The Orange County Bar Association Education Committee Presents
LEGAL WRITING 101: Writing for Success
Tuesday, March 2, 2021
Speakers Honorable William W. Bedsworth Associate Justice 4th District Court of Appeal
Donna Bader, Esq. Attorney at Law
Aaron W. Heisler, Esq. Senior Research Attorney Orange County Superior Court
Moderator Nadia D. Vazirian, Esq. OCBA Education Committee Orange County Bar Association
Education Committee
Legal Writing 101: Writing for Success
Part 1- Perspective from the Court of Appeals
Hon. Justice William Bedsworth
I. CLARITY
That’s the focus of my remarks and it should be the focus of your writing.
“In the law, the power of clear statement is everything.” Justice Story (Marshall’s right-hand man). Quoted by Chief Justice Rehnquist with approval at page 42 of his book The Supreme Court.
So why don’t we have clear statement? Because everybody thinks they have to learn a new style, like a new language, for briefs. Adam Freedman, author of several texts on legal writing, says, “What distinguishes legal boilerplate is its combination of archaic terminology and frenzied verbosity, as though it were written by a medieval scribe on crack.”
Many of you sit down to write with a feeling of dread that has often led to procrastination and is now verging on panic. You have some sense that you have to write a brief like it was a research paper, with all kinds of fancy language and syntax and citations as complicated as footnotes in a law review article.
You don’t. What you have to do is write with clarity. If you’re right and you’re clear, you will win. If you aren’t right, you shouldn’t win and all the fancy vocabulary and histrionic prose you can muster shouldn’t change that. If you
1 of 15 don’t understand that, you spent too much time with LA Law and Ally McBeal and not enough time with your ethics assignments.
If clearly presenting the truth doesn’t enable you to win, THEN YOU SHOULDN’T HAVE WON.
And while there are mechanical and technical considerations which Aaron has handled beautifully, and tips for more effective communication, which Donna has provided in her outline, the actual writing task can be handled with relative ease if you just remember your goal is clarity. So I’m going to focus on clarity and then Donna and Aaron and I are going to try to help you make your clarity more persuasive and get it before the court.
1. WAYS TO ENSURE CLARITY:
A. Introductions: Tell ‘em what you’re gonna tell ‘em.
B. Organic clarity: Simple words, simple sentences, well- organized paragraphs (Scalia and Garner; Making Your Case)
C. Introductory Words: You were taught some rules in the seventh grade about not beginning paragraphs and sentences with certain words like “But” and “And.” Forget those rules.
D. Know the applicable standard of review. This is true both in appellate courts and law and motion courts. If you aren’t clear about what you need to win, your brief won’t be.
2 of 15 E. Style: There are lots of ways to grow your crop; choose the one that best fits the land you’re growing it on and the climate in which it must grow. You’ve all been raised on Strunk and White. I was too. But Strunk was born in 1869. White was one of his students at Cornell. I’m not sure you should be accepting as the Bible of your style something written by a man who predated the telephone and would today be almost 152 years old.
F. Careful Word Usage
2. TONE: You are an officer of the court. An officer of the judicial system that is the base rock of the freedom and justice that makes our country a beacon of hope to the rest of the world. Conduct yourself accordingly.
A. Be respectful to the court – all courts, including the one you think erred.
B. Be respectful to opposing counsel. Civility will not only help you win, it will make your life easier and better.
3 of 15 Part 2- Legal Writing Tips for Trial and Appellate Attorneys
Donna Bader, Esq.
“Lawyers are, on the whole, interesting people who can talk without putting you to sleep. So why are we so dull and pompous on paper? Why do we write things that would make us laugh if someone spoke them? Hearing your words will steer you away from absurdities.”
Howard Posner
1. Even persuasive writing doesn’t mean you always win.
a. The facts should be on your side.
b. The law should favor your position.
2. In the beginning was the client . . .
a. Who told you a compelling story that made you want to take the case.
b. Attorneys deconstruct the story to take out its humanity.
1. A person became a plaintiff/defendant.
2. The problem became a cause of action.
3. Legal terminology is used to tell the story.
3. Preparing to Write:
a. Find your theme/story.
b. What do you want the judge to do?
c. Outline your presentation.
