I’ve been blogging “my little heart out lately” but had to take a day off to prepare for my New
Hamsphire Supreme Court argument which was delivered this afternoon. I don’t know exactly
how many appellate arguments I’ve made, but it is likely to be in the vicinity of 60 or thereabouts.
Most of my efforts have been with the New Hampshire Supreme Court, but I
probably have 5-10 in the Vermont Supreme Court. I’ve also appeared in the 1st Circuit Court of
Appeals (Boston) and the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals (New York).
I’m writing to say how much I’ve enjoyed these experiences and how privileged and challenged I’ve felt delivering these arguments. When an attorney goes to an appellate court to argue, he/she is entering the arena of ideas. What is the current law? What should the law be? How would the decision impact the due administration of justice? What is fair and equitable? All of these things get thrown into the stew.
In approaching today’s argument, I had a plan. I knew what I wanted to say and I knew the order in which I wanted to say it. But, as John Steinbeck once wrote: “The best laid schemes of mice and men go oft awry”. My plan was history immediately after I said: “May it please the Honorable Court, my name is Peter Decato. I represent “my client”, the petitioner below.”
I was questioned “heavily” by the justices today. That questioning alarmed me, but I am buoyed by what a bystander said: “The justices asked you all those questions today because they really want to rule in your favor and they want you to help them do that.”
Forever the optimist, I await the verdict.
Hamsphire Supreme Court argument which was delivered this afternoon. I don’t know exactly
how many appellate arguments I’ve made, but it is likely to be in the vicinity of 60 or thereabouts.
Most of my efforts have been with the New Hampshire Supreme Court, but I
probably have 5-10 in the Vermont Supreme Court. I’ve also appeared in the 1st Circuit Court of
Appeals (Boston) and the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals (New York).
I’m writing to say how much I’ve enjoyed these experiences and how privileged and challenged I’ve felt delivering these arguments. When an attorney goes to an appellate court to argue, he/she is entering the arena of ideas. What is the current law? What should the law be? How would the decision impact the due administration of justice? What is fair and equitable? All of these things get thrown into the stew.
In approaching today’s argument, I had a plan. I knew what I wanted to say and I knew the order in which I wanted to say it. But, as John Steinbeck once wrote: “The best laid schemes of mice and men go oft awry”. My plan was history immediately after I said: “May it please the Honorable Court, my name is Peter Decato. I represent “my client”, the petitioner below.”
I was questioned “heavily” by the justices today. That questioning alarmed me, but I am buoyed by what a bystander said: “The justices asked you all those questions today because they really want to rule in your favor and they want you to help them do that.”
Forever the optimist, I await the verdict.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment