c o n tin u es , i t i s p o ss ib le to se n se a bond of

sym pathy o r r e s is ta n c e , "A ll the p sy ch o lo g ica l a r t s c an be em ployed to

ev a lu a te the j u r o r 's le an in g s , "^9 in c o n tra s t , he co n c lu d es , l i t t le can be

le a rn e d by o b se rv in g a g roup of peop le an sw er the q u e s tio n s p u t by the

judge,

R , L o r ry , op, c i t , , p , 36,

^^L o u is N iz e r , My L ife in C o u rt (New Y ork: P y ra m id B ooks, 1963), p , 40,

7 9 ib id , , pp , 40-41 ,

219

When a j u r o r who is c le a r ly u n accep tab le a s defined by law is

found, he is e a s ily ex c lu d ed by s ta tin g the cau se of h is u n a c ce p tab ility .

Such le g itim a te c a u s e s v a ry am ong the ju r is d ic t io n s , b u t u su a lly a re

c le a r - c u t in d ic a tio n s of p re ju d ic e d a ttitu d e to w ard the sp ec ific c a se o r

such c a s e s in g e n e ra l . L e ss e a sy to define a r e the c a u s e s fo r w hich

an a tto rn e y i s p e rm it te d to exclude a ju r o r p e re m p to r ily . In th is c a s e ,

i t i s s im p ly a s su m e d th a t i t i s re a so n a b le fo r a law y e r to o b je c t to a

p o te n tia l ju r o r b e c a u s e he h a s an in tu itiv e fee lin g w hich c a l ls fo r

re je c tio n . Some such fee lin g s can be id en tified . F o r e x a m p le , if a

ju r o r h a s b een o b jec te d to fo r cau se b u t the ob jection h a s b e e n o v e rru le d ,

the law y er m ay w ish to send the ju r o r aw ay p e re m p to r ily fo r f e a r he h a s

been in su lte d by the o r ig in a l o b jec tio n , and the in su lt m ig h t p re ju d ic e

h im a g a in s t the c a s e , A s the n u m b er of p e re m p to ry ch a lle n g e s is

l im ite d , the p r e s e r v a t io n of th e m u n til the s tra te g ic tim e b e c o m e s so m e­

thing of a gam e b e tw een the la w y e rs . E a ch a tte m p ts to fo rc e the o th e r

to exclude a ju r o r who w as ob jec tio n ab le to the f i r s t la w y e r , th u s the

opponent h a s w a s te d a cha llenge and th e re b y h e lp ed the one who fo rc e d

h im to do i t . F u r th e r , if one law y er can a r ra n g e i t so h is opponent h a s

u se d a ll h is c h a lle n g e s w hile s ti l l re ta in in g som e of h is c h a lle n g e s , then

he h a s c o n tro l of the s itu a tio n and m ay e ffec t an im b a lan ce on the ju ry

in h is favor, ®2

80 W, S, S te w a rt, op, c i t , , ppw 140-141, ^ k b id ., 141, % bid i, p . 143,

220

F in a lly , in the se le c tio n of the ju ry , w hat c h a r a c te r is t ic s do the

a tto rn e y s look fo r on w hich to b a se th e ir accep tan ce o r re je c tio n ? The

c h a r a c te r is t ic s see m to d iv ide in to th re e c a té g o rie s - - in te llig e n c e and

education , le a d e rsh ip c a p a c ity , and p re ju d ic e - -w ith the l a s t b e in g the

m o s t w idely d isc u s s e d and the m o s t am b ig u o u s.

E d u ca tio n of j u r o r s , and th e ir in te ll ig e n c e , is m ean ing fu l to the

t r i a l a tto rn e y in two w ay s. In the f i r s t p la c e , the in te llig e n c e and

u n d ers tan d in g of the ju ry m u s t be su ffic ien t to follow the d e ta i ls andQ O

a rg u m e n ts w hich the la w y e r in ten d s to u se in the t r i a l . M uch litig a tio n

invo lves a deep p e n e tra tio n in to com p lex s u b je c t-m a tte r , w ith the ju ry

being ob liged to s e le c t f ro m v a r io u s e x p e r t te s tim o n y and to ev a lu a te

a rg u m en ts f ro m the te s tim o n y . P re su m a b ly , in such a c a se i t would

e ith e r be to the advan tage of bo th p a r t ie s th a t the ju ry be ab le to c o m p re ­

hend the p ro ce e d in g s; o r , should one side p e rc e iv e i ts e l f a s c le a r ly

d e fic ien t in te r m s of fa c t, i t m ig h t w ish to ob ta in a l e s s in te llig e n t ju ry

and hope to w in th ro u g h m isu n d e rs ta n d in g . In any ev en t, i t i s fe l t to be

v aluab le to the a tto rn e y th a t he ob ta in d a ta on the in te llig e n c e and edu­

ca tio n of the ju ry so a s to in c re a s e h is a l te rn a t iv e s .

L e a d e rsh ip p o te n tia l of v a r io u s m e m b e rs of the ju ry i s a lso of

in te r e s t to a t to rn e y s . The follow ing s ta te m e n t, m ade e a r ly in the p re s e n t

®^Samuel W eiss , How to T ry a C ase (New Y ork; B a k e r , V oorh is and Co. a 1940), pp , 4 5 -4 6 ,

221

c e n tu ry , su g g e s ts one a ttitu d e on ju ry s e le c tio n w ith re g a rd to in te l l ig e n c e

le a d e r s h ip , p e r s o n a li ty , e tc .

M ark th e i r [ the j u r y ] c an d o r, a g e , h u m o r, in te llig e n c e , so c ia l s tan d in g , o ccu p a tio n , and le t y o u r e y es choose the m o s t f r ie n d ly , l ib e r a l and noble fa c e s - -y o u n g o r o ld , but b e t te r young than o ld - - b e t te r w a rm th an co ld fa c e s ; b e t te r b u ild e rs than s a le sm e n , b e t te r f a r m e r s th an in v e n to rs , b e t te r good, l ib e ra l d e a le r s than a ll . A void d o c to rs , law ­y e r s , and p e ttifo g g e rs . T h e re is a l i t t le m a n , d e fo rm ed , n a r ro w , s e lf ish , o p in ionated . Y onder i s a c a p tio u s , c a u s tic , w itty m a n , of s ta le jo k e s and s t r e e t - c o r n e r a rg u m e n ts ; and f u r th e r on is a h a rd m a n , g r im -fa c e d and co ld , g re y look, w hite b lood and g la s s y e y e s . R ule th em a l l off, if p o s s ib le .The w o rld h a s u se d th e m i l l . T hey w ill sp re a d th e ir m is e ry fo r com pany sak e ,

The sam e au th o r goes on to em p h asize the p o s s ib le im p o rta n c e of l e a d e r ­

sh ip th ro u g h sp e c ia l ed u ca tio n o r e x p e r ie n c e . He say s th a t if the ca se

in v o lv es a p ro b le m of c o n s tru c tio n and one of the j u r o r s is a c o n s tru c tio n

e n g in e e r , th e re i s a s tro n g lik e lih o o d th a t w h a te v e r opinion he e x p re s s e s

to the ju ry w ill be a c c e p te d a s com ing fro m an a u th o r ity . T h is ten d s to

be tru e a c r o s s the b o a r d - - i f the c a se in v o lv es in s u ra n c e , an in su ra n c e

Q Cm an on the ju ry w ill have e x tre m e in flu e n c e , e t c , , s ta te s th is au th o r .

The fo ca l p o in t of m o s t co n c e rn in ju ry se le c tio n , h o w ev er, is

the d isc o v e ry of p re ju d ic ia l a ttitu d e s lik e ly to in flu en ce unduly the

d e c is io n . The p re ju d ic e s a r e sought n o t only to rem o v e the u n d e s ira b le

on es b u t to find th o se who com e in c lin ed to v o te w ith the exam ining

Jo sep h W. D onovan, M odern J u ry T r ia l s (New Y ork: G, A, Jen n in g s C o ,, I n c , , 1927), p , 227,

85 lb id . , p , 228,

222

la w y e r . The te s tim o n y of the p ra c t i t io n e r s su g g es ts th a t w hile the

su c c e ss fu l t r i a l law y er knows th a t l i t t le can be le a rn e d by openly ask in g

a ju r o r if he is p re ju d ic e d , n e v e r th e le s s th is is f re q u e n tly the ex ten t ofQ /

ex am in a tio n . On the c o n tra ry , the reco m m en d a tio n of the effec tive

t r i a l la w y e r is th a t ju r o r s can b e p ro b ed fo r p re ju d ic e only by thorough

o b se rv a tio n , and by engaging th e m in p e rso n a l c o n v e rsa tio n to the l im it

a llow ed by the c o u r t. The c o u n se l t r i e s to a sk q u e s tio n s th a t re q u ire

m o re th an a s ing le w ord a n s w e r- -h e w an ts the j u r o r to ta lk to h im . He

t r i e s to g e t the ju r o r to te l l ab o u t h is hom e life , w o rk , fam ily b ack g ro u n d ,

no ting no t only th e substance of the an sw er b u t how the ju ro r e x p re s s e s

h im se lf . S o m etim es the la w y e r w ill engage in som e re p a r te e w ith

88h is opponent and w atch the e ffe c t i t h a s upon v a r io u s ju r o r s .

F ro m th e se e f fo r ts , an a tto rn e y ex p ec ts to le a r n if the ju r o r h as

p re v io u s ly s e rv e d on a ju ry , an d if so how he v o ted . He le a rn s if the

ju r o r h as h im se lf b een involved in litig a tio n , and if so , on w hich side;

h e le a rn s if the ju r o r h as b een a cc u sed of any c r im e , and if so , w hat

th e ou tcom e w as; he le a rn s w h e th e r anyone c lo se to the ju r o r (husband,

w ife , r e la t iv e , o r c lo se f r ie n d , e tc . ) h a s b een so invo lved w ith the c o u r ts .

® ^F ran c is L , W ellm an , S u ccess in C o u rt, f^ew Y ork: The M ac­m illa n C om pany, 1941), pp. 100-101.

®^W. S. S tew art, og. c i t . , p . 142; S. W e is s , op. c i4 ., p . 44.

®®F. L . W ellm an , S u c ce ss in C o u rt, op. c i t . , p . 99.

223

T he law y er a tte m p ts to le a rn if the ju r o r is a w ork ingm an o r m e m b e r of

a la b o r union o r a m e m b e r of m a n a g em e n t, o r se lf-e m p lo y e d o r u n em ­

p loyed o r if anyone c lo se to h im is so a s so c ia te d w ith a m a jo r

em p lo y m en t g roup . The law y er in v e s tig a te s w h eth er o r no t the ju ro r

h a s any p re v io u s e x p e rie n c e w ith the p a r t ic u la r l i t ig a n ts , th e ir la w y e r ,

o r th e i r p ro b le m s . S p ec ific a lly , the law y er seek s to le a rn if the ju r o r

h a s fo rm e d any ju d g m en t re g a rd in g the c a s e , the l i t ig a n ts , th e ir la w y e r ,

e t c . ; and he goes beyond sim p ly ask in g the ju ro r if he i s ab le to abide

by the p rep o n d e ran c e of ev idence r e g a rd le s s of the d ire c tio n i t goes .

T he ju r o r i s q u estio n ed re g a rd in g h is own e x p e r ie n c e s - -w h e th e r he h a s

e v e r su ffe re d in ju ry such a s th a t w hich i s invo lved in the p r e s e n t c a s e ,

o r w h e th e r he h a s c a u se d such in ju ry , o r w h eth er anyone c lo se to the

ju r o r h a s b e e n so invo lved . In each of th e se avenues of in q u iry , the

d e te rm in a tio n of the ex is te n c e of one o r m o re of the f a c to r s g e n e ra lly

su g g e s ts the p re su m e d p re ju d ic e . T h a t i s , if the ju r o r i s a m e m b e r of

m an ag em en t and the c a s e in v o lv es a co n te s t betw een a w o rk e r and h is

e m p lo y e r , i t i s ex p ec ted th a t the ju r o r w ill be p re - in c l in e d to fav o r the

em p lo y e r.

R es tin g m o re on the te s tim o n y of the p r a c t i t io n e r s is the ju d g ­

m e n t of the in fluence of n a tio n a lity on a d ec is io n . T h e re se em s to be no

d is a g re e m e n t th a t the e thn ic d e r iv a tio n of the ju r o r w ill s ig n ifican tly

224

a ffe c t the w ay in w hich the ju ro r re sp o n d s to the t r i a l . In one c a s e , the

w r i te r su g g es ts th a t la w y e rs a g re e th a t th e I r i s h , I ta lia n s and Jew s

", . . a r e su b jec t to an em o tio n a l a p p e a l, w hile the S co tch , E n g lish ,

G erm an s and N o rd ic s a r e no t, "89 T he a u th o r does ad m it th a t ex cep tio n s

to th is ru le a re p o s s ib le . I t is a lso a g re e d th a t v a r io u s re lig io u s and

ethn ic g roups can b e ex p ec ted to be p re ju d ic e d a g a in s t one a n o th e r , I t

a lso se e m s to be a c c e p te d th a t young j u r o r s a r e to be ex p ec ted to be le s s

d ifficu lt to d ea l w ith and m o re lik e ly to be re ce p tiv e to a rg u m e n t. The

young ju r o r is th u s p r e f e r r e d by p la in tiffs and opposed by d e fen d an ts , 91

A re m a in in g p re ju d ic e m o s t d iff ic u lt of a l l to c h a ra c te r iz e i s

th a t feeling th a t a j u r o r sim p ly does n o t lik e a la w y e r. A fte r som e tim e

spen t question ing a p o te n tia l ju r o r , la w y e rs te s tify re g u la r ly th a t som e

m en sim p ly seem a p r io r i un likely to s e e the ca se in the way the a t to rn e y

w ould have i t , 92 in such c a s e s , co u n se l r e je c ts the ju r o r p e re m p to r i ly

and hopes th a t i t d o es no t la te r tu rn o u t th a t the ju r o r w as p re d isp o s e d

to vo te in fa v o r of th e m an who re je c te d h im , 93

The fa c to r th a t m a k e s the se le c tio n of a ju ry of sp e c ia l in te r e s t

to the rh e to r ic ia n i s th e cho ice a v a ila b le to the one who w ould seek to

89w , S, S te w a r t, og. c i t , ,. p . 143,

90f , L , W ellm an , S uccess in C o u rt, op, c i t . , p , 99,

91lbid, 9 2 ib id ., p. 106,

93w , R , L o r r y , o£. c i t , , p , 35,

225

in flu en ce . T h a t i s , r h e to r ic h a s long co n ce rn e d i t s e l f w ith the a n a ly s is

of the aud ien ce to b e in flu en c ed , b u t u su a lly fronti th e p e rsp e c tiv e of

see in g w hat can be done to a d ju s t to the in d iv id u a ls who a re th ru s t upon

the s p e a k e r . In the c o u r tro o m , h o w ev er, the sp e a k e r h a s som e o p p o r­

tu n ity to s e le c t , f ro m am ong a la rg e group p re s e n te d to h im , th o se

p e r s o n s who b e s t su it h im - - th e s p e a k e r . T h u s , the d isc o v e ry of a

ra tio n a le upon w hich to b a s e th is se le c tio n p o s e s a r a th e r d iffe re n t p r o ­

b le m than th a t of seek ing to a d ju s t to a g iven au d ien ce .

The O pening S ta tem en t

C a re fu l thought and long p ra c t ic e h a s e s ta b lis h e d a c le a r p a t te rn

to a t r i a l a t law , one fe lt to b e b e s t d esig n ed to b r in g the judge o r ju ry

to the m o s t r a tio n a l p o s s ib le d e c is io n . The a u d ito rs a r e f i r s t to ld w hat

i s to b e p ro v ed ; th en they a r e p re s e n te d w ith th e p ro o f; then th ey a r e to ld

the s ig n ifican ce of the p ro o f. T he f i r s t s te p - - th e opening s ta te m e n t- - is

in ten d ed to do noth ing m o re th an give a p re v ie w of w hat i s to com e.

"The p u rp o se of the opening s ta te m e n ts of co u n se l i s to in fo rm the ju ry

in a g e n e ra l w ay of the n a tu re of the ac tio n and the d e fen se th e re to so

th a t the ju r o r s m ay be b e t te r p r e p a re d to u n d e rs ta n d and ev a lu a te the

ev idence a s i t d ev e lo p s . R ea so n ab ly , the e n t ire c o u r t p ro c e s s i s

vague and m y s te r io u s to the j u r o r s in m any c a s e s and i t i s th u s d e s ira b le

9 4 ib id ., p . 45.

226

th a t they shou ld be in fo rm ed a t once w hat is going to h ap p en . The

opening s ta te m e n t p ro v id e s an opportun ity fo r the a t to rn e y s to enhance

the ju ry*s re c e p tiv ity to th e ir m a te r ia ls w hich fo llow . As one w r i te r

p u t i t , "T he opening s ta te m e n t, b e ing in the n a tu re of a p ro lo g u e , m u s t

to a s g re a t ex te n t a s p o ss ib le su b s titu te fo r the s tag e se ttin g s and l ig h t­

ing e f fe c ts , the p e rsu a s iv e b ac k d ro p s and th e a tr ic a l i l lu s io n s so e ffective

95in c re a tin g the a p p ro p ria te a tm o sp h e re in the th e a tr e , " The follow ing

p a ra g ra p h is a h y p o th e tica l i l lu s tr a t io n of w hat m ig h t be sa id in an

opening s ta te m e n t to exp lain i t s p u rp o se .

Now th a t you have b een s e le c te d to t r y th is c a s e , o u r p r a c ­tic e p e r m its m e to m ake w hat is known a s an opening s ta te m e n t b e fo re the w itn e sse s a r e c a lle d . A s I to ld you d u rin g y o u r se le c tio n , I r e p re s e n t the p la in tiff and I am now going to open on b e h a lf of the p la in tiff . T h is opening s ta te m e n t is n o t ev id en ce , and i t w ould n o t be p ro p e r fo r m e to a rg u e , I m ak e th is opening s ta te m e n t only in the hope th a t I m igh t a s s i s t you in unde r standing the ev idence a s i t is p ro d u ced . In th is opening s ta te m e n t I hope I can p u t o u r th eo ry in a connected fo rm , giving you th e p ic tu re w hich m u s t n e c e s s a r i ly com e b i t by b it f ro m the w itn e s s e s ,

W ithin the open ing , th e re a r e r e s t r ic t io n s a s to the ex ten t the a tto rn e y

can go in ex p la in in g the law inv o lv ed , b u t g e n e ra lly he is p e rm it te d to

exp la in law to the ex ten t i t i s n e c e s s a ry to the p ro p e r u n d ers tan d in g of

the c a s e . A lso w ith in th is sp eech to the ju ry i t i s p ro p e r to an tic ip a te

9 5 lb id ,, p , 47,

S, S tew art, op_, c i t , , p , 159.

22 7

any m is im d e rs ta n d in g o v e r te rm s o r m a te r ia ls w hich w ill be u sed in the

p ro o f. If u sag e in the t r i a l w ill v a ry f ro m o rd in a ry u s a g e , i t i s d e s ira b le

to d is c u s s th is w ith th e ju ry in the opening so a s to in c r e a s e th e ir c o m ­

p re h e n s io n ,

A g re a t d e a l of em p h asis i s p la c e d upon the va lue of aud ience

a tten tio n and the im p o rta n c e of ge ttin g a m e ssa g e to the ju ry w hile i ts

m e m b e rs a r e s t i l l f r e s h and in te re s te d . Not only i s the sp e a k e r e x h o rted

to o b ta in the a tte n tio n of the ju ry in it ia l ly , b u t he i s ex p ec ted to gauge the

len g th of h is r e m a rk s to th e ir a tten tio n , D iffe ren t f ro m the o rd in a ry

sp e a k e r s itu a tio n , if a law y er ru n s o v e r ly long in h is opening r e m a rk s

i t i s p o ss ib le th a t th e judge w ill in te r r u p t to c h a s tis e h im and thus w eaken

h is p o s itio n in th e e s tim a tio n of the ju ry ,

L eg a l p r a c t i t io n e r s give a good d ea l of though t to the q u estio n of

w hich is m o re in flu e n tia l in the speak ing s itu a tio n , p r im a c y o r re c e n c y .

G en e ra lly , the w r i te r s choose the safe ground and s e le c t bo th . They

a rg u e th a t the f i r s t sp e a k e r in the t r i a l gains an ad v an tag e a s w ell a s

the f in a l s p e a k e r , T h is co m es in to c o n s id e ra tio n w ith re g a rd to the

c o u n se l fo r the d e fe n se , a s he h a s an option to p r e s e n t h is opening

97 F . L . W ellm an , Day in C o u rt, op. c i t . , p . 136.

98w , S, S tew art, o£, c i t , , p , 158,

99w, R , L o r r y , o£, c i t , , p , 51,

100 J , C, R eed , 0£ , c i t . , p , 195,

228

s ta te m e n t e i th e r im m e d ia te ly a f te r the sp eak e r fo r the p la in tiff o r a f te r

the co m p le tio n of the p re s e n ta t io n of the p la in tif f 's ev id en ce . A t le a s t

one re c e n t c o m m e n ta to r u rg e s the defense to open im m ed ia te ly . To

w a it, he s ta te s , r a i s e s a s e r io u s chance th a t the oppo rtu n ity to wirL'. a

re c e p tiv e h e a r in g f ro m the ju ry h as p a s se d . " F i r s t im p re s s io n s , " th is

a u th o r n o te s , " freq u en tly in flu en ce an in d iv id u a l's th inking to such an

esctent a s to c o lo r the e ffe c t of a l l subsequen t e x p e r ie n c e s . H is

e3q>lanation fo r th is i s th a t the ju ry ten d s to develop a " s e t" in th e ir

th ink ing f ro m the opening s ta te m e n t fo r the p la in tiff , and once th is

o c c u rs i t i s v e ry d iff icu lt to b r in g the ju ry into an a ttitu d e of w illin g n e ss

to l is te n to an opposing v iew poin t.

Fo llow ing th is th e o ry , the au th o r co n tin u es, i t is re a so n ab le to

ex p ec t th a t a t t im e s the f i r s t sp e a k e r is so effec tiv e a s to "ch an n e lize"

the th inking of som e ju r o r s f ro m th a t po in t on, ". . , so th a t a l l ev idence

th e r e a f te r re c e iv e d is n o t h e a rd w ith the sam e o b jec tiv ity a s w ould be

the c a se w e re such an opening s ta te m e n t not to be m ad e . "102 F ro m th is

lin e of re a so n in g , i t i s concluded th a t the defense a tto rn e y would b e w ise

to in tro d u ce h is p o s itio n a s soon a s p o ss ib le so a s to avoid the e ffe c ts of

the op p o n en t's r e m a rk s .

T h is a n a ly s is i s a c le a r d em o n stra tio n of the opposition of the

la w y e r 's rh e to r ic to the rh e to r ic a l foundations of th e leg a l sy s te m . The

10 Iw . R . L o r r y , o£. c i t . , p . 49. lO^Ib id .

229

sy s te m seek s a r a t io n a l d e c is io n by re q u e s tin g the ju r y to w ithhold ju d g ­

m e n t u n til a l l th e ev id en ce i s in . The la w y e r know s, th rough p r a c t ic e ,

th a t th is canno t b e a s su m e d to have o c c u r re d . T h u s , the law y er s e e k s

to tak e advan tage of a p re s u m e d m o tiv e on the p a r t of the ju ry , to red u c e

the te n s io n s of in d e c is io n , by w ork ing fo r im m ed ia te judgm ent in h is

fa v o r . The le g a l sy s te m se ek s to o ffse t the p o ss ib le n o n -ra tio n a l e ffec t

of th is by p re s e n tin g the sam e o p p o rtu n ity to the opposing cou n se l. If,

h o w e v e r, the la w y e r s ’ th e o ry of g r e a t s tre n g th in the f i r s t a rg u m e n t

p re s e n te d h o ld s , th en to th a t ex ten t the ra tio n a l e ffec t of the a d v e r s a r y

sy s te m i s red u c ed .

I t h a s a lr e a d y b e e n su g g ested th a t the opening i s an e x e rc is e in

in fo rm a tiv e s p e e c h - - th e a tto rn e y is e3q>licitly fo rb id d en to engage in

a rg u m e n t. T h is p r e s e n ts som e co n flic t in th ink ing , fo r while a ll w r i te r s

on the su b jec t a g re e th a t one m u s t fo llow the r e s t r ic t io n to avo id a r g u ­

m e n t, a t the sa m e tim e a l l se e m to a g re e th a t the opening s ta te m e n t i s

a good o p p o rtu n ity fo r a s p e a k e r to advance h is p o s itio n . The r e s u l t is

th a t the la w y e r i s e n c o u ra g e d to be f a i r , c le a r , b r ie f , in fo rm a tiv e ,

cand id , s im p le , and a t th e sam e tim e to b e fo rc e fu l, s tro n g , and w in a

fa v o ra b le im p re s s io n f ro m the ju ry . M ore sp e c if ic a lly , the opening

i s to b e confined to th e fa c ts and m u s t n o t inc lude a d isc u ss io n of how

49.W. D onovan, og. c i t . , p . 211; S. W e iss , og. c i t . , p p . 4 8 -

230

the fa c ts a r e to be p ro v ed . The s ta te m e n t should be te m p e ra te and

confined w ith in re a so n a b le bounds of p ro p r ie ty and good fa ith , "A nything

ap p ro ach in g an em o tio n a l a p p e a l, o r an a tte m p t to sway the ju ry im p ro ­

p e r ly should be a s s id u o u s ly av o ided , If a sp e a k e r does s tra y beyond

the l im its in h is opening , he r is k s being in te r ru p te d by h is opponent and

reb u k ed by the ju d g e , "T h is m ig h t cau se the ju ry to b e liev e you w ere

try in g to p u ll som eth ing o v e r on th em and s h a tte r com plete ly the e ffec t

of y o u r in tro d u c to ry ex p o s itio n , The way in w hich in fo rm atio n is

to b e com bined w ith p e r s u a s io n , conclude the w r i te r s , i s to m ake the

f a c ts a s p re s e n te d su ffic ien tly d ra m a tic th a t they m ak e th e ir own co n ­

c lu s io n s , "V ery few p e r s o n s , " s ta te s an e a r ly co m m en ta to r, ", , ,

co m p reh en d the fo rc e th a t th e re i s in a c le a r , su cc in c t, o rd e r ly

n a r r a t iv e of f a c t s , " He co n tin u es , " th e re is a lo g ic a l pow er abou t such

a n a r ra t iv e th a t ex ceed s o ften the m e re fo rc e of ingen ious rea so n in g .

I t i s the n a tu ra l log ic of the f a c ts , "1^7

W ith r e g a rd to the m a n n e r of sp eech in th e opening s ta te m e n t,

th e re see m s to be g e n e ra l a g re e m e n t th a t the s ty le ought to be c o n v e r ­

s a tio n a l, f r ie n d ly , and w ithou t tlie u se of e ith e r te c h n ic a l or f lo r id

lan g u ag e . The sp ea k e r i s ex p ec ted to avo id the s te reo ty p e d p h y s ic a l

104-y^ R , L o r ry , op, c i t , , p , 51, ^^^I b id . , p , 53,

lO^ib id , W, D onovan, og, c i t . , p , 240,

231

m a n n e r ism s a s s o c ia te d w ith the o ra to r - -m o v e m e n t, g e s tu re , v o ice ,

e tc . He is not to le c tu re the judge o r ju ry , b u t r a th e r in fo rm a s one

p e rs o n to an o th e r .

The a r ra n g e m e n t of the opening s ta te m e n t is fe lt to be an

im p o rta n t fa c to r in judge o r ju ry c o m p reh en s io n . G en era lly speak ing ,

the ch ro n o lo g ica l o rd e r is c o n s id e re d b e s t , w ith a g re e m e n t th a t som e

c a s e s should s ta r t w ith the key even t and th en go b ack and r e la te s u r ­

rounding fa c ts in a t im e sequence . In any c a s e , the law y er i s u rg ed

to s e t out only th o se fa c ts he can rea so n ab ly ex p ec t to p ro v e . If an y th in g

he should u n d e rs ta te h is c a se .

The opening s ta te m e n t, th en , c o r re sp o n d s to the ex o rd iu m and

n a r ra t io n in the tra d it io n a l o ra tio n a s s e t fo r th in the rh e to r ic of C ice ro .

I t p e r fo rm s the ta s k of meiking the in i t ia l ap p ro ac h to the a u d ito r to -win

a fav o rab le h e a rin g and in s t ru c t h im a s to the n a tu re of the c a s e . I t

p r e p a re s the judge o r ju ry to h e a r the te s tim o n y and see the ev id en ce ,

w hich i s to co m e , w ith in te llig e n t u n d e rs tan d in g . In ev itab ly , the opening

a lso in tro d u c e s the p e r fo r m e r s (i . e . , the law y e rs ) to the a u d ito rs . If

the opening s ta te m e n t s e rv e s to b r in g the judge o r ju ry to h e a r the

ev idence o b j e c t i v e l y i t h a s acco m p lish ed i t s m in im um p u rp o se ; if one

lO SRenry H ard w ick e , 0£, c i t . , pp . 38-39; W. R . L o r r y , 0£ . c i t . , pp . 46 -47 .

109w. S. S tew art, og. c i t . , p . 160; J , C. R eed , og, c i t . , p . 239.

11ÛF. L . W ellm an , Day in C o u rt, op. c i t . , pp . 134-137.

232

la w y e r m an ag es to w in sp e c ia l fa v o r th rough h is open ing , i t i s s im p ly a

p ro d u c t of the a d v e r s a ry sy s tem w hich can be e jq jec ted to o ccu r f ro m

tim e to tim e .

P re s e n ta t io n of E v idence

E v id en ce in a c o u r t of law p r e s e n ts a v e ry c o m p lica ted ch a llen g e

to the s tuden t of rh e to r ic a l th e o ry . P ro b a b ly in no o th e r p lace do es the

law d e m o n s tra te so m uch co n ce rn fo r the rh e to r ic a l a s p e c ts of the

ju d ic ia l p ro c e s s . E v id en ce , in law , is the stuff f ro m w hich d e c is io n s

a r e m ad e . T h e re i s exp ec ted to be a p o s itiv e c o r re la t io n be tw een the

q u a lity of ev idence p re se n te d in a t r i a l and the q u a lity of the d ec is io n

re n d e re d . T h a t i s , if the ev idence i s ra tio n a l so should be the d ec is io n .

The p ro b le m s th a t a r i s e , bo th le g a l and rh e to r ic a l , a r e co n ce rn ed w ith

a s s u r in g th a t the ev idence is r a t io n a l.

The o b jec tiv e of ev idence is to d e m o n s tra te fa c t . The o b je c t of

the t r i a l i s to d ec id e on fa c t and th en apply the law to the fa c t. In the

ju d ic ia l p r o c e s s , th e re a r e two s te p s to be c o n s id e re d w ith r e g a rd to

f a c t s - - f i r S t , the a d m iss ib ili ty of the ev idence; seco n d , the p ro b a tiv e

value of the ev id en ce once i t i s a d m itte d in to c o n s id e ra tio n . B oth s te p s

involve rh e to r ic a l th e o ry . In C h ap te r I the lim ita tio n s of ju d ic ia l decision*

m ak in g , a s v iew ed by A r is to t le , w e re d isc u s se d . A t th is po in t, i t is

n e c e s s a ry to d is c u s s the p ra c t ic a l cond itions of ju d ic ia l t r i a l s a s v iew ed

by the A m e ric a n le g a l p ro fe s s io n .

233

F i r s t , a t r i a l ta k e s p la c e w ith in r e s t r i c t io n s of t im e and p la c e .

U nlike the le g is la t iv e a s se m b ly w hich can d e la y ju d g m en t u n til i t is

s a tis f ie d enough in fo rm a tio n i s a v a ila b le , th e c o u r t is o b lig ed by the

n a tu re of th e d e c is io n s i t m a k e s to p ro c e e d w ith the da ta im m e d ia te ly

a t h an d and r e n d e r a ju d g m en t b a s e d on w hat i s p re se n te d . T he c o u rt

m u s t d ec id e on f a c ts r e la tin g to p a s t e v e n ts , and is th e re fo re g e n e ra lly

l im ite d to the te s t im o n ia l r e p o r t of w itn e s s e s o r c irc u m s ta n tia l ev id en ce .

T he fix ed n a tu re of the c o u r t p re v e n ts i t f ro m the m ov em en t w hich m ig h t

a llo w fo r d i r e c t o b se rv a tio n of d a ta s t i l l c u r r e n t to i ts in v e s tig a tio n , ^^^

A s the c o u r t r e l ie s upon ev idence re m o v ed f ro m th e o r ig in a l fa c t i t is

r e a so n e d th a t som e c o n tro l i s n e c e s s a ry to av o id a s m uch a s p o ss ib le

the d is to r t io n w hich is ex p ec ted to o c c u r .

Second , b y the c o n tro v e rs ia l and em o tio n a l n a tu re of th e is s u e s

w ith w hich a c o u r t m u s t d e a l, i t is e:qpected th a t th e p a r t ie s to the co n ­

f l ic t w ill c o n s ta n tly be te m p ted to g a in th e i r c a u se b y f ra u d o r o th e r

m e a n s of d ece iv in g the tr ib u n a l. A g ain , r u le s a r e e s ta b lish e d to g o v ern

u se of ev id en ce a t th o se p o in ts a t w hich f ra u d i s lik e ly to o c c u r .

T h ird , th e p e r s o n s who engage in th e ju d ic ia l in v e s tig a tio n a r e

u su a lly la y m e n w ith r e g a rd to the sp e c ia l a r e a u n d e r in v e s tig a tio n . In

the c o u r t, p ro b le m s of m e d ic in e , p sy ch o lo g y , b u s in e s s , s c ie n c e , and

H, W igm ore , og. c i t , , pp , 927-928 ,

234

so fo r th co n s tan tly com e up fo r d ec is io n . E ven tra in e d ju d g es cannot be

e x p e r ts in each of the f ie ld s dem anding a d ec is io n . E v en m o re , ju r y ­

m e n la c k the tra in in g in the d e c is io n -m ak in g p ro c e s s w hich a judge

p o sse s se s* T h e re fo re , ru le s a r e s e t up to im p o se lim ita tio n s on p ro o f

so a s to e s ta b lis h a s ta n d a rd of in q u iry su itab le to the lay ju d g es. T hus,

in a c o u r t som e d ata w hich w ould be c o n s id e re d by an e x p e r t in the f ie ld

i s o m itted f ro m c o n s id e ra tio n .

F o u r th , the d ra m a tic se ttin g of the c o u rt a s opposed to the ca lm

of a la b o ra to ry r e q u ire s som e sp e c ia l c o n tro ls . A s a lre a d y re p o rte d ,

the is s u e s b e fo re a c o u r t a re u su a lly em otionally toned th e m se lv e s .

T hen , the p a r t ic ip a n ts - -c o u n s e l , c l ie n ts , ju ry , ju d g e , s p e c ta to rs , c o u rt

o f f ic e r s , and the l ik e - - a s they in te r a c t w ith one an o th e r ten d to in c re a s e

the em o tio n a l a s p e c ts of the a tm o sp h e re . P a r t ic u la r ly , the way in w hich

the judge o r ju ry r e a c t to the m e s s a g e s com ing f ro m the ev idence and the

p a r t ic ip a n ts m ay v a ry m e a s u ra b ly acco rd in g to the a tm o sp h e re w ithin

th e c o u rt. T h a t i s to say , th o se a ss ig n e d to the ta s k of a rb i tra t io n a re

c o n s ta n tly b o m b ard ed w ith m e s s a g e s a ttra c tin g th e ir fa v o r to one side o r

the o th e r , no t only the a c tu a l w o rd s of the w itn ess o r the docum ent, b u t

the m a n n e r of the w itn e ss and h is way of speaking and h is ap p ea ra n c e ,

and the way h e re sp o n d s to the a tto rn e y s . E ven m o re than the in tended

p ro o f, the b eh av io r of the a c c u se d o r the c lie n ts w hen th ey a r e not a c tu a lly

235

p e rfo rm in g , o r the b eh av io r of the a t to rn e y s a t a l l t im e s a c t a s m e ssa g e s

to the judge o r ju ry w hich a r e being decoded in te rm s of the i s s u e s of

the t r i a l . A ll of th e se fa c to rs m ay m ak e a g r e a te r o r l e s s e r im p re s s io n

on the a r b i t r a to r s depending upon the c irc u m s ta n c e s in the c o u rtro o m .

T h u s, an o th e r function of the ru le s i s to en co u rag e the fo cu s of a tten tio n

on the m o s t d e s ira b le p ro o fs and d im in ish the fo rc e of the i r r e le v a n t o r

u n d e s ira b le p ro o fs ,

T h ese p r a c t ic a l cond itions of ju d ic ia l t r i a l s , th e r e fo re , fo rm the

foundation of the t r i a l r u le s of a d m is s ib il i ty . S p ec ifica lly , the ta s k of

a ju ry (or judge if th e r e i s no ju ry ) i s to d e te rm in e the p ro b a tiv e value

of the ev idence subm it^'ed,. th a t i s , the w eigh t o r quality to b e a s c r ib e d

to ev idence so a s u ltim a te ly to m ake a d is tin c tio n be tw een the conflic ting

p o s itio n s . The ru le s of a d m iss ib ili ty do n o t seek to p e r fo rm th is ta s k

fo r the ju ry . H o w ev er, a s the a im of th e c o u r t is to in su re a ra tio n a l

d e c is io n , and a s the p r a c t ic a l l im ita tio n s of the ju d ic ia l p ro c e s s do not

su g g est an independen t cap ac ity fo r r a t io n a l d e c is io n -m a k in g , ru le s of

a d m iss ib ili ty a r e s e t up to p e rm it the ju d g e to co n tro l the ev id en ce so

th a t only th a t w hich i s w o rth co n s id e rin g i s b ro u g h t to the a tte n tio n of

the ju ry . W hether a p ie c e of ev idence i s w o rth co n s id e rin g depends

llZ T h e fo u r p r a c t ic a l l im ita tio n s on ju d ic ia l d e c is io n -m a k in g and m uch of th e ir i l lu s tr a t io n w as taken f ro m J , H. W igm ore , op. c i t , , pp . 925-932.

236

(w ithin the co n tex t of g iven ru le s ) upon w h e th e r the judge d eem s the

ev idence lik e ly to en co u rag e a ra tio n a l d e c is io n in lig h t of the p ra c t ic a l

l im ita tio n s m en tio n ed p re v io u s ly ,

P re s u m a b ly , if i t w e re the judge who g a th e red the fa c ts in each

case a t law , he w ould cu ll out the u n d e s ira b le ev idence b e fo re com ing

to t r i a l . A s th is is not the c a s e ; a s i t i s the p a r t ie s in co n flic t who b rin g

fo rth the e v id en ce , then the t r i a l a s s u m e s the function of a se in e to

rem o v e the unw anted ev idence b e fo re i t can e n te r into the c o n s id e ra tio n

of the ju ry , o p e ra tin g upon the th e o ry , a s s ta ted b e fo re , th a t if the

decid ing p a r ty is no t ex p o sed to i r r a t io n a l p ro o fs then the d ec is io n is

le s s lik e ly to r e s t upon i r r a t io n a l g ro u n d s . I t should be no ted in

p a s s in g th a t the judge,, w hen dec id in g w ithout a ju ry , i s f e l t to b e capable

of p e r fo rm in g both the ta s k of s e le c tin g f ro m a ll the ev idence th a t w hich

i s w o rth co n s id e rin g and then d e te rm in in g the p ro b a tiv e v a lu e of the

re m a in d e r . I t i s a s su m e d th a t th e ju d g e 's tra in in g in ra tio n a l d e c is io n ­

m ak ing is su ffic ien t to o ffse t the w e a k n e s se s seen in a ju ry .

The p u rp o se of the d i r e c t ex am in a tio n is to p ro v id e cond itions

conducive to the co m m u n ica tio n , f ro m w itn e ss to judge o r ju ry , w hat

the w itn e ss h a s p e rc e iv e d of a p a s t fa c t. I t i s re a so n e d by the p r a c t i t io n e r s

of the ju d ic ia l p ro c e s s th a t th e p r im a r y v eh ic le of such a com m unication

l l ^ i b i d . , p . 924. ^ ^ ^ Ib id ., p . 925.

237

is a s tra ig h tfo rw a rd re c i ta t io n by the w itn e s s , g e n e ra lly u n s tru c tu re d

by the exam in ing co u n se l. T ha t i s , once the t r i a l ru le s have b een ap p lied

to d e te rm in e w hat w itn e s s e s a r e to b e h e a r d , then i t i s fe lt the m o s t

e ffec tiv e co m m u n ica tio n w ill be a c h iev ed b y le ttin g the w itn e ss r e p o r t

on h is p e rc e p tio n s , in h is own w o rd s , T he exam in ing co u n se l i s

a d v ise d to a sk only th o se q u es tio n s n e c e s s a r y to evoke an a d m iss ib le

re sp o n se f ro m the w itn e ss w ithout su g g es tin g by the n a tu re of the q u es tio n

w hat should be sa id by the w itn e ss , L ead in g q u es tio n s , th o se w hich

e i th e r d ire c tly su g g e s t the a n sw e r w hich co u n se l d e s ir e s o r w hich e m ­

body a m a te r ia l fa c t and m ay be a n s w e re d " y e s " o r "no , " a r e no t

p e rm it te d in the e x am in a tio n in ch ie f,

The te s tim o n y of a w itn e ss i s s t r u c tu r e d , to an ex ten t, by the

ru le s of ev id en ce . In th e f i r s t p la c e , th e oa th w hich i s a d m in is te re d and

the av a ilab le ru le s of p u n ish m en t u n d e r p e r ju ry a r e d esig n ed to s e rv e a

118p ro p h y la c tic p u rp o s e - -p re v e n tio n of in te n tio n a l d is to r tio n of th e r e p o r t .