4 of 15
3. Consider your audience:
a. Judges are people – they like being entertained.
b. They want to understand the issue in the shortest time.
c. They want to do the right thing, i.e., achieve justice, but they are required to follow the law.
d. You want them to say “This isn’t fair” or “You’re right.”
e. Judges have heavy workloads. Make it easy for them.
Repeating citations. Attaching documents that were filed at previous hearings.
4. Unbearable weight of the legal sentence OR fear of the naked sentence
a. Why have just one descriptive word when two will emphasis the point?
Null and void Without legal force or effect Cease and desist
b. Conditions/exceptions hooked on to the sentence that bog it down.
Plaintiff timely filed his response, except for the fact that he failed to attach Exhibit A, which was referred to in his Reply, and he also failed to prepare a written Request for Judicial Notice.
c. Borne out of fear that our sentences will be used against us
d. Billable event – the less the client understands, the more we charge
5. Physical presentation:
5 of 15 a. Lots of white space – more inviting and peaceful
b. Paragraph frequently
c. Variety in spacing – quotes
d. Keep underlining, bolding, and italics to a minimum.
6. Tips: a. Avoid obvious cut & paste – pg. ## from WL, wrong names.
b. Longer is easier but shorter is better.
c. Simplify – don’t write like a lawyer (vehicular collision vs. car wreck).
d. Tell them what you want and no more.
e. Shorter sentences with action verbs. Avoid passive voice “to be.” Longer sentences slows us down.
The motion was granted. The Court granted the motion.
f. Avoid big words no one but you understand.
g. A paragraph should not fill up an entire page.
h. Marshmallow construction – filled with unnecessary words.
i. Too much information in sentences.
j. Periods give us the chance to pause.
k. Avoid too many dates unless they are important. Starting sentences with “On _____, 2021” may signal that the date is important.
l. Don’t discuss the details of a cited case if you just need a principle.
6 of 15
m. I prefer names vs. titles.
n. Use language a layperson can understand. Test it out!
o. Easy to read fonts.
p. Put your strongest point first. Add it to the Introduction as well. q. Do not bury important points.
r. Be picky with quotations.
s. Strong headings – the reader should be able to understand the argument.
“The Court sits as a thirteenth juror and must grant a motion for new trial and/or an additur, if the court, after weighing the evidence, is convinced the jury clearly should have reached a different verdict.” (No!)
“Plaintiff’s failure to serve the defendant within three years from filing the complaint warrants dismissal of this action pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 583.210(a).” (Yes.)
t. Good introduction – Tell the court the basic facts, what you want, and the applicable law.
u. Tell a good story!
7 of 15 Part 3 - Perspective from the Superior Court
Aaron Heisler, Esq. Senior Research Attorney
I. The Role of Research Attorneys in the Orange County Superior Court
a. Organization of Judicial Officers by Subject Matter (in alphabetical order)
i. Civil (Limited, Unlimited, Complex) ii. Criminal iii. Family iv. Juvenile (Dependency and Delinquency) v. Probate / Mental Health vi. Superior Court Appellate Panel
b. Brief Overview of Research Attorneys
i. RAs fall under the purview of the Office of General Counsel
ii. Number of RAs (of February 2, 2021)
1. 56 Research Attorneys total (enough for a mid-sized firm!) 2. Civil - 36 (27 Unlimited, 6 Complex, 3 Reserve) 3. Criminal - 6 4. Family - 6 5. Juvenile - 2 6. Appellate Panel - 3 7. Probate / Mental Health - 3
8 of 15 c. Typical Life Cycle of a Civil Motion
i. Motion is filed (generally at least 16 court days before hearing)
ii. 10 court days before hearing date: courtroom attendant prepares the calendar (before oppositions are typically due)
iii. 8 court days before hearing date: distribution to RAs (before replies are typically due)
iv. 2-3 court days before hearing: RA turns in a work-up
v. 1 court day before hearing: tentative posted
II. General Tips
a. Know Your Audience
i. Research your judicial officer
ii. Consider the research attorney
iii. Do not “educate” your reader unnecessarily. For example, the standard of review on demurrer probably does not warrant more than a few sentences. No need to rule-proof or analogize/distinguish every case.
b. Pragmatic Tips for Content
i. Be relevant. Look critically at your best arguments, lead with them, and drop the rest.
ii. Be focused. For example, do not argue the merits if the merits are not before the court. Few motions really require a recitation of the entire background of the parties’ relationship or the entire litigation to date.
iii. Be organized.
1. A good introduction and clear headings should be your best friends.
2. Many research attorneys and judges believe the introduction should be the most important part of the brief. Leave out fluff, say what the motion is about, why the result you ask for is the right one, and only include critical facts.
3. Section headings should read like a summary of your argument.
4. Use IRAC/CRPAP as a guide, not a rule.
9 of 15 iv. Be honest. Do not misquote the record. Do not mischaracterize authority you cite. Read completely any statute, opinion, or other authority cited.
v. Be interesting.
1. Stick with the active voice unless you need to soften a particular statement of fact or conclusion.
2. Mix short declarative sentences with longer sentences.
3. Consider demonstratives or pictures where paragraphs or words fail.
vi. Be courteous. Don’t bicker with opposing counsel. Save accusations for instances where they are appropriate. Invective and exaggeration are rarely appropriate. vii. Be clear.
1. Cite your evidence specifically (i.e. page and line or paragraph).
2. Cite other documents in the court’s file specifically (i.e. name and date of filing, ROA where possible). (See Local Rule 314A.) viii. Be reasonable. Acknowledge negative authority and make appropriate concessions.
ix. Spend time on your Notice of Motion. Cite the law upon which you rely and make sure to clearly frame the relief you seek.
x. Spend time on your proposed order (if you submit one).
xi. Reply briefs should respond to the opposition. Consider bullet points.
1. Don’t repeat your moving papers.
2. Beware the temptation to rely on new arguments or evidence. “The general rule of motion practice … is that new evidence is not permitted with reply papers.” (Jay v. Mahaffey (2013) 218 Cal.App.4th 1522, 1537.) Where new evidence is permitted with the reply, the opposing party should be given the opportunity to respond to it. (Id. at p. 1538.)
xii. Do not forget to review any Rules of Court applicable to your motion and case type.
10 of 15 c. Presenting Your Documents in an Electronic World
i. E-file like your motion depends on it
1. Name your document clearly (see Exhibit A)
2. Choose your category carefully
a. Certain categories do not undergo human review
b. E.g., if you file a “declaration” asking for a continuance, it will not likely be seen unless there is another reason to review the file.
ii. Bookmarks - the new exhibit tabs (see Exhibit B)
1. Want to learn how? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LLLzOPd_T7I
2. But please put a blank page in front of each exhibit with only the exhibit name (e.g., “Exhibit A”) on it
iii. Hyperlinks – the next big thing for big records? (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wLv4CUpwjhQ)
iv. Choose searchable text if you want the court to quote you.
v. Consider e-filing processing times
vi. Courtesy copies – format and delivery III. Specific Motions Common to Civil and Probate Proceedings
a. Demurrers / Motions to Strike / Motions for Judgment on the Pleadings
i. Meet and confer requirements
ii. Remember the limited relief available. Demurrers and motions for judgment on the pleadings must dispose of an entire cause of action or pleading.
iii. Remember the limits of judicial notice.
1. Judicial notice cannot be taken of the truth of factual assertions or findings contained in court records or official acts of state agencies. (Arce v. Kaiser Foundation Health Plan, Inc. (2010) 181 Cal.App.4th 471, 482.)
11 of 15 2. Judicial notice cannot be used to convert a pleading challenge into a contested evidentiary hearing.
3. No need to ask for judicial notice of the pleading challenged. b. Discovery Motions
i. Consider an informal discovery conference under Code Civ. Proc., § 2016.080.
ii. Make sure the questions and responses are before the court.
iii. Try to avoid letting the separate statement become a useless exercise in copying and pasting. c. Motions for Summary Judgment / Adjudication
i. “Section 437c is a complicated statute. There is little flexibility in the procedural imperatives of the section, and the issues raised by a motion for summary judgment (or summary adjudication) are pure questions of law. As a result, section 437c is unforgiving; a failure to comply with any one of its myriad requirements is likely to be fatal to the offending party.” (Brantley v. Pisaro (1996) 42 Cal.App.4th 1591, 1607.)
ii. A motion for summary adjudication requires extra attention on the notice of motion and separate statement.
iii. Remember the difference between material facts and immaterial facts.
1. Material facts are those relevant to resolving the issues raised in the motion. They must be included in the separate statement.
2. Immaterial facts are those not directly relevant to the issues, but perhaps helpful to put the motion into context. They should not be included in the separate statement.
3. When citing a material fact, cite to the separate statement or response to separate statement. When citing an immaterial fact, cite to the evidence.
iv. Don’t try to create an illusion of disputed facts in your opposition. Pick the critical fact or facts in dispute and focus on them.
v. Consider alternatives (e.g. bifurcation and trial on stipulated facts).
12 of 15 d. Motions for Non-Discovery Sanctions
i. Carefully consider whether non-discovery sanctions are really warranted.
ii. Many sanction statutes have special notice periods.
IV. The Court’s Use of Temporary Judges
13 of 15 Exhibit A – The Court’s “File” For A Civil / Probate Matter
14 of 15 Exhibit B –Document With Bookmarks
15 of 15
Speaker Biographies
Hon. William W. Bedsworth
William W. Bedsworth was born in Long Beach, California, and grew up in Gardena. He played intercollegiate baseball, wrote for the school paper, represented day students in the student senate, and earned a Bachelor’s Degree (cum laude) from Loyola University of Los Angeles in three years (1968), and his Juris Doctorate from the University of California at Berkeley (Boalt Hall) three years later.
After graduation from law school he joined the Orange County District Attorney’s Office where he served as a trial deputy, appellate attorney, and finally as managing attorney in charge of its law and motion/appellate division. He handled cases in both the California and United States Supreme Courts, and his argument before the California Supreme Court in In re James D. (1987) 43 Cal.3d 903, was videotaped by the National School Safety Center for educational use. During his career as a prosecutor, he was twice chosen President of the Association of Orange County Deputy District Attorneys and twice elected to the Board of Directors of the Orange County Bar Association.
In 1986, he was elected to an open seat on the Orange County Superior Court. He was re-elected in 1992, and in 1996, the Commission on Judicial Nominees Evaluation of the state Bar rated him “exceptionally well qualified” (highest possible rating) for appointment to the Court of Appeal. He was appointed to the Fourth District Court of Appeal, Division 3 by Governor Pete Wilson in February, 1997. He was then elected to that position in 1998 and re-elected in 2010.
Justice Bedsworth has taught law school classes at Western State University (where he was the commencement speaker in 2003), Chapman University, the California Judicial College, and presently teaches at the University of California, Irvine Law School. He has also taught at the California Judicial College in Berkeley. He served on the Board of Directors of the National Conference of Christians and Jews and was a principal in Fair Share 502 (a charity whose 10 members raised almost a million dollars for homeless children).
He was the Hispanic Bar Association’s Judge of the Year in 1997, the Celtic Bar’s judge of the year in 2012, and received the LGBT Lavender Bar Association’s first Leadership Award in 2011. He received the David G. Sills Award, the Orange County Bar Association’s Lifetime Achievement Award for appellate law, in 2015. In 2017, the California Chapter of the American Board of Trial Advocates honored him by naming their highest judicial award after him.
In addition to law review articles, he has published in the lay press, most recently in Sierra and Coast magazines. His monthly humor column “A Criminal Waste of Space” is nationally syndicated, and self-described as the most aptly named feature of the dozen legal publications in which it appears. He has won several awards for it, including five from the California Newspapers Association. In 2010, he was chosen for one of George Mason University’s coveted Green Bag awards – the two other winners in his category were Nina Totenberg of NPR and Jeffrey Toobin of The New Yorker. In 2003, The Times of London gave him its Judicial Wisdom of the Year award for recognizing that “There is no non-culpable explanation for monkeys in your underpants.” His third collection of legal humor, Lawyers, Gubs and Monkeys, was published in 2017.
Justice Bedsworth lives with his wife Kelly and their surfeit of cats in Laguna Beach, California. His primary recreational interests are his three children, four grandchildren, golf, country music, baseball, ice hockey, and the restoration of a 125-year old house in Seneca Falls, New York. He worked as a National Hockey League goal judge for 15 years (he proudly wears a 2007 Stanley Cup ring) and was the subject of a story in ESPN The Magazine entitled “Justice of the Crease.”
DONNA BADER Attorney at Law
Post Office Box 168 Yachats, Oregon 97498
(949) 494-7455 Fax: (949) 494-1017
E-Mail: [email protected]
EMPLOYMENT
1977 to present Appellate Attorney: Certified as a Specialist in Appellate Law by the State Bar of California from 1999-2018. Prepared over 400 civil appeals and writs. Extensive experience in a broad range of matters for plaintiffs and defendants, including medical and legal malpractice, personal injury, insurance bad faith, business, and real estate law.
Founding and former Editor of Plaintiff magazine, which is sent to over 5,000 plaintiffs’ attorneys in Northern California; Former Editor of the Orange County Trial Lawyers Association’s magazine, The Gavel, Consumer Attorney of California’s magazine, The Forum, and Consumer Attorney of Los Angeles’s magazine, Advocate. Contributing legal writer to several Orange County magazines, as well as editing and writing for legal publishers. Member and former Chair of the Appellate Section of the Orange County Bar Association.
2000 to present Mediator: Handled appellate mediations for the Second Appellate District of Los Angeles. I have also handled several settlement conferences as a volunteer for the Orange County Superior Court.
1980 to 1981 Research Attorney: Law and Motion Department of the Orange County Superior Court. Duties included analyzing and researching civil cases, summarizing the facts and applicable law, and making recommendations to the judges.
EDUCATION Western State University, Fullerton, CA Received J.D. in June 1977. Graduated top quarter of class. Honors: American Jurisprudence Award in Constitutional Law
Institut International des Droits de L’Homme (International Institute of Human Rights), Strasbourg, France (1979) Completed courses in international human rights, multi-national corporations, international conventions and treaties, and humanitarian law. 1
Attended numerous writing conferences and seminars at American Film Institute, UCI, UCLA, Sherwood Oaks, and other writing organizations.
Dana Curtis Mediation Training. Intensive five-day training from Dana Curtis of Sausalito, who is a well respected mediation teacher, having taught and lectured at Stanford Law School (10 years) and Santa Clara University (8 years). She has designed and taught mediation programs for many courts, including the Second Appellate District and is one of the founders of appellate mediations.
ADMISSIONS
California Supreme Court and Courts of Appeal (1977) Southern District, United States District Court (1991) Central District, United States District Court (1996) Eastern District, United States District Court (1998) United States Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit (1998) United States Supreme Court (1999)
ARTICLES AND PUBLICATIONS
"Why Can't We All be Civil?," Advocate, December 2013 "An Afternoon with Former Justice Carlos Moreno," Advocate, August 2013 "DOMA and Proposition Struck Down: What Does It Mean for Lawyers?," Advocate, August 2013 "When a Dog is More than Chattel," Plaintiff, May 2013 "Hey! You Better Not Hurt Man's Best Friend, Advocate, March 2013 "Painting a Picture at Trial for the Court of Appeal," Advocate, December 2012
"Cuba: One Lawyer's Perspective," Gavel, Summer 2012
"Cuba: One Lawyer's Perspective," Advocate, May 2012
"Reid v. Google: Two Big Questions Answered," Advocate, December 2010
"Prop. 19: The Legal Issues of Legalizing Marijuana," Advocate and Plaintiff, October 2010
"Another Perspective: How do Women Impact the Extinction of the Trial Lawyer?," Plaintiff, March 2010 2
“Book Review: Law and Motion Model Forms,” Plaintiff, February 2010
“Lawyers at Midlife,” Plaintiff, January 2010
“Understanding Standards of Review,” The Advocate, December 2009
“Can Actors Teach Us Trial Skills?,” The Gavel, Winter 2009
“Is the Feres Doctrine Fair?,” The Gavel, Fall 2009
“Meditation,” The Gavel, Summer 2009
“Book Review: Making Your Case: The Art of Persuading Judges,” Plaintiff, March 2009
“The Good We Do – Lawyers Lauded at Gay Pride Parade,” Plaintiff, August 2009
“Solo by Choice: How to Be the Lawyer You Always Wanted to Be,” Plaintiff, August 2009
“Book Review: Making Your Case: The Art of Persuading Judges,” The Advocate, February 2009
“Sharpening Your Oral Argument Skills,” The Advocate, December 2008
“Looking Back at the End of the Case,” Plaintiff, September 2008
“Looking Back at the End of the Case: Critical Perspectives of an Appellate Attorney,” The Warrior, Winter 2008
“Looking Back at the End of the Case: an Appellate Perspective,” The Gavel, Summer 2008
“The Courtroom as Theater: Is the Courtroom Just Another Stage?,” Plaintiff, June 2008
“You Win Some; You Lose Some,” Plaintiff, May 2008
“Art and Law: Is There a Connection?,” Plaintiff, April 2008
“Is it Safe to Take a Vacation?” The Gavel, Spring 2008
“Opposing Motions for Summary Judgment in Medical Malpractice Cases,” Plaintiff, Dec. 2007
“Sanctions Under CCP Section 128.7 for Meritless Claims and Defenses: A Waste of Time?,” The Advocate, December 2007
“Storytelling in Brief-Writing,” Plaintiff, November 2007
“Working with Juries: Can you go too far?,” Plaintiff, October 2007
"Applying Res Ipsa Loquitur to Premises Liability Fire Cases," Plaintiff, August 2007
3
“After the Trial is Over,” The Forum, March 2006
“The Value of the Jury System,” The Forum, March 2005
“Oops, I Forgot to Object (or, How Not to Lose your Appeal at Trial),” The Forum, December 2005
“Crafting a Solid Statement of Decision,” The Forum, October 2005
“Law and Motion: Making as Few Mistakes as Possible – Part 2,” The Gavel, Fall 2005
“Law and Motion: Making as Few Mistakes as Possible – Part 1,” The Gavel, Summer 2005
“Considering Alternatives to Trial,” The Forum, June 2005
“Keeping the Justices awake (and interested) during Oral Argument,” The Advocate, September 2004
“Our Court of Appeal,” Orange County Lawyer, August 2004
“Demystifying Oral Argument,” The Advocate, August 2004
“Interview with Judge Mary Fingal Erickson,” The Gavel, Summer 2004
“Interview with Judge W. Michael Hayes,” The Gavel, Spring 2004
“Storytelling in Brief Writing,” Utah Trial Lawyers Association, Summer 2004.
“Ms. Bader Goes to Sacramento or How I Became a Lobbyist for a Day,” Forum, June 2004
“Home on the Range (or How Five City Lawyers Pretended to be Cowgirls for a Few Days),” O.C. Lawyer, April 2004
“Interview with Joshua Karton, The Gavel, Winter 2004
“Judicial Interview with Judge Thierry Colaw,” The Gavel, Winter 2004
“Opposing Motions for Summary Judgment,” The Gavel, Spring 2004
“Opposing Motions for Summary Judgment in Medical Malpractice Cases,” The Advocate, August 2003
“Storytelling in Brief Writing,” The Warrior, Journal of the Trial Lawyers’ College, Spring 2003
“Building a Better Trial Lawyer,” The Advocate, May 2003
“A Few Moments with Gerry Spence,” The Advocate, May 2003
“Storytelling in Brief-Writing,” The Advocate, January 2003 4
“Is Gender Bias Impossible to Eliminate?” The Gavel, Winter 2003
“Challenges to Plaintiff’s Complaint: Review Your Complaint from the Defense Attorney’s Perspective,” The Advocate, September 2002
“OCTLA Member Spotlight: Marjorie Wilson Day, Esq.,” The Gavel, Spring 2002
“OCTLA Member Spotlight: Jim Traut, Esq.,” The Gavel, Winter 2002
“Complex Litigation Courtrooms: The Courtrooms of the Future,” The Gavel, Fall 2002
“America without a Jury System,” The Gavel, Summer 2002
“After the Trial is Over,” The Gavel, Spring 2002
“Enhancing Your Chances for Success in Law and Motion,” The Gavel, Winter 2001
“Show Me the Record,” Orange County Lawyer, December 1999
“Filing the Notice of Appeal in Civil Actions,” Orange County Lawyer, May 1996
“Law and Motion: An Insider’s View,” Orange County Lawyer, July 1996
“Retaining Appellate Counsel,” Directory of Free-Lance Professionals, Nov. 1994-Jan. 1995
“Parents and Teenagers, Rights and Responsibilities: Law,” Dawn Magazine, August 1980
“Parental Rights and Responsibilities,” Dawn Magazine, April 1980
“Subchapter S Corporations,” Woman Entrepreneur Report, April 1979
“Homesteads,” Dawn Magazine, March 1979
PUBLISHED CASES
Sharifpour v. Le (2014) 223 Cal.App.4th 730 [167 Cal.Rptr.3d 422]
Estate of Trikha (2013) 219 Cal.App.4th 791 [162 Cal.Rptr.3d 175]
Littlefield v. County of Humboldt (2013) 218 Cal.App.4th 243 [159 Cal.Rptr.3d 731]
Brown v. Mid-Century Insurance Company (2013) 215 Cal.App.4th 841 [156 Cal.Rptr.3d 56]
Mooney v. County of Orange (2013) 212 Cal.App.4th 865 [151 Cal.Rptr.3d 469] 5
Plotnik v. Meihaus (2012) 208 Cal.App.4th 1590 [146 Cal.Rptr.3d 585]
Entazampour v. North Orange County Community College Dist. (2010) 190 Cal.App.4th 832 [118 Cal.Rptr.3d 585]
Presta v. Tepper (2009) 179 Cal.App.4th 909 [102 Cal.Rptr.3d 12]
Nguyen-Lam v. Cao (2009) 171 Cal.App.4th 858 [90 Cal.Rptr.3d 205]
Freedman v. Superior Court (2008) 166 Cal.App.4th 198 [82 Cal.Rptr.3d 563]
Dobos v. Voluntary Plan Administrators, Inc. (2008) 166 Cal.App.4th 678 [82 Cal.Rptr.3d 900]
Bernard v. Foley (2006) 39 Cal.4th 794 [47 Cal.Rptr.3d 248]
Estate of Myers, In re (2006) 139 Cal.App.4th 434 [42 Cal.Rptr.3d 753]
Johnson v. Ford Motor Co. (2005) 35 Cal.4th 1191 [29 Cal.Rptr.3d 401]
John Y. v. Chaparral Treatment Center, Inc. (2002) 101 Cal.App.4th 565 [124 Cal.Rptr.2d 330]
Guardianship of Kassandra H. (1998) 64 Cal.App.4th 1228 [75 Cal.Rptr.2d 668]
Hufft v. Horowitz (1992) 4 Cal.App.4th 8 [5 Cal.Rptr.2d 377]
La Jolla Village Homeowner’s Association v. Superior Court (1989) 212 Cal.App.3d 1131 [261 Cal.Rptr. 146]
Pressler v. Irvine Drugs, Inc. (1985) 169 Cal.App.3d 1244 [215 Cal.Rptr. 807]
White v. County of Orange (1985) 166 Cal.App.3d 566 [212 Cal.Rptr. 493]
In re Marriage of Golden (1981) 123 Cal.App.3d 567 [176 Cal.Rptr. 807]
BOOKS
An Appeal to Reason (2011) Bench Press Publishing
California Summary Judgment and Related Termination Motions (2006) The Rutter Group
1980 Supplement to California Mechanic’s Lien Law Handbook, M. Marsh, Parker and Sons Publications
