Meet-and-greet spotlights rookie judges

Listen to this article

Seven new Hennepin County judges have a message for attorneys who argue in their courtrooms: Relax, be succinct, and be careful about the font you use on your briefs.

A contingent from the newest crop of judges in Minnesota’s 4th District were introduced to about 100 attendees at a panel discussion last week presented by Messerli & Kramer and the Hennepin County Bar Association.

The new judges on the panel, some of whom have been on the bench for only weeks, were Hilary Lindell Caligiuri, Nicole Engisch, Bill Fisher, Tom Fraser, Juan Hoyos, Carolina Lamas and Bruce Manning. They fielded a variety of questions from audience members and from veteran 4th District Judge Jay Quam, who moderated.

The question topics ranged from personal details to courtroom conduct. Attendees learned that Fisher worked as a towboat deck hand while in college, that Manning used to belong to an improv theater group, and that Hoyos was planning on seeing a band at First Avenue after the discussion.

The talk got more serious, and often more candid, when it turned to work issues. Asked what surprised them most about being a judge, many cited the pace and volume of the work. Caligiuri said she was “stunned” by how full the days are.

“Decision fatigue is real,” agreed Manning. “I have a high-volume misdemeanor calendar and I have to weigh the pros and cons of a particular course of action in each one. I’m more tired at the end of the day than when I was practicing law even though I work fewer hours.”

Hoyos and Lamas said that seeing the behind-the-scenes staff in action has also been an eye-opener. “What controls a sentence in a lot of cases is what gets entered into a computer by a clerk,” said Lamas. “They get overlooked.”

Asked about the best part of their relatively new jobs, the judges pointed to the variety of cases and the support they receive from senior judges. Asked for the worst part, the judges were candid.

“I do feel like I have no idea what I’m doing sometimes,” said Caligiuri. “You put that pressure on yourself when you really want to make good, fair decisions.”

“With our calendars, we have to go by the seat of our pants sometimes,” said Engisch. “That’s not my style.”

“I’ve had to come to terms with the fact that every decision I make will make someone upset,” said Lamas.

New perspective

Many of the judges remarked on things they know now that they wish they had known when they were practicing law. Lamas said she now realizes more than ever that decisions from the bench are based on the facts of the case, not on the ability of a lawyer to argue.

Engisch acknowledged that as a former prosecutor, she now understands why she used to think some judges lean toward defendants. “They’re simply defending their constitutional rights,” she said.

The talk then turned to what lawyers should expect when facing the newly minted judges, and how to make everyone’s job easier. More than one judge cautioned attorneys against resorting to personal attacks against opposing counsel and to be careful about insulting the judge — even when you might not mean to, such as when comparing a judge to one you worked with years before, or threatening the bench with appeals.

“Stick to the facts,” said Fraser. “A neutral will shut down if you resort to attacks. And don’t ignore the argument made by the other side — tell us why it doesn’t work.”

Manning advised practicing an argument by explaining it to a lay person, and concentrating only on what the judge needs to know to make a proper ruling. “Go with your strongest stuff and stick with it,” he said. “Lawyers want to try every argument that they think might fit, but that’s not effective advocacy.”

That applies to structuring briefs, too, said Fraser: “If you haven’t explained the central issue by the third paragraph, you haven’t done your job.”

(And speaking of briefs, do not submit one to Manning using Times New Roman, Courier or any sans serif font under any circumstances. Garamond and New Century Schoolbook are OK, though.)

Much of the rest of the judges’ advice revolved around common sense and common courtesy: Be concise, be respectful, be on time, try to relax and presume that the judge has read your brief.

“Know the law, be fair and pick your battles,” said Lamas.

And rest assured that judges carry a mental list of bad lawyers — and they do talk among themselves.

“Judges have coffee together all the time,” said Quam. “If you annoy one judge, the other judges will hear about it.”