A d d itio n a lly , i t i s f re q u e n tly re c o m m e n d ed th a t p rev en tin g the fu tu re

w itn e s s e s f ro m s ittin g in c o u r t to h e a r w h at th e o th er w itn e s se s have to

W eiss , 0£ , c i t . , p . 52,

L , W ellm an , Day in C o u rt, op . c i t , , pp , 153; 157»

l l^ H e n ry H ard w ick e , o£, c i t . , pp , 105-106,

H, W ig m o re , o£, c i t , , p p , 942-943,

238

say w ill p re v e n t the te s tim o n y of one f ro m su g g estin g changes o r

ad d itio n s in the te s tim o n y of a n o th e r , M o re o v e r , w hat a w itn e ss can

e x p re s s a s te s tim o n y is l im ite d to the ex ten t th a t he m ay re p o r t only

d ire c tly o b se rv e d da ta ; the ru le s p re v e n t h im fro m e x p re ss in g in fe re n c e s

w hich he h a s d raw n fro m h is o b s e rv a tio n s , a lthough in a q u a lified w ay^^^

The p re su m p tio n i s th a t the judge o r ju ry should b e p e rm itte d to d raw

th e ir own co n c lu s io n s fro m the d ire c t re p o r t . S im ila r ly , the w itn e ss

m ay te s tify only to th a t w hich he h a s h im se lf e x p e rien ced . He m a y no t

u til iz e h e a r s a y . T he h e a r s a y ru le is b a se d upon a know ledge of the

n u m ero u s p o ss ib le e r r o r s u n d erly in g any te s tim o n ia l ev id en ce- -p e rcep tio i^

re c o lle c tio n , n a r ra t io n - -a n d seek s to hold e r r o r to a m in im um by

re q u ir in g a l l te s tim o n ia l a s s e r t io n s to be m ade in c o u rt *?, , , so th a t

th ey m ay th e re be te s te d by in te r ro g a tio n s c a lc u la te d to g e t a t th e se

17 1p o ss ib le so u rc e s of e r r o r and to re v e a l th em , " If the w itn e ss canno t

a p p e a r in c o u r t , he m u s t m ake h is te s tim o n y b e fo re a su itab le o ffic ia l

e lse w h e re .

W ithin th is f ra m e w o rk of r e s t r ic t io n s , th en , the t r i a l a tto rn e y

m u s t p lan to p r e s e n t h is ev idence in the m a n n e r b e s t ca lcu la ted to w in

ap p ro v a l fro m th o se a s s ig n e d to ju d g e , A q u es tio n i s th u s r a is e d a s to

S. S te w art, og. c i t . , p . 168,

H, W igm ore , og. c i t . , p . 944.

1 2 1 lb id ., p . 942.

239

the m o s t e ffec tiv e o rd e r in w hich to p r e s e n t w itn e s s e s , and the a lm o s t

u n iv e r s a l ad v ice is to p r e s e n t the b e s t f i r s t . If a c a se i s to tu rn p r i ­

m a r i ly on the te s tim o n y of a key w itn e ss , one who w ill do the m o s t to

im p r e s s the judge o r ju ry w ith the s tre n g th of the c a s e , then he should

be p u t on f i r s t . The v a lu e of p r im a c y is em p h as iz ed no t only in

co n n ec tio n w ith the co n ten t of the te s tim o n y , b u t w ith the e ffec tiv e n e ss

of p re s e n tin g the te s tim o n y a s w ell. The m o s t in te llig e n t, h o n es t, and

p e r s u a s iv e w itn e ss (so long a s the p e rs u a s io n fa v o rs the side u sin g h im )

should be p re s e n te d e a r ly , say the p r a c t i t io n e r s . The re a so n m o s t

f re q u e n tly g iven fo r th is o r d e r is th a t the re c e p tiv ity of the ju ry i s fe lt

to b e h ig h e s t e a r ly in the t r i a l b e fo re it can b eco m e t i r e d , b o re d , o r

b la s e .

T h e re i s no doubt am ong the p r a c t i t io n e r s th a t the w ay in w hich

te s tim o n y is p re s e n te d w ill in fluence the ju d g m en t of the p ro b a tiv e value

of i t a s ev id en ce . To i l lu s t r a te , the sam e te s tim o n y com ing f ro m two

d if fe re n t w itn e s se s m ay have d iffe re n t e ffe c ts upon the ju ry in m ak ing

the d e c is io n . To c a r r y th is d iffe re n tia tio n to the e x tre m e , one re c e n t

c o m m e n ta to r in d ic a te s th a t if an a t to rn e y 's w itn e s s e s f i t the follow ing

a d je c tiv e s , he h a s l i t t le to w o rry about: w is e , in te ll ig e n t, p o ised ,

C. R eed , 0£ . c i t . , pp . 250; 259.

^^^H enry H ard w ick e , o£. c i t . , p . 82.

240

re a so n a b le , c o u ra g e o u s , co n fid en t, tru s tw o rth y , u p r ig h t, m o d e st,

com posed , q u ie t, se d a te , s im p le , g ra c io u s , re fin e d , u n affec ted , p r o ­

found, d e l ib e ra te , s e r io u s , e lo q u en t, in c is iv e , zind e n th u s ia s tic . On

the o th e r hand , the a tto rn e y should be co n cern ed abou t any w itn e sse s

who cou ld b e d e s c r ib e d by the follow ing w ords: a r ro g a n t , in so len t,

d ic ta to r ia l , d o m in e e rin g , v a in , o v e rb e a rin g , pom pous, con tem ptuous,

b lu s te r in g , n o isy , g a r ru lo u s , b o a s tfu l, shallow , s u p e rf ic ia l , i r r a t io n a l ,

p re ju d ic e d , s e rv i le , faw ning , o b seq u io u s , in g ra tia tin g , w eak , w itle s s ,

d u ll, and fe a r fu l . In m o re r e s t r a in e d language, the sam e au th o r

d is c u s s e s the p o s s ib le p e r s u a s iv e im p a c t of the m a n n e r of p re se n ta tio n

of w itn e sse s by saying

. . . th e a p p e a ra n c e of the w itn e ss w ill have a b e a r in g on the e ffec t of h is te s tim o n y ; h is a b ility to p re s e n t fa c ts c le a r ly and in a p e r s u a s iv e fa sh io n m u s t b e c o n s id e red ; h is g e n e ra l in te llig e n c e and ab ility to h an d le the sk illfu l c ro s s -e x a m in a tio n of opposing co u n se l m u s t be w eighed so th a t h is e ffe c tiv e n e ss m ay n o t b e d e s tro y e d and y o u r c a se w eakened by a d ra m a tic c o lla p se u n d e r c ro s s -e x a m in a tio n .

If , in an sw erin g q u e s tio n s , a w itn e ss d e lay s too long to d e lib e ra te

on h is a n s w e r , i t i s f e l t th a t the c o u r t and ju ry w ill a s su m e th a t he is n o t

being e n tire ly cand id . I t i s b e lie v e d th a t o v e r -d e lib e ra tio n on a n sw e rs

i s a s ign of r e f re s h in g the m e m o ry of a p re p a re d te s tim o n y . M o reo v er,

too m uch d e lay in the p r o g re s s of the tes tim o n y w ill ten d , i t i s s ta te d by

R . L o r ry , og, c i t . , pp . 67-68 . l^ S i b id . , p . 24.

241

the p r a c t i t io n e r s , to lo se the a tte n tio n of judge and ju ry and th e re fo re

1 2 Aw eaken the in te r e s t in the c a s e . A lso , the d r e s s of the w itn e ss is

b e lie v e d to in flu en ce h is c re d ib ili ty . T he m o s t im p o rta n t w itn e s s e s

should be cau tio n ed no t to d r e s s in gaudy o r unusually s tr ik in g clothing

fo r fe a r i t w ill a t l e a s t d e t r a c t f ro m the te s tim o n y , and a t m o s t cau se

a p re ju d ic e a g a in s t the w itn e s s . A bove a l l , expensive and f la sh y jew e lry

127should no t be w o rn b y the p e r s o n te s tify in g .

F in a lly , th e c re d ib ili ty of the w itn e ss w ill be p u t to a s e v e re te s t

u n d e r c ro s s -e x a m in a tio n . T h is w ill la rg e ly be d isc u s se d in a follow ing

se c tio n , b u t fo r the t im e , i t should be no ted th a t the w itn e ss who allow s

h im se lf to b e d raw n in to show ing i l l te m p e r by the c r o s s - e x a m in e r is

128ex p ec ted to lo se c re d ib ili ty in the e y es of the ju ry .

The r h e to r ic a l ta s k of the a tto rn e y du rin g d ire c t ex am in a tio n is a

unique one in m an y w ay s. F o r ex a m p le , m o s t com m only if one i s to

p e r fo rm a p e r s u a s iv e ta s k he n eed .o n ly b e in co n tro l of h im s e lf . The

la w y e r , in th is c a s e , m u s t d raw p e r s u a s iv e com m unica tion f ro m ano ther

p e rs o n m uch a s a m u s ic ia n b r in g s m u s ic fro m an in s tru m e n t. Speaking

m e ta p h o r ic a lly , th e n , a t r i a l la w y e r m u s t p lay the w itn e ss so th a t the

te s tim o n y i s n o t in d is c o rd w ith the e n t i r e p o s itio n be in g p r e s e n te d by

the a tto rn e y . He m u s t ob ta in enough f ro m the w itn e ss to fu lf il l the ro le

126H ickam and S can lon , op. c i t . , p . 278.

1 2 7 ib id ., p . 278. ^^^ Ib id ., p . 284.

242

w hich h as been a s s ig n e d to the p a r t ic u la r w itn e ss . He is c a re fu l no t to

go fu r th e r fo r f e a r of e i th e r b o r in g the aud ience o r b rin g in g fo rth

ad d itio n a l te s tim o n y w hich w ill dam age the c a s e . He (the law yer)

m u s t fu rn ish th e ju ry enough te s tim o n y on each p o in t to win th e ir b e lie f;

he m u s t not d u p lica te te s tim o n y on the sam e p o in t beyond n e c e s s ity fo r

f e a r of a ro u s in g b o red o m o r a su sp ic io n th a t he p ro te s ts too m uch on

thi,s po in t,

When suddenly faced w ith the u n fa m ilia r su rro u n d in g s of the

c o u r t and the u n fa m ilia r ro le of the w itn e s s , the re sp o n se of the in d iv i­

d ual m ay re q u ire a s s is ta n c e f ro m the exam in ing co u n se l to m a in ta in the

te s tim o n ia l v a lu e of the w itn e ss . Som e p e rso n s a r e u n d ers tan d ab ly aw ed

by the s itu a tio n and n eed a good d e a l of en co u rag em en t to say w hat they

know. In such a c a s e , the a tto rn e y b eg in s w ith q u es tio n s e a sy to a n sw e r--

n a m e , a d d re s s , o ccupation , fa m ily , e tc , - - s o a s to tak e the w d tness’

m in d off the ch a llen g e of the c o u rtro o m and p e r m it h im to re la x .

O ther w itn e s s e s re sp o n d in qu ite an o p posite w ay. F o r one of the

few tim e s (if n o t the only tim e) the ind iv idual fin d s h im se lf the c e n te r of

a tten tio n in an im p o rta n t p ro c e e d in g . He h a s som eth ing to o ffe r to the

cau se of ju s tic e and i t goes to h is h ead , "We a r e then co n fro n ted w ith

S, S tew art, o£, c i t . , p . 174.

L , W ellm an, D ay in C o u rt, op. c i t . , p , 145,

C. R eed , og, c i t . , p . 260.

243

an exh ib ition e n tire ly out of keep ing w ith the p e rso n a li ty of the w itn e ss

a s we had o b se rv e d i t th e re to fo re and b e liev ed i t to b e , U nder th e se

c irc u m s ta n c e s the w itn e ss " , , , b eco m es s tim u la te d to the p o in t of

e x h i la r a t io n ,” "U n le ss th is w itn e ss , , , i s so b e re d o r c u rb ed , he m ay

do in ca lcu lab le dam age to the s ide ca llin g h im , ” I t m ay even be n e c e s ­

s a ry to w ith d raw the w itn e ss te m p o ra r i ly to a llo w an opportun ity to ta lk

to h im out of h e a r in g of the c o u r t, I t goes a s obvious th a t the la w y e r

m u s t re m a in in c a lm c o n tro l of h im se lf th ro u g h o u t the ex am in atio n . He

m u s t luiow w hat in fo rm a tio n each w itn e ss h a s to o ffe r and how he h a s

p lanned to ob ta in i t and in w hat o rd e r . T h is r e q u ire s a c e r ta in am o u n t

of m a tu r i ty and com m and , I t is a lso the function of the a tto rn e y to

s itu a te h im se lf , w hile q u es tio n in g , to en co u rag e lis te n in g by the j u r y - -

they should be ab le to see and h e a r the w itn e ss ,

If by d es ig n o r s u rp r is e i t happens th a t a h o s ti le w itn e ss i s c a lle d

to te s tify , th e re a r e v a r io u s w ays reco m m en d ed fo r dealing w ith h im . In

g e n e ra l, i t i s su g g ested th a t c o u r te sy and b re v ity w ill d ea l b e s t w ith such

a s itu a tio n . If the w itn e ss unexpected ly changes f ro m frien d ly to h o s ti le ,

l i t t le can b e done ex cep t to in d ica te th a t he once cam e to the a t to rn e y 's

R, L o r r y , o£, c i t . , pp , 65 -66 ,

, p , 66, g, S tew a rt, og. c i t , , p , 175,

L , W ellm an , Day in C o u rt, op. c i t . , pp . 145-146.

244

office and l e t the ju ry conclude th a t he h a s th u s changed h is te s tim o n y .

In r a r e c a s e s the co u n se l i s u rg e d to take an a g g re s s iv e a ttitu d e to w ard

a h o s ti le w itn e ss and th u s o b ta in u se fu l te s tim o n y , b u t i t i s b e lie v ed th a t

tliis i s in freq u e n tly d e s ir a b le ,

T h roughou t the d i r e c t ex am in a tio n the lav /y er i s ad v ise d to keep

h im se lf in the b ack g ro u n d . I t i s the ev id en ce , and th u s the w itn e ss , th a t

is c a llin g fo r a tten tio n , an d the a tto rn e y does h is c a s e a d is s e rv ic e if he

d is t r a c ts f ro m th a t a tte n tio n . I t m ay happen th a t an opponent m ak es

h im se lf i r r i t a t in g th rough c o n s ta n t o b jec tio n s and b y p e rs o n a l r e m a rk s

a d d re s s e d to the o th e r la w y e r . In th is c a s e , i t is w ise to ig n o re the

r e m a rk s and re fu se to be d raw n in to b ick e rin g o v e r p o in ts of law . In

the long ru n , the i r r i ta t in g a tto rn e y w ill do h im se lf m o re h a rm than g o o d i^

F in a lly , the law y e r m u s t r e s i s t a rg u in g h is c a se a s the ev idence

is p r e s e n te d . T h is is unde s ira b le both b ec au se i t w eak en s the e ffe c t of

the c a s e a s a w hole u n it p r e s e n te d in an e ffec tiv e o r d e r and b e ca u se i t

g ives the opponent a runn ing acco u n t of the s tra te g y of the c a s e .

In co n c lu sio n , i t i s c le a r ly e s ta b lish e d th a t th e su b m iss io n of

ev idence c o n s titu te s a c o m p lex and s ig n ifican t p a r t of the ju d ic ia l p ro c e s s .

E v id en ce s e rv e s both a d ia le c t ic a l and a rh e to r ic a l fu n c tio n . D ia le c tic a l,

S, S tew art, op . c i t , , p , 175; S, W e iss , 0£ , c i t , , p , 67;J , C, R eed , op, c i t , , p . 265 -266 ,

S, S tew art, 0£ , c i t . , p . 176.

245

in the se n se th a t i t i s p a r t of an in v e s tig a tiv e p r o c e s s to le a rn of fa c ts

w hich h av e o c c u r re d in p a s t t im e . R h e to rica l, in the sen se th a t a d v o c a te s

s e le c t and p r e s e n t the ev id en ce in su ch a w ay a s to win b e lie f f ro m the

d ecid ing p a r t i e s . The ru le s of a d m is s ib il i ty a r e s e t up to enhance the

d ia le c tic a l n a tu re of the p r o c e s s . T he a d v o c a te s , o p e ra tin g w ith in the

co n tex t of the r u le s , se e k to o b ta in the g r e a te s t p o ss ib le rh e to r ic a l

e ffe c t. T he p r o c e s s of p re s e n tin g f a c ts to the judge and ju ry i s by no

m e a n s c o m p le te , h o w ev e r, u n til c ro s s -e x a m in a tio n is g iv en a chance

to o p e ra te a s a m o d e ra tin g fo rc e upon the te s tim o n y .

C ro s s -E x am in a tio n

C ro s s -e x a m in a tio n i s c e r ta in ly the m o s t p o p u la r a s p e c t of

ju d ic ia l d e c is io n -m a k in g . T h is i s so p ro b a b ly b e cau se th e re is so m uch

d ra m a in c ro s s -e x a m in a tio n . The ex c ite m e n t of th is type of q u estio n in g

co m es f ro m the fa c t th a t i t i s a d i r e c t duel b e tw een w itn e ss and c o u n se l.

If, in d e s c r ib in g the d i r e c t ex am in a tio n the m e ta p h o r of a la w y e r be in g a

m u s ic ia n w as p e rm it te d , th en fo r c ro s s -e x a m in a tio n the a tto rn e y m ay be

d e s c r ib e d a s a f is h e rm a n . F i r s t , he w o rk s the w itn e ss to tak e h is b a i t ,

and w hen i t i s tak en the " f ish " m u s t b e p lay ed sk illfu lly if h e i s to be

b ro u g h t in a g a in s t h is w ill. T h e re i s a s tro n g in c lin a tio n am ong the p r a c ­

tic in g a tto rn e y s to say th a t c ro s s -e x a m in a tio n i s an a r t , depending fo r

i t s s u c c e s s upon the sk il l and w it of the co u n se l. S till, the ra tio n a le

Ij, W ellm an , S u c c e ss in C o u rt, op. c i t . , p . 124.

246

of c ro s s -e x a m in a tio n can be e x p re s s e d and the p ro c e s s and m eth o d can

be d is c u s s e d . One w r i te r , in fa c t, ta k e s d ire c t ex cep tion w ith the

d e s c r ip tio n of c ro s s -e x a m in a tio n a s an a r t . He n o tes th a t th e re i s , to

be s u re , o p p o rtu n ity fo r d isp lay of w it, ta c t , sh re w d n e ss , keen o b s e rv a ­

tio n , u n d e rs ta n d in g , and the lik e . B u t in h is m ind good t r i a l la w y e rs

depend l e s s on a r t and m o re on so lid p re p a ra tio n , "T hey w ork h a rd to

m a s te r the su b jec t in litig a tio n , they know th e ir fa c ts and re a l iz e f ro m

c a re fu l stu d y ju s t w h ere they w ant to a r r iv e and ju s t w hat po in t they w ant

to m ak e .

T he o b je c t of c ro s s -e x a m in a tio n i s to p e rm it th e opposing co u n se l

to m o d e ra te , m od ify , o r r e je c t the ev idence sub m itted a g a in s t h is cau se

by each w itn e s s . C ro ss -e x a m in a tio n is fe lt to be a s tro n g s e c u rity

a g a in s t in c o m p le te , d is to r te d , o r fa ls e ev idence , One su c c e ss fu l

p r a c t i t io n e r goes so f a r a s to d e s c r ib e i t a s the g r e a te s t le g a l engine

e v e r in v en ted fo r the d isc o v e ry of t ru th , C ro s s -e x a m in a tio n i s fe l t

to b e e ffec tiv e in exposing tru th in v a r io u s w ays. It m ay fo rc e a w itn e ss

to abandon a p r e p a re d p o s itio n and im p ro v ise h im se lf in to rev ea lin g fa c ts

he w ish ed to w ithhold . I t m ay so m odify h is b eh av io r a s to convince the

judge and ju r y th a t h is a c tio n s a r e th o se of a d ish o n es t m an . It m ay be

S. S tew art, og. c i t . , p . 219,

^^^H enry H ard w ick e , og, c i t . , p , 138.

1 4 lT h is s ta te m e n t, o r ig in a lly a ttr ib u te d to F . L . W ellm an in h is n o ted A r t of C ro s s -e x a m in a tio n , i s r e i te r a te d and su p p o rted by an eq u a lly s u c c e ss fu l t r i a l law y er of m o re r e c e n t t im e s - -L . P . S try k e r , op. cit.,pk 73.

247

n e c e s s a ry to d e te rm in e th a t a w itn e ss who is e m b a r ra s s e d o r confused

is n o t d is to r tin g te s tim o n y in ten tio n a lly o r , on the o th e r hand , to d e te r ­

m in e th a t a w itn e ss who a p p e a rs to b e the v e ry e s se n c e of h o n es ty is

t ru ly an acco m p lish e d l i a r , "The p sy c h o lo g ic a l a s p e c ts a r e in trig u in g

and l im i t le s s ," r e p o r ts one su c c e ss fu l c o n te m p o ra ry a tto rn e y . "The

ju r y 's in s t in c t , " he co n tin u es , "b a se d on com m on e x p e r ie n c e , d e te rm in e s

the re a c tio n . It i s the la w y e r 's duty to p ro v id e enough g r i s t fo r the

m il l . >i 142

T h u s, the th e o re t ic a l a ssu m p tio n upon w hich the techn ique of

c ro s s -e x a m in a tio n r e s t s i s th a t once g iven a f re e chance to r e p o r t on

w hat p u rp o r ts to be f i r s t- h a n d k n o w le d g e --s ta te d in fu ll and w ithou t the

e m b e llish m e n t of ju d g m e n ts - -a w itn e ss can b e s t be te s te d fo r a c c u ra c y

by ex p o su re to the q u e s tio n s of an opposing a tto rn e y , in the p re s e n c e of

the ju d g e , ju ry , an d the in d iv id u a l a g a in s t whom the te s tim o n y i s d ire c te d .

If th e re have b een o m iss io n s (in ten tio n a l o r o th e rw ise ) the gaps w ill be

fille d ; if th e re h av e b een d is to r t io n s , they w ill be c o r re c te d ; if the

in d iv id u a l te s tify in g i s unw orthy of b e lie f in g e n e ra l, he w ill be ex p o sed .

On the o th e r hand , p re su m a b ly , if the w itn e ss h as re p o r te d h is e x p e r ie n c e s

a c c u ra te ly and h o n e s tly the c ro s s -e x a m in a tio n w ill n o t u n fa irly w eaken

th is ev idence,

N iz e r , o£. c i t . , p . 421.

143J . W. D onovan, op. c i t . , p . 228.

248

O nce the ph ilo so p h y of c ro s s -e x a m in a tio n h a s b een s ta te d , i t i s

n e c e s s a ry to exam ine v a r io u s m e th o d s of p ro c e d u re to gain an u n d e r ­

s tand ing of the im p lied rh e to r ic a l th e o ry . U n fo rtu n a te ly , th e re i s no t

a s m u ch d is c u s s io n of a c tu a l p r in c ip le s of c ro s s -e x a m in a tio n a s m ig h t

b e im ag in ed c o n s id e rin g the im p re s s iv e n u m b er of w o rd s w hich have

b e e n devo ted to th e su b je c t. A cco rd in g to one a u th o r , " th is s itu a tio n is

acco u n ted fo r by the f a c t th a t m uch invo lved in sk ill in c ro s s -e x a m in a tio n

m u s t b e a c q u ire d f ro m e rq ie rien ce and canno t be e a s ily co m m u n ica ted by

the p r in te d p ag e . I t m ig h t a lso be added p a re n th e tic a lly th a t the

la c k of sy s te m a tic and c a re fu l in v e s tig a tio n m ig h t a lso acco u n t fo r th is

la c k . I t i s c e r ta in ly a p p a re n t f ro m a g lance a t the books w ritte n on th e

su b je c t th a t m o s t of the in s tru c tio n i s in th e fo rm of ex am p les . If a l l

the i l lu s tr a t io n s of fam o u s c ro s s -e x a m in a tio n s w e re rem o v ed fro m the

b o o k s , l i t t le w ould re m a in . A s i t i s , they m ak e fo r in te re s tin g re a d in g ,

b u t re v e a l l i t t le in the w ay of p r in c ip le s .

F ro m a study of the h in ts and su g g es tio n s g iven by su c c e ss fu l

la w y e rs , i t i s p o ss ib le to v iew c ro s s -e x a m in a tio n a s a gam e s itu a tio n .

The gam e b e g in s by an id e n tif ic a tio n of r o le s - - th e w itn e ss a t l e a s t i s

id e n tif ied in fa v o r of h is own te s tim o n y and fre q u e n tly id e n tif ie s h im se lf

^^"^Asher L . C o rn e liu s , The C ro s s -E x a m in a tio n of W itn esses (Ind ianapo lis: T he B o b b s -M e rr i l l Com pany P u b l is h e r s , 1929), p . 1.

249

in b eh a lf of th e s ide w hich h a s c a lle d h im to te s tify ; th e a tto rn e y c r o s s -

exam in ing i s the opponent. To th e e x ten t one g iv es in , the o th e r g a in s .

T h is re la tio n sh ip i s c le a r ly m o re t ru e in the c a se of a p e r ju re d w itn e s s ,

b u t u su a lly o c c u rs even though the w itn e ss h a s s im p ly r e la te d an e x p e r -

145ien ce to the b e s t of h is a b ility .

B e fo re the gam e can b e g in , the a t to rn e y opposing the te s tim o n y

m u s t d ec id e w h e th e r to g am b le on p la y in g --d o e s the chance of ga in o ffse t

the chance of lo s s ? To w hat ex ten t h a s h is p o s itio n b ee n d am ag ed b y the

te s tim o n y ? If th e re h a s b e e n l i t t le o r no d am ag e , i t i s fo o lish to c r o s s -

exam ine an d iru n a r i s k of in c u r r in g lo s s . T he r e p o r ts of the a tto rn e y s

s ta te th a t m o re c a s e s a r e lo s t by a tto rn e y s lo s in g the c ro s s -e x a m in a tio n

gam e th an a r e won b y a s u c c e ss fu l job of q u es tio n in g . T h is i s a d iff i­

cu lt d e c is io n fo r a la w y e r to m ak e . T h e re a lw ay s se e m s to b e an u rg e

to have a go a t e v e ry w itn e ss ju s t in c a se som eth ing m ig h t be ac co m p lish e d .

T h is i s c o n s id e re d a d an g ero u s c o u rse fo llow ed only by in e x p e rie n c e d o r

in e ffec tiv e c b o s s - e x a m in e rs .

If , h o w ev er, the co u n se l d e te rm in e s to c ro s s -e x a m in e a w itn e s s ,

he m u s t do so only if he h a s m ad e th e p ro p e r p re p a ra t io n . In the f i r s t

^ ^ % i d . , p . 52.

L . W ellm an , D ay in C o u rt, op. c i t . , p . 181; J . C. R eed , op. c i t . , p . 276.

L . W ellm an , S u c c ess in C o u rt, op. c i t . , p . 125.

250

p la c e , i t i s n e c e s s a ry th a t he u n d e rs ta n d h is o p p o n en t's p o s itio n a s w e ll

a s h is own. 148 Q u es tio n s should not be a sk e d u n le s s the a n sw e r is

known a t the h ig h es t le v e l of p ro b ab ility and u n le s s the a n sw er w ill co n ­

tr ib u te to the cau se of the q u e s tio n e r m o re th an i t h e lp s the side th a t

c a lle d th e w itn e ss , 149 E v e ry d e ta il and d o cu m en t m u s t b e s tu d ied and

c a te g o r iz e d so a s to b e a v a ila b le to the q u e s tio n e r on s h o r t n o tice . The

q u e s tio n e r h im se lf m u s t f i l l h is m ind w ith th is in fo rm a tio n so th a t he

can know w hat is a v a ila b le and use i t w hen a p p ro p r ia te , 1^® S o m etim es

th is am o u n ts to an am az in g am ount of d a ta th a t m u s t b e p r e p a re d by the

a t to rn e y , b u t each ad d itio n b r in g s h im c lo s e r to the lik e lih o o d of a

s u c c e ss fu l c ro s s -e x a m in a tio n , "T h is , in the l a s t a n a ly s is , i s the 'a r t '

of c ro s s -e x a m in a tio n - - th o ro u g h p re p a ra tio n , "1^1

In c o n te m p o ra ry p ra c t ic e , no e3q>erienced t r i a l law y e r " , , ,

w ould th ink of p ro c ee d in g to t r i a l w ithout dem and ing fu ll d is c lo s u re f ro m

h is opponent th rough th e d isc o v e ry p ro c e d u re s , "152 T hrough th is p r o c e s s ,

a la w y e r m ay dem and to be p e rm itte d to see v i ta l docum ents to be u sed

a g a in s t h im and he m ay dem and to b e p e rm it te d to q u es tio n the opposing

1 4 8 a , I j , C o rn e liu s , o£, c i t , , pp , 26; 29,

149H enry H ard w ick e , og. c i t , , p , 166,

1 5 0 l , N iz e r , 0£o c i t , , p , 333, l ^ l lb id ,

152H ickam and Scanlon , o£, c i t , , p , 91.

251

c lie n t and p o ten tia l w itn e s se s . In e s s e n c e , an a tto rn e y m ay do h is

e x p lo ra to ry c ro s s -e x a m in a tio n b e fo re the t r i a l when an e r r o r w ill not

d e s tro y h is p o s itio n in the ey es of the ju ry . A lso , he th u s develops a

t r a n s c r ip t of o ffic ia l te s tim o n y w hich m ay be u sed to d is c r e d i t opposing

w itn e ss d u rin g the t r i a l . (R ules fo rb id sim ply e n te r in g such a t r a n s c r ip t

in to the r e c o rd , b u t i t m ay be u se d d u rin g question ing if a p ro p e r foun­

d ation i s la id by in q u irin g of the w itn e s s w h eth er he m ad e the re c o rd e d

s ta te m e n t, T h u s,, un d er m o d e rn ru les^ th e re i s no ex cu se fo r an

a tto rn e y n o t to b e fu lly acq u a in ted w ith a ll in fo rm a tio n re la t in g to the

c a s e , even to the po in t of having a p re l im in a ry c ro s s -e x a m in a tio n on

r e c o rd .

N ext in the p ro c e s s co m es the d ec is io n as to the o rg an iza tio n of

the c ro s s -e x a m in a tio n and the m a n n e r of beginning . F i r s t , a l l a g re e i t

i s n e c e s s a r y to fo rm u la te an o b jec tiv e and s tick to i t . A lthough th e re

w ill so m e tim es be h o u rs of q u es tio n s betw een each s tep in the p lan , i t i s

n e v e r th e le s s v a lu ab le to hold to p lan n ed o b jec tiv e s . S o m etim es i t i s

a s good to s ta r t c ro s s q u es tio n s a t the s ta r t of the te s tim o n y and exam ine

in the o rd e r in w hich the w itn ess p re s e n te d i t . On the o th e r hand , i t m a y

be v a lu ab le by question ing f i r s t th a t te s tim o n y w hich w as given la s t ,

^^^I b id , , p , 112. L . C o rn e liu s , 0£ . c i t , , p , 18.

N iz e r , o£. c i t . , p. 346.

252

H ere the rationale is that th is p a r t of the story is m ost fre sh in the mind

of the ju ry and a stunning v ictory over the w itness in such a d istinct p a rt

of the testim ony m ight be m ore destructive than if saved until la te r .

In other cases , a stra tegy is recom m ended which is called going "for

the jugular, " That is , ignoring a ll the m inor points and moving stra ig h t

into an exam ination of the essence of the d ire c t testim ony. Still

another technique is to s ta r t by exposing a se rie s of untruths which m ay

individually be triv ia l but in rap id combination tend to destroy the c re d i­

b ility of the w itness quickly.

W hatever stra tegy is finally selected by the att orney will depend

upon h is evaluation of the ch arac te r of the w itness. A good c ro s s ­

exam iner m ust be p rep ared to make judgm ents about individuals of widely

differing types. This conflicts with the a sse rtio n made e a r lie r in the

chapter that a lawyer could lea rn m ost about human nature by studying

h im self and projecting those conclusions to o thers. In the f ir s t p lace ,

through the discovery m echanism s it is possible to am ass data about

age, education, employment, associa tions, fam ily, po litics, and the like

about the w itness well before the actual t r ia l . T here is no excuse fo r a

c ro ss-ex am in er to face a s tran g er in the courtroom . ^^9 Added to th is

S, S tew art, og. c i t . , p. 225.

157Xj, N izer, op. c i t . , p. 60. ^^^Ibid.

^®^A. Li. C ornelius, op. cit. , p. 35.

253

in fo rm a tio n i s the a n a ly s is of the a tto rn e y h im se lf a s he w atch es the

w itn e ss d u rin g te s tim o n y b e fo re and d u rin g the t r i a l . An a t to rn e y should

b e p r e p a re d to u n d e rs ta n d the p e rsp e c tiv e of th ese in d iv id u a ls - - to pu t

h im se lf in th e ir ro le and p re d ic t a re sp o n se to c ro s s -e x a m in a tio n ,

F u r th e r m o r e , the o b se rv a tio n of a w itn e s s ' body, fa c e , h an d s , e y e s ,

l ip s , m o v em en ts of h an d s and fe e t w hile an sw erin g q u es tio n s m ay re v e a l

a w eak n ess in c h a r a c te r o r te s tim o n y , T h is ad m on ition a r i s e s f ro m

a th e o ry th a t c e r ta in p h y s ic a l a c tio n s a c t a s signs of ag ita tio n re su lt in g

f ro m fa ls e te s tim o n y . A lthough a cunning l i a r w ill a ttem p t to co n cea l

such s ig n s , n e v e r th e le s s , th e e y e s , to n es of the v o ic e , and th e m outh

a r e the b e s t in d ex es to the s ta te of m in d of the w itn e ss , "A co n v u lsiv e

tw itch in g of the m u s c le s of the m ou th w ill o ften b e tra y ag ita tio n w hich

the w itn e ss w ish e s to c o n c e a l, w hile the eye w ill r e v e a l no th ing , , , , ^

O bviously , co n s ta n t a tte n tio n m u s t b e g iven to the a c tu a l te s tim o n y of

the w itn e ss to no te c o n tra d ic tio n s , o m is s io n s , and o th e r e r r o r s of t e s t i ­

m ony w hich w ill c a ll fo r the a tte n tio n of the c ro s s -e x a m in e r . One lead ing

p r a c t i t io n e r p r e p a re s a c h a r t w hich in c lu d e s the v i ta l p o in ts of the t e s t i ­

m ony and b e s id e each one a r e l is te d any in c o n s is te n c ie s m ade by the

^^^I b i d , p . 36, W e iss , o£, c i t , , p , 121,

162 jjen ry H ard w ick e , o£, c i t , , p , 153,

254

w itn e ss in p rev io u s te s tim o n y , in the p r e - t r i a l d ep o s itio n , o r any o th e r

163do cu m en ts av a ilab le .

W ith th ese p r e l im in a r ie s fin ish ed , the gam e b eg in s . A s the

a tto rn e y ap p ro ach es the w itn e s s , he m u s t d e te rm in e h is own m a n n e r of

q u es tio n in g . E ith e r a sav ag e , v ic io u s , and te r r ify in g ap p ro ach o r a

f r ie n d ly , co n c ilia to ry one m ay be u se d . I t s e e m s m o re com m on to

b e lie v e th a t the fo rm e r i s m o re e ffec tiv e , b u t the te s tim o n y of the p r a c ­

t i t io n e r s fa v o rs the l a t t e r , F ra n c is L . W ellm an, an o ft-q u o ted

w r i te r on c ro s s -e x a m in a tio n , how ever, cam e to b e lie v e tow ard the end

of h is c a r e e r th a t in c e r ta in c a se s b ro w b ea tin g a w itn e ss w as the m o s t

e ffec tiv e m ean s of fo rc in g ou t the tru th , No ru le of thum b i s g iven

fo r choosing betw een the two a p p ro a ch es , and m u s t be le f t to the in d iv id u al.

One c r i te r io n govern ing the se le c tio n of the la w y e r 's ap p ro ach

to the w itn e ss , h o w ev er, i s th e need to im p re s s the judge and ju ry th a t

the w itn e ss is being f a ir ly d e a lt w ith . In th e c ro s s -e x a m in a tio n g am e ,

the -witness beg ins w ith a p ro b ab le sym pathy fro m the ju ry . He i s p la ce d

in the ro le of the underdog and the a tto rn e y m u s t b e c a re fu l to do nothing

to en co u rag e th a t sym pathy , The ju ry h a s h e a rd a s to ry f ro m the

N iz e r , op, c i t , , pp, 114-115,

^^^H enry H ard w ick e , og. c i t , , p , 188,

165p, W ellm an , S u ccess in C o u rt, op, c i t , , pp, 125-126,

L , C o rn e liu s , og. c i t , , p , 27,

255

w itn e s s , to ld in h is way and p ro b ab ly in a m an n e r b e s t d es ig n e d to

en co u rag e b e lie f . In the m idd le of the s to ry , when the ju ry p ro b ab ly h as

no re a so n to d isb e liev e i t , the opposing co u n se l r i s e s to c ro s s -e x a m in e

and th u s su g g es t th a t th is new acq u a in tan ce m ay be a l i a r . T h is is a

d iff icu lt im ag e to o v e rco m e . The ju ry ten d s m o s t o ften to a ssu m e

the ro le of im p a r t ia l ad ju d ica to r and ex p ec ts the ac tio n s of the a tto rn e y s

to be such th a t e v e ry chance fo r te llin g the tru th is b e ing g iven the w it­

n e s s . None of h is ac tio n s m u s t give the im p re s s io n of su p p re ss in g the

tru th . The a tto rn e y m u s t be v e ry c a re fu l in q u estio n in g c h ild re n ,

w om en, o ld p eo p le , d isab led p e r s o n s , and o th e rs s im ila r ly p ro n e to

w inning sym pathy . N o n -ra tio n a l a s i t m ay seem , th e se ty p es a r e no t

ejq jected to su b m it to the sam e sc ru tin y a s o th e rs . One w r i te r , fo r .

in s ta n c e , w ould no t a tta c k a p r ie s t fo r fe a r the ex am in a tio n would do

m o re h a rm to h is cau se th an good. H ow ever, the sam e w r i te r po in ts

to the n e c e s s ity to gauge the ju r y 's fe e lin g s fo r they m ay change th e ir

sym pathy fo r the w itn ess a s the c ro s s -e x a m in a tio n p ro c e e d s . In one

c a s e , fo r ex am p le , a s ick old m an w as u n d er c ro ss -e x a m in a tio n .^ -^ ,

type m o s t lik e ly to have co m p assio n f ro m the ju ry . A s the q u es tio n s

w ent a lo n g , the w itn ess cam e to be m o re and m o re re v e a le d a s one not

^^^Ib id . S. S tew art, o£. c i t . , p . 231.

^^^Ib id . N iz e r , 0£ . c i t . , p . 141.

256

d e se rv in g of sym pathy . . . T h e re i s a p o in t a t w hich even such a

w itn e ss m ay b e d e a lt w ith a g g re s s iv e ly , and th a t i s w hen he h a s b een so

d is c re d ite d th a t the ju ry a c tu a lly en joys h is d isc o m fitu re . "171 The only

w ay to te l l w hen such a tim e i s re a c h e d is v isu a l a n a ly s is of the m ood of

the ju ry .

D uring the questio n in g th e law y e r h a s the advan tage of co m p le te

c o n tro l of the s itu a tio n , if he ch o o ses to a v a il h im se lf of i t . The way in

w hich the q u es tio n s a r e f ra m e d d e te rm in e s c o n tro l. If the su b stan ce of

the m a t te r u n d er in v e s tig a tio n is p u t in the q u es tio n and s e t out fo r the

w itn e ss to a f f irm o r deny , the q u e s tio n e r re m a in s in c o n tro l. If, on the

o th e r hand , the q u es tio n s a r e o p en -en d ed , s ta r t in g w ith such w o rd s a s

"w hy, " "how, " "w hat, " and the l ik e , i t w ill be the w itn e ss who d e te r ­

m in e s the su b stan ce of the a n s w e r , th e d ire c tio n i t ta k e s , and the tim e

devo ted to i t . In a lm o s t e v e ry c a s e , i t i s to the advan tage of the q u e s ­

tio n e r to u se the fo rm e r type of q u e s tio n and c o n tro l the d ire c tio n of the

q u es tio n in g . Only w hen a w itn e ss h a s b een le d to a p o in t th a t f re e d o m

to e la b o ra te on an an sw e r w ill s im ply m ake m o re f i r m h is im p each m en t

i s i t d e s ira b le to a sk an open q u es tio n . The dev e lo p m en t of a lin e of

q u estio n in g i s a lso m o re e ffec tiv e ly c o n tro lle d if the q u es tio n s a r e kep t

sh o r t and to the po in t. W itn e sse s a r e m o s t f re q u e n tly p e rs o n s of a v e ra g e

in te llig en ce and ed ucation and the q u es tio n s m u s t be p h ra s e d in a fo rm

171•Ibid., p , 352, ^72ibid,, p . 303,

257

and language lik e ly to be u n d e rs to o d . To the ex ten t the sp ec ific questio n

i s u n d e rs to o d , to th a t ex ten t the gu idance of the q u e s tio n e r re m a in s

e ffe c tiv e .

N ot only i s i t d e s ira b le fo r the q u e s tio n e r to be in a c tu a l co n tro l

of the s itu a tio n , i t i s a lso im p o r ta n t th a t the judge and ju ry p e rc e iv e h im

a s b e in g in c o n tro l, w h e th e r he i s o r n o t. A s long a s the ju ry s e e s the

c r o s s - e x a m in e r a s w inning the g am e h is cau se i s ad v an ced . T h u s , th e re

m ay b e t im e s w hen an a n sw e r i t to ta lly the op p o site of th a t ex p ec ted o r

d e s ir e d . The q u e s tio n e r m u s t no t p e rm it the ju ry to see h is c a u se h as

b e en h a rm e d . He m u s t p lay the ro le of one who is a lto g e th e r p le a se d

w ith the c o u rse of e v e n ts . He should a lso have the good se n se to

p e r m it such a w itn e ss (one who h a s begun to s c o re p o in ts a g a in s t the

q u e s tio n e r) q u ie tly to le av e th e s tan d . A com m on m is ta k e i s to continue

1 Cq u es tio n in g such a w itn e ss and m ak e the d ifficu lty ev en w o rse .

T he p ro c e s s of c ro s s -e x a m in a tio n goes on, th e n , a t two le v e ls :

one i s an a c tu a l s c ru tin y of th e d i r e c t te s tim o n y to c o r r e c t e r r o r s o r

o m is s io n s , and the o th e r i s the d ra m a p e r fo rm e d fo r b e n e f it of the judge

^^^A. L . C o rn e liu s , op. c i t . , p . 39; W. S, S te w a rt, op. c i t . ,p . 223.

L . W ellm an , Day in C o u rt, op. c i t . , p . 210; J , C. R eed, op. c i t . , pp . 325-326.

^^^A. L . C o rn e liu s , op. c i t . , p . 128; W. S. S te w a rt, op. c i t . , pp . 233 -235 .

258

and ju ry and d es ig n ed to ex p o se the w itn ess a s one not w orthy of b e lie f .

B oth a r e fe l t n e c e s s a ry to a ra tio n a l ev a lu a tio n of the fa c ts in a c a s e .

S u ccess fo r the a tto rn e y a t e ith e r le v e l m ay d is c r e d i t the value of a

w itn e ss a s a f a c t-g iv e r . I f , th rough c o r re c t io n s and add itions the h a r m ­

fu l e ffec t of the te s tim o n y is o ffse t, the w itn e ss w ill not have c o n tr ib u ted

e ffec tiv e ly to f a c ts n e c e s s a ry to w in the c a s e fo r the side th a t c a lle d h im .

T h is se em s ra tio n a l. On the o th e r hand, if by m eth o d s of g u ile , t r ic k e ry ,

con fusion , r id ic u le , o r h o n e s t escposure an a tto rn e y can d e s tro y w hat is

c a lle d by c la s s ic a l r h e to r ic ia n s the w itn e s s ’ e th o s , the e f fe c tiv e n e ss of

the te s tim o n y is eq u a lly d e s tro y e d . T h is m ay o r m ay no t be ra tio n a l

depending upon the v a lid ity of the m ean s of a tta c k . F o r ex am p le , p r a c ­

t i t io n e rs of law a r e w ell a w a re of the in h e re n t p ro b le m s of hum an

p e rc e p tio n , re c o lle c tio n , and n a r ra t io n . T hey e s ta b lish e la b o ra te ru le s

vnLof a d m iss ib ili ty of ev id en ce in an a ttem p t to c o r r e c t fo r th e se p ro b le m s .

A m ong the ru le s i s one p ro h ib itin g the use of lead in g q u estio n s on d i r e c t

ex am in a tio n , on the a ssu m p tio n th a t th rough th e u se of su g g estio n an

a tto rn e y m ay le a d an h o n e s t w itn e ss to te s tify to f a c ts he w ould n o t have

o th e rw ise . H ow ever, d u rin g c ro s s -e x a m in a tio n suggestion is n o t only

p e rm itte d , i t is the m a in s ta y of the p ro c e s s . S u ccessfu l p ra c t i t io n e r s

r e c a l l w ith p le a s u re the m an y tim e s they h av e le d a w itn ess to expand

H . W igm ore d ev o tes m o s t of h is book on the S c ience of Ju d ic ia l P ro o f to th is type of p ro b le m .

259

upon h is te s tim o n y ag a in and ag a in u n til he h a s , th ro u g h re d u c tio ad

ab su rd u m , ejcposed m uch of i t a s fa b r ic a tio n . To be ab le to supply such

d e ta il fo r a g iven day som e tim e in the p a s t i s good re a so n to a s su m e the

s to ry i s m a d e -u p , T he r e s u l t is the lik e ly re je c tio n of the e n tire ty

of the w itness* te s tim o n y on the a ssu m p tio n th a t if p a r t of the s to ry is

fa lse none of i t should be b e lie v e d . The p ro b le m in th is i s the fa ilu re

of the p r a c t i t io n e r s to o ffe r a m e an s to d is tin g u ish b e tw een the l i a r who

h a s m a d e -u p d e ta ils to su p p o rt an in te n tio n a lly fa lse s to ry and th e h o n e s t

w itn e ss who h a s , th ro u g h su g g estio n , u n in ten tio n a lly e la b o ra te d upon h is

a c tu a l e x p e r ie n c e s .

In th e d ra m a tic p o r tio n of the c ro s s -e x a m in a tio n , i t is im p o rta n t

to be s u re the ju ry h a s n o tic ed the im a g in a ry p o r tio n of the te s tim o n y . If

a fa b r ic a tio n w ere to go u n n o ticed , i t s value in d e s tro y in g the c re d ib ili ty

of the w itn e ss w ould be lo s t . T hus one techn ique su g g ested is to so lid ify

a fa b r ic a tio n once i t h a s b ee n a r t ic u la te d . T h a t i s , once the w itn e ss h a s

te s tif ie d to a fa c t the q u e s tio n e r b e lie v e s he can p ro v e to b e f a ls e , the

w itn e ss i s a sk e d to re p e a t the fa c t ag a in and ag a in f ro m e v e ry ang le to

p re v e n t h im f ro m e3q>laining aw ay the e r r o r by som e re a so n a b le ex cu se .

W ith each a n s w e r , the w itn e ss goes d e e p e r in to a co m m itm en t on the

po in t and le s and le s s l ik e ly to deny i t . A nd, w ith each r e - a s s e r t io n , the

177A , L , C o rn e liu s , 0£ , c i t , , pp, 155-156,

260

w itn e ss m oves h im se lf c lo s e r and c lo s e r to im p each m en t. When fin a lly

the law y er sp rin g s h is p ro o f th a t the s ta te m e n t is f a ls e , the w itn e ss i s

d e s tro y e d w ith l i t t le hope of re c o v e ry . T he ju ry i s un lik e ly to b e lie v e

any th ing e lse the w itn e ss sa y s .

S till m o re im p o r ta n t to m ain ta in in g the a ttitu d e of the ju ry i s the

cap ac ity of the q u e s tio n e r to stop w hen he h a s acco m p lish e d h is goal.

T h e re i s a po in t of c lim a x w hich is re a c h e d in c ro s s -e x a m in a tio n w hen

the g r e a te s t am ount of v a lu e h as b een o b ta in ed by a given lin e of q u e s tio n s .

To p ro c e e d fu r th e r on th a t lin e m igh t p e r m it the w itn ess to e3q>lain aw ay

any h a rm th a t h a s b e en done h im o r a t l e a s t to d is t r a c t the a tten tio n of

the ju ry f ro m the p a r t ic u la r conclusion the c ro s s -e x a m in e r h a s o b ­

ta in e d . The ju ry i s n o t tra in e d in th e ev a lu a tio n of te s tim o n y . They

ten d to m ak e fa ir ly g ro s s d is t in c t io n s - - a w itn e ss h a s to ld the tru th o r not;

the fa c t i s a s the w itn e ss sa id o r no t, and so fo r th . S o m etim es a tru ly

s ig n ifican t a c c o m p lish m e n t of c ro s s -e x a m in a tio n such as the ex p o su re of

a m a jo r m is s ta te m e n t by the w itn ess m ay b e lo s t in ex tended questio n in g

a ro u n d the p o in t and in the fin a l a n a ly s is co u n t v e ry l i t t le to w ard the

d e c is io n . I t i s f e l t th a t if a v a lid ex p lan a tio n can b e m ad e fo r w hat

N iz e r , og, c i t . , p . 101; S. W e iss , o£, c i t . , p . 119.

L . C o rn e liu s , op. c i t . , p . 34; F . L . W ellm an, D ay in C o u rt, pp . 196; 223.

ISOlbid.

261

h a s b een d raw n f ro m the w itn e s s , then i t can b e m ad e th rough the p ro c e s s

of r e - d i r e c t ex am in a tio n by the co u n se l o r ig in a lly ca llin g the w itn e s s .

T h u s , by cu tting off the w itn e ss b e fo re he can ex p la in a g r e a te r im p a c t

m ay be m ad e on the ju ry and no p ro p e r in fo rm a tio n tru ly lo s t .

A g re a t d ea l i s sa id by p ra c t i t io n e r s ab o u t the v isu a l cu es w hich

a c t a s s ig n s of fa ls if ic a tio n by w itn e s s e s , an d o th e r c h a r a c te r is t ic s of

the in d iv id u a l w hich he lp the q u e s tio n e r . I t h a s a lre a d y b een su g g ested

th a t the e y e s , the m o u th , the v o ic e , m u sc le m o v e m e n ts , h an d s , e t c . ,

m ay re v e a l flaw s in the s to ry o r the c h a ra c te r of the w itn e ss . T he

e x a m in e r i s ex p ec ted to study th e se c lu es c a re fu lly and a d ju s t h is ap p ro ach

a c c o rd in g ly . A w itn e ss m ay be ex pected to v a ry in the s tre n g th w ith

w hich he w ill oppose the o b jec tiv e of the q u e s tio n e r . " T h e re is a p sy c h o ­

lo g ic a l tim e fo r v e n tu re so m e n e s s w ith a w itn e ss . A q u estio n p u t to h im

w hen he i s v ig o ro u s ly r e s i s ta n t m ay be in e ffec tu a l. The sam e q u e s tio n

th row n a t h im w hen he is s tunned and low in m o ra le m ay induce a

co n fess io n . "^^2 x h e r e i s som e d isa g re e m e n t am ong p ra c t i t io n e r s a s to

w hat p h y s ic a l re sp o n se is m o s t re v e a lin g to th e q u e s tio n e r . Som e say

the ey es a r e m o s t in d ic a tiv e . O thersw watch h an d s o r the whole fa c e ,

saying the b e s t l i a r s le a r n f i r s t to co n tro l th e i r e y e s . In a I960 d isc u s s io n

W eiss , o£. c i t . , p . 121; H en ry H ard w ick e , o£. c i t . , p . 153.

N iz e r , og, c i t . , p . 127.

262

of psycho logy in law , D w ight G. M cC arthy concludes th a t " . . . w ith in

re a so n ab le l im its th e re can b e no qu estio n b u t th a t the e x p re ss io n s of

183 . .the face a r e in d ica tiv e of the em o tio n s . " In any ev en t, i t se e m s a s if

m o s t ex p e rien ced c ro s s -e x a m in e r s a d ju s t th e ir s tra te g y in a c c o rd a n c e

w ith th e ir ju d g m en ts of the w ea k n esse s of the w itn e ss b a se d on o b se rv a tio n s

of som e c u e s .

The ju ry a lso w a tch es w itn e sse s . T h e re is no s ing le th e o ry of

w hat c h a r a c te r is t ic s a r e m o s t m ean ingfu l to the m a jo r ity of ju r ie s , b u t

i t i s g e n e ra lly b e liev ed th a t th e p h y s ica l c h a r a c te r is t ic s m en tio n ed above

a re u se d . C u rio u sly , one ex p e rie n c ed advocate n o te s th a t a c to r s r a r e ly

m ake good w itn e ss e s . He ju d g es tha t the a c to r is so co n ce rn ed w ith

m aking a good p e rfo rm a n c e th a t he fa ils to p lay the ro le dem anded by

ju r ie s . T h a t i s , w it, g e s tu r e s , ca lm re sp o n se to the whole s itu a tio n ,

a n sw e rs g iven w ith a f l a i r , do not seem to be effec tiv e in e s ta b lish in g

c re d ib ili ty . On the c o n tra ry , u n so p h is tica ted in d iv id u a ls who a re f r ig h ­

tened o r aw ed by the c o u r tro o m a tm o sp h e re and who re sp o n d qu ie tly and

IQCshyly tend to win m o re confidence fro m ju r ie s .

The v a r io u s w r i te r s on c ro ss -e x a m in a tio n devote c o n s id e ra b le

a tten tio n to d iffe re n t ty p e s of w itn e sse s : p e r ju re d w itn e s s , s a rc a s t ic

18S o u g h t G. M cC arth y , P sycho logy and the L aw (Englew ood C liffs , N . J . : P r e n tic e -H a l l , I960), p . 167.

184f , L . W ellm an, Day in C o u rt, op. c i t . , p . 204.

N iz e r , o£. c i t . , pp . 127-128.

263

w itn e ss , c h ild re n , f e m a le s , e x p e r ts , h o s tile w itn e s s e s , and so fo rth .

The in d iv id u a l c a s e s can b eco m e so sp ec ific th a t no g e n e ra l p r in c ip le s

m ay be d raw n . I t could b e g e n e ra liz e d th a t i t i s n e c e s s a ry to a d ju s t the

a p p ro ach in question ing to f it the p a r t ic u la r ind iv idual u n d e r ex am in a tio n .

C e r ta in ly , ttb e n questio n in g e x p e r ts f ro m v a r io u s f ie ld s i t i s n e c e s s a ry

fo r the a tto rn e y to in fo rm h im se lf in the f ie ld . C e r ta in ly , the q u e s tio n e r

w ill adop t a d iffe re n t a p p ro ach fo r a w itn e ss judged to be ly ing th an fo r

a w itn e ss judged to be h o n e s tly m is ta k e n . How the ac tu a l a d ju s tm e n t is

m ad e te n d s to v a ry f ro m one p ra c t i t io n e r to a n o th e r ,

In the f in a l a n a ly s is , the gam e of c ro s s -e x a m in a tio n is won o r

lo s t by an a tto rn e y depending on the way the ju ry o r judge in te r p r e ts the

a n s w e rs and b eh av io r of the w itn e ss . I t r a r e ly happens th a t a w itn e ss is

a b so lu te ly exposed a s a l i a r , o r an a c c u se d c o n fe sse s on the w itn e ss

187stan d , te le v is io n p ro g ra m s to the c o n tra ry no tw ith stand ing . T h u s ,

i t i s the r e la tiv e c re d ib ili ty of opposing w itn e s s e s , a s m od ified by

c ro s s -e x a m in a tio n , w hich fo rm the b a s is fo r ju d g m en ts of fa c t . H ow ever,

th ro u g h th e p e r io d of c ro s s -e x a m in a tio n , the a tto rn e y s have b een den ied

P a r t ic u la r ly good ex am p les of books d isc u ss in g ad ju s tm e n t to d iffe re n t s itu a tio n s in c ro s s -e x a m in a tio n a r e the follow ing: F , L , W ell­m a n , T ^ A r t of C ro££-Eocam uiation (New Y ork: M acm illan C o , , 1923); and A, L , C o rn e liu s , op, c it.

N iz e r , op, c i t , , pp , 9-12 ,

264

the chance to a rg u e the m e r i t s of th e ir c a s e - - to ad v an ce th e ir own i n t e r ­

p re ta t io n s of the fa c ts and law . T h is i s le f t to the c lo s in g a rg u m en t,

Clo sing A rg u m en t

The function of the f in a l a rg u m e n t is to su m m a riz e the fa c ts

w hich h ave b een p re s e n te d in ev idence and d raw c o n c lu s io n s f ro m th em

w ithou t " , , , s a c r if ic in g em otion o r lucidity,"^® ® T h is s ta te m e n t of

p u rp o se ex p o ses a d iffe re n c e of opin ion a s to the th e o ry of the c lo sin g

a rg u m e n t. T h e re se e m s to b e som e co n flic t b e tw een the d isap p ro v a l of

o ld -fa sh io n e d o ra to ry , the ap p ro v a l of fa c t and lo g ic , and the p r a c t ic a l

e ffe c tiv e n e ss of w inning b e lie f f ro m the ju ry by any accep tab le m e a n s .

One p ra c tic in g law y er c a lls fo r g r e a te r a tte n tio n to m e th o d s of th ink ing

an d re a so n in g . "T he a b ili ty to th in k c le a r ly and r e a s o n a c c u ra te ly , " he

sa y s , " a r e the fu n d am en ta l and e s s e n tia l q u a lif ic a tio n s of the law -

189y e r , " He say s th a t i t i s im p o rta n t to know la w s , c a s e s , and ru le s of

ev id en ce , b u t " the find ing , p re se n tin g , p ro v in g , d is c u s s in g and in te r ­

p re tin g of c e r ta in fa c ts m ak e up a la rg e p a r t , p e rh a p s fo u r- f if th s o r even

n in e - te n th s of t r i a l s a t law , , . , " The t r i a l la w y e r , he con c lu d es , m u s t

c o n s id e r f i r s t if h is con ten tion i s a su ffic ien t b a s is fo r a su it o r d e fe n se .

^ ^ ^ Ib id ., p , 151,

189A lbert S, O sb o rn , "A C ase Book on T hought and R eason ing , A m e ric a n L aw School R ev iew , V ol. 5 (M ay, 1925), p . 534,

265

and then w h e th e r o r not th e re e x is ts a re a so n a b le p ro b a b ility of i t being

acc e p te d by the c o u r t.

F ro m a sp eech f i r s t d e l iv e re d in 1921 b u t c o n s id e re d so v aluab le

a s to d e s e rv e re p r in tin g in 1947, i t i s le a rn e d th a t,

n ex t to th e a d v o c a te 's w illin g n e ss to se iz e upon, an a ly ze and u n d e rs ta n d the d e ta ils of the c a s e w hich he i s p re p a r in g fo r t r i a l . . . n ex t in the a rm o u ry of the advocate [ i s J the p ow er to s e le c t out of th is v a s t m a s s of d e ta il the th in g s th a t r e a l ly m a t t e r , and the c o u rag e to r e je c t . . . th e accu m u la tio n of u n n e c e s s a ry m a te r ia l . . . . O th e r th ings b e in g eq u a l, the s h o r te s t a rg u m e n t is the b e s t . ^91

The au th o r g o es on to d e c la re ,

I know i t i s sa id , and som e p eo p le b e liev e i t m o s t fe rv e n tly , th a t s in ce advocacy is the a r t of p e rsu a s io n , the m o s t im p o r ta n t th in g in advocacy m u s t b e the ab ility to m ak e a flo w ery sp ee ch . W ell, f o re n s ic e loquence h a s , so we a re to ld by h is to r ia n s , f lo u r ish e d in v a r io u s a g e s , b u t I canno t b r in g m y s e lf to b e liev e th a t h ig h ly rh e to r ic a l p e r io d s r e a lly e v e r h av e h a d , e i th e r on ju d g e s o r on ju r ie s , qu ite the in fluence w hich h is to r ia n s and b io g ra p h e rs a s s u r e you th ey d id h ave in the c a se of the p a r t ic u la r su b je c t of th e ir a d m ira tio n . A t any r a te , i t i s a p ro d u ce w hich d o es n o t keep . Can anyth ing b e m o re d e p re s s in g th an read in g the ro llin g p e r io d s even of g re a t sp e e c h e s , . . ?

In the c o n c lu s io n of the sp eech , the au th o r in d ic a te s the th e o ry he ho lds

re g a rd in g le g a l a rg u m e n t.

I th in k i t w ill be found th a t fo r ev e ry s o r t of t r ib u n a l i t is fo rc ib le an d o rd e r ly s ta te m e n t f a r m o re than rh e to r ic a l e la b o ra tio n w hich in d u ces b e lie f and e ffec ts p e rsu a s io n ; an d ,

1 9 0 lb id ., p. 535.

1 9 1 v isco u n t S im on, "T he V ocation of an A d v o ca te , " The C anadian B a r R ev iew , XXV (F e b ru a ry , 1947), p . 156.

266

th e re fo re , w hile w e la w y e rs ought to study, to en joy , and w ithin our o p p o rtu n itie s p r a c t is e , the d ifficu lt and d an g e ro u s b u s in e ss of r h e to r ic , I w ould beg ev ery o n e of you • , . esch ew rh e to r ic a s a su b s titu te fo r w ork and b e liev e th a t the e ffec tiv e way in w hich the v o ca tio n of advocacy is follow ed is f a r m o re by devoting y o u rs e lf to p re c is e and a c c u ra te u n d e rs tan d in g of a l l th a t is invo lved in the fa c ts and the law of the c a se and a c le a r and o rd e r ly s ta te m e n t of the co n seq u en ce , th an in the u se of h ig h -so u n d in g and ro tund p h ra seo lo g y . ^92

G iving an o th er su p p o rtin g opinion to the th e o ry th a t le g a l a rg u m e n t should

focus on fa c t and lo g ic is - th e s ta te m e n t w hich fo llow s.

If the c a se i s p ro p e r ly p re p a re d fo r t r i a l and the in s tru c t io n s p ro p e r ly d raw n . . . the a rg u m e n t to the ju ry is o rd in a r i ly con ­fin ed to the f a c t is s u e s p re se n te d by the in s tru c tio n s . The te s tim o n y re la t in g to th e se fa c t i s s u e s should be rev iew ed in a c a re fu l and e ffec tiv e m an n e r and lo g ic a l a rg u m en t in su p p o rt of fav o rab le in fe re n c e s to b e d raw n f ro m the p h y s ica l fa c ts and c irc u m s ta n tia l ev id en ce , should be m ad e . C are should be taken no t to p a tro n iz e o r in su lt the in te llig e n c e of the ju r o r s and log ic and lu c id ity o r re a so n in g should b e r e l ie d upon r a th e r th an v e rb o s ity and v eh em e n ce . A busing the a d v e rs a ry , h is a tto rn e y o r unfavo rab le ta c t ic s u su a lly w ill p re ju d ic e the ju ry in th e i r fav o r w hile if th e i r conduct is r e a l ly re p re h e n s ib le , the ju ry on som e m e m b er of th e ju ry , a t l e a s t , i s ap t to d e te c t i t w ithou t your help .

"The b e s t p u rp o se of o r a l a rg u m en t, " th is au th o r co n c lu d es , " is to em pha­

s ize and to c a ll the a tten tio n of the c o u r t d ire c tly to the v i ta l p o in ts

n e c e s s a ry to the e s ta b lish m e n t of y our th e o r ie s . "^^4

H a r r i s 's H in ts on A dvocacy, p ro b a b ly the m o s t d u ra b le p iec e of

w ritin g on the su b jec t of leg a l advocacy , d e m o n s tra te s m o re p re c is e ly

19 2 ib id ., p . 158.

^^^Claud B , F lo r a , "E ffec tive P re s e n ta t io n of the L aw , " K ansas C ity Law R eview , IV (A p ril, 1936), p . 87.

1 9 4 ib id ., p. 88.

267

the sch izo id n a tu re of thought on the c lo sin g a rg u m e n t. In i t , the w r i te r

s a y s , "I do no t say you should appeal to the p a s s io n s o r sy m p a th ies of a

ju ry , b u t i t i s p e r fe c tly a llow ab le to induce the ju ry to m ake th a t ap p ea l

fo r th e m se lv e s . E la b o ra tin g upon th a t s e n tim e n t, he says

The m an who d ire c t ly so lic its c o m p assio n i s a p o o r ad v o ca te , b u t he who p r e s e n ts the fa c ts of h is c a se so th a t the ju ry m ay re g a rd h is c lie n t w ith th a t sen tim en t i s a g r e a t one. The one know s hum an n a tu re , the o th e r does n o t. The one aw akens y our sym pathy , the o th e r a ro u s e s y o u r co n tem p t.

. . . A t the B a r , ex cep t in r a r e c a s e s , the h ig h e r g ifts of o ra to ry a r e out of p la c e . . . .

On the o th e r hand,, th e re a r e w r i te r s on the th eo ry of the c lo sin g

a rg u m e n t who m ove m o re in the d ire c tio n of p e rs u a s io n and give le s s

e m p h a s is to log ic and f a c t r e s t r ic t io n s . F o r e x a m p le , one w r i te r p u ts

h is p o s itio n th is way: "W hile f lo r id o ra to ry h a s ten d ed to d is a p p e a r ,

t ru e eloquence is s t i l l of su p rem e im p o rta n c e . H is a rg u m e n t is

th a t s im p ly b ec au se f o rm e r p a t te rn s of pub lic speak ing seem r id ic u lo u s

and out of p lace in a l a t e r tim e , th e re i s no re a s o n to b e liev e th a t p r in ­

c ip le s of e ffec tiv e p e rs u a s io n , when u til iz e d in m o d e rn m e th o d s , a r e

n o t su itab le to the le g a l s itu a tio n . O th er than m e th o d s of e ffec tiv e

co m m u n ica tio n th ro u g h d e liv e ry te c h n iq u es , th is a u th o r s t r e s s e s the

n eed to show conv ic tion on the p a r t of the a tto rn e y . A no ther o b s e rv e r

l^ S o e o rg e W. K eeton , H a r r i s 's H in ts on A dvocacy (London: S tevens & Sons, L im ite d , 1943), p . 37,

196xbid.

^ ^ ^ B e rn a rd L . S h ientag , "The T r ia l of a C iv il J u ry A ction in New Y ork , " U nited S ta te s L aw R eview , LXIX (A p ril, 1935), p . 207.

268

notes that the key to an e ffective sum m ary is the rea lization that the

judge or jury are only concerned with finding m a ter ia l on which to b ase

a d ecisio n . The jud icia l p r o c e ss thrusts upon the judge or jury the task

of m aking a d ecision w hether it is d esired or not; whether they have any

in te r e st in the case or not. They approach the c lo sin g argum ents with

the knowledge that soon a d ecision m ust be m ade. They are looking for

a b a s is ’upon which to found the d ecision . A pparently, th is m ay be

rational or a rationalization . The law yer should strive to give it to

them .

The u ltim ate in departure from the rational theory of the final

sum m ation is m ade in a T rea tise on A m erican A dvocacy. T his book,

w hich i s d escribed by its author as an A m erican v ersio n of the noted

w ork on advocacy by the B r itish w riter R ichard H a rr is , dw ells on the

sty le of the final sta tem en t--th e length and structure of sen tences; the

figurative d e v ic e s , the "pleasant rh etorica l flourish" which is "always

accep tab le. "^99 For exam ple , the author m akes the following com m ent

rem in iscen t of B r itish e lo cu tio n ists .

The ad vocate should avo id p a re n th e se s a s m u ch a s p o ss ib le ;but if he em ploy one, le t it be for the purpose of em p h asis.I t r e q u ire s som e s k ill . . . to do th is e ffe c tiv e ly . If done w e ll,

^^®Ijord M acm illan , "Som e O b se rv a tio n s on the A r t of A dvocacy , " T he C anadian B a r R ev iew , XIII (Jan u a ry , 1935), p . 22.

199Alexander H. R obbins, A T rea tise on A m erican A dvocacy (St. L ouis: Central Law Journal Company, 1913), p . 70.

269

h is p a re n th e s is w ill s ta n d ou t like the p r in c ip a l o b jec t of a b r i l l ia n t p y ro te ch n ic d isp la y ; b u t if i l l -p e r f o rm e d , i t w ill be m o re lik e a dam p c e n te rp ie c e , w hich b e c o m e s a f a i lu r e . . . .

A re c o g n itio n of a p o te n tia l co n flic t b e tw een ra tio n a l dec id in g and p e r ­

su a s io n c o m e s f ro m th is a u th o r 's a s s e r t io n th a t in th o se p la c e s w h ere

lo g ic i s w eak a rh e to r ic a l f lo u r is h o r two w ill h ide th.e fa c t. T he au th o r

p r o te s t s .

I t i s n o t m e a n t th a t a ju r y should be a r t i f ic ia l ly o r h y s te r ic a l ly e x c ite d , b u t th a t, by a p ro p e r em p lo y m en t of a r t , the ad v o ca te should c au se th em , n o t m e re ly to h e a r w hat he sa y s , b u t to p e rc e iv e the p ic tu re p a s s in g th rough h is own m in d , and to be qu ick en ed w ith the im p u lse of h is own s e n sa tio n s .

On the o th e r h an d , the sa m e a u th o r say s l a t e r " . . . th a t ap p ea lin g to

the p a s s io n s of a ju ry , in re p ly , in a d ir e c t m a n n e r is out of p la c e and

u n fa ir , "^^2 Y et, the sam e a u th o r s t r e s s e s the im p o rta n c e of d isc o v e rin g

the m o tiv e s of the ju ry . "U n le ss th e se can b e d is c o v e re d ," he s a y s , "the

ad v o ca te w ill be w ork ing in th e d a rk and w ill su c ce ed , if a t a l l , by

203a c c id e n t. " He goes on to sp ecu la te tlia t th e b a s is of d e c is io n v a r ie s

w ith each ju r o r and m ay ra n g e f ro m p re ju d ic e , d is lik in g the lo o k s of one

p a r ty , to s im p ly jo in ing w ith the m a jo r i ty . T h is i s no t a ra t io n a l th e o ry ,

A f in a l re p u d ia tio n of a ra t io n a l th eo ry in the a p p ro ac h to the c lo s in g

a rg u m e n t c o m e s in the fo llow ing s ta tem e n t in the sam e book.

^Q °Ibid. ^O ^Ib id ., p . 71.

ZOZlb id . , p . 109. ^O ^ib^d., p . 193.

270

With a ll the a d v o c a te 's n a tiv e sk ill and ingenu ity i t m ay happen th a t he h a s not su cceed ed w ith h is w itn e s s e s . He could no t m ake th em in te llig e n t. The m o s t pow erfu l im ag in a tio n cannot supply f a c ts . The advocate m ay find out a t l a s t th a t he h a s a w eak c a s e . But w hat th en ? Shall he d e s p a ir? By no m e a n s , if h e h av e le a rn t som eth ing of the a r t he p r a c t ic e s . A w eak ca se and a s tro n g ad v o ca te w ill o ften b e a t a s tro n g c a se and a w eak ad v o ca te . Now the s tre n g th of advocacy l ie s in the ad ap ta tio n of m a te r ia ls to the end d es ig n ed . If the advocate can a d ju s t th em so th a t, a s a w hole, they w ill seem to be t ru e , he w ill w in. The fa c ts m ay be so a r ra n g e d th a t th ey w ill look la r g e r th an they a r e , a l l th in g s be ing la rg e o r sm a ll by c o m p a riso n .

A T re a t is e on A m e ric a n A dvocacy i% to be s u re , o v e r fifty y e a r s old

and m ay not be an e ffec tiv e re p re s e n ta t io n of thought on the le g a l p ro c e s s .

B u t the e s se n c e of the id e a s in th a t book a r e echoed in th o se p u b lish ed

m uch m o re re c e n tly . L ou is N iz e r looks upon the sum m ation a s c le a r ly

a p e rsu a s iv e e f fo r t . He ta lk s of the ru le of p ro b a b ility and how i t is

u se d to p e rsu a d e a ju ry . "The ju ry d ec id es the ca se b ec au se of the ru le

of p ro b a b ility , " N iz e r a s s e r t s . " It [ th e ju r y ] a c c e p ts one v e rs io n a s

205a g a in s t an o th e r b e ca u se i t a c c o rd s w ith i t s own s ta n d a rd of e x p e rie n c e . "

A nother re c e n t co m m en ta to r d is c u s s e s the q u es tio n th is w ay.

I t i s so m e tim e s sa id th a t an ap p ea l to the em otions i s out of p lac e in the law c o u r ts , a s d e tra c tin g f ro m o b je c tiv ity and re a so n . T h is is a re a c tio n a g a in s t the a r t i f ic ia l o ra to ry of the e igh teen th and e a r ly n in e teen th c e n tu r ie s , and is tru e up to a po in t.

^^^I b id . , p . 199. ^®^L. N iz e r , c^ . c i t . , p . 14.

271

It i s e s s e n t ia l , n e v e r th e le s s , th a t the in te llig en ce and the w ill of the l i s te n e r should be b ro u g h t to w ork in con junction in fav o u r of the ad v o ca te ,

T h e re fo re , th e re is re a s o n to b e liev e th a t in sp ite of the p ro te s ta t io n s

a g a in s t th e u se of rh e to r ic (as the la w y e rs u n d e rs ta n d i t to include only

n o n - ra tio n a l p e rsu a s io n ) in c lo sing a rg u m e n ts , the co n sen su s of p r a c t i ­

t io n e rs i s th a t w ith in the l im its im p o se d by the ru le s of the c o u rt, an

a tto rn e y should seek to d isc o v e r a l l th e av a ilab le p ro o fs , includ ing a

c a re fu l r e fe re n c e to the fa c ts of r e c o rd , the sy s te m a tic u se of sound

re a so n in g , and the p r in c ip le s of p e rs u a s io n o th e r than th e s e . T h is , of

c o u rse , i s a r e s ta te m e n t of the A r is to te lia n th eo ry .

Looking m o re sp ec ifica lly a t p r a c t i t io n e r s ' su g g estio n s reg a rd in g

the c lo s in g a rg u m e n t, i t i s p o ss ib le to d is c e rn som e p r in c ip le s . In the

f i r s t p la c e , s im ila r to any p e rs u a s iv e e f fo r t it i s u se fu l to m ake a

ju d g m en t abou t the a ttitu d e of the judge o r ju ry . T ha t i s , to the ex ten t

the a tto rn e y can u n d e rs ta n d w hat p a r t s of h is case have b e e n im p re s s iv e

and w hat p a r t s r e je c te d ; w hat p a r ts m ig h t be advanced b e s t by r e i te ra t io n

only , and w hat p a r t s r e q u ire ex ten s iv e a rg u m en t, to th a t ex ten t he is

m o re lik e ly to p r e s e n t an effec tive c lo s in g speech , In m o s t c a s e s

th e re i s m uch m o re ev idence than can be fu lly su m m a riz e d in the c lo sin g

^^^John H , M unkm an, The T echn ique of A dvocacy (London;S tevens & Sons L im ite d , 1951), p . 149.

C. R eed , o£, c i t . , pp , 367-368; 373.

272

s ta te m e n t. T h u s , i t i s n e c e s s a r y th a t th e advocate study the e n t i re re c o rd

and s e le c t w hat he w ill co v e r in h is su m m atio n . He w ill p e r fo rm

th is se lec tio n w ith som e c r i t e r i a in m in d . F i r s t , he w ill g e n e ra lly

a tte m p t to m agn ify h is own c a se and m in ify h is opponent’s . He w ill

ana lyze h is opponent’s a rg u m e n ts and e v id e n c e , noting th o se w hich have

seem ed to m ak e any im p re s s io n on the ju ry . He w ill be s u re to an sw er

a ll such a rg u m e n ts . In ev a lu a tin g con flic tin g te s tim o n y , the law y er

w ill t ry to show th a t p ro b a b ility fa v o rs h is in te rp re ta tio n . A tto rn e y s

p u t a g re a t d ea l of e m p h a s is upon the j u r y ’s ju d g m en t of w hat se e m s to

m ake s e n se . The s ide th a t d e m o n s tra te s th a t i ts ev idence m a k e s m o re

sen se i s lik e ly to w in. ^ ^

In the c lo sin g sp eech the a tto rn e y w ill be w ise to u s e the re c o rd

of ev idence to su p p o rt h is p o s itio n . T h e re seem s to be g e n e ra l a g ree m e n t

th a t the c lo sin g sp eech i s b e s t w hen i t s tic k s to the ev id en ce and does not

O 1 pm ove off in to ap p e a ls no t d ire c t ly su p p o rte d by te s tim o n y . One

p ra c t i t io n e r h a s a tab le s e t in f ro n t of the ju ry and p la c e s on i t co p ies

2 0 8 f . L i , W ellm an , D ay in C o u rt, op. c i t . , p . 245.

2 0 9 j, C. R eed , 0£ , c i t . , pp . 366; 378.

210w . S. S tew art, og, c i t . , p . 276.

211s. W e iss , o£. c i t . , p . 174; L . N iz e r , og. c i t . , p . 15.

212f . L . W ellm an , S u ccess in C o u rt, op. c i t . , p . 208.

273

of the r e c o rd , p r e t r i a l d ep o s itio n s , and o th e r d o cum en ts w hich h e u s e s

fo r r e fe re n c e o r s im p ly p ro p s to in c r e a s e th e p e r s u a s iv e n e s s of h is

f in a l s p e e c h . 213 A ll co m m e n ta to rs on the su b je c t a g re e th a t th e re is

no su b s titu te fo r sp eech h ab its d es ig n ed to p ro v id e b a s ic a r t ic u la tio n ,

and o th e r te c h n ic a l a s p e c ts n eeded fo r u n d e rs tan d in g w hat is sa id . 214

F in a lly , no t on ly m u s t an a tto rn e y a rg u e in fa v o r of h is i n t e r p r e ­

ta tio n of the f a c ts of the c a s e , he m u s t a lso a c t a s an in te r p r e te r fo r the

in s tru c tio n s on law g iv en by the ju dge . The w ay in w hich the ju ry u n d e r ­

s tan d s the a p p lic a tio n of the law to the f a c t s - - th e re sp o n s ib ili ty of th e

ju d g e - -w ill s tro n g ly in flu en ce the d ire c tio n of the d ec is io n . A s the

in s tru c t io n s f ro m the judge follow the su m m atio n , i t i s a function of the

su m m atio n to ex p la in the ca se in such a w ay th a t i t w ill no t lo se g round

d u rin g the d is c u s s io n f ro m the ju dge . ^13

T hroughou t th e e n tire t r i a l , one ad m o n itio n i s m ade o v er and

o v e r a g a in - -p r e s e rv e th e r e c o rd fo r ap p ea l. T ha t i s , a t e v e ry p o in t

w h ere th e re i s a p o s s ib il i ty of e r r o r , an a t to rn e y m u s t be su re th a t he

ta k e s the s te p s r e q u ire d by ru le s to open a p a th to ap p ea l should the

d e c is io n go a g a in s t h im . A ll la w y e rs re a s o n th a t th e re w ill su re ly be

213l , N iz e r , c i t . , pp . 160-161.

214-yY S. S te w art, og, c i t . , p . 269; J . C. R eed , og. c i t . , p . 399.

2^^S. W e iss , og, c i t . , p . 187.

274

t im e s w hen the f in a l d e te rm in a tio n of a c a s e m ay w ait m o n th s o r y e a rs

u n til they can a rg u e an ap p ea l.

A pp ella te A dvocacy

T he v e ry e x is te n c e of c o u rts of a p p e a l i s an in d ica tio n of the

rh e to r ic a l n a tu re of the ju d ic ia l sy s tem . A p p ella te c o u r ts e x is t fo r the

p u rp o se of c o rre c tin g e r r o r s o c c u rr in g in th e o r ig in a l t r i a l c o u r t . Of

the p o ss ib le e r r o r s th e re a r e ^ a n y involv ing the q u es tio n of w h e th e r o r

n o t n o n -ra tio n a l p ro o fs w e re p e rm itte d to p lay an in flu en tia l ro le in the

d e c is io n of the low er c o u rt. Thus i t is a s su m e d th a t in th o se c a s e s

w h e re a le g a l d ec is io n h a s b een unduly d e te rm in e d by n o n - ra tio n a l

s tim u li, a c o u rt of ap p ea ls w ill d isco v e r i t and p ro v id e a c o r re c t io n .

T h e se a r e c le a r ly q u es tio n s involving th e a p p lic a tio n of r h e to r ic a l th eo ry .

H o w ev er, the ap p e lla te sy s te m is of in t e r e s t in i ts e lf b e c a u se of tile

r h e to r ic a l th e o r ie s invo lved in the p re s e n ta tio n of an ap p ea l by a n a tto rn e y .

In the c o u rt of a p p e a ls an a tto rn e y m ay com e to a rg u e th a t an

e r r o r w as co m m itted in the o r ig in a l c o u r t such th a t the d e c is io n m u s t be

s e t a s id e o r som e rem ed y p ro v id ed . T h is d isc u s s io n of e r r o r i s m o stly

l im ite d to the ap p lica tio n of the law bo th in the o p e ra tio n of the c o u r t

r u le s and in the com bining of law to the f a c ts found in the c a s e . T h a t is

to say , the fa c ts tend to be p re su m e d to s ta y the w ay the o r ig in a l c o u r t - -

275

judge o r j u r y - - h a s found th em , One of the re a so n s g iven fo r th is

g e n e ra l r e fu s a l by a p p e lla te c o u r ts to in te r f e r e w ith the fin d in g s of fa c t

i s the p re s u m e d value of the o r ig in a l ju ry o r judge hav ing b een p r e s e n t

to o b se rv e the w itn e ss when the te s tim o n y w as g iven . I t i s f e l t th a t

g r e a te r o p p o rtu n ity i s thus p ro v id e d fo r judging the c re d ib ili ty of the

w itn e s s ,

A f i r s t s tep in d isc u ss in g the rh e to r ic of ap p e lla te advocacy is

to u n d e rs ta n d the v a r io u s p ro c e d u re s of c o u r ts of ap p ea l. G en e ra lly

sp eak in g , the s te p s involved (once a c a se h a s b een a c c e p te d fo r rev iew )

a r e f i r s t , the su b m iss io n of a b r ie f ; second , the o ra l a rg u m en t; th ird , a

p r e l im in a ry co n fe re n c e of ju d g es; fo u rth , the w ritin g of a ten ta tiv e

d e c is io n by an a s s ig n e d m e m b e r of the co u rt; f if th , a co n fe ren ce am ong

ju d g es to m ak e th e f in a l d ec is io n ; and f in a lly , the w ritin g and p u b lica tio n

of the d e c is io n w ith d issen tin g o r c o n c u rrin g op in ions a s th ey o c c u r . How

th e se s te p s tak e p la c e and th e e m p h a s is g iven th em w ill in fluence the

u ltim a te d e c is io n and a r e a p a r t of the r h e to r ic a l co n tex t of the ap p ea l.

F o r ex a m p le , the re la tiv e e m p h a s is g iven the o r a l a rg u m e n t a s

opposed to the b r ie f i s v ita lly re le v a n t to the r h e to r ic a l c o n s id e ra tio n s

of a p p e lla te ad v o cacy . In the A ppella te D iv isio n of the N ew Y ork S uprem e

C o u rt F i r s t D e p a rtm e n t, fo r in s ta n c e , f ro m fifty to e igh ty p e r cen t of the

^ ^ ^ K a rl N , L lew elly n , The Com m on Law T ra d itio n (Boston;L i t t le , B row n and C om pany, I960), p . 28.

276

c a s e s p r e s e n te d a r e a rg u e d o ra l ly , and the re m a in d e r a r e su b m itted on

b r ie f s a lo n e . On the o th e r han d , in the U nited S ta te s S uprem e C o u rt,

o ra l a rg u m e n t is ex pected of each c a se and the c o u r t o rd in a r i ly in s is ts

217on o ra l a rg u m e n t even if the p a r t ie s a r e w illing to su b m it on b r ie f s .

To o b ta in a g e n e ra l u n d e rs tan d in g of ap p e lla te c o u r t p ro c e d u re ,

the p r a c t ic e s of som e re p re s e n ta t iv e c o u rts is g iven be low . P r io r to

h e a rin g a rg u m e n t in the A p p e lla te D iv ision of the New Y o rk S uprem e

C o u rt, the ju s t ic e s re a d the b r ie f s and thus r e le a s e the a tto rn e y s f ro m

the n e c e s s i ty of ex ten s iv e explcuiation of the n a tu re of the c a s e , ^18 In

the U nited S ta te s S uprem e C o u rt, the ju s t ic e s have som e know ledge of the

n a tu re of the c a se by having p a r t ic ip a te d in the d isc u s s io n o v e r the

p e titio n of c e r t i o r a r i , bu t w h e th e r o r no t the b r ie f s a r e re a d b e fo re

a rg u m e n t depends upon the p a r t ic u la r ju s t ic e , and the ex ten t of the w o rk

load fac ing the c o u r t. T h e re is re a s o n to b e liev e th a t i t i s no t com m on

fo r S uprem e C o u rt ju s t ic e s to r e a d b r ie f s re g u la r ly b e fo re a rg u m e n t, ^^9

Among the U nited S ta tes C o u rts of A p p ea ls , the p r a c t ic e v a r ie s f ro m

one c i r c u i t to a n o th e r . In som e c a s e s , b r ie f s a r e in v a r ia b ly re a d , in

o th e r c a s e s , they a r e re a d a t the d isc re tio n of the ju s t ic e s , and in s t i l l

21 7 D elm ar K a rlen , A p p e lla te C o u rts in the U nited S ta tes and E ngland (New Y ork; New Y o rk U n iv e rs ity P r e s s , 1963), p p , 19; 70,

p, 20,

2 1 9 p re d e r ic k B e rn a y s W ien e r, B rie fin g and A rgu ing F e d e ra l A ppeals (W ashington , D, C, : BNA Incorporated;) 1963), p , 16,

IÊ;':

277

o th e rs b r ie f s a r e r a r e ly re a d , In. the New Y o rk C o u rt of A p p ea ls ,

the p r im a r y m o tiv a tio n to r e a d b r ie f s f a l ls upon the judge to w hom the

c a se h a s b e e n a s s ig n e d fo r th e p re p a ra t io n of a sp e c ia l r e p o r t . He w ill

ten d to be w e ll p r e p a re d even to the e x te n t of having h is law c le rk s

p r e s e n t d u rin g a rg u m e n t. A s h is co lle a g u e s know he h a s b e e n a ss ig n ed

22.1th e c a s e , th ey m ay ten d to be m o re la x in p re p a ra tio n .

D u rin g o r a l a rg u m e n t, p ra c t ic e ten d s to be r e la t iv e ly s tan d a rd

am ong the v a r io u s c o u r ts . A ll c o u r ts p ro v id e a sp ec ified p e r io d of tim e

fo r each c o u n se l, and ten d to g u a rd i t c lo se ly . The a p p e lla n t m ay re s e rv e

a p o r tio n of h is tim e fo r re b u tta l follow ing the p re s e n ta t io n of the ap p e llee .

D uring the a rg u m e n t, the p ra c t ic e of ju d g es question ing co u n se l is

v ir tu a l ly u n iv e r s a l , w ith v a r ia t io n s com ing only in the f re q u e n c y of

q u e s tio n s and th e i r n a tu re .

F o llow ing o r a l a rg u m e n t, the p ra c t ic e s of c o u r ts ten d to v a ry .

The ch ie f c o n s id e ra tio n s h e r e co n ce rn the d ec is io n -m a k in g p ro c e d u re a

given c o u r t fo llo w s. F i r s t , i t i s u se fu l to know a t w hat s tag e of the p r o ­

c e s s the f i r s t vo te i s tak en am ong the ju d g e s . In som e c o u r ts , a f i r s t

vo te i s ta k e n im m e d ia te ly , and in o th e rs the c a se is s tu d ie d b e fo re the

v o te , "If tlie vo te i s tak en f i r s t , the opin ion is v e ry ap t to b eco m e , , ,

a b r ie f in su p p o rt of the m a jo r i ty v o te - -a n o th e r fa c to r th a t e m p h as izes

^^Ol b i d , , pp , 16-18 , ^^^D, K a r le n , op, c i t . , p , 36,

278

the im p o rtan ce of the im p re s s io n le f t a t the c lo se of the o r a l a rg u ­

m e n t, "222 T h u s, w hile the ju d ic ia l sy s te m a s su m e s a cap ac ity on the

p a r t of the judge to d e c la re an in it ia l p o s itio n and s ti l l m a in ta in a m ind

open to add itio n al a rg u m en ts w hich m ay ca u se h im to r e v e r s e h im se lf ,

the law y e rs have o b se rv e d a tendency am ong ju d g es to becom e ad v o ca te s

fo r th e ir p o s itio n once they have p u b lic ly id en tified th e m se lv e s w ith i t .

T h is i s an o th er in s ta n c e of ap p a re n t co n flic t betw een the rh e to r ic a l

th e o r ie s of the le g a l sy s te m and th o se of the p ra c tic in g p ro fe s s io n .

C le a r ly , the ra tio n a lity o r non - ra tio n a li ty of an ap p e lla te d e c is io n w ould

b e in fluenced by a d e s ir e to m a in ta in a c o n s is te n t v iew poin t, on the p a r t

of the ju d g es , b e tw een the im m ed ia te im p re s s io n gained f ro m o r a l a rg u ­

m e n t and the f in a l co n clu sio n e x p re s s e d a f te r co n fe ren ces with o th e r

ju d g es and includ ing study of the b r ie f s .

Second, w h e th e r one judge i s a s s ig n e d to w rite a d ra f t op in ion o r

if a l l judges w rite a m em o ran d u m on the c a s e w ill in fluence the rh e to r ic a l

co n tex t of the ap p ea l. In the U nited S ta te s S uprem e C o u rt, fo r ex am p le ,

c a s e s a r e h e a rd M onday th rough T h u rsd ay w hen the c o u rt i s in s e s s io n ,

an d on F r id a y a co n fe ren ce is h e ld . A t the c o n fe ren c e , the c a se is

s ta te d by the Chief J u s tic e and then i t i s d is c u s se d by each A sso c ia te

J u s t ic e in o rd e r of s e n io r ity . A fte r th i s , the c a se is vo ted on in an

2 2 2 f , B , W iener, 0£ , c i t , , pp , 19-20,

279

in v e rs e o rd e r of s e n io r ity , in the a tte m p t to keep se n io r ity f ro m in flu ­

encing the v o te . Once th e d ec is io n h a s b een m a d e , a ju s tic e is a s s ig n e d

to w rite an opinion by the s e n io r ju s t ic e in the m a jo r i ty . The d ra f t

opin ion is c irc u la te d am ong the ju s t ic e s , and f in a lly c o n s id e re d a t one

o r m o re c o n fe re n c e s . In p a r t ic u la r ly d iff icu lt c a s e s , th e re m ay be

p e rs o n a l d isc u ss io n am ong m e m b e rs of the m a jo r i ty and p o ss ib ly ten o r

m o re d ra f ts m ade of the op in ion , W iener m ak es the follow ing com m en t

on the r h e to r ic a l c o n s id e ra tio n s of th is p ro c e d u re .

F re q u e n tly , the c r i t ic a l fa c to r is th u s the leng th of tim e b e tw een a rg u m e n t an d co n fe ren c e . If a c a se a rg u e d on a W ednesday is v o ted on by F r id a y , n e c e s s a r i ly the im p re s s io n le f t by the o ra l a rg u m e n t w ill be tre m e n d o u s ly s ig n ifican t.To th e ex ten t th a t th e vo te is p o stp o n ed to the n ex t F r id a y o r to the co n fe ren ce fo llow ing th a t one, the b r ie f o r the ju s t ic e s ' independen t r e s e a r c h lo o m s l a r g e r in the f in a l d e te rm in a tio n ; the g r e a te r the t im e - la g , the m o re ind ep en d en t study b eco m es p o s s ib le ,

A m ong o th e r F e d e r a l c o u r ts , the p r a c t ic e s v a ry . In F i r s t C irc u it

of the U nited S ta tes C o u rt of A p p ea ls , th e re i s a co n fe ren ce h e ld a t the

end of e v e ry s ittin g and a p re l im in a ry vo te h e ld , a f te r w hich the a s s ig n ­

m e n t fo r opinion w ritin g i s m ad e . E ach judge does no t w rite a

m em o ra n d u m . In the Second C irc u it , e v e ry s ittin g judge w r i te s a

m em o ra n d u m fo r e v e ry c a s e h e a rd . In each m em o ran d u m the judge

in d ic a te s h is re a c tio n s to the le g a l p r in c ip le s invo lved and a ten ta tiv e

^ ^ ^ Ib id ., p , 21.

280

v o te . No c o n fe re n c e i s h e ld u n til a l l have p r e p a re d a m e m o ra n d u m and

re a d those of the o th e r ju d g e s . A t the co n fe ren c e d is c u s s io n m a y o ccu r

and te n ta tiv e v o te s m ay be re a f f irm e d o r r e v e r s e d , and a judge i s a s s ig n e d

to w rite the m a jo r i ty op in ion . In the F o u rth C irc u it , a co n fe re n c e i s h e ld

on the a f te rn o o n a f te r the a rg u m e n t. D isc u ss io n ta k e s p la ce on the

b r ie f s and o r a l a rg u m e n t. A fte r the c a se h a s b een th o ro u g h ly d is c u s s e d

(it m ay be c a r r ie d o v e r to a la te r co n feren ce) a vo te i s tak en and the

Chief Judge a s s ig n s a w r i te r of the opinion. T he p r a c t ic e s of the o th e r

F e d e ra l c o u r ts a r e v a r ia t io n s of th e se p a t te rn s ,

In th e A p p e lla te D iv isio n of the New Y o rk S uprem enG ourt, F i r s t

D e p a r tm e n t, the judge to w hom the c a se is sp e c if ic a lly a s s ig n e d m u s t

study the p a p e r s su b m itted and conduct o r s u p e rv is e such in d ep en d en t

r e s e a r c h a s he f e e ls n e c e s s a ry . He m u s t tak e in to acco u n t the v a lu e s

involved in the c a s e , and do v ir tu a l ly a il th a t w ould be invo lved in w ritin g

an opin ion , fo r u ltim a te ly he w ill reco m m en d to th e r e s t of th e c o u r t

how the c a s e should b e d isp o se d of. The o th e r ju d g es w ill in fo rm th e m ­

se lv e s on the c a se a s m u ch a s p o s s ib le c o n s id e rin g the tre m e n d o u s

dem ands on th e ir t im e . D uring the c o n fe re n c e , the judge to w hom the

c a se h a s b e e n a s s ig n e d r e p o r ts to the group and m a k e s h is re c o m m e n ­

d a tio n s , "H e sp eak s w ith no sp e c ia l au th o rity abou t th a t ap p ea l; no o th e r

2 2 4 ib id ,, pp. 21 -28 ,

281

ju s t ic e y ie ld s to h is ju d g m en t b e c a u se the ap p e a l w as a s s ig n e d to h im ;

and no undue r e s p e c t i s p a id to h is v iew s o r reco m m en d a tio n , The

c a se i s su b jec te d to g e n e ra l d isc u s s io n la s tin g fro m a few m in u te s to

h o u r s , o r c a r r ie d o v e r to a n o th e r co n fe re n c e . An opinion w r i te r is

a s s ig n e d once a m a jo r i ty i s d e te rm in e d .

The w r i te r of the opinion sends c o p ie s to a ll h is c o lle a g u e s and

they d is c u s s i t a t th e fo llow ing c o n fe re n c e . A gain a fu ll d is c u s s io n on

the c a se m ay r e s u l t . "S o m etim es a t th is p o in t, a p re v io u s ly d issen tin g

v iew m ay b e c o n v e r te d by d isc u s s io n in to the p re v a ilin g v iew , and an

op in ion p re p a re d a s a flam in g d is s e n t m ay b eco m e the opin ion of the

c o u rti'^ ^ ^

The p ro c e d u re in the N ew Y ork C o u rt of A ppeals is s im i la r to

th a t ju s t d is c u s s e d . T h e re is one ex cep tio n , h o w ev er, w o rth no ting .

D u rin g the c o n fe re n c e of ju d g e s , a tap e re c o rd in g is m ad e of the d e lib e ­

ra t io n s and i s a v a ila b le to the judge who u ltim a te ly w r i te s th e opin ion or

to a l l ju d g es in th e ev en t th e c a se i s c a r r i e d o v e r to a second o r th i rd

c o n fe ren c e ,

C om m enting on the above m en tio n ed p ra c t ic e of a s s ig n in g c e r ta in

ju d g e s p r im a ry r e s p o n s ib il i ty fo r a c a se p r io r to the o r a l a rg u m e n t,

A r th u r T . V a n d e rb ilt say s

K a r le n , og. c i t . , pp . 2 5 -2 6 . ^^^I b id . , p p . 26-27 .

p . 38.

282

T h e re a r e m any ap p e lla te c o u r ts in w hich the ap p ea ls a re a s s ig n e d fo r the w ritin g of d e c is io n s to the v a r io u s ju s t ic e s in ro ta tio n in advance of h e a r in g a rg u m e n t. H um an n a tu re be ing w hat i t i s , i t in e v itab ly fo llow s th a t the ju d g es who a r e n o t ch a rg e d w ith the w ritin g of an opinion in a p a r t ic u la r c a se a r e n o t lik e ly to tak e a s g re a t an in te r e s t in the c a se a s they w ould if they thought they m ig h t be c a lled on a t the c o u rt co n fe ren ce to w rite the opin ion . Ju d g es in one g re a t c o u r t have b een known to s lip ou t fo r a cup of te a w hen a ca se w as on in w hich th ey w ould no t b e p r im a r i ly re sp o n s ib le fo r the op in ion . T h is s y s te m , of c o u rse , is a l l w rong , b u t w here i t e x is ts , co u n se l w ill do w ell to u se a ll h is ingenu ity to a s c e r ­ta in who i s th e judge who h a s b een a s s ig n e d to w rite the opinion in h is c a s e .

T he obvious o b jec tio n to th is p ra c t ic e i s th a t i t ten d s to re s u l t in o n e -

m a n d e c is io n s , an d V a n d e rb ilt re c o g n iz e s th is by en co u rag in g la w y e rs

to c o n c e n tra te th e i r a tte n tio n upon the judge a s s ig n e d to th e ir c a s e .

The ad v o ca te , on ap p ea l, h a s two ch an n e ls of co m m u n ica tio n to

the co u rt: the b r ie f and th e o r a l a rg u m en t. E a ch h a s a function to p e r ­

fo rm . W hen m o s t e ffec tiv e ly u se d , one w ill co m p lem en t the o th e r . In

E n g lish ap p e lla te c o u r ts , the e m p h a s is i s p la c e d on o ra l a rg u m en t and

the b r ie f i s l im ite d to two o r th re e p a g e s in d ica tin g how the c a se cam e

up and the p o in ts to be a rg u e d . The o r a l a rg u m e n t l a s t s u n til the co u n se l

have f in ish ed o r the c o u r t re q u e s ts th em to stop . In the U nited S ta te s ,

on the o th e r hand , the b r ie f h a s a s su m e d co n s id e ra b ly m o re im p o rta n c e .

2 2 8A rthu r T . V a n d e rb ilt , " F o re n s ic P e r s u a s io n , " The Jo h n R a n ­dolph T u c k e r L e c tu re s , L e c tu re d e liv e re d b e fo re the School of L aw of W ashington and L ee U n iv e rs ity , 1949-1952, L ex in g to n , V irg in ia , 1952, pp . 51-52.

229ibid ., p. 49.

283

H e re , the b r ie f h a s becom e a w r itte n a rg u m e n t in su p p o rt o r in o p p o si­

tion to the o r d e r , d e c re e , o r ju d g m en t below , The va lue of the b r ie f

v a r ie s w ith the p ra c t ic e of the c o u r t. If b r ie f s a r e r e a d only a f te r o ra l

a rg u m e n t, and if the c o u rt h a s b een p e rsu a d e d to d ec id e the c a se one

w ay, the " , , , b r ie f b eco m es the peg on w hich i t can hang i t s co lle c tiv e

ju d ic ia l h a t, " If b r ie fs a r e r e a d in advance of a rg u m e n t, then the b r ie f

a c ts a s a f i r s t s tep in p e rsu a s io n . F in a lly , in a v e ry c lo se c a se w h ere

le g a l m a te r ia ls m u s t be s tu d ied c a re fu lly , ", . , the b r ie f b eco m es the

fa c to r on w hich the e n t ire c a se w ill be won o r lo s t , "^31 the b r ie f ,

the a tto rn e y p u ts the fa c ts of the c a se se le c te d f ro m the re c o rd of the

lo w er co u rtes p ro c e e d in g s , in d ic a te s th e body of la w --p re c e d e n t c a s e s

and o th e r a u th o r ity --w h ic h he fe e ls su p p o rt h is in te rp re ta t io n , and w o rk s

a l l of th em in to the i s s u e s r a is e d on the ap p ea l and an a rg u m en t in h is

fa v o r : T he b r ie f p ro v id e s an opportun ity fo r d e ta il and e la b o ra tio n no t

p o ss ib le on o r a l argument, ^32

The function of the o r a l a rg u m e n t i s to e m p h as iz e and c la r ify th e

w r itte n a rg u m e n t ap p ea rin g in the b r ie f , a cc o rd in g to the U nited S ta te s

S uprem e C o u rt, The o ra l a rg u m e n t should no t se e k to re v ie w the long

s e r ie s of d e c is io n s upon w hich the ap p ea l i s b a se d . R a th e r , i t should

230p^ B , W iener, 0£ , c i t , , p , 37, ^^^Ib id ,

232-^ iley R u tledge , "T he A p p ella te B r ie f , " The Jo u rn a l of the B a r A sso c ia tio n of the D is tr ic t of C olum bia , IX (A p ril, 1942), p , 150,

284

s e le c t one o r two m o s t convincing c a s e s and d is c u s s th em . R a th e r than

r e a d fro m the r e c o rd below o r f ro m th e d e c is io n s of p re v io u s c a s e s ,

the a tto rn e y d u rin g o ra l a rg u m en t should speak w ith th e c o u r t on the

q u es tio n of w h e th e r h is in te rp re ta t io n of the law is to be accep ted over

th a t of h is opponent. D iv e rg en t l in e s of p re c e d e n t shou ld b e d isc u sse d .

T he feeling a g a in s t the re ad in g of p r e p a re d sp eech es d u rin g o ra l a rg u ­

m en t is so g re a t th a t th e U nited S ta te s S uprem e C o u rt h a s w ritte n its

d isa p p ro v a l in to the c o u r t r u le s ,

P o s s ib ly b e c a u se of the re a c t io n a g a in s t pub lic speak ing d isc u s se d

in the p re v io u s c h a p te r , the d ire c tio n of sym pathy in th e U nited S ta tes

h a s b£en to fa v o r the b r ie f and d im in ish th e im p o rta n c e of o ra l a rg u m en t

o r to d isco n tin u e i t a l to g e th e r . T h is tre n d se e m s to b e a p a r t of a g e n e ­

r a l m ov em en t aw ay fro m e m p h a s is upon t r i a l o r ad v o cacy w ork in g e n e ra l.

F o r som e tim e w r i te r s and s p e a k e rs have been c o n ce rn ed w ith th is

developm en t. One in d iv id u al c a lle d a tte n tio n to a q u e s tio n n a ire sen t to

ten law sch o o ls in th e w e s te rn p a r t of the U nited S ta te s , The r e s u l ts

show ed th a t only sev en p e r cen t of th e s tu d en ts p lan n ed to en te r any fo rm

of t r i a l w o rk . T h e ir re a so n s w e re th a t i t re q u ire d too m uch w ork , w as

n o t a s lu c ra t iv e , and th a t t r i a l w o rk i s on i t s way ou t, A nother

^^^R alph M , C a rso n , "C onduct of th e A p p e a l- -A L a w y e r 's V iew , " A ppeals (P h ilad e lp h ia : A m e ric a n L aw In s titu te , O c to b e r , 1954), p , 87, T h is book is one in a s e r ie s on th e p re p a ra t io n and t r i a l of a c iv il a c tio n p u b lish ed by the A m e ric a n L aw In s titu te , I t in c lu d es tl ire e a r t ic le s ,

A , G ooch, "S hall A dvocacy V a n ish ? " W ashington Law R eview and S ta te B a r J o u rn a l, V ol, 31(W inter, 1956), pp . 358-367,

285

c o m m e n ta to r n o ted , " It a p p e a rs to m e th a t a sad d ec lin e in the a r t [ of

a d v o c a c y j h a s b een tak ing p la c e fo r som e tim e . "^35 Qf the th re e m a jo r

fa c tio n s in th e le g a l p ro fe s s io n —le g a l s c h o la rs , o ffice la w y e rs who

a d v ise c l ie n ts a s to the law , and a d v o c a te s - - th is a u th o r say s of advocacy,

I g re a t ly f e a r th a t th is b ra n c h of the p ro fe s s io n , in c o n tr a s t to th e o th e r two b ra n c h e s , i s m a rk e d ly on the d e c lin e . T h is i s n o t a lo n e m y own o b se rv a tio n . I t i s c o n firm ed b y the o b s e rv a tio n of ju d g es and la w y e rs of w ide e x p e rie n c e and sound ju d g m en t, who a r e deep ly c o n c e rn e d about th e p ro b le m .

A s a r e s u l t of th is a lleg ed d ec lin e in ad v o cacy , i t is o b s e rv e d th a t th e re

h a s b een a d ec lin e in the ap p lica tio n of the tech n iq u es of the a r t of

advocacy : l e s s e ffec tiv e p re s e n ta t io n of c a s e s . A n o th e r o b se rv a tio n

su g g e s ts a s te a d y d ec lin e in the e m p h a s is on advocacy in the fa c e of

in c re a s in g n e ed . A lm o st a l l the w r i te r s in d ica te sh o ck a t th e r e p o r t

f ro m the H a rv a rd Law School of a s tu d en t q u e s tio n n a ire w hich a sk e d the

s tu d en ts to l i s t in ran k o rd e r the s k il ls of a la w y e r . T he lo w e s t sk ill

r a n k e d --b y a w ide m a rg in - -w a s ad v o cacy .

In re sp o n se to th is a p p a re n t t r e n d aw ay f ro m ad v o cacy , the m e m ­

b e r s of the p ro fe s s io n have p ro d u ced an im p re s s iv e n u m b e r of

2 3 5 p r e d e r ic k V an P e l t B r y a n , "The R ise and F a l l o f th e A r t of A d v o c a c y , " C hitty*s L aw J o u r n a l, V o l. 7 (1957), p . 13.

^^^ Ib id .

^ ^ ^ H e n ri M« A ld rid g e , "A dvocacy—A D eclin ing A r t? " The A la ­b a m a L a w y e r , V ol. 20 (O cto b er, 1959), pp . 388-395,

^^®Lon L , F u l le r , "W ork on the C u rr ic u lu m , " H a rv a rd L aw School B u lle tin , N o, 2 (Ju ly , 1948), pp . 1 -10 ,

286

a rg u m e n ts in fa v o r of the o r a l a rg u m e n t o v e r the w r itte n b r ie f . The

fo llow ing a r e re p re s e n ta t iv e , R o b e r t H, J ac k so n , then A sso c ia te J u s tic e

of the U nited S ta te s S uprem e C o u rt, sa id in 1951:

L a w y e rs so m etim es q u e s tio n the value of th e re la t iv e ly s h o r t o r a l a rg u m e n t p e rm it te d in the N ation*s h ig h e s t c o u r t.T hey a s k w h e th e r i t is no t a v e s tig ia l fo rm a lity w ith l i t t le e ffe c t on th e r e s u l t . In e a r l i e r t im e s , w ith few c a s e s on i t s d o ck e t, the C ourt could and d id h e a r a rg u m e n ts th a t la s te d fo r d a y s , , , , O ver the y e a r s the tim e a llo tte d fo r h e a r in g h a s b e en sh o rte n e d , b u t i t s im p o rta n c e h a s n o t d im in ish ed .T he s ig n ifican ce of the tre n d is th a t the s h o r te r the t im e , the m o re p re c io u s i s each m in u te ,

I th ink the J u s tic e s w ould a n sw e r unan im ously th a t now , a s tra d it io n a lly , they re ly h ea v ily on o ra l p re s e n ta t io n s . M ost of them fo rm a t le a s t a te n ta tiv e conclusion f ro m i t in a la rg e p e rc e n ta g e of the c a s e s , , , , The b a r m u s t m ake i t s p r e p a ­ra tio n s fo r o ra l a rg u m en t on th e p r in c ip le th a t i t a lw ay s is of the h ig h e s t , and often of c o n tro llin g , im p o rta n c e ,

Spealcing a s a judge of the a p p e lla te c o u rt in In d ian a , C h a r le s F , R em y

sa y s , " P e rs o n a lly , I think e v e ry c a se of any im p o rta n c e should be

a rg u ed o ra lly , " He o b se rv e s th a t in h is co u r t, the r e c o rd goes only to

the judge who h a s b een a ss ig n e d th e p a r t ic u la r c a s e . T h u s , i t i s only

th ro u g h o ra l a rg u m e n t th a t the rem a in in g ju d g es o b ta in the m a jo r

im p re s s io n of th e c a s e , "If I w e re to go b ack in the p r a c t ic e , " R em y

co n c lu d es , "I w ould a rg u e o ra lly e v e ry c a se on a p p ea l in w hich I w as

in te re s te d , "240 ^ r e p re s e n ta tiv e of the Iowa S uprem e C o u rt s ta te s ,

2 3 9 R o b ert H , Jack so n , "A dvocacy b e fo re th e S u p rem e C ourt: Sug­g e s tio n s fo r E ffe c tiv e C ase P re s e n ta t io n s , " A m e rica n B a r A sso c ia tio n J o u rn a l, V ol, 37 (N ovem ber, 1951), p , 801,

2 4 0 ch a .rle s F , R em y, " B r ie f and O ra l A rg u m en t on A ppeal, " Ind iana L aw J o u rn a l , Vol. VI, P ro c e e d in g s of the 34th A nnual M eeting , Ind iana S ta te B a r A sso c ia tio n , B loom ington , I n d ., Ju ly 10-11 , 193(^pp, 16* 28,

287

I t i s o ften a sk e d w h e th e r the c o u rt r e a l ly d e s ir e s o r a l a rg u m e n ts , and , a s a c o ro lla ry in q u iry , w h e th e r they do any good w hen p re s e n te d . Both q u e r ie s m u s t be a n sw ered s tro n g ly in the a f f irm a tiv e . N ot only a r e o ra l a rg u m e n ts g e n e ra lly en jo y ed b y the c o u r t, b u t, m uch m o re im p o rta n t, w hen w e ll h an d led th ey a r e m o s t he lp fu l to i t . Of c o u rse , the w r itte n r e c o r d s , b r ie f s , and a rg u m e n ts a r e of p r im a r y v a lu e , b u t f i r s t im p re s s io n s a r e a lw ays im p o r ta n t, and th e se a r e g a in ed f ro m the a p p e a ra n c e s of the a tto rn e y s b e fo re the c o u r t and w hat th ey say th e re .

The fo llow ing e n th u s ia s tic com m ent w as m ad e by an A sso c ia te J u s t ic e of

the O reg o n S uprem e C o u rt,

One of the m o m en ts w hich m a k e s u s p ro u d of our m e m b e r ­sh ip in the le g a l p ro fe s s io n o c c u rs w hen we see an a tto rn e y r i s e in an a p p e lla te c o u r t, w alk to the le c te r n and then a d d re s s th e c o u r t co n cern in g h is c a se in a m a n n e r w hich ho ld s the r a p t a tte n tio n of a ll . . . . The m e m b e rs of the B ench b eco m e so a b s o rb e d in the a tto rney*s d isc o u rse th a t he con tinues u n in te r ­ru p te d by any q u es tio n . P la in ly , he i s c re a tin g fo r h is c a s e a fa v o ra b le im p re s s io n th a t is tak ing deep ro o t. B efo re h is a l lo tte d tim e h a s e la p se d he re su m e s h is s e a t even though a l l w ould have b ee n w illin g fo r h im to h av e con tinued . When we o b se rv e such an exam ple of advocacy , a l l doubts co n cern in g the v a lu e of o r a l a rg u m e n t v an ish .

L e s s p o e tic an d m o re p ra c t ic a l i s F r e d e r ic k B . W ien er, an a tto rn e y in

W ashington , D , C. and fo rm e r A s s is ta n t to th e S o lic ito r G e n e ra l of the

U nited S ta te s , "T he b ru ta l , h a rd fa c t i s , " sa y s W iener, " th a t som e

c a s e s a r e won and lo s t on o ra l a rg u m e n t, "^43 E la b o ra tin g upon th is

s ta te m e n t, W iener s a y s ,

241q , K . T hom pson , "O ra l A rg u m en ts in the S uprem e C o u rt of Iow a, " Iow a L aw R eview , V ol, 38 (Spring , 1953), p , 394,

242Q eorge R o ssm a n , "A ppella te C o u rt A dvocacy: T he Im p o rtan ce of O ra l A rg u m e n t, " A m ericcui B a r A sso c ia tio n J o u rn a l, V ol, 45 (Ju ly , 1959), p . 675,

2 4 3 p red er ick B . W ien er, "O ra l A dvocacy, " H a rv a rd L aw R eview V ol, 62 (N ovem ber, 1948), p . 58,

288

T h e re a r e , of c o u rs e , som e c a s e s w hich a p a r ty can n o t lo s e , and o th e r c a s e s w hich he canno t w in , r e g a rd le s s of the sk ill o r le a rn in g o r p e r s u a s iv e p o w e rs of h is ad v o ca te . B u t in the la rg e in te rm e d ia te zo n e , co m posing p e rh a p s f if ty p e r cen t of the to ta l , w h ere no one w ould suppose *that c iv iliz a tio n w ill com e to an end w h ich ev e r w ay th is c a se i s d ec id ed , * and w h ere the c a s e s do n o t p r e s e n t p r e s s in g p ro b le m s o r b u rn in g is s u e s , o ra l a rg u m e n t p la y s a v e ry su b s ta n tia l if no t a d e c is iv e p a r t in d e te rm in in g the o u tco m e , , , , I t i s c e r ta in th a t , to an am az in g d e g re e , ju d g e s ' im p re s s io n s a t the c lo se of th e o ra l a rg u m e n ts co inc ide w ith th e i r f in a l d e te rm in a tio n s ,

W riting o v e r a d ecade l a t e r , W ien er in d ic a te d th a t he h ad c o n firm e d h is

b e lie f in the h igh c o r re la t io n b e tw een d e c is io n s of ju d g e s im m e d ia te ly

follow ing o r a l a rg u m e n t an d the f in a l d e c is io n in the c a s e , W iener

e m p h a s iz e s th a t th is co n c lu s io n should n o t im p ly a c a u s a l r e la t io n w ith

the o ra l a rg u m e n t. On th e c o n tr a ry , such a c o r re la t io n o c c u rs in sp ite

of the m an y in e ffec tiv e a rg u m e n ts . T h e re i s a lso no w ay to d e te rm in e

w h eth er o r n o t the d e c is io n w ould have b ee n d iffe re n t had th e re b een no

o ra l a rg u m e n t. N e v e r th e le s s , in one study inc lud ing d a ta f ro m th i r ty -

e ig h t S ta te and T e r r i to r i a l c o u r ts of l a s t r e s o r t a s w e ll a s th a t f ro m

F e d e ra l ap p e lla te c o u r ts , the " , , , p e rc e n ta g e of co in c id en ce w as v e ry

high; the l a r g e s t group of ju d g es w ro te th a t th e ir f in a l vo te co inc ided

w ith th e ir im p re s s io n a t th e c lo se of the a rg u m e n t in 90 p e r cen t o r m o re

of a l l c a s e s h e a rd , " In a n o th e r , m o re re c e n t study , the p e r cen t ran g ed

fro m fifty to e igh ty p e r c e n t of th e c a s e s com ing b e fo re F e d e r a l a p p e lla te

244ibid,

289

c o u r ts . In th is s tudy on ly one judge r e p o r te d a p e rc e n ta g e of n in e ty o r

h ig h e r , In conclud ing h is co m m en ts on the re la tiv e m e r i t s of b r ie fs

and o ra l a rg u m e n ts , W ien er sa y s , "A ll I can f a ir ly o r p ro p e r ly a s s e r t

i s th a t s u c c e ss on a p p e a l i s f a r m o re lik e ly to follow fro m e ffe c tiv e than

in e ffec tiv e b r ie f s and a rg u m e n ts , , , . W hile th is m ay s e e m to be

q u ite a r e s e rv e d s ta te m e n t, i t r e f le c ts a rh e to r ic a l th e o ry in c o n flic t

w ith th a t h e ld by m any in the p ro fe s s io n v/ho b e liev e th a t the t r a in e d

judge in the c o u r t of a p p e a l w ill, th ro u g h h is own study of the c a s e a s

w e ll a s h is re c e p tio n of c o u n s e ls ’ a rg u m e n ts , u ltim a te ly d is c o v e r the

p ro p e r ru le s of law . In such a b e lie f , th e e ffec tiv e n e ss o r la c k of i t in

a rg u m e n ts should only fa c i l i ta te o r im p ed e th is se a rc h ; i t i s n o t ex p ec ted

to m ak e a s ig n if ic an t d iffe re n c e .

P ro m in e n t a tte n tio n is g iven by p r a c t i t io n e r s to th e r h e to r ic a l

e ffe c tiv e n e ss of the s t r u c tu re of b r ie f an d o r a l a rg u m e n t. T h e re i s

s tro n g a g te e m e n t th a t th e a r ra n g e m e n t o f p o in ts in e i th e r w ill in c r e a s e

o r d e c re a s e th e p ro b a b ility of a fa v o ra b le ju d g m en t.

The a r ra n g e m e n t of the b r ie f i s e s s e n tia l ly s ta n d a rd iz e d in to the

follow ing m a jo r d iv is io n s : (I) re su m e of the op in ions of lo w er c o u r ts ;

(2) q u es tio n s p re s e n te d in the appeal; (3) s ta te m e n t of fa c ts ; (4) su m m ary

3 W ien e r , B rie f in g and A rg u in g F e d e ra l A p p e a ls , op , c it.pp , 31-32 ,

2 4 6 ib id ,, p , 33,

290

of a rg u m en t; (5) a rg u m en t; and (6) a v e ry b r ie f conclusion . W ithin th ese

d iv is io n s , h o w ev er, the a tto rn e y h as d is c re tio n . In the s ta te m e n t of

f a c ts , fo r ex am p le , the co u n se l m u s t te l l a s to ry w hich is c o n s is te n t

w ith the re c o rd b u t w hich c r e a te s a fa v o ra b le im p re s s io n fo r h is po sitio n .

"T he id ea l end to be sought in y o u r s ta te m e n t of the fa c ts i s th a t the

s ta te m en t when co m p le te should p o in t n a tu ra lly to y ou r co n c lu sio n .

The s ta te m e n t m u s t be c le a r and in fo rm a tiv e . "The b a s ic p sy ch o lo g ica l

fa c t th a t know ledge is cum u la tiv e can be u se d to advantage by w orking

f ro m the e s s e n t ia l fa c ts to w ard the d e ta i ls . "248 Many a tto rn e y s a ttem p t

to re la te the te s tim o n y in the sam e o rd e r a s i t w as p re s e n te d by the

w itn e sse s . T h is w as the only w ay i t cou ld b e p re se n te d in the o r ig in a l

c o u r t, b u t the ap p e lla te a tto rn e y can r e - a r r a n g e the fa c ts so th a t they

fo rm a un ified w e ll-o rd e re d s to ry . T h u s , the sam e w itn e ss m ay have

o rig in a lly re la te d fa c ts re le v a n t to two p o in ts in the ap p ea l. T h e re is no

re a so n to r e - s t a t e a ll th e se fa c ts a t o n ce , b u t r a th e r he should a r ra n g e

a ll the fa c ts re le v a n t to po in t A to g e th e r , and th o se re le v a n t to p o in t B

to g e th e r . T h e re see m s to b e s tro n g a g re e m e n t am ong w r i te r s th a t

the s tro n g e s t p o in t should be p u t f i r s t .

M. C a rso n , 0£ . c i t . , p . 78.

248f . B . W ien er, "O ra l A d v o cacy ," op. c i t . , p . 68.

249ibid.

291

F i r s t im p re s s io n s a re la s tin g . T he hum an m ind d oes no t lik e to ho ld ju d g m en t in su sp en se . We b eg in to lean in one d ire c tio n o r the o th e r a lm o s t a t once, and h av ing begun to develop a ju d ic ia l hunch in fav o r of one s id e , we do not e a s ily r e v e r s e o u r s e lv e s . Ju d g es fro m e x p e r ie n c e if no t by te m p e ra m e n t a r e lik e ly to be m o re open -m inded th an m o s t of u s , b u t th ey too a r e hu m an . If on read ing your f i r s t p o in t the judge h a s the im p re s s io n th a t y o u r ca se is w eak , the ch an ces th a t your l a t e r p o in ts w ill change h is m in d a r e n o t good, ^50

Such a co n c lu sio n is c o n s is te n t w ith th e o r ie s in psycho logy w hich

d e s c r ib e a p ro c e s s of te n s io n -re d u c tio n o c c u rr in g in d e c is io n -m a k in g .

The th e o ry a s s u m e s th a t ind iv iduals e x p e r ie n c e te n s io n f ro m the lack

of d e c is io n an d have a strong ten d en cy to red u ce the te n s io n by seeking

d e c is io n . T h u s , th is th eo ry d e s c r ib e s a p ro c e s s a t c ro s s -p u rp o s e to

the r a tio n a l th e o ry w hich a s su m e s th e w ithholding of d e c is io n to the l a s t

p o s s ib le m o m en t, w hen a s m uch d a ta a s p o ss ib le h a s b een g a th e re d . If

the n o n - ra tio n a l th e o ry i s h e ld , then i t fo llow s th a t an a tto rn e y , when

w ritin g b r ie f , should n o t only p u t h is s tro n g p o in ts f i r s t , he should

avoid a m u ltip lic ity o f a rg u m en ts w eak and s tro n g to c o n c e n tra te on h is

2 c 1few s tro n g e s t p o in ts and hope to c a p tu re an im m ed ia te d ec is io n .

The a r ra n g e m e n t of the o r a l a rg u m e n t is a lso the su b jec t of

d isc u s s io n am ong ju d g es and p r a c t i t io n e r s . In the f i r s t p la c e , i t is the

p r a c t ic e of som e to d iv ide the o ra l a rg u m e n t am ong two o r m o re a tto rn e y s .

2 5 0 jjen ry W eihofen, L eg a l W ritin g S tyle (St. P a u l , M inneso ta:W est P u b lish in g C o ,, 1961), p . 192,

251jEdward S. D ore , " E x p re s s in g the Idea: The E s s e n tia ls of O ra l and W ritte n A rg u m en t, " F o rd h am L aw R eview , XXIII (D ec. 1954), p ,231 .

292

T h is p ra c t ic e is g e n e ra lly d isc o u ra g e d . F u r th e r , the co u n se l i s

a d v ise d to pay c o n s id e ra b le a tte n tio n to the opening sen te n ce o r tw o,

"H igh on the l i s t of e s s e n tia ls i s the u se of a good opening sen ten ce o r

p a ra g ra p h to ca tch the cou rtes a tte n tio n and e ffec tiv e ly to lodge the m a jo r

p o in ts of the c a se in the c o u r t 's m in d in the c r i t i c a l f i r s t two m in u te s

of a rg u m en t. "253 A lso , i t i s im p o rta n t th a t the a tto rn e y im m e d ia te ly

r e la te the c o u rt to the c o n tro v e rsy . The co u n se l should say w hich p a r ty

he r e p re s e n ts and the n a tu re of th e c a se and the p o s itio n in w hich the

c a s e com es up on ap p ea l.

F ollow ing the s ta te m e n t of fa c ts co m es the a rg u m e n t. In o ra l

a rg u m e n t i t i s w ise to follow the law p o in ts of th e b r ie f only to the ex ten t

th a t m ax im u m u se i f m ade of the unique ad v an tag es of the o r a l p r e s e n ­

ta tio n . Some p o in ts can be m o s t e ffec tiv e ly developed o ra l ly , while

o th e rs a r e b e s t le f t to a r e fe re n c e to the b r ie f . S o m etim es i t is w ise to

c o n s id e r the type of p e rso n n e l on th e c o u r t in d e te rm in in g the o rg a n iz a tio n

of o r a l a rg u m en t. Som e c o u r ts a r e m uch m o re in c lin ed to a s k q u es tio n s

th an o th e rs ; som e c o u r ts m ay be m o re in c lin ed to fa v o r one p o s itio n

th an o th e rs .

Should the tr ib u n a l w ith w hich you have to d ea l fa l l m a rk ed ly in to any one of th e se c a te g o r ie s , y o u r d ev e lo p m en t in o r a l

252r , M. C a rso n , op. c i t . , p . 78.2 C 9

F . B , W ien e r, "O ra l A dvocacy , " op. c i t . , p . 61.

2 5 4 r , M. C arbon , 0£ . c i t . , p . 78.

293

a rg u m e n t of the law p o in ts m ay w e ll he a ffec te d . A c o u rt in c lin e d to a sk q u e s tio n s i s one to w hich you w ould p r e s e n t y o u r le g a l c o n ten tio n s in som ew hat su m m ary fo rm , w hile o rg a n iz in g in d ep th the p r in c ip le s of d e c is io n invo lved and the n a m e s of lead in g c a s e s so th a t you m ay re sp o n d a p p ro p ria te ly to th e ex p ec ted q u e s tio n s . F o r the s o -c a lle d u n in q u is itiv e c o u r t , on the o th e r h and , you w ould develop y o u r in itia l p re s e n ta t io n w ith m o re fu lln e s s in re l ia n c e upon i t s being y o u r p r in c ip à l o r a l s ta te m e n t co n cern in g the law , in th a t you w ill n o t have m an y q u es tio n s to m e e t.

S im ila r ly , w ith a c o u r t w hich you b e lie v e to b e sy m p a th e tic to y o u r side of th e c a se o r to y o u r m a jo r p ro p o s itio n s , you w ill develop a m o re ejq )ansive fo rm of s ta te m e n t of y o u r le g a l p ro p o s i t io n s , w h ich m ay re c e n tly have b een e n d o rse d in th a t c o u r t and w hich you m ay th e re fo re ex p ec t to c a r r y you to v ic to ry upon y o u r s ta te m e n t of fa c ts ; w h e re a s w ith the so - c a lle d u n re c e p tiv e c o u r t you m u s t ex p e c t to ad v an ce y o u r p ro p o s itio n s of law b y s tag e s and b e p r e p a re d fo r cha llenge and a d v e rse c o m m e n t. Such a re c e p tio n , if y o u r le g a l a rg u ­m e n t i s sound and w e ll m a rs h a lle d , should g ive you only a b e t te r e n try in to th e ju d ic ia l m in d . T h a t ad v o ca te i s a s tu te who w e lco m es an d w ill s tr iv e to m e e t on an e q u a l b a s is the ch a llen g e and q u e s tio n of a c o u r t dem anding to b e convinced .

T he o r a l a rg u m e n t i s n o t c o n s id e re d a good p lace to rev iew in d e ta il a

long s e r ie s of d e c is io n s w ith ex ten d ed d isc u s s io n s of the fa c ts invo lved .

I t i s f a r b e t te r to s e le c t only " . . . a c a rd in a l p o in t a ro u n d w hich l e s s e r

p o in ts rev o lv e lik e p la n e ts a ro u n d the sun. . . . " "T he te m p ta tio n i s

a lw ay s p r e s e n t to ‘l e t no g u ilty p o in t escape* in th e hope th a t if one hook

b r e a k s an o th e r m ay h o ld . " Such a p ro c e d u re m ay b e in o rd e r fo r th e

b r ie f w h e re the judge m ay re a d a s l i t t le o r a s m uch a s he d e s i r e s , b u t

th is w eak en s an o r a l a rg u m e n t.

ZSSib id . , p p . 8 2 -8 3 .

c i t . , p . 104,2 5 6 jo h n W. D a v is , "The A rg u m en t of an A p p ea l, " A p p ea ls , op.

294

A p p ella te advocacy p ro v id e s a unique chance fo r aud ience an a ly ­

s is . A c o u rt of a p p e a ls re f le c ts the a ttitu d es of the sam e m en o v e r and

o v e r , and the a tt i tu d e s a r e a m a t te r of public re c o rd . W ithin the o ra l

a rg u m en t the c o u r t ten d s to a sk q u es tio n s w hich re v e a l sp ec ific a ttitu d es

and in te re s ts abou t the c a se a t hand . "The la w y e r, of a l l w r i te r s , h as

the e a s ie s t ta s k w hen i t co m es to iden tify ing h is r e a d e r s . The th re e

o r n ine m en to w hom h is b r ie f and a rg u m e n t a r e d ire c te d a r e freq u en tly

p e rso n a lly known to the a tto rn e y . H e should have som e id e a of w hat w ill

ap p ea l to th em an d w hat w ill n o t. "He m ay know so m eth in g of th e ir

s e v e ra l ta s te s an d in te r e s t s : th e i r p o lit ic a l, so c ia l and econom ic po in ts

of v iew , th e ir h o b b ies and the ju d ic ia l and o th e r pu b lic f ig u re s whom

they a d m ire . . . . "258 one w r i te r pu t it,

F in a lly , and m o s t im p o rta n t of a l l , re m e m b e r th a t you a r e not ju s t a rg u in g to a body; you a r e s tr iv in g to p e rsu a d e a m a jo r ity of sev en ind iv idual h u m an b e in g s , o r a d iv is io n of th re e , to r e v e r s e o r a f f irm . To study and know the in a r tic u la te m a jo r p r e m is e of each . . . i s n o t uneth ical; th is i s p la in com m on s e n se . P u t y o u rse lf in the p lace of each ju d g e , though w ith h is p e rs o n a li ty and n o t y o u rs ; and then dec ide w hat would m ove you. E a c h ap p e lla te ju d g e , unlike the ran d o m ju ry m a n , can b e d is s e c te d by r e s o r t to h is opinions o v e r the y e a r s , a s w ell a s f ro m o th e r le g itim a te s o u r c e s . 2^9

^^^H . W eihofen, o£. c i t . , p . 5. ^^^Ib id .

259G eorge John M ille r , "In tro d u c tio n to O ra l A rg u m en t of an A ppeal, " F lo r id a L aw Jo u rn a l , XXV (June, 1951), p . 222.

295

T h u s , w ith r e g a rd to au d ien ce a n a ly s is , " i t i s nothing le s s th an fo o lish

fo r a law y er to fa il to keep c le a r ly b e fo re h im the m en ta l p ic tu re of the

mzin whom he is a d d re s s in g , . . .

F in a lly , w ith r e g a rd to o r a l ad v o cacy , i t i s obvious th a t b a s ic

s k il ls of good sp eech should be em ployed . T h a t i s , the e f fe c tiv e n e ss of

the co u n se l w ill be in c re a s e d to the ex te n t he p re s e n ts h im se lf w e ll

b e fo re the c o u r t, sp eak s so th a t a l l m ay h e a r w hile avoid ing th e so m e ­

t im e s e x c e ss iv e d e liv e ry m o re su itab le to a ju ry . The sp e a k e r should

u se language f ittin g fo r the o c ca s io n w hile avoid ing the v e ry com m on

fa u lt of o v e r -u s e of te c h n ic a l ja rg o n . T he sp e a k e r should d r e s s and

b eh av e acco rd in g to the ex p ec ted ro le of a co u n se l p re se n tin g a c a se

b e fo re a d ign ified tr ib u n a l. Above a l l , the a tto rn e y m u s t n o t r e a d to the

c o u r t . W r ite r s on ap p e lla te advocacy have m ade th is adm o n itio n m o re

fre q u e n tly than any o th e r ty p e . F ro m the freq u en cy and v eh em en ce

w ith w hich such co m m en ts a r e m a d e , i t can only be concluded th a t m any

la w y e rs a tte m p t to o v erco m e th e ir in ad e q u a c ie s in pub lic speak ing by

rea d in g p re p a re d sp ee c h e s o r even w o rse , re a d in g d ire c tly f ro m the

r e c o rd of the lo w er p ro c e e d in g s . I t h a s a lre a d y b een no ted th a t the U. S.

Suprem e C o u rt h a s w r itte n in to i t s ru le s a b an on read in g n o te s to the

W eihofen, og. c i t . , p . 5.

296

c o u r t in i t s r u le s . T h e re can be no doubt th a t a sk ille d sp e a k e r w ill

re c e iv e a m o re fa v o ra b le h e a r in g in any a p p e lla te c o u r t,

T h is c h a p te r h a s b een dev o ted to a r e la tiv e ly d e ta ile d ex am in a tio n

of the rh e to r ic of le g a l p ra c t ic e a s p r e s e n te d by th o se engaged in th e day

to day w o rk of a la w y e r . I t can be s a id in te n ta tiv e co n clu sio n th a t the

rh e to r ic a l th e o r ie s of p r a c t i t io n e r s ten d to le a n m o re in the d ire c tio n of

m o d e rn p e rs u a s io n th e o ry than do th o se of le g a l s c h o la r s . T h a t i s to

say , the a tto rn e y who m e e ts c lie n ts in h is office an d a d v e r s a r ie s in the

c o u rt o r a d m in is tra t iv e agency m u s t b eg in w ith the fra m e w o rk of ra t io n a l

d e c is io n -m ak in g and seek to d isc o v e r w ays in w hich he can b e s t advance

h is cau se v/ithout open ly v io la tin g th e g iven r u le s . In h is s e a rc h , the

p ra c tic in g a tto rn e y h a s d isc o v e re d th a t p e r s u a s io n m ay tra n sc e n d the

a s su m e d ra tio n a l l im i ts . He h a s d is c o v e re d w e a k n e sse s in the p r e s c r ib e d

p ro c e s s w hich m u s t b e o v erco m e by p ro o fs o th e r than fa c ts and lo g ic .

Above a l l , he h a s d isc o v e re d th a t ju s t ic e m ay depend m o re upon the

e ffe c tiv e n e ss w ith w hich a g iven co u n se l u s e s the av a ilab le m e a n s of

p e rs u a s io n than upon any s in g le r a t io n a l fa c to r invo lved ,

261°^M any w r i te r s d isc u s s the p u b lic speak ing a s p e c t of ap p e lla te advocacy . The fo llow ing a r e s im p ly r e p re s e n ta t iv e , W illiam C, M cD onald, "O ra l A rg u m en t, " T e x a s B a r J o u rn a l , XVI (A pril 22 , 1954), p p , 209-210; P a x to n B la i r , "A ppella te B r ie f s and A d v o c a cy ," F o rd h am L aw R eview , XVIII (M arch , 1949), p p , 30-48; G eorge I , H a ig h t, "T he A dvocate in C o u rts of R eview , " W isco n sin Law R ev iew , V ol, 1940 (M ay, 1940), pp , 327-334,

297

T h e se o b s e rv a tio n s g ive r i s e to the q u e s tio n of th e v a lid ity of the

u n d e rly in g rh e to r ic a l th e o r ie s of the leg a l p r o c e s s . T h is q u estio n w ill

b e p u rsu e d in the follow ing c h a p te r .

C H A PTER V

APPROA CHES TO THE VALIDATION

OF LEG A L RHETORIC

D ata thus fa r p r e s e n te d m o s t s tro n g ly su g g e s t the e x is ten c e of an

u n d erly in g rh e to r ic a l th e o ry in the leg a l p r o c e s s . B oth le g a l s c h o la rs

and p r a c t i t io n e r s reco g n ize th e e s se n tia l ly rh e to r ic a l c h a ra c te r of

ad ju d ica tio n .

T he in fo rm a tio n in the p re ce d in g c h a p te rs a lso p ro v id e s a c le a r

p ic tu re of the c h a ra c te r of th e rh e to r ic a l th e o ry of law . I t seem s a s if

the th e o ry h a s changed l i t t le f ro m th a t once s ta te d b y A r is to t le , I t

a s su m e s th a t m an h a s the ca p a c ity fo r ra tio n a l d ec is io n -m a k in g , bu t

re c o g n iz e s a p ro b ab ility of n o n - ra tio n a lity beco m in g a co n tro llin g fa c to r

in the ju d ic ia l p ro c e s s u n le s s c a re is tak en to av o id such a tu rn of e v e n ts .

In the fa c e of e ffo r ts by p a r t i s a n s in the le g a l c o n te s t to ob ta in a d e c is io n

by any m e a n s , ra tio n a l o r o th e rw ise , the le g a l sy s te m i s desig n ed to

include su ffic ien t reg u la tio n s to a s s u re a h igh p ro b a b ili ty of ra tio n a lity

in the u ltim a te leg a l d e c is io n . H ow ever, the r e p o r ts of a tto rn e y s -« w h o se

ta sk i t i s to p e r fo rm d a ily a s le g a l p a r t is a n s - - in d ic a te th a t n o n -ra tio n a lity

re m a in s a p o ten t fo rc e in ju r is p ru d e n c e ,

298

299

The q u e s tio n re m a in s , th en , to w hat ex ten t i s the th e o ry of r a ­

tio n a l d e c is io n -m a k in g , a s p ra c tic e d in the A m e rica n le g a l s y s te m ,

v a lid ? I t i s the p u rp o se of th is c h a p te r b r ie f ly to e x p lo re th e ap p ro a ch es

w hich have b een ta k e n to the a n sw erin g of th is q u estio n ,

0

Two co m m en ts m u s t be m ade re g a rd in g o rg an iz a tio n . F i r s t , the

v a lid a tio n e ffo r ts h av e tended to fo cu s on the v a r io u s ta s k s of ad ju d i­

ca tio n in d iv id u a lly . T h u s, th is c h a p te r w ill con fo rm to th a t p o licy and

follow a p a t te rn s im i la r to that of C h a p te r IV , although no t inc lud ing a ll

the ta s k s . Second, m e th o d s of v a lid a tio n tend to d ivide e a s ily in to two

ty p e s - - c r i t i c a l and e3q>erim ental. The c r i t ic a l ap p ro a c h es to v a lid a tio n

ten d to com e f ro m m e m b e rs of the le g a l p ro fe s s io n and fo llow the le g a l-

lo g ic a l p a t te rn . E x p e rim e n ta l d a ta m o s t freq u en tly co m es f ro m the

f ie ld s of p sy ch o lo g y , so c ia l p sy ch o lo g y , and in two in s ta n c e s , f ro m

p o li t ic a l s c ie n c e . W ith o ccas io n a l e x ce p tio n s , th is c h a p te r w ill d isc u s s

d a ta f ro m the two m eth o d s se p a ra te ly .

L a w y e r-C lie n t In te rv ie w s

One s e r ie s of in v es tig a tio n s d es ig n e d to ", , , ex p lo re the s ig n i­

f ic a n t b u t n e g le c te d f ie ld of le g a l co m m u n ica tio n , , , , " h a s begun by

in v es tig a tin g a tto rn e y to c lien t co m m u n ica tio n , The r e s u l t s of Üiis

^Wayne N , T hom pson and S, I n s a la ta , "C om m unica tion f ro m A tto rn e y to C lie n t, " T he Jo u rn a l of C om m unica tion , XIV (M arch , 1964), pp , 22 -33 ,

300

study h ave a lre a d y b een d is c u s s e d in C h apter IV , but the m eth od d e s e r v e s

so m e ad d ition al co m m en t h e r e . The m eth o d of th is study w a s a q u e s tio n ­

n a ir e sen t to 320 a tto r n e y s in C h icago , of w h ich f if ty - th r e e w e r e retu rn ed .

The in v e s t ig a to r s w e r e s a t is f ie d that the sa m p le co n stitu ted a r e a so n a b le

c r o s s - s e c t io n of the le g a l p r o fe s s io n in C h icago .

T he f i r s t p a r t o f the q u estio n n a ire sought in form ation co n cern in g

(1) the r e la t iv e im p o r ta n c e o f f iv e p o s s ib le s o u r c e s o f b reak d ow n s in

com m u n ication ; (2) th e a t to r n e y s ’ s e l f -a n a ly s e s of th e se so u r c e s ; (3)

th e ir su g g e s te d so lu tio n s ; and f in a lly (4) co m m u n ica tio n b a r r ie r s in

addition to the f iv e w h ich w e r e to b e ranked by the r e sp o n d e n ts , ^

A seco n d p a r t of the q u estio n n a ire u t il iz e d the " c r it ic a l in cid en t"

tech n iq u e , a m eth od u se d in p sy c h o lo g y w h ich a sk ed the resp o n d en t to

"give the m o s t in te r e s t in g exam p le of a breakdow n in a t to r n e y -c lie n t

com m u n ica tion in you r own p e r s o n a l e x p e r ie n c e , " A th ird step in the

q u e s t io n n a ir e --a n o p en -en d ed in v ita tio n to m ak e add itional c o m m e n ts - -

ten ded to c o n firm p r e v io u s c o n c lu s io n s .

In con c lu d in g , the au th ors o f th is stu dy sta te that the s p e c if ic

fin d in gs o f the study a r e l e s s s ig n if ic a n t than the " grou n d -b reak in g naturd'

of th e ir p r o je c t in g e n e r a l. W hile th ere h a v e b e e n m any s tu d ie s in th is

a r e a , sa y the a u th o r s , ", , . n e v e r b e fo r e h a s th e re b een an a ttem p t to

^Ib id ,, pp, 22; 24, ^ Ib id ,, p . 30,

301

in v e s tig a te th e p ro b le m m u ltid im e n s io n a lly an d sy s te m a tic a lly . Beyond

th is q u e s tio n n a ire , the a u th o rs p la n to c o n s tru c t " . . . a le g a l v o ca b u la ry

te s t a s a s c re e n in g and r e s e a r c h in s tru m e n t an d a r e e x p e rim en tin g w ith

d iffe re n t a u d i to r / anti v isu a l m o d es of p re s e n tin g a le g a l docum en t to

laym en .

E v id en c e in the T r ia l C o u rt

P ro b a b ly the m o s t th o ro u g h ly in v e s tig a te d a sp e c t of the le g a l p r o ­

c e s s is th a t of ev a lu a tin g ev id en ce in judg ing q u e s tio n s of fa c t. T h is

p ro c e s s in c lu d e s the lo g ic a l foundation of th e t r i a l c o u r t , d i r e c t e x a m i­

n a tion , w itn e ss te s tim o n y , and c ro s s -e x a m in a tio n .

B a s ic to the s y s te m of d e te rm in in g q u e s tio n s of fa c t i s the p r e ­

sum ed lo g ic a l foundation . F e l ix S. C ohen, in 1950, p re s e n te d a c r i t ic i s m

of th is foundation . ® C ohen’s th e s is w as th is .

The d is a g re e m e n ts of opposing la w y e rs on s ta te m e n ts of s im p le fa c t , an d the even w id e r d is a g re e m e n ts th a t c h a ra c te r iz e th e ir v iew s on m o re c o m p lic a te d fa c ts (’opinion* and *law*), c a ll fo r a m o re hum ane an d so c ia l v iew of t ru th and m ean in g th an a p p e a rs in m o s t of the t ra d it io n a l lo g ic b o o k s. T h is i s n o t to say th a t the t ra d it io n a l lo g ic b o o k s a r e w ro n g . I t i s only to say th a t so f a r the lo g ic ia n s , h av ing c o n c e n tra te d th e i r v is io n on the lo g ica l h eav en s w h ere w o rd s con tinue a t r e s t and m ean the sam e thing f o re v e r , h ave n o t fu lly ex p lo red the im p e r fe c t e f fo r ts of hum an b e in g s to co m m u n ica te w ith each o th e r . ^

^ Ib id . , p . 33.

^ F e lix S. C ohen, " F ie ld T h eo ry and J u d ic ia l L o g ic , " The Y ale Law J o u rn a l, V ol. 59 ( J a n u a ry , 1950), pp . 238-272 .

^ Ib id . , p . 242.

302

Cohen su g g es ts th a t le g a l lo g ic ia n s could b en e fit f ro m a study of the

p h y s ic a l s c ie n c e s . He say s th a t E in s te in ’s co n tr ib u tio n w as the d ev e lo p ­

m en t of fo rm u la e " , , , by w hich d iffe ren t acco u n ts of the sam e p h y s ic a l

even t m ay be c o r re la te d w ith ea ch o th e r , so th a t f ro m the p o s itio n and

d ire c tio n of an even t in any p h y s ic a l sy stem we can c a lc u la te i t s p o s itio n

and d ire c tio n in any o th e r sy s te m ,

T h u s , he s a y s , i t i s n e c e s s a ry in the law to c o n s tru c t a log ic

w hich can acco m o d ate ’t r u th ’ in i t s v a rio u s fo rm s ; th a t w hat a p p e a rs to

be an h o n e s t t ra n s a c tio n fro m one p e rsp e c tiv e •»vill a p p e a r ’crooked*

f ro m a n o th e r . He c a lls fo r a lo g ic ", , , fro m w hich we can p re d ic t the

su c c e ss iv e ’d is to r t io n s ’ th a t any o b se rv e d so c ia l f a c t w ill undergo a s i t

p a s s e s th ro u g h d iffe re n t value -c h a rg e d f ie ld s in the ’w o r ld - l in e ’ of i ts

h is to ry , " He d e s c r ib e s "w o r ld - lin e " a s a te r m u s e d in p h y s ics to

include a l l the s e r ie s of lo c a tio n s of a body in s p a c e - t im e . T hus, law

m u s t be ab le to cope w ith " a c c u ra te " re p o r ts of the sam e "fac t" which

oa r e d ia m e tr ic a lly opposed.

T h u s , in the t r i a l of q u es tio n s of fa c t, n o te s Cohen, the law

s e a rc h e s fo r c a u sa l re la t io n s . W as the neg ligence of A the cau se of the

acc id en t su ffe red by B ? A c tu a lly , if s t r ic t lo g ic w e re em ployed, the

s tr in g of c a u s a l re la tio n s could b e c a r r ie d to in fin ity , fo r if B had no t

^Ibid . Sibid.

303

b een d riv in g a t a c e r ta in tim e in a c e r ta in p la c e , the n eg lig en ce of A

could n o t h av e c au se d the a cc id en t; and , if B h ad n e v e r b een b o rn , th e re

w ould hav e b een no a c c id e n t, and so on, "W hat we a c tu a lly do, " co n ­

tin u es C ohen, "w hen we lo o k fo r a le g a l cau se i s to p ic k out of th is

in fin ity of in te rs e c tin g s tra n d s a u se fu l po in t a t w hich pub lic p r e s s u r e

can be p la c e d . "9 T h is p o in t i s s e le c te d b e c a u se i t i s b e lie v e d th a t som e

im p ro v em en t in so c ia l conduct can be ach iev ed o r som e re l ie f ob ta ined

fo r th e p la in tiff . T h u s , the cau se of an a c c id e n t i s n o t a lto g e th e r a

q u es tio n of fa c t b u t a com bination of fa c t and v a lu e ju d g m en t.

R esu ltin g f ro m h is c r i t ic a l a n a ly s is a r e , a c c o rd in g to Cohen, a

n u m b er of p ro p o s itio n s w hich cou ld be te s te d e x p e r im e n ta lly .

1. The m o re re p re h e n s ib le the conduct, the m o re read ily w ill ju d g es find a c a u sa l connection b e tw een the conduct and the in ju ry co m p la in ed of.

2. T he m o re h a te fu l the defendan t, the m o re re a d ily w ill ju d g es find a c a u sa l connection b e tw een the defendan t and the in ju ry co m p la in ed of.

3. A ju d g m en t a g a in s t a h igh ly re s p e c te d c itiz e n h a s a l a r g e r p re c e d e n t va lue than a ju d g m en t a g a in s t a d e sp ise d p e rso n ; c o n v e rse ly , a ju d g m en t in fav o r of a d e sp is e d p e rso n h a s a la r g e r p re c e d e n t va lue th an one fo r a p i l la r of so c ie ty .

4 . A va lue d if fe re n tia l in a ttitu d e of judge and ju ry tow ard a g iven c la s s w ill be r e f le c te d in d iffe re n c e s of ju d g m en t a s to w h e th e r in d iv id u a ls of the g iven c la s s a r e re sp o n s ib le fo r the w ro n g s co m p la in ed of,

O bviously , if Cohen*s a n a ly s is is to be ac c e p te d , then the a s su m e d r a ­

tio n a l b a s is of the le g a l p r o c e s s m u s t be s ig n ifican tly a d ju s te d . To th o se

9 lb id ., p . 243. lO lb id ., p . 259.

304

who h o ld in fa v o r of the s tre n g th of fa c t and log ic a s o p p osed to the n o n -

ra tio n a l in flu en ces in the t r i a l c o u r t , Cohen is say ing th a t such a b e lie f

i s a t l e a s t p a r ty m yth .

A t the v e ry h e a r t of a t r i a l of fa c t is the a s su m p tio n th a t the le g a l

p ro c e s s o f fe rs a re lia b le m eth o d fo r s e c u rin g an a c c u ra te p ic tu re of an

ev en t in the m in d of the judge o r ju ry . The so u rc e of th e e v e n t-p ic tu re

i s m o s t com m only the te s tim o n y of w itn e s s e s , and the m ed iu m i s the

q u estio n in g of the w itn e s s e s by opposing co u n se l. U nderly ing th is sy s te m

a r e a n u m b er of a s su m p tio n s . O ne, a w itn e ss p r e s e n t a t the scen e of an

ev en t i s ab le to p e rc e iv e the ev en t w ith re a so n a b le a c c u ra c y ; tw o, the

w itn e ss i s ab le to r e p o r t h is p e rc e p tio n s in such a w ay th a t h is p e rs o n a l

ju d g m en t w ill n o t e x c e ss iv e ly d is to r t the re p o r t; and th re e , th a t a w it­

ness* m e m o ry i s su ffic ien t to a llo w a co m p le te r e p o r t of h is e x p e r ie n c e s

(the "w hole tru th " ) a f te r a d e lay . T h ese a r e a few of the a ssu m p tio n s

th a t do no t even inc lude a c tio n s of the a t to rn e y s , n o r the ju d g m en t of the

ju ry . The sy s te m fu r th e r a s s u m e s th a t a c c u ra c y of r e p o r t i s b e s t

o b ta in ed th ro u g h d i r e c t q u estio n in g by an a tto rn e y g and th a t the c r e d i ­

b ili ty and a c c u ra c y of the w itn e ss can b e s t be te s te d th ro u g h a

c ro s s -e x a m in a tio n of an opposing a tto rn e y . The le g a l p ro c e s s ex p ec ts

th a t ru le s of a d m is s ib il i ty w ill e ffec tiv e ly co n tro l th e flow of n o n -ra tio n a l

p ro o fs to a ju ry , and th a t ju ry m e m b e rs th e m se lv e s a r e m o s t cap ab le of

305

judging w hich of s e v e ra l w itn e sse s should b e b e lie v e d . F in a lly , the

le g a l s y s te m e x p e c ts th a t a ju ry w ill poo l i t s c o lle c tiv e know ledge, v a lu e s ,

e x p e r ie n c e s , and a r r iv e a t a fa c t- ju d g m e n t b a s e d upon th e ev idence p r e ­

sen ted in c o u r t , and com bine th is fa c t- ju d g m e n t w ith th e law a s g iven by

the judge to fo rm a v e rd ic t .

Som e of th e se a s s u m p t on,3 h av e b een in v e s tig a te d fo r v a lid ity .

A p p lica tio n of p sy c h o lo g ic a l s tu d ie s to te s tim o n y d e s e rv e f i r s t m en tio n .

W ritin g f i r s t in 1909, Hugo M u n s te rb e rg m ad e a la s tin g im p re s s io n upon

th e le g a l p ro fe s s io n b y challeng ing m an y of the a s su m p tio n s of v a lid ity

of f i r s t - h a n d te s tim o n y , ^^ S ta ted s im p ly , M u n s te rb e rg re p o r te d the

fin d in g s of e x p e r im e n ts w hich su g g ested th a t w i tn e s s e s ’ p e rc e p tio n v a r ie d

and i t i s q u ite p o s s ib le th a t s e v e ra l w itn e s s e s o b se rv in g the sam e even t

m ay r e p o r t d iffe re n tly w ithou t in ten tio n a l d is to r t io n . In f a c t , l a te r

s tu d ie s ten d ed to in d ic a te th a t e y e -w itn e ss te s tim o n y i s m o s t f req u en tly

in c o n s is te n t w ith the f a c ts a s w ell a s w ith o th e r w itn e s s e s , H ow ever,

the r e p o r te r s f ro m psy ch o lo g y le f t open a door of v a lid ity to the litig a tio n

p ro c e s s by no ting .

E r r o r s in o b se rv a tio n such a s th e se do n o t, of c o u r s e , c o n s ti­tu te th e w hole s to ry . I t i s p o ss ib le th a t the ju ry m ay b e able

^^Hugo M u n s te rb e rg , On The W itn ess S tand (New Y ork: C la rk B o a rd m a n , C o , , L td , , 1923),

^^H aro ld E r n e s t B u r t t , L eg a l P sy ch o lo g y (New Y ork : P r e n t ic e - H a ll, I n c , , 1940), pp , 14-16 .

306

to s if t som e of th is co n flic tin g ev idence and b r in g a ju s t v e rd ic t; b u t th e g r e a te r the d is a g re e m e n t and the m o re n u m ero u s the e r r o r s in o b se rv a tio n , the g r e a te r is the ju r y 's ta sk .

M odern d is c u s s io n s of th is su b jec t seem to su p p o rt th e se co n c lu s io n s .

T h is in fo rm a tio n , th e re fo re , ten d s ag a in to em p h as iz e the im p o rta n c e of

ju d g m en t b y the ju ry in re sp o n se to the s tim u li p re s e n te d to th em in the

c o u r t. I t e m p h a s iz e s the s ig n ifican ce of the w ay in w hich an a tto rn e y

p re s e n ts h is w itn e s s e s , q u es tio n s th em , and how they re sp o n d to c r o s s -

ex am in a tio n . T h a t i s , i t e m p h a s iz e s the p ro o fs of a l e s s c le a r ly ra tio n a l

n a tu re .

In v e s tig a tio n s of the v a lid ity of the ju ry o r judge re sp o n se to the

w ide ran g e of p ro o fs ju s t m en tio n ed have no t b een p e r fo rm e d ex ten s iv e ly .

Of th is a r e a of in v e s tig a tio n , th e fo llow ing s ta tem e n t w as m ad e by a

r e s e a r c h a s s o c ia te a t Y ale L aw School holding advanced d e g re e s in

p sycho logy a s w e ll a s a law d e g re e .

T he proceduB S of law involve s tu d ied e s tim a te s of b e h av io r a s p a r t of the ju r i s t i c p r o c e s s and ev a lu a tio n . The s ig n ifican ce and th e r e l ia b i l i t ie s of c o u r tro o m b e h av io r and the e fficacy and a p p ro p r ia te n e s s of ru le s and p r a c t ic e s re q u ire stud ied a n a ly s is .

On th e w hole , law fin d s in the c u r re n t p sy ch o lo g ica l a n s w e rs , w h e re th e re p u rp o r t to be any , an in su ffic ie n cy of d a ta , a la c k

Ib id , , p . 16.

^^See C a r ro l l A . W h itm er, "P sy ch o lo g y in Law and in C rim in o - logy , " i n J . S tan ley (ed. ), P sy ch o lo g y in U se (New Y ork; A m e ric a n Book C om pany, 1951)

307

of p e rs p e c tiv e on the so c ia l co m p lex ity of the i s s u e s i t s tu d ie s , a n d , by im p lic a tio n , a la c k of su ffic ien t a n a ly s is and re f le c tio n fo r u t i l i ta r ia n p u rp o se . The d a ta th a t e x is ts is sp o rad ic and p o o r ly f it te d . P sy c h o lo g ic a l f ra m e s of re fe re n c e a r e m o stly n o t o rd e re d to any su b s ta n tia l v iew of so c ia l r e a l i t ie s , and m an y of the g e n e ra liz a tio n s th a t is s u e a re e x c e ss iv e ly co n je c ­tu r a l and , o ften s im p ly a rg u m e n ta tiv e .

An ex am p le of the k ind of v a lid a tio n th is w r i te r c a lls fo r is a study of the

ju d g m en ts m ad e by ju d g es and ju r ie s of w itn e ss c re d ib ili ty on the b a s is

of m a n n e r of e x p re s s io n by th e w itn e s s . One study su g g ests th a t i t is

n e c e s s a ry to u n d e rs ta n d the p a r t ic u la r w itn ess b e fo re such ju d g m en ts

can b e m ad e v a lid ly . The study su g g es ts th a t som e w itn e sse s a p p e a r

gu ilty of in te n tio n a l p e r ju ry b e c a u se of signs of ten s io n re su ltin g f ro m

o th e r c a u s e s . B u t, a s i s s ta te d above, the av a ila b le in fo rm a tio n is

qu ite l im ite d in th is a r e a . T he Y ale r e s e a r c h a s s o c ia te concludes :

In te r m s of c u r re n t p e r s p e c t iv e , i t w ould a p p e a r th a t the d im e n sio n a lity of in d iv id u al b e h a v io r is th e p sy ch o lo g ica l con ­tr ib u tio n given g r e a te s t no te in le g a l thought and le g a l p r o c e s s e s .T he s y s te m a tiz a tio n of co n cep tio n s of the i r r a t io n a l and a f a i r co m p o sitio n a l u n d e rs tan d in g of the re la tio n sh ip b e tw een the ra t io n a l and the i r r a t io n a l— o r , in m o re b a s ic p sy ch o lo g ica l t e r m s , th e cognitive and the e m o tio n a l- - is the l a r g e s t and m o s t sp e c ific in q u iry th a t law d i r e c ts to w ard p sycho logy today . The r e f e r e n c e s , in bo th in s ta n c e s , a r e sought in v a r io u s f ra m e s of so c ia l e x p e r ie n c e , bu t i t i s p r e c is e ly th is la t t e r s o r t of d a ta th a t i s la rg e ly , though n o t e n t ire ly , m is s in g .

^^ R o b ert S. R edm ount, "A P an to sco p ic V iew of Law and P sy c h o ­logy* " ZSHZSfÉ,2É&2SÊ1 E d u c a ü o n , V ol. 10, No. 4 (1958), pp . 442-443 .

^^K arl G e rb e r t , "T he P sy ch o lo g y of E x p re s s io n and the T echnique of C r im in a l In te rro g a tio n , " Jo u rn a l of P sycho logy and P sy c h o th e ra p y ,V ol. 2 (1954), pp . 85-98 .

17R . S. R edm ount, og. c i t . , p . 448.

308

The s tu d ie s of w itn e ss p e r fo rm a n c e , th e re fo re , e m p h a s iz e the

im p o rta n c e of the a tto rn e y s in the t r i a l . In lig h t of the p ro b le m s im p li­

c it in te s tim o n y , the u ltim a te d e c is io n of judge o r ju ry r e l i e s h eav ily

on the e ffec tiv e n e ss of ex am in a tio n and c ro s s -e x a m in a tio n .

In M arch of 1956 the Society fo r the P sy c h o lo g ic a l Study of Social

I s s u e s and the S ocie ty fo r th e Study of S ocia l P ro b le m s h e ld a sym posium

on "W itn ess P e r fo rm a n c e u n d e r S t r e s s . "1® A m ong o th e r q u e s tio n s

d eem ed d e se rv in g of e x p e r im e n ta l v e r if ic a tio n w e re th e se ; (1) to w hat

e x ten t do es the p r e - t r i a l c o v e rag e by n e w sp a p e rs tend to in tim id a te

w itn e s s e s and to f ix the a ttitu d e of ju r o r s ; (2) to w hat e x te n t d o es a

s la sh in g a tta c k in a p u b lic c o u r tro o m ten d to b r e a k down a w itn e ss and

g e t m o re tru th fu l a n sw e rs ; and (3) to w hat ex ten t does i t h e lp an u n tra in e d

o b s e rv e r such a s a ju r o r to judge th e c re d ib ili ty of a w itn e s s by allow ing

h im to w atch the w itn e ss te s t i fy , o r s im ila r ly , to w hat e x te n t does

d em ean o r in the ab se n c e of s t r e s s and u n d e r v a r io u s ty p e s of s t r e s s

re v e a l c re d ib ili ty . C le a r ly , th e se q u e s tio n s seek to e x p lo re the v a l i­

d ity of the a ssu m p tio n in th e le g a l p ro c e s s th a t th e co m b in a tio n of

ex am in a tio n and c ro s s -e x a m in a tio n b e fo re a ju ry w ill p ro b a b ly re v e a l a

ra tio n a l con clu sio n re g a rd in g the ev en t in q u es tio n .

^®The v a r io u s r e p o r ts of th is sy m p o siu m c o n s titu te th e e n tire is s u e of The Jo u rn a l of S o c ia l I s s u e s , XIII, No. 2 (1957).

^9Ja c k B , W ein s te in , "T he L aw ’s A ttem p t to O b ta in U sefu l T e s t i ­m ony, " T ^ J o u r i ^ of S o c l ^ I s s u e s , o£. c i t . , pp . 6 -11 .

309

F o r ex a m p le , w ith r e g a rd to c ro s s -e x a m in a tio n m any p r a c t i t io n e r s

a g re e w ith one r e p o r tin g to the sy m p o siu m th a t s t r e s s i s a n e c e s s a ry

in g re d ie n t of c ro s s -e x a m in a tio n in g e ttin g a t the t ru th . He sa id th a t

s t r e s s f ro m q u es tio n in g on c o l la te r a l m a t te r s such a s the w itn e s s ' c r i ­

m in a l b ack g ro u n d o r r e p o r ts of h o m o sex u a lity w ill in c r e a s e the

p ro b a b ility of b r in g in g the w itn e ss to s ta te w hat he b e lie v e s to be tru e .

H o w ev er, a t th e sam e m e e tin g , a n o th e r p r a c t i t io n e r d is a g re e d w ith th is

co n c lu s io n . He c la im e d th a t d ra m a tic re v e la tio n s and b reak d o w n s of

w itn e s s e s m a y o c c u r in the la w y e r 's o ffice b u t r a r e ly - - e x c e p t on te le ­

v is io n - -d o e s i t happen in c o u r t. If a w itn e ss h a s com e to c o u r t

re so lv e d to te l l a fa ls e s to ry , then the ch an ces a r e th a t i t w ill b e re v e a le d

only th ro u g h d i r e c t c o n tra d ic tio n and co n flic tin g c irc u m s ta n c e s r e la te d

in the te s tim o n y of o th e r w itn e s s e s . T h is le a v e s the f in a l co n c lu sio n

to the in te rp re ta t io n of the judge o r ju ry . W ith r e g a rd to s t r e s s u nder

c ro s s -e x a m in a tio n , th is p r a c t i t io n e r c la im s , a s the q u es tio n in g in c r e a s e s

s t r e s s , " It b e c o m e s in c re a s in g ly a p p a re n t to the w itn e ss th a t he cannot

re m a in n e u tr a l and th a t he m u s t defend h im se lf by choosing s id e s , "

^ ^ H a r r is B . S te in b e rg , "T he P r a c t i t io n e r S peaks Out: W itness P e r fo rm a n c e a s Seen by a T r ia l A tto rn e y , " J o u rn a l of S o c ia l I s s u e s , op. c i t . , pp . 30 -31 .

21pavil W. W illia m s , "T he P r a c t i t io n e r S peaks O ut: W itness P e r fo rm a n c e a s V iew ed by a U. S. A tto rn e y , " J o u rn a l of S ocia l I s s u e s , op . c i t . , pp . 34 -35 .

^ ^ Ib id . , p . 34.

310

The w itn e ss a lm o s t a lw ays ch o o ses the side th a t c a lle d h im to te s tify ,

and once the cho ice is m ad e , the w itn e ss b eco m es c e r ta in of ev ery th in g

23he s a y s . If th is v iew i s tak en , a d riv in g c ro s s -e x a m in a tio n could be

esqjected to r e s u l t in m o re h a rm than good w ith r e g a rd to the ju r y 's

a ttitu d e to w a rd th e e x a m in e r 's p o s itio n .

The ev idence is co n flic tin g , th e re fo re , co n cern in g the ro le of

c ro s s -e x a m in a tio n in b rin g in g the ju ry to a ra tio n a l d e c is io n . Some

s tu d ie s su g g es t th a t te s tim o n y i s m o s t a c c u ra te and co m p le te when c o m ­

b in ed w ith f r e e r e c i ta l and d i r e c t ex am in a tio n , and th a t c ro ss -e x a m in a tio n

b r in g s out l e s s co m p le te in fo rm a tio n , m o re in a c c u ra te in fo rm a tio n , and

e l ic i ts m o re "d o n 't know " a n s w e rs . Y e t, on the o th e r h an d , the

p e r s i s te n t e x p e r ie n c e of la w y e rs te s t i f ie s to the e f fe c tiv e n e ss of c r o s s -

ex am in a tio n to re v e a l a fa ls e o r in a c c u ra te s to ry . The u ltim a te t e s t ,

of c o u rse , i s w hat the ju ry u s e s to fo rm i t s d ec is io n and the d e g re e to

w hich the ju ry d e c is io n i s c o n s is te n t w ith r e a l i ty , o r , th a t i s , how

ra tio n a l i s the j u r y 's d ec is io n .

