Improving Appellate Oral Arguments Through Tentative Opinions and Focus Orders

Oral arguments in court are often not as important as they seem. Judges might have already made up their minds, and lawyers can struggle to answer tough questions on the spot. It costs a lot of time and money for everyone involved. But the goal is still the same: to make sure the court makes the right decision and does justice. To make oral arguments better, courts can use tentative opinions and focus orders. These changes can help make sure that everyone’s voices are heard and that the court gets it right. So basically, some courts send a draft of their opinion to the lawyers before they have to argue their case in court. This helps the lawyers know what the court is thinking and makes the oral argument more helpful. The judges don’t think it makes their decisions less fair, and most lawyers like it. The California court issues a tentative opinion before oral argument to help save time and make the argument more focused. This has led to better quality and efficiency for the court, saving money for taxpayers. The court sends out a letter inviting the parties to participate in a short oral argument to respond to the tentative opinion. Courts in California and Arizona issue tentative opinions before oral arguments to save time and resources. Lawyers like this idea, but judges have concerns about it. This process could improve the courts’ ability to make the right decisions, and it’s worth trying out on a limited basis. Focus orders are instructions from the court to the parties involved in a case, telling them what specific issues or questions to focus on during their arguments. Judges use focus orders to make oral arguments more effective and relevant to the court. This helps the lawyers prepare better, and it gives the judges a preview of the parties’ positions. It’s a useful tool that benefits everyone involved in the case. A combination of tentative opinions and focus orders could be really helpful in Florida appeals. This would involve the judges giving a preview of their thinking on a case and telling the parties what issues they need to focus on during the oral argument. It would make the process more focused and efficient, and help everyone involved in the case. This has already been tried in California and has shown positive results. The interview with the presiding justice of the California Fourth District Court of Appeal discussed the process of issuing opinions. The panel judges are only revealed the Friday before the week of oral argument, and the author of the opinion is noted only in the final opinion. The court used to strongly encourage parties to waive oral argument to speed up the process, but this is no longer the case. The court in California and Arizona have a program where they send out tentative opinions before oral arguments. However, in California, they mistakenly said that oral argument wouldn’t help their decision, which isn’t allowed. The Arizona program started because a lawyer asked for the draft opinion before arguments, and the court started sharing it. Both courts think the program is a good way to handle a lot of cases. Legal scholars have suggested different ways to improve oral arguments in court. Some have proposed judges giving a preliminary decision at the start of the oral argument, while others have suggested asking the lawyers to focus on specific issues. These ideas aim to make oral arguments more effective and fair.

Source: https://www.floridabar.org/the-florida-bar-journal/improving-appellate-oral-arguments-through-tentative-opinions-and-focus-orders/