The courtroom is the modern battleground of America, where disputes and crimes alike are brought to trial, discussed, and concluded by the presiding judge’s informed legal opinion. Like any battleground, it’s good to know the lay of the land and what to expect, as much as possible. For attorneys preparing to enter the courtroom for any kind of case, having a good idea of what a judge expects and appreciates is a crucial component of victory. Just like in any other place in life, it may be a good idea to consult an expert.
Seattle-based lawyer David Ruzumna is a seasoned attorney of almost 30 years, and is precisely such an expert. After getting his undergraduate degree in Sociology at Humboldt State University, and later his law degree, he passed the bar exam in 1997 and established his own practice in 2000. More importantly, in 2012 he began working as a judge pro tem in King County District Court—a role whose service quickly expanded into other courts in King and Snohomish counties until he was working near full time in a judicial capacity. The experience has made him a better attorney with experience on both sides of the bench, and gives him specific insights into what attorneys should be prioritizing to find success.
“Having an experienced mentor is invaluable. Find someone who has been practicing for a long time, and who has the time and willingness to provide mentorship as needed,” Ruzumna says.
“Even if you have become an expert in an area of law, you should continue reading and learning about it from other perspectives; in other words, never become lazy or complacent when it comes to nourishing your knowledge base.”
To that end, David Ruzumna has narrowed down a list of five things that, in his experience, judges expect from attorneys in the courtroom. There’s no ironclad strategy to winning every case, but there are ways to improve one’s chances, make the case easier to engage with, and not waste the judge’s valuable time.
Five Expectations And Best Practices
David Ruzumna’s recommendations are based on experience from either side of the bench, and are aimed at attorneys looking to improve their work and dodge pitfalls that might negatively impact their case. These are more specific than broader advice such as starting and finishing presentations strongly (to better ensure the audience retains information), and are specific, actionable things that can be implemented immediately.
Ruzumna begins with briefs, and one specific piece of advice stands out: don’t use ‘template’ briefs. When judges are reviewing a motion they’ll oven skim past templated boilerplate recitations of applicable rules or standards being applied in a motion. Keeping briefs short and focused is the goal—they don’t need to be long to be effective, as every word of an efficiently written brief will be read and considered by the judge.
David Ruzumna says, “A written brief that is overly laden with boilerplate text that has been cut and pasted from a template will not be taken seriously by the judge. If you are required to include basic legal standards and rules within a brief (i.e., to preserve an objection/argument for appellate purposes), at least keep the ‘boilerplate’ confined to a clearly marked section of the brief.”
When it comes to motions specifically, Ruzumna has a few bits of advice to give. The first of these is to not assume that the judge has already reviewed the written materials, or is familiar with the case. It’s common for the lawyers involved to have a more detailed and nuanced understanding of the case than the judge hearing a given motion, and assuming familiarity could result in key information or nuance being skimmed over or not properly examined.
Ruzumna has information about the content of the motions themselves as well: in written motions, be extremely clear at the outset what the judge is being asked to do. He’s seen many instances of attorneys launching into their case justifications and arguments about why the judge should agree with them, all without ever explicitly stating what the attorney wants to happen should they win. Clarity is critical—both in function and in form.
“Particularly in jurisdictions where motions are primarily decided on the written materials (i.e., without oral argument), be sure to proofread what you are submitting to the judge,” Ruzumna adds. “Ensure that your written materials are free from grammatical and spelling errors.”
The last piece of advice should go without saying, but both as an attorney and a judge, David Ruzumna has seen this go ignored more than is proper: when making a court appearance, especially in person but also remotely, please make an effort to appear professional. Dress as you would for a jury trial, and if you’re appearing remotely ensure that your camera and microphone are clean and of quality. These things may seem small and superficial, but they make a difference.
Keeping An Eye On The Pipeline
David Ruzumna has been a practicing legal expert for decades, and has experienced the legal world from a wide enough array of perspectives to understand when the tide is shifting and the entire industry may be about to change. The legal world is on the verge of a number of large shifts, with changing laws and regulations across the United States, growing new technology platforms (and associated concerns), and shifting societal needs. It’s more important than ever for legal experts to supplement their mandatory CLEs (Continuing Legal Education) with robust networking, state and federal Supreme Court updates, and general industry news publications in order to keep up.
“I try to view mandatory CLE hours as a bare minimum rather than as a goal,” Ruzumna explains. “A good attorney will have more than enough accumulated CLE hours in any given reporting period to satisfy the WSBA. Attorneys do not have every answer to every potential legal question; rather, a good attorney’s skillset is knowing where and how to look for the answer to a particular question.”
One growing trend that Ruzumna finds particularly exciting is the integration of technology into daily legal practice. Tools like AI-assisted contract analysis and e-discovery platforms are making legal work more efficient, opening up time for the practitioner to focus on strategy and client relationships. For a solo practitioner like himself, it’s incredibly helpful as a tool to level the playing field against larger firms. Ruzumna is also excited by the growing emphasis on alternative dispute resolution approaches, like mediation, because it saves his clients time and money.