D ec is io n by J u ry

The p u rp o se of the ju ry in a t r i a l a t law i s n o t p r im a r i ly to e n ­

han ce the ra t io n a li ty of th e d e c is io n . R a th e r , the ju ry is h e ld to be a

^^I b id . , p . 35. 24h , E , B u r t t , o£. c i t . , p . 146,

25 B rian A , G ro sm an , "T e s tin g W itness R e l ia b i l i ty ," The C r im i­n a l L aw Q u a r te r ly , V ol. 5 (N ovem ber, 1962), pp. 318-327.

311

sa fe g u a rd fo r the peop le a g a in s t o p p re s s io n by the s ta te ; i t is ex pected

th a t a ju ry w ill a c t a s a r e p re s e n ta tiv e of the v a lu es w ith in the im m e ­

d ia te so c ie ty and m odify p o ten tia lly h a r s h ru le s of law . H o w ever, the

ju ry i s s t i l l ex p ec ted to o p e ra te w ith in the c la s s ic a l a s su m p tio n of the

ra t io n a l c a p a c ity of m an , A ju ry is s t i l l ex pected to w ithhold d ec is io n

u n til a l l ev idence h a s b een p re s e n te d and to m ake i t s d e c is io n w ith in the

con fines of the ev id en ce , and the law a s g iven by the ju d g e . J u ry

d e c is io n s a r e n o t ex p ec ted to b e c a p r ic io u s o r n o n -ra tio n a l.

N e v e r th e le s s , th e re is ev idence to su g g est th a t ju r i e s do not

behave a s e3q>ected. A s one c r i t ic p u t it»

P e r h a p s nothing in the e n tire r e a lm of advocacy s e rv e s the p u rp o se s of th o se d e te rm in e d to avo id a d ec is io n b a s e d on a c le a r - c u t is s u e a s does an in s is te n c e on the r ig h t to a t r i a l by ju ry . H e re i s a m eth o d of rea.ching a d ec is io n th a t d e fie s lo g ic a l ju s t if ic a tio n . I ts sh o rtc o m in g s a r e n o to rio u s , , , , ^^

One w r i te r h a s p r e p a re d a l i s t of q u a lif ic a tio n s a ju r o r should be re q u ire d

to m e e t b e fo re being s e le c te d fo r du ty . B oth the c h a r a c te r of the dem an d s

m ad e in th e l i s t and th e reco g n itio n of the fa c t th a t c u r re n tly no such

q u a lif ic a tio n s a r e en fo rce d s tro n g ly in d ic a te s a la ck of confidence in

p r e s e n t ju r y d e c is io n s . The q u a lif ic a tio n s a r e th ese :

1. C r i t ic a l T hinking A b ility , I t i s e s s e n tia l th a t the p ro sp e c tiv e ju r o r b e ab le to d raw sound in fe re n c e s f ro m d a ta

A dlew , "T he D ia lec tic of A dvocacy , " B oston U n iv e rs ity L aw R ev iew , XXXVI (F a ll , 1956), p , 582,

312

and o b s e rv a tio n s , to re c o g n ize im p lie d a s su m p tio n s , to re a s o n lo g ic a lly by deduction and in te rp o la tio n , and to ev a lu a te s tre n g th and re le v a n c e of a rg u m e n t.

2, P e r s o n a l i ty S ta tu s . The p ro sp e c tiv e ju r o r should b e f re e of such m e n ta l d is o rd e r and em o tio n a l in s ta b il i ty a s w ould p ro d u c e an undue p reo c c u p a tio n w ith h is own p ro b le m s of a d ju s tm e n t, and a s ig n if ic an t d is to r t io n of re a l i ty .

3, A ttitu d in a l O r ie n ta tio n . The p ro sp e c tiv e ju r o r shou ld no t be in se n s it iv e o r opposed to the g e n e ra lly a c ce p ted v a lu e s and co n d itio n s su rro u n d in g hum an p ro p e n s it ie s and hum an f r a i l ty , so c ia l o rd e r and the re q u ire m e n ts of d isc ip lin e , c h a r i ty and co m p ass io n a te u n d e rs ta n d in g , ju s t ic e , eq u a lity and in te g r i ty . He shou ld be f r e e of any m o rb id p re o c c u p a tio n o r a ttitu d e w hich w ould m a te r ia l ly co lo r h is p e rc e p tio n s and u n d e rs tan d in g of p eo p le and e v e n ts .

4 , S o c ia l P e rc e p tio n . The p ro sp e c tiv e j u r o r 's o b se rv a tio n and in te rp re ta t io n of b e h a v io r should no t be so fau lty a s to be th o ro u g h ly in a c c u ra te , and h is ju d g m en t in so c ia l s itu a tio n s should n o t r e f le c t m a rk e d n a iv e te o r g u llib ility .

5, G e n e ra l In fo rm a tio n . The p ro sp e c tiv e ju r o r should no t la c k such a fund of g e n e ra l in fo rm a tio n a s w ould p re v e n t a m in im a l a w a re n e s s of th in g s and ev en ts in so c ie ty n e c e s s a r y fo r an e le m e n ta l a d ju s tm e n t.

6, G e n e ra l In fo rm a tio n A bout the In s titu tio n of L aw . The p ro sp e c tiv e j u r o r should n o t be to ta lly ig n o ra n t o r g ro s s ly m is in fo rm e d a s to the c h a ra c te r an d function of g e n e ra lly known le g a l p r o c e s s e s and le g a l p e rso n n e l, ^7

The a u th o r of th is p ro p o sa l w ould a lso t e s t fo r m e m o ry and h o n es ty of

the p ro sp e c tiv e ju r o r if he could d e v ise a w ay to t e s t th e se i te m s .

C le a r ly , if one m u s t p o s s e s s such q u a lit ie s to p e r fo rm the ta s k of ra tio n a l

d e c is io n -m a k in g , then c u r r e n t ju r i e s a r e fa llin g s h o r t of th e goal (even

if i t i s a s su m e d liia t ju r i e s a r e tru ly re p re s e n ta t iv e of a l l a b ili ty le v e ls ,

^ ^ R o b e rt S. R edm ount, "P sy ch o lo g ic a l T e s ts fo r S e lec tin g J u r o r s , " K an sas L aw R eview , V ol. 5 (1957), p . 401.

313

w hich is d en ied b y p r a c t i t io n e r s ) , and if th is i s the c a s e , th en s e r io u s

doubt i s c a s t on th e a s su m e d rh e to r ic a l th e o ry in th e t r i a l co u rt.

F ro m the e x p e r im e n ta l r e s e a r c h in to ju r y b e h a v io r add itional

s tre n g th is g iven the a s su m p tio n of a s tro n g ly n o n - ra t io n a l c h a ra c te r in

ju ry d e c is io n s . One study ex am in ed the b e h a v io r of a ju ry a s a function

of the p r e s t ig e of the fo re m a n and the n a tu re of h is le a d e rsh ip ,^ ® F o u r

ju ry p a n e ls w e re m a tc h e d in th is e x p e r im e n t, and e ach w as p ro v id ed

w ith a t r a in e d e x p e r im e n te r a s a le a d e r , unknow n to the r e s t of the ju ry .

E a c h ju ry h e a rd the sam e c a s e a s p re s e n te d b y a c to r s and law s tu d en ts

fo llow ing an a c tu a l t r a n s c r ip t in c o u r tro o m c o n d itio n s . Im m ed ia te ly

a f te r the t r i a l , th e ju ry co m p le te d a q u e s tio n n a ire d ea lin g w ith im p o r t­

an t a s p e c ts of the c a se and th en r e t i r e d to a ju r y ro o m to d isc u s s and

d ec id e the c a s e . Im m e d ia te ly follow ing the d e c is io n a n o th e r q u e s tio n n a ire

w as co m p le ted . B oth q u e s tio n n a ire s invo lved s ta tin g the is s u e s of the

c a se and in d ica tin g a " y e s " o r "no" an sw er to th e m ,

F o r each p an e l a d if fe re n t type of le a d e rs h ip w as u se d by the

fo re m a n . The ty p e s in c lu d ed h igh p re s t ig e a u to c ra t ic ; low p re s tig e a u to ­

c r a t ic , h igh p r e s t ig e d e m o c ra tic and low p r e s t ig e d e m o c ra tic . Two such

^® W illiam B e v a n , R o b e r t S, A lb e r t, P i e r r e R , L o i seaux . P e te r N, M ay fie ld , and G eo rg e W rig h t, " Ju ry B eh a v io r a s a F u n c tio n of the P r e s t ig e of the F o re m a n an d th e N a tu re of h is L e a d e rs h ip , " Jo u rn a l of P u b lic L aw , V ol. 7 (F a ll , 1958), pp , 419-449 .

2 9 lb id ,, p . 423,

314

e3q>erim ents w e re p e r fo rm e d and s ta t is t ic a l m e a s u re m e n t em ployed in

each . The co n c lu sio n s show ed an in c o n s is te n c y b e tw een the two e x p e r i­

m e n ts . In the f i r s t , le a d e rsh ip d id n o t have a s ta t is t ic a l ly s ig n ifican t

c o n s is te n t in flu en ce upon the dam age aw a rd , b u t in the second experim ent^

the a u to c ra tic le a d e r p ro d u ced a g r e a te r re la tiv e sh ift th a n d id the dem o­

c ra tic ; the le v e l of p re s t ig e d id n o t a p p e a r to b e s y s te m a tic a lly

in flu en tia l in e i th e r e x p e rim e n t. A cco rd in g to the e x p e r im e n te rs , the

d a ta d e m o n s tra te (including the in c o n s is te n c y b e tw een the two e x p e r i­

m en ts and the d iffe re n tia l in the e ffec tiv e n ess of v a r io u s le a d e r s ,

. . . the ex ten t to w hich the s itu a tio n a l and o th e rw ise c irc u m ­s ta n tia l f a c to r s in fluence w hat i s a s su m e d to b e a co m p le te ly ra t io n a l a c tiv ity --h o w the p la in tiff f a re s depends not only upon the m e r i t s of h is c a s e , b u t upon the ju ry th a t h e a r s i t , and upon th e p e rso n a li ty and b e h a v io r of the ju ry fo re m a n , 31

A d d itio n a l in fo rm a tio n w as ob tained in the second ex p e rim en t.

The n u m b er of s ta te m e n ts m ad e d u rin g each d e lib e ra tiv e se s s io n , the

p e r cen t of the to ta l m ade by the le a d e r , and the n u m b er of b a llo ts taken

p r io r to unan im o u s a g re e m e n t w as checked . F ro m th is d a ta , i t i s

le a rn e d th a t th e h ig h -p re s tig e a u to c ra tic le a d e r w as m o s t in flu en tia l,

hav ing b ro u g h t h is g roup to a g re e m e n t a f te r one b a llo t. Follow ing in

o rd e r in th is rank ing w as the low p re s t ig e a u to c ra t ic , h igh p re s tig e

d e m o c ra tic , and la s t w as the low p re s t ig e d e m o c ra tic le a d e r . I t w as

^Qlb id . , p . 433. 31jb id , , p . 434. ^^Ib id . , p . 435.

315

n o ted th a t th is o rd e r c o rre sp o n d e d c lo se ly to the ra n k o r d e r of am ount

of a w a rd s p re s e n te d by the ju r ie s . " T h is is c le a r e v id en ce , " s a id the

e x p e r im e n te r s , " , . . th a t group opin ion re f le c ts to a s ig n if ic a n t d eg ree

the v iew of an e ffec tiv e l e a d e r - - o r in b ro a d te r m s , th a t re a s o n m ay in

la rg e m e a s u re be p e rsu a s io n . T h is l a s t s ta te m e n t i s s ig n if ic a n t in

th e a n sw erin g of the q u es tio n of the v a lid ity of the ra t io n a l rh e to r ic

a s su m e d in the le g a l p ro c e s s .

A n ex ten s iv e and continuing study is be ing m ad e of ju ry b eh a v io r

a t the U n iv e rs ity of C hicago . The fin d in g s of th is s tu d y , s im i la r to the

o th e r s , r e v e a l s e r io u s re a so n to doubt the ra tio n a lity of ju ry d e c is io n s .

A lthough the f in a l r e p o r t of the U n iv e rs ity J u ry P r o je c t h a s no t b een

p u b lish e d , som e p re l im in a ry d a ta is a v a ila b le and som e d is c u s s io n of

the m e th o d s of in v e s tig a tio n h a s b een m ad e .

T h is study h a s p ro ce ed ed a long two lin e s of in v e s tig a tio n ; one

h a s b een the in te rv iew in g of ju r o r s and ju d g es who hav e p a r t ic ip a te d in

a c tu a l t r i a l s , and the o th e r h a s invo lved the c re a tio n of e x p e r im e n ta l

ju r ie s f o r the study of p ro b le m s no t p o s s ib le w ith r e a l j u r i e s . F o r

ex a m p le , 1500 ju r o r s who had se rv e d on 213 d iffe re n t c r im in a l c a s e s in

C hicago and B ro o k ly n w e re in te rv iew ed w ith re g a rd to the im p o rta n c e of

3 3 lb id ., pp . 435-436 .

3 4 0 a le W. B ro e d e r , "The U n iv e rs ity of C hicago J u ry P r o je c t , " N e b ra sk a Law R ev iew , V ol. 38, No. 2 (1959), pp . 744-760 ,

316

the d e lib e ra tio n s of ju r i e s . I t w as d is c o v e re d th a t in a lm o s t e v e ry c a se

a b a llo t w as tak en im m e d ia te ly ; in th i r ty p e r c en t of th e c a s e s the f i r s t

b a llo t w as unan im ous an d tlie d ec is io n m ad e . In the re m a in in g sev en ty

p e r cen t of the c a s e s w hich show ed d iffe re n c e of opinion on the f i r s t

b a llo t , " , , . the m a jo r i ty on the f i r s t b a llo t a lm o s t a lw ays won,

T he m a jo r ity won in ab o u t n ine ty p e r c e n t of th e se c a s e s , and i t d id no t

m ak e any d iffe re n c e who c o m p rise d the m in o r i ty - -n e i th e r w ea lth y n o r

p o o r p e r s o n s , m en o r w om en, "T he b ro a d po in t su g g ested , of c o u rs e ,

i s th a t m o s t c r im in a l c a s e s a r e d ec id ed d u rin g the t r i a l and n o t d u rin g

the d e lib e ra tio n s , " In th e v e ry few c a s e s in w hich a m in o rity v iew on

th e f i r s t b a llo t b e c a m e the m a jo r ity u ltim a te ly , i t w as n e c e s s a r y th a t

th e m in o rity be a t l e a s t a s s tro n g a s th re e f ro m the f i r s t ,

A co n c lu sio n m o s t re le v a n t to th e q u es tio n of the co n flic t b e tw een

th e p r a c t i t io n e r s ' r h e to r ic a l th e o ry and th a t p re su m e d b y the le g a l sy s te m

w as d a ta co n cern in g the d iffe re n c e am ong ju r o r s a s d e c is io n m aJcers, I t

h a s b een shown in C h ap te r IV th a t p ra c tic in g a tto rn e y s b e lie v e th e e thn ic

b ack g ro u n d of a j u r o r in flu en c es h is re a c tio n to a t r i a l . The le g a l sy s te m

p re s u m e s th a t such n o n - ra tio n a l in flu en c es can be avo ided . T he d a ta in

th is study su g g e s ts th a t p e r s o n s w ith G erm an and B r i t is h b ack g ro u n d s

^ S lb id ,, p , 747, 3 6 ib id ,, p , 748,

317

a r e m o re lik e ly to fa v o r the g o v e rn m e n t and th o se of N eg ro , S lav ic and

I ta lia n d e sc e n t m o re lik e ly to fa v o r acq u itta l.

A n o th er ap p ro a c h to th e in v e s tig a tio n in v o lv ed hav ing ju d g es

co m p le te q u e s tio n n a ire s in ju ry t r i a l s . B efo re a j u r y 's d e c is io n w as

aJinounced, the t r i a l judge w as a sk e d to in d ica te , am ong o th e r th in g s ,

how he w ould h av e v o ted had th e r e b een no ju ry . The study in c lu d ed

3 ,0 0 0 q u e s tio n n a ire s , h a lf f ro m c r im in a l c a s e s and th e o th e rs of a p e r ­

so n a l in ju ry v a r ie ty . In the f i r s t p la c e , i t can be p re d ic te d th a t the aw a rd

f ro m a p e rs o n a l in ju ry su it w ill b e f ro m fo rty to fif ty p e r cen t h ig h e r in

an E a s te rn m e tro p o lis than in a M idw est o r S o u th ern r u r a l com m unity .

F u r th e r , in a c r im in a l c a s e , th e judge and ju ry a g re e d e ig h ty -o n e p e r

c e n t of the t im e , and in p e r s o n a l in ju ry c a s e s th ey a g re e d e ig h ty - th re e

p e r cen t of the t im e . A m ong the d isa g re e m e n ts in c r im in a l c a s e s i t

w as d isc o v e re d th a t ju d g es w e re c o n s id e ra b ly m o re p ro n e to con v ic t.

H ad a l l 1500 c r im in a l c a s e s b e e n t r ie d by a judge a lone th e re w ould have

b e e n h a lf a s m an y a c q u it ta ls . A lso , the d is a g re e m e n ts cam e m o s t .

f re q u e n tly in s ta tu to ry rap e c a s e s w h ere the ju ry ac q u itte d in n inety p e r

c e n t of c a s e s w h e re th e judge w ould have con v ic ted . Of in te r e s t in the

p e rs o n a l in ju ry c a s e s w as the f a c t th a t the d a ta d id n o t su p p o rt the

p o p u la r a ssu m p tio n th a t ju r ie s a r e m o s t in c lin ed to fin d the defenden t

37lbid. 38ib id ., p. 749.

318

liab le and re d u c e the a w ard when ev idence is w eak. On the c o n tra ry ,

th e re w as l i t t le d iffe ren ce b e tw een judge and ju ry in find ing fo r d efen ­

d an ts .

D riv in g d ire c tly in to the h e a r t of the ra tio n a lity a s su m e d in le g a l

d e c is io n -m ak in g i s the finding of " ju s tic e " v ary in g a c c o rd in g to the type

of litig a n t.

If the defendant i s an in d iv id u a l, the judge and ju r y p ra c tic a lly n e v e r d if fe r on the q u e s tio n of lia b ili ty b u t the j u r y 's aw ard w h ere the v e rd ic t is fo r the p la in tiff is ap p ro x im a te ly ten p e r ­c en t h ig h e r than th a t of the ju d g e . If the defendan t i s a c o rp o ra tio n th e re b e g in s to be a d iffe ren ce even on the q uestion of l ia b il i ty . The ju ry fin d s a g a in s t c o rp o ra tio n s two p e rc e n t m o re th an does the ju d g e . A nd if the defendant i s a c ity o r s ta te , th e ju ry finds l ia b il i ty in e igh t p e rc e n t m o re of the c a s e s . The s itu a tio n on the dam age side is s im i la r . W here the defendan t is a c o rp o ra tio n o r a c ity o r s ta te an d the v e rd ic t i s fo r p la in tiff , the ju ry a w a rd s ap p ro x im a te ly tw en ty -fiv e p e r ­c e n t m o re than does th e ju d g e . , , , If the ju ry f in d s a ra i lro a d l ia b le , the aw ard is abou t th i r ty p e rc e n t h ig h e r th a n th a t of the ju d g e . . . .'^0

T h e re w as no s ig n ifican t d iffe re n c e d isc o v e re d b e tw een s ta te and fe d e ra l

ju d g es and b e tw een s itu a tio n s invo lv ing w ritte n in s tru c t io n s and a

ju d g e 's su m m ary of the ev id en ce and com m ents on th e w eigh t of the

ev idence , and c a s e s in w hich th e se th ings w ere not do n e .

In the e x p e rim e n ta l ju ry s itu a tio n s , tape re c o rd in g s of m ock

t r i a l s b a s e d on ac tu a l t r i a l s w e re p re p a re d and p la y ed to s e v e ra l d if fe re n t

p an e ls of p e r s o n s ac tu a lly c a lle d fo r ju ry duty. A lso , the d e lib e ra tio n s

^^Ib id . , p . 750. '^Olbid., p p . 750-751,

319

of the ju ry w e re re c o rd e d and in te rv ie w s of the ju r o r s a t v a r io u s s tag e s

of the c a se w e re m ad e . A t th e tim e of th is r e p o r t , fo u r m oo t c a s e s had

b een d ev e lo p ed and p layed to o v e r 100 ju r ie s .

Som e of the in fo rm a tio n th u s gained h as su g g es ted th a t ju r ie s do

in fa c t lo w er the am ount of th e a w a rd when ev idence of l ia b il i ty i s w eak.

The d a ta f u r th e r support the a ssu m p tio n m ade by t r i a l r u le s th a t when

the ju ry know s a defendant to be in s u re d the am ount of th e a w a rd ten d s

to in c re a s e . W hen ju r ie s b e lie v e d the defendant to have no in su ra n c e ,

the a v e ra g e a w a rd w as $33 ,000 ; w h ere the defendan t d isc lo s e d th a t he

had in su ra n c e and the a tto rn e y s d id not r a is e an o b jec tio n , the av e rag e

aw ard ro s e to $ 3 7 ,000 . B u t th e d a ta a lso c a s t s e r io u s doubt on s tan d a rd

c o u rt p ro c e d u re s fo r c o r re c tin g the in fluence of n o n - ra t io n a l p ro o fs .

When the defendan t ad m itted he h ad in su ra n c e , the a t to rn e y s r a is e d

o b jec tio n s , and the judge in s t ru c te d the ju ry to d is r e g a rd th is in fo rm a tio n ,

the a v e ra g e a w a rd w as in c re a s e d to $46 ,000 . "T he o b jec tio n and

in s tru c tio n to d is re g a rd , in o th e r w o rd s ,, s e n s itiz e the j u r o r s to the

fa c t th a t th e defendant is in s u re d and th e re b y in c r e a s e th e aw ard .

Such in fo rm a tio n r a i s e s a q u estio n a s to the so u rc e of a conclusion

on the p ro p e r am ount of an a w a rd . W here do the ju r ie s ob ta in a s tan d a rd

fo r se ttin g such am o u n ts? T he a n s w e r , f ro m th is study , h a s b een th a t

4 1 lb id ., p . 754.

320

in c a s e s w h e re the p la in tiff in d ic a te s how m uch m oney he w an ts and the

defendant d o es n o t p re s e n t and a rg u e in fa v o r of a m o re re a so n a b le

am oun t, the ju r i e s a r e in c lin ed to s t a r t w ith w hat they th in k w as the

p la in t i f f s r e q u e s t , cu t i t in h a lf a s a ru le , and r e p o r t th e ir d e c is io n .

In any of th e se c a s e s , i t should b e em p h as iz ed , if a c tu a l c o u r t p ro c e d u re

w e re fo llow ed the lo sin g p a r ty cou ld go b e fo re a c o u r t of ap p ea ls and

a rg u e th a t r e v e r s ib le e r r o r h a d b ee n co m m itted , a s , fo r ex am p le , in

the c a se w h ere in fo rm a tio n r e le v a n t to the in su ra n c e of the defendan t

w as m ad e so a p p a re n t. T h is , of c o u r s e , le a d s to a q u es tio n of the

v a lid ity of the th e o ry of the a p p e lla te a rg u m e n t, and a p p e lla te ju d ic ia l

d e c is io n -m a k in g .

A p p ella te A dvocacy

M ore c r i t ic i s m h as b een d ire c te d to w ard th e a p p e lla te p ro c e d u re s

than to w ard any o th e r p a r t of the le g a l p ro c e s s . T h is i s a s i t should b e .

F o r i t i s in th e c o u r ts of ap p ea l th a t a l l the th e o re t ic a l a ssu m p tio n s

und erly in g the ap p lica tio n of law m e e t th e i r u ltim a te t e s t . In the fin a l

a n a ly s is , the rh e to r ic a l th e o r ie s of the le g a l p ro c e s s a r e u se d in the a c t

of approv ing th e i r u s e . A p p e lla te c o u r ts o p e ra te w ith in a co n tex t of

ra tio n a l d e c is io n -m ak in g b a se d upon the w ritte n and o r a l a rg u m e n ta tiv e

e ffo rts of co u n se l; the a im of the a p p e lla te c o u rt i s to p a s s ju d g m en t upon

4 2 ib id ., p . 759.

321

th e ra t io n a li ty w ith w hich f a c t and law w as b ro u g h t to g e th e r in the c o u rt

b e lo w , ag a in a s a r e s u l t of a rg u m e n ta tiv e e f fo r ts of a t to rn e y s , o r to

ap p ro v e o r d isa p p ro v e the ra tio n a lity of a d e c is io n of a lo w e r ap p e lla te

c o u r t .

A f i r s t s tep to w a rd v a lid a tio n of th e a p p e lla te p r o c e s s h a s b een to

in q u ire a f te r the c h a r a c te r of d e c is io n sough t. O bviously th e d ev e lo p m en t

of a s y s te m a tic th e o ry of d e c is io n -m a k in g m u s t r e s t upon an u n d ers tan d in g

of the e ffec ts d e s ir e d f ro m the a p p lic a tio n of the sy s te m . If one is to

c r i t ic iz e the rh e to r ic of a p p e lla te ad v o cacy , he m u s t f i r s t g e t in m ind

w h at i s th e o b je c t of th e p e r s u a s iv e e f fo r t of the a tto rn e y . The r h e to r ic a l

a p p ro a c h w ill v a ry , undoub ted ly , depending upon w h e th e r the ob jec t of

th e b r ie f and o r a l a rg u m e n t i s to help the judge see th a t " th e law " r e s t s

w ith one s id e o r a n o th e r; o r th a t "the law " ought to r e s t w ith one side o r

a n o th e r ; o r s im p ly to b r in g the judge in to a f ra m e of m in d w hich w ill be

in s tru m e n ta l to h is vo ting in fa v o r of one s id e o r a n o th e r in the ju d ic ia l

c o n fe re n c e , w hile p ro v id in g the judge w ith su ffic ien t le g a l ra tio n a liz a tio n

to m ake such an e ffe c t a c c e p ta b le by th e com m unity a t la r g e .

W hat d e c is io n , th en , is the ap p e lla te judge ex p ec ted to m ak e? In

th e f i r s t p la c e , th e o b jec t d e s ir e d in a sy s te m of law is p re d ic ta b ili ty . A

c lie n t w an ts to know fro m h is a tto rn e y w hat he can ex p ec t to b e p e rm it te d

to d o --w h a t w ill be the le g a l re sp o n se to h is fu tu re ac tio n s» o r w hat w ill

322

the law say abou t a p a s t ev en t. The a tto rn e y can an sw er only in t e r m s

of p re d ic ta b le b eh av io r of the c o u rt, and th is m o s t com m only is done b y

r e fe re n c e to w hat the c o u r t h a s done in the p a s t . The assu m p tio n i s

th e re fo re m ad e th a t the ju d ic ia l re sp o n se i s c o n s is te n t- - th e law fo r a

g iven s e t of fa c ts today w ill s t i l l be so to m o rro w . The id e a l s itu a tio n ,

c le a r ly , w ould be a body of law e s ta b lish e d and p e rm a n e n t, a r is in g f ro m

u nquestioned s o u rc e s , and u n affec ted by ch an g e , and su ffic ien tly b ro a d

a s to p ro v id e fo r a l l p o s s ib le s itu a tio n s in fa c t . In such a s itu a tio n , th e

r h e to r ic a l ob ligation of co u n se l and co u rt w ould be a lo g ic a l d e m o n s tra ­

tio n , deductive in fo rm , showing the n e c e s s a ry re la tio n sh ip betw een

p r in c ip le s of law and sp ec ific fa c ts .

T h a t such a s itu a tio n does no t and , m o re o v e r , should n o t p r e v a i l

h a s b een the o b jec t of a rg u m en ts f ro m th o se c a lle d le g a l r e a l i s t s .

O p era tin g c r i t ic a lly , the le g a l r e a l is ts have f i r s t a tta c k e d the b a s ic m y th

of law a s s ta te d above, "E v en in a re la tiv e ly s ta tic so c ie ty , m en have

n e v e r b een ab le to c o n s tru c t a co m p reh en siv e , e te rn iz e d se t of ru le s

an tic ip a tin g a l l p o s s ib le le g a l d isp u tes and se ttlin g th em in advance , "

sa id J e ro m e F ra n k in h is L aw and the M odern M ind ,^^ C le a r ly , a f o r t io r i

such a sy s te m i s not p o s s ib le in m o d ern so c ie ty . N e v e r th e le s s , m e m b e rs

^ ^ Je ro m e F ra n k , Law and the M odern M ind (New Y ork; C o w ard - M cC ann, 1949), p . 6,

323

of the le g a l p ro fe s s io n p ro c e e d a s if they had such an id e a l sy s te m . Says

F ra n k ,

. . . o b se rv e the a rg u m e n ts of co u n se l in a d d re s s in g the c o u r ts , o r the v e ry op in ions of the c o u r ts th e m se lv e s : th ey a re w o rd ed a s if c o r r e c t d e c is io n s w e re a r r iv e d a t by lo g ic a l deduction f ro m a p r e c is e and p re -e x is t in g body of le g a l r u le s . Seldom do ju d g e s d isc lo s e any con tingen t e le m en ts in th e i r re a so n in g , any doub ts o r la c k of w h o le -h e a rte d conv iction . The ju d ic ia l v o c a b u la ry co n ta in s few p h ra s e s e x p re s s iv e of u n c e r ta in ty .

E cho ing F r a n k ’s c r i t ic i s m , p h ilo so p h e r M o rr is R ap h ae l Cohen c a lls

a tte n tio n b ack to the tim e (d isc u sse d in C h ap ter I) w hen law w as b e lie v e d

to have d iv ine sanction ; includ ing both the law of M o ses thought to have

b een h an d ed down f ro m God on M t. S inai and the m o re re c e n t E u ro p e an

tra d it io n of n a tu ra l r ig h ts com ing f ro m a n a tu ra l law e te rn a l and

unchanging . "T h e o rth o d o x v iew , " o b se rv e s C ohen, " is th a t the ju d g e s ,

e sp e c ia lly the ju d g es of the S uprem e C o u rt, a r e th e re to see th a t no

le g is la tio n c o n tra v e n e s th e se e te rn a l p r in c ip le s . T h is co n cep t, co n ­

c lu d es Cohen, h a s ". . . lo s t rep u te am ong sc h o la rs and th in k e rs . " He

co n tin u es , " In c re a s e d study h a s shown an am azin g v a r ia t io n a s to w hat

p r in c ip le s a r e c o n s id e re d ju s t . " C o u rts c le a r ly fa ce in c o n s is te n t v a lu e s

and r e v e r s e th e m se lv e s on the sam e v alu e fro m tim e to tim e . "In

4 4 lb id ., pp. 8-9 .

^ ^ M o rr is R ap h ae l Cohen, R easo n and Law (G lencoe, I llin o is : The F re e P r e s s , 1950), p . 137.

324

g e n e ra l , the p r in c ip le s of n a tu ra l law w hich h av e b e e n fo rm u la te d have

re p e a te d ly b e e n shown to b e m e a n in g le ss o r q u es tio n -b e g g in g . "^6

Such c r i t ic is m s tro n g ly in d ic a te s th a t th e r h e to r ic a l o b jec t of an

ap p e lla te ad v o ca te i s n o t s im p ly to p ro v e to the c o u r t th a t the "law "

n e c e s s a r i ly fa v o rs h is p o s it io n - -h e m u s t do m o re . If i t is re co g n iz ed ,

a s th is a rg u m e n t c la im s , th a t ju d g es e x e rc is e su ff ic ie n t d is c re tio n a s to

c re a te law w h ere th ey fe e l i t is n e c e s s a ry , th en i t fo llow s th a t r h e to r ic a l

a n a ly s is m u s t s e a rc h f u r th e r in to the n a tu re of p ro o f u se d to m ake such

d e c is io n s . Of t h i s , ’ Cohen s a y s .

W hen . . . ju d g es in the n am e o f . . . p r in c ip le s , decide th a t c e r ta in m e a s u re s a r e u n ju s t and th e re fo re u n co n s titu tio n a l, they a r e su b s titu tin g th e ir own op in ions fo r the d e lib e ra te ju d g m e n ts of o u r le g is la tu r e s and i t i s w e ll to n o te th a t the c o u r ts by th e i r v e ry co n s titu tio n do n o t h av e a s m uch a c c e s s to the f a c ts of th e c a se a s C o n g re ss o r the s ta te le g is la tu r e s .T hey canno t in s t i tu te in q u ir ie s . T hey a r e r e s t r i c t e d to b r ie f s an d o r a l a rg u m e n ts of a few h o u rs by two la w y e rs .

I t i s a s u p e rs ti t io n to suppose th a t the ju d g e ’s op in ions on eco n o m ic and so c ia l q u e s tio n s do no t in flu en ce h is d e c is io n s .H is to ry b e l le s th a t a s su m p tio n .

B en jam in C ard o zo c o n s id e re d ju d ic ia l d e c is io n -m a k in g to in c lu d e

the sam e e le m e n ts a s le g is la tiv e d e c is io n -m a k in g , an d th e re fo re su g ­

g e s te d to the a p p e lla te ad vocate th a t he m u s t a p p ro a c h fo re n s ic p e r s u a s io n

a s he w ould d e lib e ra tiv e p e rsu a s io n . H ow ever, C a rd o zo w ould re c o g n iz e

d iffe re n c e s b e tw een the two s itu a tio n s . F o r ex a m p le , the judge m ay

find an obvious le g a l ru le to f it the p a r t ic u la r c a s e com ing fro m the

^ ^ I b id . , pp . 1 3 7 - 1 3 8 . 4 ? i b i d . , p . 138.

325

c o n s titu tio n o r a s ta tu te . If th a t h a p p e n s , say s C a rd o zo , th e judge need

look no f u r th e r . T he judge p ro c e e d s w ith the s a tis fa c tio n th a t a c le a r

c o n s titu tio n a l ru le w ill tak e p re c e d e n c e o v e r a s ta tu te , and th a t a s ta tu te

w ill com e b e fo re a ju d g e -m a d e law . B u t s t i l l a judge*s w o rk is n o t

su p e rflu o u s o r m e c h a n ic a l. T h e re w ill re m a in c a s e s th a t fa l l in gaps

in law o r w ith in a m b ig u itie s of th e law ; th e re m ay b e h a rd s h ip s and

d iff ic u ltie s re q u ir in g m itig a tio n . Of the le g a l m yth C ard o zo sa y s .

In te rp re ta t io n i s o ften spoken of a s if i t w e re no th ing b u t the s e a rc h and th e d isc o v e ry of a m ean in g w hich , h o w ev er o b sc u re and la te n t , h a d none th e l e s s a r e a l and a s c e r ta in a b le p r e ­e x is te n c e in th e l e g i s la to r 's m in d . The p r o c e s s i s , in d eed , th a t a t t im e s , b u t i t i s o ften so m eth in g m o re .

T he "so m eth in g m o re " of w hich C ard o zo spoke in c lu d ed the reco g n itio n

th a t le g a l ru le s an d p re c e d e n ts s im p ly fo rm the b a s is of the ju d g e 's

ap p ro a c h , and th a t le g a l d e c is io n -m a k in g is a p r o c e s s c o n s ta n tly d e v e ­

lop ing new in d u c tio n s w hich m odify the r u l e s . ^9 To th e a d v o ca te ,

C ard o zo say s th a t ju d ic ia l p ro o f w ill u ltim a te ly invo lve m an y in flu en c es .

My a n a ly s is of the ju d ic ia l p r o c e s s co m es th en to th is , and l i t t le m o re : logic» and h is to r y , and c u s to m , and u t i l i ty , and the a c c ep te d s ta n d a rd s of r ig h t conduct, a r e the f o rc e s w hich sing ly o r in co m b in a tio n shape the p r o g re s s of the law . W hich

^ ^ B en jam in N athan C ard o zo , T he N a tu re of the J u d ic ia l P r o c e s s (New H aven: Y ale U n iv e rs ity P r e s s , 1921), pp . 14-15 .

^^I b id . , p p . 4 7 -4 8 .

326

of th e se fo rc e s sh a ll dom inate in any c a s e , m u s t depend la rg e ly upon the c o m p a ra tiv e im p o rta n c e o r v a lu e of the so c ia l in te r e s t s th a t w ill be th e re b y p ro m o te d o r im p a ire d ,

A nd, C ardozo m ig h t have added , i t i s th e r e fo re the ta s k of the advocate

n o t only to show th e c o u r t th a t lo g ic , o r h is to r y , o r cu s to m o r u til i ty ,

o r w h atev er cou ld le g itim a te ly w a r ra n t d e c is io n in h is fa v o r , b u t the

advocate h a s the o p p o rtu n ity and the o b lig a tio n to p e rsu a d e the ju d g es

th a t v a lu e s and so c ia l in te r e s t s c a ll fo r th e se le c tio n of a p a r t ic u la r

p o s itio n . "If you a s k how he C the ju d g e j i s to know when one in te r e s t

ou tw eighs a n o th e r , " say s C ard o zo , "I can only a n sw e r th a t he m u s t g e t

h is know ledge ju s t a s the le g is la to r g e ts i t , f ro m ex p e rie n ce and study

and re fle c tio n ; in b r ie f , f ro m life i t s e l f ,

A lthough C ardozo*s a n a ly s is of d ec is io n -m a k in g is h igh ly c r i t ic a l

of the th eo ry w hich r e s t r i c t s p ro o fs to the a s su m e d c lo se d sy s te m of

le g a l p r in c ip le s , he c le a r ly s ti l l p re s u p p o s e s a ra tio n a l b a s is of d ec is io n .

A lthough he w ould b ro ad e n the se le c tio n of p ro o fs fo r the ap p e lla te

a d v o ca te , C ardozo a t i l l ex p ec ts th a t the f in a l d e c is io n w ill be c le a r ly

c o n s is te n t w ith the ex p ec ted v a lu e s of la w —im p a r t ia l i ty , ad h e ren ce to

p re c e d e n t w h ere p o s s ib le , ab so lu te av o id an ce of p re ju d ic e , w him o r

f itfu ln e ss ; s y m m e tr ic a l developm en t of le g a l ru le s c o n s is te n t w ith .

h is to ry o r cu s to m o r lo g ic , w hile b a lan c in g sy m m e try w ith equ ity and

f a i rn e s s , C e r ta in ly C ardozo does no t p e rc e iv e ju d ic ia l d ec is io n -m ak in g

^ ° Ib id . , p . 112, ^ % i d . , p , 113, ^ ^ Ib id ,, pp . 112-113.

327

ai; re su lt in g f ro m n o n -ra tio n a l s o u rc e s o r u l te r io r and u n s ta te d m o tiv e s ,

J e ro m e F ra n k is not so g e n e ro u s . To F ra n k , the e la b o ra te s ta te m e n ts

of the ra t io n a l b a s is of ju d ic ia l d e c is io n s a r e nothing m o re than r a t io n ­

a liz a tio n s - - "T h i s p ra c tic e of m ak ing o u rse lv e s a p p e a r , to o u rse lv e s and

o th e r s , m o re ra tio n a l than we a r e , , , . The need fo r ra tionaliza tion^

a c c o rd in g to F ra n k , co m es f ro m the n eed to develop c e r ta in ty , s e c u r ity ,

r ig id ity , an d u n ifo rm ity in the law w hile a t the sam e tim e m ak ing the

sy s te m function p ra c tic a lly in day by day s itu a tio n s . T h e se p ra c t ic a l

an d id e a l g o a ls a r e s e lf -c o n tra d ic to ry , bu t th e co n flic t i s co n cea led in

p r a c t ic e b y se rv in g the p r a c t ic a l n eed and concealing i t w ith su ffic ien t

ra tio n a liz a tio n to suggest th e id e a l o p e ra tio n , F ra n k a c c u s e s ju d g es

of p ro d u c in g a sy llo g is tic m ach in e - lik e c e r ta in ty in a d e c is io n w hich

m ig h t h av e fa v o re d e ith e r s id e .

T he w eak n ess of th e u se of fo rm a l lo g ic i s now exposed .The c o u r t can decide one w ay o r the o th e r and in e i th e r ca se can m ak e i t s reaso n in g a p p e a r equally f la w le ss . F o rm a l log ic i s w hat i ts nam e in d ic a te s ; i t d e a ls w ith fo rm and no t w ith su b stan ce . The sy llo g ism w ill n o t supply e ith e r the m a jo r p re m is e o r the m in o r p re m is e . The 'joker* is to b e found in the se le c tio n of th e se p r e m is e s . In the g re a t ru n of c a s e s w hich com e b e fo re the c o u r ts , the se le c tio n of p r in c ip le s , and the d e te rm in a tio n of w h e th er the fa c ts a r e to be s ta te d in te rm s of one o r an o th e r m in o r p r e m is e , a r e the ch ie f ta s k s to be p e r fo rm e d . T h ese a r e d ifficu lt ta s k s , fu ll of h a z a rd s and u n c e r ta in t ie s , b u t the h a z a rd s and u n c e r ta in tie s a r e o rd in a r ily co n cea led b y the glib u se of fo rm a l lo g ic ,

F ra n k , og. c i t , , p , 30, p , 66,

328

F ro m such an a n a ly s is i t is p o s s ib le to conclude th a t if the judges have

w ide cho ice in a d e c is io n beyond s ta te d ru le s and a u th o r it ie s then the

ta s k of the ad v o ca te m u s t a lso b e to p r e s e n t p ro o f th a t g o es beyond

s ta te d ru le s and a u th o r it ie s of law . F u r th e r , the lo g ic a l end of F r a n k 's

lin e of re a so n is th a t "the law " can n e v e r be known w ith c e r ta in ty w ithou t

a sp ec ific p ro n o u n cem en t of a c o u r t on a sp ec ific s e t of f a c ts , and even

then i t i s su b jec t to fu r th e r ap p ea l.

A sp ec ific a p p lica tio n of such co n c lu sio n s w as m ad e to the r h e ­

to r ic a l th e o ry of a p p e lla te advocacy by K a r l N. L lew elly n in 1946. To

la w y e rs w hose c a r e e r s had b een in te r ru p te d by w ar L lew elly n sa id a

m o d e rn v iew of advocacy w as c a lle d fo r . The ta s k of an ap p e lla te ad v o ­

c a te , he sa id , w as to p e rsu a d e th e c o u r t to h is v iew of th e law and of

the fa c ts of h is c a s e . To do th is , th e advocate m u s t u n d e rs ta n d the

m e th o d s of the court.. The c o u r ts , sa id L lew elly n , h av e and fee l a duty

n o t only to the law b u t to th e ir own fee lin g s of w hat i s ju s t , decen t, and

f a i r . Such ju d g m en ts n e c e s s a r i ly d if fe r fro m one ju s t ic e to an o th e r and

the ad v o ca te m u s t study the in d iv id u a ls in the fo rm u la tio n of a rg u m en t.

In lig h t of th is lin e of re a so n in g , i t i s c le a r ly no t enough fo r the law y er

to p r e s e n t only a te c h n ic a lly p e r f e c t c a s e . If th e re i s r e a l m e r i t in the

c o n flic t, th e re w ill b e a te c h n ic a lly p e r fe c t c a se p o s s ib le on the o th e r

^ ^ K arl N. L lew elly n , "T he M odern A pproach to C ounselling and A d v o c a c y --E sp e c ia lly in C o m m e rc ia l T ra n s a c tio n s , " C olum bia Law R ev iew , XLVI (M arch , 1946), p p . 167-195.

329

side a s w e ll. "T he s tru g g le w ill then be fo r ac ce p tan c e by the tr ib u n a l

of the one te c h n ic a lly p e r fe c t v iew of th e law a s a g a in s t th e o th e r . "

T hinking r h e to r ic a l ly , th en , "A ccep tan ce w ill tu rn on som eth ing beyond

’le g a l c o r re c tn e s s * . M ore sp e c if ic a lly , say s L lew e lly n ,

. . . the r e a l and v i ta l c e n tr a l job is to sa tis fy the c o u r t th a t sen se and decen cy and ju s t ic e re q u ire (a) the ru le w hich you con tend f o r in th is type of s itu a tio n ; and (b) the r e s u l t th a t you co n ten d fo r , a s b e tw een th e se p a r t ie s . Y our w hole c a se , on law an d f a c ts , m u s t m ake se n se , m u s t ap p ea l a s being obvious s e n s e , in e sc a p a b le s e n se , sen se in s im p le te r m s of life and ju s t ic e . If th a t i s done, & tec h n ica lly sound c a se on the law th e n g e ts r id of a l l fu r th e r d ifficu lty ; i t show s the c o u r t th a t i t s duty to ju s t ic e bu t u rg e s along the e x a c t sam e lin e .

Such a th e o ry , in d eed the e n t i re th e o ry of the le g a l r e a l i s t s , does not

su p p o rt a co n cep t of ra t io n a l rh e to r ic in le g a l ad v o cacy . On the c o n tra ry ,

the v e ry s tro n g su g g estio n a r is in g f ro m such c r i t ic is m i s th a t leg a l

advocacy h a s th e fu ll r e a lm of p e rs u a s io n a t i ts d is p o s a l , and the a t to r ­

ney who f a i ls to m ake fu ll u se of tliis oppo rtu n ity w ill l ik e ly be le f t

b eh ind by th o se who do.

T he id e a should no t be le f t , h o w ev e r, th a t a p p e lla te ju d ic ia l

d e c is io n s a r e h a p h a z a rd . L lew elly n , speak ing ag a in in I960 , a rg u e s

th a t i t i s p o s s ib le to ap p ro ach the d e c is io n s of the c o u r ts f ro m a m o d e rn

b e h a v io ra l sc ie n c e po in t of v iew and s t i l l no t conclude th a t they a r e the

p ro d u c t of u n c o n tro lled and th u s u n p red ic tab le s tim u li. " F o r the fa c t i s , "

^ ^ Ib id ., p . 181. ^ 7 lb id .. p . 183.

330

contends L lew e lly n , " th a t the w o rk of our ap p e lla te c o u r ts a l l o v e r the

coun try is re c k o n a b le .

I t i s re c k o n a b le f i r s t , and on a re la tiv e sc a le , f a r beyond w hat any sane m a n h a s any b u s in e s s expecting fro m a m a c h in e ry devoted to se ttlin g d isp u te s s e lf - s e le c te d fo r th e i r to u g h n ess .I t is reck o n ab le second , and on an ab so lu te s c a le , q u ite su ffi­c ien tly fo r sk ille d c ra f ts m e n to m ake u sab le an d v a lu ab le ju d g m en ts abou t lik e lih o o d s , ajid qu ite su ffic ien tly to r e n d e r the hand ling of an ap p ea l a f ittin g sub jec t fo r e ffec tiv e and sa tis fy in g c ra f tsm a n sh ip .

L lew elly n ’s th e s is is th a t th e re i s a d iffe ren ce be tw een ad h e ren ce to

ru le s and lo g ic to the ex c lu sio n of a l l e lse and the s y s te m a tic ap p lica tio n

of sen se o r r e a s o n to sp ec ific p ro b le m s . Of the fo rm e r m e th o d , he

say s ju d g es t r i e d to do th e ir dec id in g w ithout re fe re n c e to m uch excep t

ru le s and a im e d a t the e lim in a tio n of the im p a c t of s e n se a s an in tru s io n ,

and w anted to w r i te th e i r op in ions a s if w isdom as o p p osed to logic w ere

h a rd ly a d e c en t a t t r ib u te , A lthough such an im ag e p re v a i ls into the

1960*s, say s th is a u th o r , the c o u r ts in ac tu a lity do n o t o p e ra te along

such l in e s . R a th e r , c o u r ts o p e ra te w ith in a w ide ran g e of k inds of

ac tio n . T hey d a ily engage in a p r o c e s s of c re a tiv e ch o ice . Y et such a

wide ran g e of cho ice " , , , in no w ay p ro d u ces an undue u n reck o n ab ility

of r e s u l ts , S ense i s in co n s ta n t u se in the ap p e lla te c o u r ts , in a ll

S ^K arl N , L lew ellyn , The Com m on Law T ra d itio n (Boston;L it t le , B row n and Com pany, I9 6 0 ), p , 4,

59ib id , ^Oibid-,, p , 5, ^ I jb id .

331

ty p es of c a s e s . B u ilt in to the sy s tem a r e su ffic ien t steady ing f a c to rs

to a s s u r e th is con tinual ap p lica tio n of re a so n . L lew ellyn in c lu d es am ong

th e se f a c to rs th e follow ing: 1) ju d g es g row up in a leg a l e n v iro n m e n t

an d a r e cond itioned to re sp o n d in a m a n n e r c o n s is te n t w ith th a t e n v iro n ­

m en t; .2) the a p p e lla te c o u r t o p e ra te d u n d e r heavy in fluence of le g a l

d o c tr in e and d o c tr in a l te ch n iq u es com m only known; 3) m e re ly becom ing

a judge im b u es one w ith a s e n se of re sp o n s ib ili ty fo r ju s tic e ; 4) th e re

is a tra d it io n of one s ing le r ig h t an sw e r and the c o u rt m u s t w r ite out

i t s opinion in a w ay to p e rsu a d e o th e r ju d g es and li tig a n ts of i t s ju s tic e ;

5) th e r e c o rd of fa c ts i s u su a lly f ro zen f ro m the lo w er co u rt; 6) the

i s s u e s a r e l im ite d , sh a rp e n e d , sp ec ific a lly p h ra se d ; 7) the e f fo r ts of

a d v e r s a ry a rg u m e n t by co u n se l p ro v id e a reck o n ab ility ; 8) the d e c is io n

of an ap p e lla te c o u r t i s a g roup d ec is io n and the r e s u l t of in te ra c tio n

am ong the ju s t ic e s who b e n e f it f ro m ju d ic ia l s e c u rity and h onesty ; 9)

th e m e m b e rs of the c o u r t a r e known to a l l , th e i r r e c o rd of d e c is io n ­

m ak ing is av a ilab le to anyone. Such ch eck s do not n e c e s s a r i ly p ro v id e

re c k o n a b ility of such a sw eeping c h a ra c te r a s d re a m e d of in the id e a l

le g a l sy s te m , sa y s L lew elly n . B ut they p ro v id e i t fo r the sp ec ific c a s e - -

w hich is the r e a l c o n c e rn of the a tto rn e y .

^ ^ Ib id ., pp . 19-61.

332

The v e ry re a s o n th a t ap p e lla te c o u r ts e x is t is th a t th e re is doubt, th a t sk ille d m en do not a g re e ab o u t the ou tcom e. To re q u ire re c k o n a b ility is th e re fo re to re q u ire the a b su rd ly im p o ss ib le . N e v e r th e le s s , l e t i t be re p e a te d : th is am az in g in s titu tio n , o u r L aw , a n sw e rs in s ig n ifican t d eg ree to the dem and. T h a t f a c t i s v ita l . I t n ee d s know ing. I t a lso n e e d s u se .

To the rh e to r ic ia n , th en , th is au th o r is saying th a t th e r e i s m e r i t

in studying the p ro b a b ili t ie s of a p p e lla te advocacy ; of seek ing to le a r n

m o re of the w ide cho ice of p e r s u a s iv e o p p o rtu n itie s open. B u t i t m u s t

be done w ithin a co n tex t of the le g a l sy s te m i ts e lf , fo r th is s t ru c tu r e

w ill continue to p ro v id e su b s ta n tia l c lu e s to the b eh av io r of a p p e lla te

c o u r ts .

T h e re i s , a cc o rd in g to L lew e lly n , a w ealth of r e s e a r c h opportun ity

in the study of ju d ic ia l op in ions. F ro m th is r e c o rd of the d ec is io n -m a k in g

p ro c e s s of ap p e lla te c o u r ts m uch could be le a rn e d about the v a lid ity of rh e ­

to r ic a l th e o r ie s u n d erly in g the ap p e lla te p r o c e s s i ts e lf . One r e c e n t study

a p p ro a c h e s ju d ic ia l op in ions a s rh e to r ic a l e f fo r ts d es ig n ed to p e r fo rm a

p e rsu a s iv e ta s k w ith r e g a rd to the g e n e ra l pub lic a s w ell a s th e sp ec ific

l i t ig a n ts , In th e opin ion of th is w r i te r , th e re would be v a lu e in r h e to r i ­

c a l c r i t ic is m of ju d ic ia l op in io n s, u s in g p r im a r i ly the r h e to r ic a l th eo ry of

^ ^ Ib id ,, p , 7,

^ ^ W arren E , W righ t, " Ju d ic ia l R h e to ric : A F ie ld fo r R e s e a rc h , " Speech M onographs, XXXI (M arch , 1964), pp , 64-72 ,

333

A r is to t le a s the ra t io n a le fo r c r i t ic i s m , L lew ellyn ex p an d s on th is th e ­

s is an d p ro p o se s v a r io u s c r i t ic a l and q u a n tita tiv e a p p ro a c h e s to the

study of ju d ic ia l o p in io n s . He su g g e s ts the study of the l in e s of in te r ­

ac tin g p e r s o n -a n d -p e rs o n a l i ty w ith in a w ork ing group such a s an

a p p e lla te c o u r t . To h im , the m a s s of d a ta av a ilab le in c o u r t r e p o r t s - -

no t of the U nited S ta te s S uprem e C o u rt f o r i t s p ro b le m s a r e d is t r a c t in g - -

of the v a r io u s s ta te s " , , , a r e g ifts to b e h a v io ra l r e s e a r c h a s v a luab le

, , , a s te n s of th o u san d s , , . ' ' o f r e p o r t s th a t m igh t b e g a th e re d in a

la b o ra to ry e x p e r im e n t, L lew elly n p ro p o s e s sy s te m a tic s tu d ie s of

r e a c tio n s of ju d g e s to c e r ta in b u s in e s s a r ra n g e m e n ts , o r a q u an tita tiv e

a n a ly s is of the g ro w th and n a tu re of d is s e n t , o r to o p e ra te "by the

d e ta ile d c a s e s tu d ie s , one of w hich su g g e s ts the pow er of a g r e a t ju d g e 's

p e r s u a s iv e n e s s b y w ay of su b s ta n c e , th e o th e r h is p o w er, in sp ite of

ab se n c e of su b s ta n c e , to m is le a d by p r e s t ig e and m a n n e r ,

L lew e lly n , w ritin g in I960 , d e c la re d th a t th e b e h a v io ra l s c ie n c e s

h ad fa ile d to tak e ad v an tag e of the r e s e a r c h o p p o rtu n itie s in law . While

th e re m ay b e d is a g re e m e n t on the v a lu e and p ro d u c tiv ity of such r e s e a r c h ,

i t d o e s , n e v e r th e le s s , e x is t . I t h a s a lre a d y been sa id th a t in the 1930*s

th e re w as m uch se n tim e n t am ong som e m e m b e rs of the p ro fe s s io n to

open up a c a se to the p sy ch o lo g ica l and so c io lo g ica l e n v iro n m e n t of the

65 K, N, L lew e lly n , 0£ , c i t , , p p , 514-515, ^^I b id , , p , 515,

334

le g a l d ec is io n -m ak in g p r o c e s s , R e c e n tly , th e re h as a r i s e n a m o v e­

m e n t to challenge the a p r io r i e s ta b lish m e n t of law a lto g e th e r and pu t

in i t s p lace w hat i s c a lle d e x p e rim en ta l ju r is p ru d e n c e , 68 B r ie f ly , th is

id e a p ro p o se s to develop an e v e n t-c e n te re d m eth o d of app ly ing law . The

d ec is io n of law would be b a se d on the e m p ir ic a lly d e te rm in e d v a lu e s of

w hat i s the in ten d ed p u rp o se of the law and w hat w ill be ach iev ed by a

p a r t ic u la r d ec is io n . The law would then a d ju s t to the changing n eed s of

each ev en t, r a th e r than t r y the fo rm a l lo g ic a l ap p ro ach of app ly ing p r e -

e s ta b lish e d p r in c ip le s , O bviously th is th e o ry to ta lly z e je c ts the

p re su m p tio n of e s ta b lish e d ra tio n a lity in th e law , and o ffe rs in i t s p lace

a sc ie n tif ic ap p ro ach to p ro b le m solv ing . Such a th e o ry , if ad op ted , .

w ould a lso s ig n ifican tly m odify the rh e to r ic a l ap p ro ach to th e ju d ic ia l

p r o c e s s - - c a l l in g in s te a d fo r an a lm o s t p u re ly s c ie n tif ic -d ia le c t ic a l

m ethod ,

^^See E d w ard S tevens R obinson, L aw and the La>vyers (New Y ork: The M acm illan C om pany, 1937), pp, 51-68 fo r a c le a r s ta te m e n t of th is sen tim en t,

6 8 F re d e r ic k K, B e u te l, Some P o te n tia l i t ie s of E x p e r im e n ta l Ju ris p ru d e n c e a s a New B ran ch of S ocia l S c ience (Lincoln: U n iv e rs ity of N e b ra sk a P r e s s , 1957), T h is e n tire book i s devoted to se ttin g fo rth the id e a b eh ind ex p e rim e n ta l ju r is p ru d e n c e ,

6 9 T h o m a s A , W ill, " L eg a l P r o b le m S o lv in g , " T u la n e L a w R e v ie w , XXXVI, (F e b r u a r y , 1962), p , 397,

335

M ore sp e c if ic a lly , e x p e r im e n ta l-q u a n tita tiv e a n a ly s is of ju d ic ia l

dec is ion -m éik ing h a s b een g e n e ra lly r e s t r i c te d to the study of the ju s t ic e s

in te r m s of th e ir a t t i tu d e s , g roup b e h a v io r , and p a t te rn s r e p re s e n te d in

d e c is io n s . The o b je c tiv e , m o s t f re q u e n tly , is to p r e d ic t d e c is io n s . In

a d is c u s s io n of the v a r io u s r e s e a r c h m eth o d s u s e d , G lendon S ch u b e rt (a

le a d e r in p o li t ic a l sc ie n ce q u a n tita tiv e a n a ly s is of c o u r ts ) c a lls a tte n tio n

to the a p p lica tio n of the G uttm an cu m u la tiv e sca le to s e ts of ju d ic ia l

v o te s . "T he r e s e a r c h done th u s f a r , " say s S ch u b e rt, " in cu m u la tiv e

sc a lin g in d ic a te s th a t th e re i s a h igh d e g re e of c o n s is te n c y in the a t ti tu d e s

of S u p rem e C o u rt ju s t ic e s to w a rd the r e c u r r e n t i s s u e s ’of pub lic p o licy

th a t c h a ra c te r iz e th e ir w o rk lo ad . In te rm s of an ex p lan a tio n of the

m e th o d of c o u r t d e c is io n s , say s S ch u b e rt, such a c o n s is te n c y of re sp o n se

in in d iv id u a l ju d ic ia l voting " . . . a p p e a rs to p ro v id e a m uch b e t te r

g e n e ra l ex p lan a tio n . . . th an does the a l te rn a tiv e tra d it io n a l th e o ry of

s ta r e d e c is is , th a t c o n s is te n c y in the m an ip u la tio n of p re c e d e n tia l le g a l

ru le s and p r in c ip le s is a fun ctio n of le g a l c ra f ts m a n sh ip . "71

A second ap p ro ach to the study of ju d ic ia l d e c is io n -m a k in g h a s

b e en to v iew the c o u r t a s a sm a ll group and apply the m e th o d s w hich have

b e e n developed fo r sm a ll g roup a n a ly s is . S. Sidney U lm er r e p o r ts a

"^^Giendon S ch u b ert (ed . ) Ju d ic ia l D ec is io n -M ak in g , In te rn a tio n a l Y earb o o k of P o li t ic a l B eh a v io r R e s e a rc h , Vol. 4 (New Y ork: The F r e e P r e s s of G lencoe , 1963), p . 3.

71lbid.

33d

study of le a d e rs h ip in the M ich igan S u p rem e C o u rt. A m ong o th e r

b e n e fits of such r e s e a r c h , sa y s U lm e r , i s th a t " , . . fo r p ra c tic in g

la w y e rs , in fo rm a tio n about th e p o w er o r in fluence s tru c tu r e of a c o lle g ia l

c o u r t is of som e v a lu e in p re d ic tin g th e ju d ic ia l re sp o n s e to the fa c t

s tim u li p re s e n te d in p a r t ic u la r c a s e s . Such in fo rm a tio n a s i t e n te r s

in to the fo rm u la tio n of a p p e a ls (b r ie f s , a rg u m e n ts , e t c . ) , b e c o m e s a

c le a r p a r t of the rh e to r ic a l th e o ry of a p p e lla te ad v o cacy . In a m o re

m a th e m a tic a l ap p ro ach to sm a ll g roup study , S c h u b e rt h a s e x p lo red the

p o s s ib i l i t ie s of u s in g B loc A n a ly s is , G am e A n a ly s is , and S ca lo g ram

A n a ly s is . H is in i t ia l e f fo r ts hav e b e e n d ire c te d m o re to the e x p e r i­

m en ta tio n w ith m eth o d than to seek in g u se fu l c o n c lu s io n s . H o w ev er,

S ch u b e rt s a y s ,

O u r im m e d ia te c o n c e rn i s w ith the so c io -p sy c h o lo g ic a l d im en sio n of tine fo rm a l d e c is io n -m a k in g b e h a v io r of th is s m a ll , p o li t ic a l (in the p u b lic -p o lic y -c o n se q u e n c e s sen se) e li te g ro u p . O ur p r im a r y c o n c e rn is w ith th e m o tiv a tio n s w hich le a d in d iv id u a l m e m b e rs of th is sm a ll g ro u p to ch o o se , in th e i r co n jo in t voting b e h a v io r , to s e le c t c e r ta in a l te rn a t iv e s (i. e . , p r e f e r r e d o u tco m es) r a th e r th an o th e r s . In sh o r t , the fu n d am en ta l q u es tio n th a t we r a i s e i s not *what d e c is io n s h a s the S u p rem e C o u rt m a d e ? '; i t i s r a th e r "W hy (and to a l e s s e r

7 2 s . Sidney U lm e r , " L e a d e rs h ip in the M ich igan S u p rem e C o u r t ," J u d ic ia l D ec is io n -M ak in g , op . c i t . , pp . 13-28.

^ 7 3 lb id ., p . 14.

74o ien d o n A^ S ch u b e rt, Q u an tita tiv e A n a ly s is of J u d ic ia l B eh av io r, B u re a u of S ocia l and P o l i t ic a l R e s e a rc h , M ichigan S ta te U n iv e rs ity (G len­co e , I ll in o is : The F r e e P r e s s , 1959), pp . 77-376 .

337

how) d oes th e S u p rem e C o u rt m ak e the d e c is io n s th a t i td o e s ? ‘75

C le a r ly , one c o n c e rn e d w ith the rh e to r ic a l th e o ry of a p p e lla te d e c is io n ­

m aking i s c o n c e rn e d w ith the sam e q u e s tio n s . A s an ex am p le of the

re s u l ts of th is type of a n a ly s is , a study of the 1936 te r m of the U nited

S ta tes S u p rem e C o u rt f ro m the p e rs p e c tiv e of gam e th e o ry y ie ld s the

c o n c lu s io n ,

VHiether tlie ju s t ic e s . . . w ere p lay in g a gam e . . . , w ith pow er a s th e o b je c t, w e cannot sa y . B u t w e can say th a t th e ir a c tu a l b e h a v io r w as in ex cep tio n a lly c lo se c o rre sp o n d e n c e to the w ay th ey should h ave beh av ed if they h ad b een com peting in such a g a m e . To th e ex ten t th a t th e m o d el su g g e s ts i n t e r ­p re ta tio n s th a t add to o u r unde r s tan d in g of the C o u rt, and d ire c ts a tte n tio n to re la tio n s h ip s and d a ta th a t w ould n o t be p e rc e iv e d f ro m a n o th e r p e r s p e c t iv e , w e m ay be ju s t if ie d in conclud ing th a t gam e th e o ry h a s som eth ing w orthw hile to c o n trib u te to th e study of public law . 75

S u re ly if the ju s t ic e s a r e engaged in a p o w er s tru g g le w ith in

th e ir g ro u p , th en the degteee to w hich an a tto rn e y can in flu en c e th e ir

voting b e h a v io r th ro u g h p e rs u a s io n w ill b e lim ite d . On th e o th e r hand,

ap p e lla te p e r s u a s io n m a y tak e advan tage of such know ledge and u se i t to

fu r th e r a p a r t ic u la r end. In any c a s e , such in fo rm a tio n is re le v a n t to

rh e to r ic a l th e o ry and the v a lid ity of the ra t io n a l a s su m p tio n s .

A d d itio n a l in s ig h t in to a ssu m p tio n s of ju d ic ia l d e c is io n -m ak in g

com e f ro m e f fo r ts s p e c if ic a lly to develop fo rm u la s to p r e d ic t voting

b e h av io r . G e n e ra lly , such fo rm u la s invo lve quantify ing p a s t d ec is io n s

75ib id , - p . 11. 76j;b id ., p . 210.

338

of the c o u r t , a long w ith o th e r re le v a n t d a ta lyhich can be found. The

a ssu m p tio n of one sy s tem is th is : "M ost li t ig a tio n s itu a tio n s rev o lv e

a ro u n d le g is la t iv e o r ju d ic ia l ru le s of law th a t spec ify th a t c e r ta in in d iv i­

dual v a r ia b le s o r com binations of v a r ia b le s w ill le a d to c e r ta in ju d ic ia l

d e c is io n s , Such a fo rm u la , h o w ev er, a s s u m e s a c e r ta in ra tio n a l

co n s is ten cy in c o u r t b e h a v io r .

I t i s p o s s ib le to p r e d ic t how the c o u r t w ill go in a fu tu re c a se , . , f ro m a q u an tita tiv e a n a ly s is of bo th th e v a r ia b le s p r e s e n t in p a s t c a s e s and the d e c is io n s re a c h e d . T h is i s p o ss ib le p ro v id e d the c o u r t i s c o n s is te n t w ith the u n d erly in g p a t te rn i t h a s e s ta b lish e d fo r i t , , , and p ro v id e d th a t the p re s e n c e of th e re le v a n t f a c t-v a r ia b le s in the fu tu re c a s e is no t so su b je c t to d isp u te th a t one cannot know w hat f a c t - v a r ia b le s w ill be found p r e s e n t by the c o u rt,

A p ra c t ic a l ap p lica tio n of such an ap p ro ach h a s b een p ro v id e d by R eed C,

L aw lo r u s in g an IBM 7090 C om puter a t th e S tan fo rd C om putation C en te r

in P a lo A lto , C a lifo rn ia , The p ro g ra m in v o lv es s to rin g p re c e d e n ts

of the U, S» S uprem e C o u rt an.d p re d ic tin g a d e c is io n by fo u r d iffe re n t

m e th o d s. One m eth o d w ould s e t out a l l p re v io u s c a s e s in w hich a l l the

fa c ts of a p re v io u s c a se a r e p r e s e n t in the c a se to be p re d ic te d , no o th e r

^ ^ S tu a rt S . N ag el, "U sing S im ple C a lcu la tio n s to P r e d ic t Ju d ic ia l D e c is io n s , " The P r a c t ic a l L a w y e r, V ol. 7 (M arch , 1961), p , 68,

78i b i d , , p , 69.

^^R eed C , L a w lo r, u n p u b lish ed co m p u te r r e p o r t . T h is a n a ly s is w as p e r fo rm e d on the 7090 IBM co m p u te r a t th e S tan fo rd C om putation C en te r , P a lo A lto , C a lifo rn ia , The co m p u te r p ro g ra m th a t w as u sed w as p re v io u s ly developed and te s te d by L aw lo r on tiie IBM 7090 co m p u te r

■ a t W e s te rn D ata P ro c e s s in g C e n te r lo c a te d a t U, C ,L , A , E d g a r A , Jone%

339

fa c ts a r e p r e s e n t in the p rev io u s c a s e , and a t le a s t one ju s t ic e vo ted p ro

to e s ta b lis h a p ro -p re c e d e n t c a se ; an d a t le a s t one ju s tic e v o ted con to

e s ta b lis h a c o n -p re c e d e n t c a se . A seco n d m ethod c o m p a re s r e s u l ts

ob ta in ed in d e c is io n s m ad e p re v io u s ly on the sam e type of c a s e a s th a t

to be p re d ic te d . The th ird m ethod u s e s a log ic fo rm u la developed to

d e s c r ib e p a s t b e h a v io r of the c o u r t a s a w hole , and the fo u rth m ethod

u s e s a log ic fo rm u la developed fo r d e s c r ib in g the m a n n e r in w hich the

ind iv idual ju s t ic e s have vo ted w hen p re s e n te d w ith v a r io u s f a c t p a t te rn s .

Of the lo g ic -m a th e m a tic a l a p p ro a c h e s the w r i te r s a y s ,

I t is p o s s ib le th a t the r e s u l ts o b ta in ed by m eth o d s by [ s i c j th re e and fo u r w ill b e c o n tra d ic to ry . Only tim e w ill te l l how re l ia b le v a r io u s m e th o d s m ay b e . T hey can su cceed only if c o u r ts and in d iv id u a l ju s t ic e s fo llo w c o n s is te n t voting p a t te rn s and only if th e s e vo ting p a t te rn s c a n be d isc o v e re d and th en d e s c r ib e d in m a th e m a tic a l t e r m s . F o r ex am p le , i t can be shown th a t m u ltip le - ju d g e c o u r ts can be in c o n s is te n t even though e v e ry ju d g e who v o te s on th a t c o u r t i s a lw ays consistent.® ®

I t i s co n ce iv ab le , th e r e fo re , th a t such q u an tita tiv e a n a ly s is of ju d ic ia l

d ec is io n -m a k in g w ill add su b s tan tia l in fo rm a tio n co n cern in g th e q u estio n

of ra tio n a lity and c o n s is te n c y w ith w hich d e c is io n s a r e m ad e . A s th is

type of in fo rm a tio n is ob ta ined , the a n a ly s is of the rh e to r ic of a p p e lla te

advocacy w ill tak e on added so p h is tic a tio n . I t is a s su m e d , of c o u rse ,

th a t the p r e s e n t t r e n d is no t to su b s titu te c o m p u te rs fo r ju d g e s , a s one

P r o f e s s o r of L aw a t U, C, L .A . and C h a irm a n of the U; C, L , A , C o m m it­te e fo r In te rd is c ip lin a ry S tud ies of L aw and the A d m in is tra tio n of J u s t ic e , sp o n so re d fo r the u se of the f a c i l i t ie s a t W e s te rn D ata P ro c e s s in g C e n te r ,

®®Ibid,

340

w r i te r h a s p ro p o sed ,® ^ The c o n se n su s s e e m s to be th a t ab so lu te co n ­

s is te n c y and p re d ic ta b ili ty a r e u nw ise ; th a t in the f in a l a n a ly s is each

d ec is io n m u s t a r i s e f ro m the cho ice of a m an , and if th a t i s th e c a s e ,

the le g a l p ro c e s s w ill continue to invo lve r h e to r ic a l th e o ry .

® ^Paul C , B a rth o lo m ew , "T he S u p rem e C o u rt and M o d ern O b jec­tiv ity , " N ew Y ork S t a ^ J o u r n ^ V ol. 33 (Ju n e , 1961), pp . 157-164.

C H A PTE R VI

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

R h e to r ic a l th e o ry in A m e r ic a n leg a l p r a c t ic e h a s b een the fo cu s

of th is s tu d y . S p e c if ic a lly , i t h a s b e e n ask ed w h e th e r th e re i s an u n d e r ­

ly ing r h e to r ic a l th e o ry in A m e ric a n leg a l p r a c t ic e ; if so , w hat i s the

c h a r a c te r o f the th eo ry ; and , f in a lly , if such a th e o ry is to be found, i s

i t s a p p lic a tio n v a lid ?

U n q u estio n ab ly , th e re i s a rh e to r ic a l th e o ry a s su m e d in A m e ric a n

le g a l p r a c t ic e . The ap p lic a tio n of law s is founded upon a co ncep tion of a

ra tio n a l c a p a c ity in m an w hich can be app lied to h is d e c is io n s . The

d e c is io n -m a k in g p r o c e s s i s founded upon the p re s e n ta t io n of p ro o fs ,

w r itte n an d o r a l , f ro m a d v e r s a r y s to ju d g es . In th is r e s p e c t , th e sy s te m

and th e o ry h av e n o t changed f ro m th a t o r ig in a lly a r t ic u la te d by A r is to t le ,

A t i t s ro o t, the e s ta b lis h m e n t of so c ia l o r d e r th ro u g h the ru le of

law in v o lv e s a p ro b le m : by w h at fo rc e is th e law to b e u p h e ld ? If law is

b e liev e d to com e fro m su p e r-h u m a n s o u rc e s , god o r n a tu re , then ru le s

th a t a p p e a r to be i r r a t io n a l , w h im s ic a l, o r u n ju s t, c a n be a ttr ib u te d to

the in s c ru ta b i l i ty of the s u p e r-h u m a n fo rce b eh in d th e law . A s long a s

m an a c c e p ts th is fo rc e , th en he w ill be p a tie n t, a s w as Job* w ith th is

341

342

seem ing ly u n fa ir tre a tm e n t. The d ifficu lty co m es when i t i s m an , not

god, who i s re sp o n s ib le fo r the law . Then th e m o d ern -d ay Job is m oved

to in q u ire by w h at r ig h t, by w hose a u th o r ity , i s he m ade to su ffe r such

tre a tm e n t w hen o th e rs do no t. To a n sw e r th is q u estio n , the le g a l sy s tem

h a s developed a th e o ry of g o v ern m en t of law s ap p lied w ith r e a s o n , not

the ru le of m en ap p lied a t w ill. T h is sy s te m p ro c la im s th a t the law is

know able and p re d ic ta b le , and the sam e fo r a l l m en . The fo rc e beh ind

the law is R easo n and J u s t ic e ,

B u t if th is sy s te m is to do w hat i t c la im s , th e re m ay be no

d ec is io n s th a t a r e i r r a t io n a l , w h im sic a l, o r u n ju s t. To m e e t th is

re q u ire m e n t, the le g a l sy s te m h a s d ev elo p ed a com plex r h e to r ic a l s t r u c ­

tu re d es ig n ed to a s s u r e ra tio n a lity in the ap p lica tio n of law . In th e f i r s t

p la c e , the s o u rc e s of p ro o f in a le g a l c o n tro v e rs y a r e to com e fro m

w ith in the sy s te m i t s e l f - - s ta tu te s , p re c e d e n ts , e t c , , and th e re fo re a re

to develop a p e rm a n e n c e fo r eq u a l a p p lic a tio n to a l l m en. T he s o u rc e s

of p io o f in q u e s tio n s of fa c t a r e re g u la te d by an e lab o ra te sy s te m of ru le s

of a d m iss ib ili ty and c o u rt p ro c e d u re d e s ig n e d to a s s u r e the l i t ig a n ts th a t

a f a ir t r i a l w ill b e had th ro u g h the av o idance of n o n -ra tio n a l p ro o fs .

D uring the t r i a l , te s tim o n y w ill be ob ta in ed and am ple o p p o rtu n ity w ill

b e p ro v id e d fo r te s tin g i t s p ro b a tiv e v a lu e . The d ec is io n w ill u ltim a te ly

b e m ade e i th e r b y a ju d g e--w h o i s t ra in e d an d e ;q )erienced in the law and

w ill s e le c t only p ro p e r p ro o fs upon w hich to m ake a ra tio n a l d ec is io n ; o r

343

by a ju ry , w hich h a s b ee n g u ard ed fro m n o n -ra tio n a l s tim u la tio n b y the

ru le s and w ill ch eck i t s e l f by pooling th e d e c is io n -m a k in g p o w e rs of

s e v e ra l c i t iz e n s , and w hich can only d ecide q u es tio n s of fa c t, leav in g the

law to th e judge.

A d d itio n a lly , th e re a r e b u ilt in to the le g a l p ro c e s s o th e r ch eck s

and b a la n c e s d es ig n e d to p ro m o te ra tio n a lity in the d e c is io n , A ju d g e ,

if he f e e ls the s itu a tio n dem ands i t , m ay tak e the d e c is io n aw ay f ro m the

ju ry . The l i t ig a n ts , if th ey fe e l n o n -ra tio n a li ty h a s e n te re d in to the

d e c is io n , m ay tak e th e i r c a se b e fo re a c o u r t of a p p e a ls w hich o f fe r s the

in fo rm e d and e x p e r ie n c e d ju dgm en t of m o re th an one ju d g e , and th e r e

a r e s e v e ra l le v e ls of a p p e a l. The e x is te n c e of the a d v e r s a ry a rg u m e n t

a t a l l le v e ls i s d es ig n ed to hold th e in q u iry to c r i t ic a l a r e a s .

Y et, in the fa c e of th is r h e to r ic a l s t r u c tu r e , th o se who da ily

engage in i t s p r a c t ic e have grow n to v iew the p ro c e s s a s l e s s ra t io n a l

th an ex p ec ted . T he c h a r a c te r of r h e to r ic a l th e o ry in le g a l p r a c t ic e a p p e a rs

bo th co m plex and c o n tro v e rs ia l . A t t im e s , le g a l p ra c t ic e r e q u ire s a

c o u n se lo r , a t o th e r s a n e g o tia to r , an in v e s tig a to r fo r in fo rm a tiv e c o m ­

m u n ica tio n , an in fo rm a tiv e sp e a k e r , an a rg u m e n ta tiv e s p e a k e r , a

p e rs u a s iv e sp e a k e r , an e ffec tiv e w r i te r in a l l th e se fo rm s , a t t im e s an

a tto rn e y m u s t engage in m ed ia tio n and co n c ilia tio n . T h e se ta s k s and

o th e r s involve th e a p p lic a tio n of rh e to r ic a l th e o ry . D epending upon the

in d iv id u a l o r school of thought te s tify in g , such th eo ry is v iew ed v a r io u s ly

344

a s involv ing m any ap p e a ls , ra tio n a l and n o n -ra tio n a l , o r a t the o th er

e x tre m e , a s no t a ra tio n a l p r o c e s s a t a l l . The a tto rn e y s u til iz e rh e to ­

r ic a l th e o r ie s desig n ed to ap p ea l to a n o n - ra tio n a l fa c u lty a s su m e d to

o p e ra te bo th in ju d g es a s w ell a s j u r i e s . The p ra c tic in g a tto rn e y s a re

c o n c e rn e d no t only w ith fa c ts , b u t w ith the a p p e a ra n c e of fa c ts and th e ir

p re s e n ta tio n . I t i s a s su m e d th a t the a t t r a c t iv e n e s s of the ev idence , in

the fo rm of v isu a l a id s , m o d e ls , c h a r t s , m ay txiake a d iffe re n c e in the

w eig h t they have on the d e c is io n ; a n o n - ra tio n a l a ssu m p tio n . The a t to r ­

ney i s co n ce rn ed not only w ith w hat a w itn e ss s a y s , b u t how he say s i t - -

h is m a n n e r of speak ing , h is d r e s s , th e tone of h is v o ic e , fa c ia l

e x p re s s io n , e tc . The a tto rn e y a s s u m e s th a t such f a c to r s a s th e se w ill

co m m u n ica te co n c lu sio n s to a judge o r ju ry th a t m ig h t b e m iss in g fro m

the te s tim o n y i ts e lf . In th is w ay , the a tto rn e y avo ids th e lim ita tio n s fo r

ra tio n a li ty ex is tin g fo r spoken te s tim o n y . The a tto rn e y a s s u m e s th a t h is

own p e rfo rm a n c e w ill in fluence th e d e c is io n . To w hat ex ten t does he

fu lf il l the ex p ec ta tio n s of the judge o r ju ry of a ro le id e n tif ie d w ith a

s u c c e ss fu l la w y e r? N o n -ra tio n a l a s i t m ay b e , a t to rn e y s b e lie v e th a t

th e d e g re e to w hich they m e e t such ex p ec ta tio n s w ill b e in s tru m e n ta l in

ob ta in ing o r lo s in g a d ec is io n .

In te r m s of the c h eck s , th e fu n d am en ta l q u es tio n , "W hat is the

law , " c o n s titu te s a m a jo r b a r r i e r to an o v e r -a l l ra t io n a li ty in the leg a l

p r o c e s s . L e g a l p r a c t i t io n e r s h av e com e to b e liev e th a t " the law " is

345

w h a te v e r an e ffec tiv e p e r s u a d e r can b r in g a judge to say i t i s . A lthough

a judge m ay b e c o n sc ie n tio u s , h is u n d e rs tan d in g of w hat " the law " i s o r

w h at i s ju s t and sen s ib le w ill v a ry w ith the in flu en ces p e c u l ia r to h im .

T h a t i s , the av a ilab le m e a n s of p e rs u a s io n a r e no t b e in g e ffec tiv e ly

l im ite d to th o se of a ra t io n a l c h a r a c te r , say the p r a c t i t io n e r s . A s one

re p re s e n tin g the le g a l r e a l i s m school of thought m ig h t sa y , th e re m ay be

m u ch m ean ing and p re d ic ta b ili ty in the d e c is io n -m a k in g of the c o u r ts ,

b u t i t i s n o t c a u se d a s m u ch by th e e x te rn a l fo rc e s a s m u ch a s the con ­

s is te n c y w ith w hich th e sa m e n o n -lo g ic a l in flu en c es a c t on the decid ing

ju d g e . T h is b r in g s up a q u e s tio n a s to the c h a ra c te r of le g a l co n s is ten cy .

In v es tig a tio n of a tte m p ts a t v a lid a tio n of le g a l r h e to r ic y ie ld s

in c o n c lu s iv e r e s u l t s . T he fo rc e fu l and a r t ic u la te c r i t i c s advocating a

" r e a l i s t i c " th e o ry of law h av e done m uch to d isp e l the id e a l is t ic , a p r io r i ,

a u th o r ita r ia n is m h e ld o v e r f ro m the tim e of g o d -m ade law and n a tu ra l

law . B u t w hat the r e a l i s t s h av e le f t in p la c e of the s e c u r i ty of th e se

e a r ly co n cep ts is v ag u e . I t i s h e a lth y to u n d e rs ta n d th e w e a k n e sse s of

hum an p e rc e p tio n w hich e n te r in to te s tim o n y , say the c r i t i c s . I t i s

m ean in g fu l to r e a l iz e th a t th e w ay in w hichaa judge o r ju ry p e rc e iv e s the

ev id en ce w ill be in flu en ced by f a c to r s p e c u lia r to th e m and a p a r t f ro m

the ev idence i ts e lf . I t i s u se fu l to know th a t ju r ie s can m ak e th e ir

d e c is io n s w e ll b e fo re th e ev id en ce h a s b een fu lly p r e s e n te d and a rg u ed .

I t i s re v e a lin g to le a r n th a t a p p e lla te c o u r ts can r e s t t h e i r d ec is io n s upon

346

fo rc e s in te ra c tin g w ith in the m e m b e rsh ip of the c o u r t and a p a r t f ro m the

in d iv id u a l c a se a t h and . E v en m o re , the ap p e lla te c o u r t i s bound, n o t by

som e id en tif ia b le and la s tin g p r in c ip le of law , bu t r a th e r b y the b e lie f

in the se n se of one s id e o v e r a n o th e r w hich i s equally su p p o rted by le g a l

a u th o r ity . B ut the q u e s tio n i s w h e th e r o r no t the u ltim a te d ec is io n i s

founded upon a p p ro v ed and reck o n ab le g ro u n d s. The le g a l r e a l i s t s deny

th a t d e c is io n s r e s u l t f ro m the lo g ic a l ap p lica tio n of fa c ts to la s tin g le g a l

p r in c ip le s , and y e t th ey seem to have fa ith th a t le g a l d e c is io n s a re

s e n s ib le , c o n s is te n t, and p re d ic ta b le . They o ffer l i t t le ev id en ce w hich

d is c lo s e s the c h a r a c te r of " s e n s e " in th is con tex t, and w hat q u an tita tiv e

a tte m p ts th a t have b e e n m ade a r e h a p h a z a rd and, th u s f a r , in co n c lu siv e .

W hat im p lic a tio n s do such co n c lu s io n s have fo r s tu d e n ts of rh e to ­

r ic a l th e o ry ? A t th e v e ry le a s t , such conc lu sio n s re v e a l an o p era tin g

and in flu en tia l r h e to r ic a l s itu a tio n w hich h a s been e s s e n tia lly ig n o red by

rh e to r ic a l s c h o la rs and w hich is d e s p e ra te ly in n eed of study. P e rh a p s

m o re to the p o in t, th e p ro c e s s of a p p lic a tio n of law s p ro v id e s the s tu d en t

of rh e to r ic w ith an a d m ira b le o p p o rtu n ity to o b se rv e v a r io u s rh e to r ic a l

s itu a tio n s in o p e ra tio n and to exam ine and m e a s u re th em u n d e r re la tiv e ly

c o n tro lle d co n d itio n s . T h e re is u ti l i ty in such r e s e a r c h n o t only fo r i t s

ap p lica tio n to the le g a l p r o c e s s , b u t in the opportun ity to re v e a l g e n e ra l

rh e to r ic a l h y p o th e se s and d a ta a s w e ll.

347

S p ec ific a lly , the study of le g a l rh e to r ic r a i s e s s e r io u s q u es tio n

a s to th e v a lid ity of A r is to te lia n th e o r ie s of p ro o f a s a p p lied in s itu a tio n s

dem and ing c r i t ic a l d e c is io n s . In no o th e r r h e to r ic a l s itu a tio n i s th e re

such re g u la tio n of p ro o f in te r m s of the ex c lu sio n o r c o n tro l of n o n - r a t ­

io n a l e le m e n ts a s em bodied in e th o s and p a th o s . In no o th e r rh e to r ic a l

s itu a tio n h a s a s m uch a tten tio n b e e n g iven tc the fo cu sin g of the d e c is io n ­

m ak in g a c t on fa c t and re a so n a s em bodied in lo g o s . So fo cu sed , in f a c t ,

th a t le g a l education h a s developed the w id e sp rea d b e lie f th a t i t i s the

p ro p e r ap p lica tio n of le g a l p r in c ip le alone w hich i s the n e c e s s a ry eq u ip ­

m e n t of the ad v o ca te . And y e t, the te s tim o n y of th o se engaged in le g a l

advocacy a s w e ll a s th o se few s o c ia l s c ie n tis ts who h av e p e r fo rm e d

in v e s tig a tio n s th a t th e p re su m e d ra tio n a li ty of le g a l d ec is io n -m a k in g

m ay be a f ic tio n . If u n d er such c o n d itio n s , the le g a l p r o c e s s f a i ls to

b r in g fo r th , c o n s is te n tly and p re d ic ta b ly , ra tio n a l d e c is io n s , th en does

th is n o t q u es tio n the c ap ac ity fo r ra tio n a l d ec is io n -m a k in g in a l l rh e to ­

r ic a l s itu a tio n s?

A s y e t, the evidence does n o t w a r ra n t a co n c lu s io n to th is p ro b le m ,

and th e p re su m p tio n r e s t s w ith ra t io n a li ty . B ut f u r th e r in v es tig a tio n is

c a lle d fo r . The suggestion re s u l t in g f ro m C h ap ter V , fu r th e rm o re , i s

th a t such in v es tig a tio n should fo cu s on the c h a ra c te r of p ro o f o r m e ssa g e

w hich i s c o n s is te n tly the d e te rm in a n t of re le v a n t and in s tru m e n ta l e ffec ts

348

- - le g a l d e c is io n s . T h is in d ic a te s th a t r e s e a r c h a r is in g f ro m stu d en ts

of rh e to r ic o r co m m u n ica tio n w ould lik e ly b e m o re m ean ing fu l than th a t

o r ie n te d to p sy ch o lo g y o r p o li t ic a l s c ie n c e , b e c a u se the p ro b le m u n d e r

in v e s tig a tio n is a r h e to r ic a l p ro b le m . The d a ta su g g e s ts , a lso , th a t

such r e s e a r c h m u s t in c lu d e the b e h a v io ra l sc ie n c e p e rsp e c tiv e .

W hat sp ec ific q u e s tio n s m ig h t be in v e s tig a te d ? In the f i r s t p la c e ,

the key q u es tio n i s , a s s ta te d b e fo re , w hat m e s s a g e s a c tu a lly do ten d to

d e te rm in e in s tru m e n ta l e f fe c ts ? I s th e o v e ra l l s t r u c tu r e of the t r i a l of

f a c t -que s tio n s w e ll d e s ig n e d to c o n tro l co m m u n ica tio n to in su re th a t

a d m iss ib le fa c ts c o n s titu te th e p re d o m in a n t d e te rm in in g m e s s a g e s ? To

w hat ex ten t, th en , do es the ju r y r e s t i t s d e c is io n on p r e f e r r e d m e s s a g e s ?

O r c o n v e rse ly , to w hat ex te n t do m e s s a g e s o th e r th an the p r e f e r r e d on es

d e te rm in e the d e c is io n ? To w hat ex ten t i s th e judge m o re im m une to

i r r e le v a n t m e s s a g e s th an i s the lay m an ? D oes a ju ry a c tu a lly c o m p re ­

h end the ju d g e ’s in s tru c t io n s a s to law ? D oes a ju ry , a ssu m in g such

c o m p reh en sio n , a c tu a lly d ec id e the q u e s tio n s of f a c t f i r s t and th en f i t

th o se d e c is io n s to th e law a s u n d e rs to o d ? D oes the ju d g e 's m a n n e r and

m eth o d in p re se n tin g in s tru c t io n s c o n s titu te a d e te rm in in g m e ss a g e w ith

r e g a rd to the j u r y ’s d e c is io n ? To w hat ex ten t do es the d r e s s , in fle c tio n ,

fa c ia l eziqpression, e tc , of the w itn e ss in flu en ce the d e g re e to w hich he

in flu en c es the d e c is io n ? In th e face of d ire c t ly co n flic tin g te s tim o n y .

349

w hat f a c to r s m o s t f re q u e n tly ten d to cau se the ju ry o r judge to b e lie v e

one w itn e s s r a th e r th an a n o th e r?

In te r m s of th e w o rk of the ad v o ca te , the follow ing q u es tio n s

m ig h t be a sk ed . W hat i s the ro le of the opening s ta te m e n t of f a c ts ? Can

the c h o ic e , a r ra n g e m e n t, and p re se n ta tio n of fa c ts fix a d e c is io n in the

m in d of ju r o r s a t the o u ts e t of the t r i a l ? I s th e re a c o n s is te n t in c re a s e d

s tre n g th in fav o r of th e f i r s t s p e a k e r? To w hat ex ten t can c r o s s - e x a m i­

n a tio n c au se the ju d g e o r ju ry to d isb e liev e te s tim o n y ? W hat i s the e ffec t

of le g a l a rg u m e n t? To w hat ex ten t d o es a rg u m e n t tend to f ix b e lie f o r

change e s ta b lis h e d b e l ie f s ? W hat a s p e c ts of le g a l a rg u m e n t a r e m o s t

e ffec tiv e in in flu en c in g b e lie f? To w hat ex ten t does the p e rs o n a li ty of

th e ad v o ca te and th e m a n n e r of h is b e h av io r in fluence the d e c is io n ?

In te r m s of the sy s te m i ts e lf , th e se q u es tio n s m ig h t b e a sk ed .

How e ffec tiv e a r e the ru le s of ev idence in r e s t r ic t in g p ro o f to the m o s t

r a t io n a l? Is th e re a r e la t io n b e tw een the ap p lica tio n of r u le s of ev idence

and th e ra t io n a li ty of th e d e c is io n ? How r e a l i s t ic is the b e lie f th a t ju r ie s

a r e re p re s e n ta t iv e g ro u p s? To w hat ex ten t d o es the s e le c tio n of ju r o r s

by a d v o ca te s in flu en ce the u ltim a te d e c is io n (would the re je c te d ju r o r s

r e n d e r a s ig n if ic a n tly l e s s ra tio n a l d e c is io n ? )? Is th e re a d iffe re n c e

b e tw een ju ry d e c is io n s and judge d e c is io n s , and if so , w hat is th e c h a ra c te r

of the d iffe re n c e ? To w hat ex ten t do es the p e rso n a lity and so c io -e co n o m ic

b ack g ro u n d of the a c c u se d , p la in tiff , o r defendan t in fluence the u ltim a te

350

d e c is io n . A t w hat p o in t in the t r i a l d oes the ju ry f in a lly m ake i t s d e c i­

s io n ? A t w hat p o in t in the t r i a l does the judge f in a lly m ak e h is d e c is io n ?

I s th e re a re la t io n b e tw een th e se two p o in ts?

On the o th e r h an d , i t m ig h t u ltim a te ly be a sk ed w hat m o d ifica tio n s

in the le g a l sy s te m m ig h t b e m ade to in c re a s e the ra tio n a lity of d e c is io n s?

A nd ju s t a s m ean in g fu l, a re -e x a m in a tio n of w hat i s m e an t by " ra tio n a l

d e c is io n s" m ig h t be u se fu l. C e r ta in ly , in the a r e a of ap p e lla te d e c is io n s

th e re h a s b een re a d ju s tm e n t in the d e s ir e d goal. T h e re i s le s s ta lk of

finding T ru th and J u s t ic e and m o re ta lk abou t m ak ing sen s ib le d e c is io n s .

The q u es tio n , th en , m ig h t be w hat a r e the c r i t e r i a of a s e n s ib le d ec is io n ?

W ith in c re a s e d e f fo r ts in the te s tin g of r h e to r ic a l th e o ry in the

le g a l p r o c e s s , g r e a te r u n d e rs tan d in g of c r i t ic a l d e c is io n -m a k in g in

g e n e ra l is lik e ly to co m e . The p r e s e n t study h a s sought to expose the

c h a ra c te r of r h e to r ic a l th e o ry of c r i t ic a l d e c is io n -m a k in g in A m e ric a n

le g a l p ra c t ic e and to p ro v id e the b a s is fo r ad d itio n a l r e s e a r c h in th is

g e n e ra l a r e a of rh e to r ic .

BIBLIOGRAPHY

351

BIBLIOGRAPHY

B ooks

B aldw in , C h a r le s S e a r s . M ed iev a l R h e to r ic and P o e tic . G lo u c e s te r: P e te r S m ith , 1959.

B e re ls o n , B e rn a rd and Jan o w itz , M o rr is (ed s. ). R ea d e r in P u b lic O pinion and C om m u n ica tio n . R ev ise d ed . G lencoe, I llin o is :F r e e P r e s s , 1953.

B e u te l, F r e d e r ic k K, Some P o te n t ia l i t ie s of F isp e rim e n ta l J u r is p ru d e n c e a s a N ew B ra n c h of S o c ia l S c ien ce . L inco ln : U n iver s ity of N e b ra sk a P r e s s , 1957.

B row n , E liz a b e th C a s p a r . L e g a l E d u c a tio n a t M ich igan 1859-1959.Ann A rb o r: T he U n iv e rs ity of M ichigan L aw School, 1959.

B u r t t , H a ro ld E r n e s t , L e g a l P sy c h o lo g y . New Y ork: P r e n tic e -H a l l , I n c . , 1940.

B u tle r , B en jam in e F„ P la n fo r th e O rg a n iza tio n of a L aw F a c u lty in the U n iv e rs ity of the C ity of N ew Y o rk . F i r s t p u b lish ed in 1835 and re -p u b lis h e d •'vith a fo re w a rd by R u s se ll D . N ile s and an in t r o ­duction by J u liu s J . M ark e . N ew Y ork: L aw C en te r F o undation , 1956.

C ap lan , H a r ry ( tr a n s . ). C ic e ro , Ad H eren n iu m . C am b rid g e : H a rv a rd U n iv e rs ity P r e s s , 1954.

C ard o zo , B en jam in N ath an . The N a tu re of the Ju d ic ia l P r o c e s s . New H aven; Y ale U n iv e rs ity P r e s s , 1921.

The C en ten n ia l H is to ry of th e H a rv a rd L aw School, 1817-1917. C am ­b r id g e : The H a rv a rd L aw S chool A sso c ia tio n , 1918.

352

353

C la rk , C h a r le s E , H andbook of the L aw of Code P leading» 2d, ed ,S t, P a u l , M in n eso ta : W est P u b lish in g C o , , 1947,

C ohen, M o rr is R ap h a e l, R ea so n and L aw , G lencoe , I llin o is : T he F r e e P r e s s , 1950,

C o o p er, L a n e , T he R h e to r ic of A r is to t le , New Y ork : A ppleton - C e n tu ry - O ro f ts , I n c , , 1932,

C o rn e liu s , A s h e r L , T he C ro ss -E x a m in a tio n of W itn e sse s . In d ian ap o lis : The B o b b s -M e r r i l l C om pany P u b l is h e r s , 1929,

C uU inan, E u s ta c e , P r e p a ra t io n fo r T r ia l of C iv il A c tio n s . P h ila d e lp h ia : A m e ric a n L aw In s t i tu te , C o m m ittee on C ontinuing L e g a l E d u ca tio n and the A m e r ic a n B a r A sso c ia tio n , 1951,

D onovan, Jo se p h W, M o d ern J u ry T r ia l s , New Y ork: G, A , Je n n in g s C o ,, I n c , , 1927,

F ra n k , J e ro m e , L aw and the M odern M ind, New Y ork: C o w ard - M cC ann, 1949.

G oebel, J r . , J u liu s and the S taff of the F oundation fo r R e s e a rc h in L e g a l H is to ry , A H is to ry of the L aw School of C olum bia U n iv e rs ity , M orn ing s id e H e ig h ts , New Y ork : C olum bia U n iv e rs ity P r e s s ,1955,

G ray , G ile s W ilke son (com p, ), Index to th e Q u a r te r ly J o u rn a l o f Speech V o lum es I to XL 1915-1954, D ubuque, Iow a: W m , C, B row n Com pany P u b l i s h e r s , 1956,

H am lin , P a u l M, L e g a l E d u c a tio n in C olon ia l New Y o rk , New Y ork :New Y o rk U n iv e rs ity L aw Q u a r te r ly R eview , 1939,

H ard w ick e , H e n ry , T he A r t of W inning C a se s o r M odern A dvocacy , A P r a c t ic a l T r e a t i s e on P re p a ra t io n fo r T r ia l , and the C onduct of C a se s in C o u rt, 2d, ed , A lbany , New Y ork: B an k s & C om pany , 1920,

H arn o , A lb e r t J , L e g a l E d u ca tio n in the U nited S ta te s , San F ra n c is c o : B an c ro ft-W h itn ey C o , , 1953,

H a r t , J r . , H en ry M , and S ack s , A lb e r t M , The L e g a l P r o c e s s : B a s ic P ro b le m s in th e M aking and A p p lica tio n of Law , C am b rid g e : T e n ta tiv e E d itio n , 1958,

354

H elm bo ld , W, C, ( tr a n s . ), P la tons G o rg ia s . New Y ork; The L ib e ra l A r ts P r e s s , 1952,

H elm b o ld , W, C, and R ab inow itz , W. G. ( tr a n s . ) . P la to * s P h a e d ru s . New Y ork: T he L ib e ra l A r ts P r e s s , 1956.

H ick am , H u b e rt, and S can lon , T hom as M. P re p a ra t io n fo r T r ia l .P h ila d e lp h ia : J o in t C om m ittee on C ontinuing L eg a l E d u ca tio n of th e A m e ric a n Law In s titu te and the A m e ric a n B a r A sso c ia tio n , 1963.

K a rle n , B e lm a r . A p p e lla te C o u rts in the U nited S ta te s and E ng land .New Y ork: N ew Y ork U n iv e rs ity P r e s s , 1963.

K eeton , G eorge W. H a r r i s 's H in ts on A dvocacy. London: S tevens &S ons, L im ite d , 1943,

K now er, F ra n k lin H. (C om p. ). Table of C on ten ts of The Q u a r te r ly J o u rn a l of S peech 1915-1956, Speech M onographs 1934-1956, an d The Speech T e a c h e r , 1952-1956 w ith a R ev ised Index C om ­p ile d th ro u g h 1956. Speech A sso c ia tio n of A m e ric a , 1957,

L a n g e r , Susanne K. P h ilo so p h y in a New K ey. 2d ed . New Y ork:N ew A m e ric a n L ib r a r y of W orld L i te r a tu r e , I n c . , 1948,

L i t t le , C h a r le s E d g a r ( tr a n s . and ed . ). Q u in tilian the School M a s te r , T he In s titu tio n O ra to r ia of M arcu s F a b iu s Q u in tilin au s . N a sh ­v i l le , T e n n e sse e : fo r G eorge P eabody C o llege fo r T e a c h e rs , 1951.

L lew e lly n , K a r l N . T he Com m on Law T ra d itio n . B oston: L it t le ,B row n and C om pany, I960.

L o r r y , W ilfo rd R . A C iv il A ctio n — The T r ia l . P h ilad e lp h ia : A m e ric a n L aw In s titu te an d the A m eric an B a r A s so c ia tio n , 1959*

M cC arth y , D w ight C . P sy ch o lo g y and the L aw . Englew ood C liffs ,N . J . : P r e n tic e -H a l l , I960.

M unkm an, John H, T he T echnique of A dvocacy . London: S tevens &Sons L im ite d , 1951.

M u n s te rb e rg , Hugo, On th e W itness Stand. New Y ork: C la rk B o a rd m a n C o . , L td . , 1923.

355

N ich o ls , M a rie H ochm uth, R h e to ric and C r i t ic is m , B aton Rouge: L o u is ian a U n iv e rs ity P r e s s , 1963,

N iz e r , L o u is , My L ife in C o u rt. New Y ork: P y ra m id B o o k s, 1963,

R eed , A lfred Z a n tz in g e r , P re s e n t-D a y Law Schools in the U nited S ta tes and C anada. New Y ork: C arn eg ie F oundation fo r th e A dvance­m en t of T each in g , 1928,

R ev iew of L eg a l E d u ca tio n in the U nited S ta te s and C anadafo r the Y e a r 1929, New Y ork: C arn eg ie F oundation fo r the A d v ancem en t of T each in g , 1930,

R eed , John C, Conduct of L a w su its , B oston : L it t le , B row n , and C om ­pany , 1912,

R obbins, A lex an d e r H, A T re a t is e on A m e ric a n A dvocacy , St, L ouis: C e n tra l L aw Jo u rn a l C om pany, 1913,

R o b e r ts , W, R h y s, G reek R h e to ric and L i te r a r y C r i t ic is m , New York: L o n g m an s , G reen and Co, , 1928,

R obinson, E d w a rd S tevens, Law and the L a w y e rs , New Y ork: The M acm illan C om pany, 1937,

R obinson, W illiam* C, F o re n s ic O ra to ry A M anual fo r A d v o ca tes , B oston : L i t t le , B row n and Com pany, 1893,

S andford , W illiam P h ill ip s , E n g lish T h e o rie s of P u b lic A d d re s s , 1530- 1828, C olum bus, Ohio: H a ro ld L , H e d ric k , 1938,

S chubert, G lendon A , (ed, ), Ju d ic ia l D ecis io n -M ak in g , In te rn a tio n a l Y earbook of P o li t ic a l B eh av io r R e s e a rc h , V ol. 4, New Y ork; The F r e e P r e s s of G lencoe, 1963,

, Q ucintitative A n a ly s is of Ju d ic ia l B eh a v io r, B u re a u of Socialand P o l i t ic a l R e se a rc h , M ichigan S tate U n iv e rs ity , G lencoe: The F r e e P r e s s , 1959,

S co tt, H enry W, The E volu tion of Law , New Y ork; The B o rd en P r e s s P u b lish in g Co, , 1908,

S m ith , P h ilip A n s tie , A H is to ry of E d u ca tio n fo r the E n g lish B a r; w ith S uggestions a s to S ub jec ts and M ethods of Study, London: B u tte rw o r th s , 1860,

356

S tew ard , W m, S co tt, S tew art on T r ia l S tra te g y , P r a c t ic a l S uggestions to the Young L aw y er on How to O btain and H old C lie n ts , How to P r e p a r e an d T ry L a w su its , C hicago: The F lo o d C om pany,1940,

S try k e r , L loyd P a u l , The A r t of A dvocacy , New Y ork : Sim on and S c h u s te r , 1954,

T hons sen , L e s te r . S e lec ted R ead ings in R h e to ric and P u b lic Speaking,New Y ork : T he H, W, W ilson C om pany, 1942,

T hons sen , L e s te r and B a ird , A , C ra ig , Speech C r i t ic is m , New Y ork:The R onald P r e s s C om pany, 1948,

T hons sen , L e s te r , F a th e r son, E liz a b e th , and T hons se n , D o ro th ea (C om p,), B ib lio g rap h y of Speech E d u c a tio n , New Y ork: The H , W, W ilson C om pany, 1939,

T hons sen , L e s te r , R obb, M ary M a rg a re t , and T hons sen , D o ro th ea(Com p), B ib lio g rap h y of Speech E d u ca tio n S u p p lem en t: 1939-1948, New Y ork : The H , W, W ilson C om pany, 1950,

W allace , K a r l R , (ed , ), H is to ry of S peech E d u ca tio n in A m e r ic a , P r e ­p a re d u n d e r th e a u sp ic e s of the Speech A sso c ia tio n of A m e ric a ,New Y ork : A p p le tc n -C e n tu ry -C ro f ts , I n c , , 1954,

W a rre n , C h a r le s , H is to ry of the H a rv a rd Law School and of E a r ly L eg a l C ond itions, New Y ork: L ew is P u b lish in g C om pany, 1908,

W atson, J , S, (ed, ) , C ice ro on O ra to ry and O ra to rs ; w ith H is L e t te r s to Q u in tus and B ru tu s , London; H e n ry G, B ohn, 1855,

W eav er, R ic h a rd M , The E th ic s of R h e to r ic , C hicago: H en ry R eg n ery C om pany, 1953,

W eüiofen, H en ry , L e g a l W riting S ty le . St, P a u l , M in n eso ta : W est P u b lish in g C o , , 1961,

W ellm an , F r a n c is L , The A r t of C ro s s -E x a m in a tio n , New Y ork: M acm illan C o , , 1923,

_, D ay in C o u rt o r The Subtle A r ts of G re a t A d v o ca te s , NewY ork; The M acm illan C o ., 1914.

, S u c ce ss in C o u rt. New Y ork : The M acm illan C o , , 1941,

357

W ien e r, F r e d e r ic k B e rn a y s . B rie fin g and A rgu ing F e d e ra l A p p ea ls . W ashington , D, C» ; BNA In c o rp o ra te d , 1961.

W ig m o re , John H en ry . T he S cience of J u d ic ia l P ro o f , 3d. ed . B oston: L i t t le , B row n, an d C om pany, 1937.

A r t ic le s and P e r io d ic a ls

A dlew , E . "The D ia le c tic of A dvocacy , " B o sto n U n iv e rs ity L aw R eview , XXXVI, No. 4 (F a ll , 1956), 579-586 .

A ld r id g e , H e n ri M , "A d v o ca cy --A D eclin ing A r t? " The A lab am a L a w y e r, V ol. 20, No. 4 (O ctober, 1959), 388-395.

B arth o lo m ew , P a u l C. "T h e S uprem e C o u rt and M odern O b jec tiv ity , "New Y ork S tate B a r Jo u rn a l , V ol. 33, No. 3 (June, 1961), 157-164,

B a te s , H en ry M. " A d d re ss of th e P r e s id e n t , " P ro c e e d in g s of theT h ir te e n th A nnual M eeting of th e A sso c ia tio n of A m e r ic a n Law S choo ls, V ol. 13 (1913), 29-42 .

B e a le , J r . , Jo sep h H . "T h e F i r s t Y ea r C u rr ic u lu m of L aw S c h o o ls ," P ro c e e d in g s of th e Second A nnual M eetin g of the A sso c ia tio n of A m e ric a n L aw S ch o o ls , V ol. 2 (1902), 4 2 -5 1 .

_________ . "The H is to ry of L e g a l E d u ca tio n , " in Law A C en tu ry ofP r o g r e s s 1835-1935, V ol. 1, New Y ork : New Y ork U n iv e rs ity P r e s s , 1937, 104-116.

B e v an , W illiam e t . a l. " J u ry B eh av io r a s a F unction of th e P r e s t ig e of the F o re m a n and th e N a tu re of h is L e a d e rs h ip , " J o u rn a l of P u b lic L aw , V ol. 7, No. 2 (F a ll, 1958), 419-449.

B la i r , P ax to n . "A p p ella te B r ie f s and A d vocacy , " F o rd h am L aw R eview , X V m , No. 1 (M arch , 1949), 3 0 -48 .

B r e e d e r , D ale W. "T he U n iv e rs ity of C hicago J u ry P r o je c t , " N e b ra sk a Law R eview , V ol. 38, No. 2 (1959), 744-760.

B ry a n , F r e d e r ic k V an P e l t . "T h e R ise an d F a l l of the A r t of A dvocacy , " Chitty*s L aw J o u rn a l , V o l. 7, N o. 1 (1957), 13-17.

358

B ry a n t, D onald C. "R h e to ric ; I ts F u n c tio n s and I ts Scope, " TheQ u a r te r ly J o u rn a l of S peech , XXXIX, No, 4 (D ecem b er, 1953), 401-424 .

C a rso n , R alph M, "C onduct of the A ppeal—A L a w y e r 's V iew , " inA p p ea ls . P h ila d e lp h ia : A m eric an L aw In s titu te (O c to b er, 1954), 4 8 -9 5 .

C ohen, F e l ix S. " F ie ld T h eo ry and Ju d ic ia l L o g ic , " The Y ale L aw Jo u rn a l , V ol. 59, No. 2 (Jan u a ry , 1950), 238-272.

C o n s ta n s , H. P h ilip and D ickey, D a lla s C. "T he C o n tem p o ra ry R h e to ric of the L a w ," The S ou thern Speech J o u rn a l, XIX, No. 4 (M ay, 1954), 277-282 .

D av is , John W. "The A rg u m en t of an A ppeal, " in A p p ea ls . P h i la d e l­ph ia : A m e ric a n Law In s titu te (O cto b er, 1954), 90-108.

D o re , E d w ard S. "E x p re s s in g the Idea; The E s s e n tia ls of O ra l and W ritten A rg u m e n t, " F o rd h am Law R ev iew , XXIII, No. 3, (D ecem b er, 1954), 229-242.

F lo r a , C laud B . "E ffec tiv e P re s e n ta tio n of th e L aw , " K an sas C ity Law R eview , IV, No. 6 (A p ril, 1936), 86 -88 .

G e rb e r t , K a rl. "T he P sy ch o lo g y of E x p re s s io n and the T echn ique ofC r im in a l In te r ro g a tio n , " J o u rn a l of P sy ch o lo g y and P s y c h o th e r ­apy , V ol. 2 (1954), 85-98 .

G ooch, J . A . "S hall A dvocacy V anish? " W ashington Law R ev iew and S ta te B a r J o u rn a l , Vol 31, No. 4 (W inter^ 1956), 358-367 .

G ro sm an , B r ia n A . "T e s tin g W itn ess R e lia b ili ty , " The C r im in a l Law Q u a r te r ly , V ol, 5, No, 3 (N ovem ber, 1962) 318-327.

H aigh t, G eorge I . "T h e A dvocate in C o u rts of R e v ie w ," W isco n sin Law R eview , V ol. 1940, No. 3 (May, 1940), 327-334.

H arno ,. A lb e r t J . "S e p a ra te S ta tem en t in R e p o rt of C o m m ittee on A im s and O b jec tiv es of L e g a l E d u ca tio n , " H andbook of the A sso c ia tio n of A m eric an L aw S chools, V ol. 41 (1943), 125-147,

359

H a s tin g s , W illiam G. " P ra c t ic e C o u r ts , " P ro c e e d in g s of the T w elfth A nnual M eeting of the A sso c ia tio n of A m e ric a n L aw S choo ls,V ol. 12 (1912), 90-97 .

J a c k so n , R o b e r t H. "A dvocacy b e fo re the S uprem e C ourt: S uggestions fo r E ffec tiv e C ase P r e s e n ta t io n s ," A m e ric a n B a r A sso c ia tio n J o u rn a l , V ol. 37 (N ovem ber, 1951), 801-804 .

K now er, F ra n k lin H . (co m p .) . "G rad u a te T h e se s A n Index of G rad u a te W ork in Speech , " Speech M onographs (1935-1962}^

L lev /e lly n , K a r l N. "T he M odern A pproach to C o u n se llin g and A dvocacy - -E s p e c ia l ly in C o m m e rc ia l T r a n s a c t io n s ," C olum bia L aw R ev iew , XLVI, N o. 2 (M arch , 1946), 167-195.

M acm illan , L o rd . "Som e O b se rv a tio n s on the A r t of A dvocacy , " The C anad ian B a r R eview , XIII, N o. 1 (Ja n u a ry , 1935), 2 2 -3 0 .

M cC lain , E m lin . "A d d re ss of the P r e s id e n t ," P ro c e e d in g s of the Second A nnual M eeting of the A sso c ia tio n of A m e ric a n L aw S choo ls, V ol. 2 (1902), 33-41 .

M cD onald , W illiam C. "O ra l A rg u m en t, " T ex as B a r J o u rn a l , XVI,No. 4 (A pril 22, 1944), 209-210 .

M cK eon, R ic h a rd . "R h e to ric in the M iddle A g e s ," in C r i t ic s and C r i ­t ic is m A n cien t and M odern , ed . R . S. C ran e e t. al» Chicago: T he U n iv e rs ity of C hicago P r e s s , 1952, 260-296 .

M ille r , A lb e r t H. "A L a w y e r’s T re a tm e n t of h is C lien t, " A m e ric a nB a r A sso c ia tio n Jo u rn a l, V ol. 13, No. 1 (Ja n u a ry , 1927, 30-33 .

M ille r , G eorge John# "In tro d u c tio n to O ra l A rg u m en t of an A p p eal, " F lo r id a Law J o u rn a l, XXV, No. 6 (June, 1951), 219-222 .

Nagelj, S tu a r t S. "U sing S im ple C a lcu la tio n s to P r e d ic t J u d ic ia lD e c is io n s , " The P r a c t ic a l L a w y e r, V ol. 7 , N o. 3 (M arch , 1961), 6 8 -7 4 .

O liphan t, H e rm a n . "A C o u rse in B r ie f M aking and L e g a l A rg u m en t, " H andbook of the A sso c ia tio n of A m e ric a n L aw Schools and P r o ­ceed in g s of the S ix teen th A nnual M eeting , V o l. 16 (1916),156-159.

360

O sb o rn , A lb e r t S, "A C ase Book on Thought and R easo n in g , " A m e ric a n L aw School R ev iew , V ol. 5, No, 9 (M ay, 1925), 534-538,

R edm ount, R o b e r t S, "A P a n to sc o p ic V iew of L aw and P sy ch o lo g y , " Jo u rn a l of L e g a l E d u ca tio n , Vol, 10, No, 4 (1958), 436-451 ,

_________ , "P sy c h o lo g ic a l T e s ts fo r S e lec ting J u r o r s , " K an sas LawR eview , V ol, 5 (1957), 391-403,

R em y, C h a r le s F , " B r ie f and O ra l A rg u m en t on A p p ea l, " Ind ian a Law J o u rn a l , VI (1930), 16-28 (p ro ceed in g s of the th ir ty - fo u r th an n u al m e e tin g , Ind ian a S tate B a r A sso c ia tio n , B loom ington , In d ian a , Ju ly 10-11 , 1930),

R ic h a rd s , H a r ry S, " A d d re ss of the P re s id e n t , " P ro c e e d in g s of the F ifte e n th A nnual M eeting of the A sso c ia tio n of A m e ric a n Law S choo ls, V ol, 15 (1915), 60-76,

_________ , " E n tra n c e R e q u ire m e n ts fo r Law S ch o o ls, " P ro c e e d in g s ofthe F o u r th A nnual M eeting of the A sso c ia tio n of A m e ric a n Law S choo ls, V ol, 4 (1904), 29-39 .

R o b e r ts , W, R hys, " R h e to r ic a , " in The W orks of A r is to tle ed , W, D,R o ss , O xford: The C laren d o n P r e s s , 1946, V ol, X I,, 1354a-14aOb.

R o g e rs , W illiam P , " A d d re ss of the P r e s id e n t ," P ro c e e d in g s of the Seventh A nnual M eeting of the A sso c ia tio n of Aum erican Law S choo ls, V ol, 7 (1907), 67-80,

R o ssm an , G eo rg e , "A p p ella te C o u rt A dvocacy: The Im p o rtan ce of O ra l A rg u m en t, " A m e ric a n B a r A sso c ia tio n J o u rn a l , V ol. 45 (Ju ly , 1959), 675-676 ,

R u tled g e , W iley, "T he A p p ella te B r ie f , " The J o u rn a l of the B a rA sso c ia tio n of ttie D is t r ic t of C olum bia, IX , No, 4 (A p ril, 1942), 147-163,

S hien tag , B e rn a rd L , "T he T r ia l of a C iv il J u ry A ction in N ew Y o rk , " U nited S ta te s L aw R ev iew , LXIX, N o, 4 (A p ril, 1935), 183-214.

"Should A dvocacy be R e s tr ic te d to E x p e r ts , " Jo u rn a l of the A m e ric a n Ju d ic a tu re S o c ie ty , V ol, 19, No, 3 (O c to b er, 1935), 85-89 .

361

Sim on, V isco u n t, "T he V ocation of An A dvocate , " The C an ad ian B a r R ev iew , XXV, No, 2 (F e b ru a ry , 1947), 153-167,

S lo sso n , L e o n a rd B , "The N eed fo r T ra in in g in A dvocacy , " J o u rn a lof th e A m e ric a n Ju d ic a tu re S o c ie ty , V ol. 16, N o. 1 (June, 1932), 8 3 -8 7 .

S m ith , B ro m le y , " C o ra x and P ro b a b il i ty , " The Q u a r te r ly J o u rn a l of Speech E d u c a tio n , VII (F e b ru a ry , 1921), 13-42.

S m ith , R alph . "T he T each ing of P u b lic Speaking in L aw S choo ls, " The Q u a r te r ly J o u rn a l of S peech , XI (F e b ru a ry , 1925), 54-57 .

S tacy , W alte r P a r k e r . "The L a w y e r, H is C lien t and h is A d v e rsa ry , "The N o rth C a ro lin a L aw R ev iew , V ol. 4 , No. 1 (F e b ru a ry ,1926), 2 0 -23 .

S te in b e rg , H a r r i s B . "The P r a c t i t io n e r SpeaJcs: W itness P e rfo rm a n c e a s Seen by a T r ia l A tto rn e y , " J o u rn a l of S ocia l I s s u e s , XIII,No. 2 (1957), 30-31 .

S tone, H a r la n F . "T he F u n c tio n of the A m e ric a n U n iv e rs ity Law School, " P ro c e e d in g s of the E lev e n th A nnual M eeting of the A sso c ia tio n of A m e ric a n L aw S choo ls, V ol. 11 (1911), 59-61 .

S tro n g , F ra n k R . "A New C u rr ic u lu m fo r the C ollege of L aw of TheOhio S ta te U n iv e r s i ty ," Ohio S ta te Law J o u rn a l, V ol. 11, No. 1 (W in te r, 1950), 4 4 -5 6 .

S tro th e r , D av id B . " P e rs u a s io n in A m e ric a n L eg a l P r o c e d u re , " W este rn Speech (F a ll , 1961), 231-236 .

S u n d erlan d , E d so n R . "The A r t of L e g a l P r a c t ic e ," M ich ig an A lum nus, V ol. 18 (1912), 252-260 .

_________ . "T he P r a c t ic e C o u r t ," M ich igan A lum nus, V ol. 9 (1903),295 -299 .

. "T each in g P r a c t ic e , " P ro c e e d in g s of the T h ir te e n th Annual M eeting of the A sso c ia tio n of A m e ric a n Law S ch o o ls , V ol. 13 (1913), 4 7 -4 8 .

T hom pson , G. K. " O ra l A rg u m en ts in th e S uprem e C o u rt of Iow a, " Iowa Law R ev iew , V ol. 38, No. 3 (S pring , 1953), 392-409 .

362

T hom pson , Wayne N. and In sa la ta , S, John , "C om m unica tion fro mA tto rn e y to C lien t, " The J o u rn a l of C om m unica tion , XIV, No, 1, (M arch . 1964), 2 2 -33 ,

T ow nes, Jo h n C, "O rg an iza tio n and O p era tio n of a Law School, " P r o - c eed in g s of the T en th A nnual M eeting of th e A sso c ia tio n of A m e ric a n Law S ch o o ls , V ol, 10 (1910), 7 4 -7 5 ,

V a n d e rb ilt , A r th u r T . "A R e p o rt on P r e le g a l E d u ca tio n , " New Y ork U n iv e rs ity Law R ev iew , XXV, No. 2 (A p ril, 1950), 200-290,

W einste in , J a c k B , "T he L a w 's A ttem p t to O btain U seful T estim o n y , " T he J o u rn a l of S o c ia l I s s u e s , XIII, No, 2 (1957), 6 -11 ,

W h itm er, C a r ro l l A, "P sy ch o lo g y in Law and in C rim ino logy , " inP sy ch o lo g y in U se ed, J , S tanley G ray , New Y ork: A m erican B ook Com pany, 1951,

W ien er, F r e d e r ic k B , "O ra l A dvocacy, " H a rv a rd Law R eview , V ol, 62, N o, 1 (N ovem ber, 1948), 56-75,

W igm ore , John H , "M in o rity R ep o rt of the C o m m ittee on C u rr ic u lu m , " P ro c e e d in g s of the N ineteen th A nnual M eeting of the A sso c ia tio n of A m e ric a n L aw S choo ls, V ol, 19 (1921), 34-36,

W ill, T h o m as A, "L eg a l P ro b le m Solving, " T u lane Law R eview , XXXVI, N o, 2 (F e b ru a ry , 1962), 297-306,

W illiam s, D onald E , "G roup D iscu ss io n and A rg u m en ta tio n in L eg a l E d u ca tio n , " The Q u a r te r ly J o u rn a l of S peech , X U , No, 4 (D ecem b er, 1955), 397-402,

W illiam s, P a u l W, "T he P r a c t i t io n e r Speaks Out: W itness P e rfo rm a n c e a s V iew ed by a U , S, A tto rn ey , " Jo u rn a l of Social I s s u e s , XIII, No, 2 (1957), 34 -35 ,

W righ t, W a rre n E , " Ju d ic ia l R h e to ric : A F ie ld fo r R e se a rc h , " Speech M onographs, XXXI, No, 1 (M arch , 1964), 64-72,

M isce llan eo u s

Continuing L eg a l E d u ca tio n fo r P ro fe s s io n a l C om petence and R e sp o n s i­b ility» Jo in t C o m m ittee on Continuing L e g a l E d u ca tio n , The R e p o r t on the A rd e n H ouse C o n feren ce , D ec , 16-19, 1958,

363

F o th e rin g h am , W allace C. F u n c tio n s in P e r s u a s io n , (in p re s s ) .

F u l le r , Lion L . "W ork on the C u rr ic u lu m , " H a rv a rd L aw School B u lle tin . B u lle tin No. 2 (Ju ly , 1948), 1-10.

H andbook of the A sso c ia tio n of A m e ric a n Law S chools and P ro c e e d in g s of the A nnual M ee tin g s , V ol. 1-50 (1901-1952),

T he L aw Schools L ook A head , 1959 C onference on L e g a l E ducation .The Tw elfth A nnual S um m er In s titu te on L e g a l E d u ca tio n sp o n ­so re d by the U n iv e rs ity of M ichigan L aw S chool, June 15-18,1959.

L a w lo r , R eed. C. U npublished C om puter R ep o rt. S tan fo rd C om putation C e n te r , P a lo A lto , C a lifo rn ia .

R eed , A lfred Z a n tz in g e r. T ra in in g fo r the P u b lic P ro fe s s io n of the Law . B u lle tin N o, 15, New Y ork: C a rn e g ie F oundation fo r the A dvancem ent of T each ing , 1921.

S h e a re r , A lan K ent. "A C o u rse in L eg a l A dvocacy fo r P r e -L e g a l S tu ­d en ts . " D e p a rtm e n t of S peech, u n p ub lished M. A . th e s is . L aw rence : U n iv e rs ity of K an sas , 1955.

V a n d e rb ilt, A rth u r T . " F o re n s ic P e r s u a s io n ," The John RandolphT u ck er L e c tu re s , 1949-1952 (d e liv e re d b e fo re the School of L aw of W ashington an d L ee U n iv e rs ity ) . L ex in g to n , V irg in ia , 1952, 39-92.