6
SEMINARS AND SPEAKING ENGAGEMENTS
"How to Win Your Appeal at Trial," 2012 Belli Seminar, Santa Clara County Trial Lawyers Association, September 2012
"Real Estate Issues in Medical Marijuana Law," OCBA, September 2012
"Storytelling in Case Presentation," Lex Romana, Tustin, October 2012
"How to Win Your Appeal at Trial," Lex Romana, Sicily, April 2012
“Hot Topics: Court of Appeal,” OCTLA, Tustin, March 2009
“Anti-SLAPP Motions,” OCBA’s Last Dash, Costa Mesa, January 2009
“Summary Judgment and other Motions to Terminate Civil Cases,” The Rutter Group, Costa Mesa, April 2008
“Civil Writs,” The Rutter Group, San Francisco and Los Angeles, November 2006
“Law and Motion: From Pleading to Summary Judgment,” 2nd Annual California Regional TLA Conference, Santa Barbara, June 2006
“Rule I-400 and the Appellate Practitioner: Ethics of Marketing and Solicitation,” OCBA’s Appellate Section, February 2006
“Basic Appellate Procedure,” OCBA’s Last Dash, Costa Mesa, January 2005
“Ethics in Appellate Advocacy,” CAOC’s Annual Convention, Los Angeles, November 2005
“Appellate Procedure,” Hispanic Bar’s 20th Annual Mexico Seminar, Puerta Vallarta, May 2005
“Oops, I forgot to Object (or, How Not to Lose your Appeal at Trial),” CAOC, Beaver Creek, Colorado, February 2005
“College of Appellate Advocacy,” Chair, Moderator, and panelist (“Briefwriting and Oral Argument”), Costa Mesa, CA, November 2004
“Appellate Mediation,” Western State University (Mediation Class), Fullerton, California, June 2004.
“Overview of 17200 Claims,” Bridgeport Continuing Education, Biltmore Hotel, Los Angeles, California, April 2004 “(At Least) 10 Things You Should Know before Filing a Writ Petition with the Court of Appeal,” OCBA’s Last Dash, Whittier Law School, Costa Mesa, California, January, 2004
“Opposing Motions for Summary Judgment,” Consumer Attorneys of Los Angeles, Las Vegas Convention, September 2003 7
“Tort Litigation Practice and Procedure: Internet Investigative and Research Techniques,” Consumer Attorneys of Los Angeles, Omni Los Angeles Hotel, April 2003
“How Not to Lose Your Case at Trial,” Orange County Bar Association, Tahiti, Sept. 2002
“Ten Things You Should Know Before Filing a Writ Petition,” Celtic Bar Association, Adare Manor, Ireland 2002
“Ten Things You Should Know Before Filing Your Writ Petition,” Orange County Trial Lawyers Association, Tustin, California, September 2002
“Briefwriting,” Hispanic Bar Association, Costa Rica, 2001
“Effective Law and Motion,” Hispanic Bar Association’s 16th Annual Mexico Seminar, Cancun, Mexico, May 2001
“Do’s and Don’ts before the Court of Appeal,” Hispanic Bar Association, Aruba, 2000
PROFESSIONAL AFFILIATIONS
Orange County Bar Association, Board of Directors, Director at Large, 2003-2004
Orange County Bar Association, Education Committee, 2003-2004
Orange County Bar Association, Administration of Justice Committee – 2003-2004
Orange County Bar Association, Appellate Section, Chair, 2003
Orange County Bar Association, Appellate Section, Program Chair, 2002
Orange County Trial Lawyers, Board of Directors – 2001 to 2004. Awarded Board Member of the Year for 2003
AWARDS
Presidential Award of Merit, CAOC, November 2005
Distinguished Service Award, CAALA, April 2003
Board Member of the Year, OCTLA, 2003
SuperLawyer 2007-2021
8
AARON W. HEISLER
Aaron Heisler is a Senior Research Attorney with the Superior Court of California, County of Orange.
In his 9 years with the court, Mr. Heisler has researched, analyzed, and made recommendations on thousands of motions and petitions submitted for hearing before judges on the court’s Unlimited Civil, Complex Civil, and Probate / Mental Health panels.
Additionally, Mr. Heisler has presided as a temporary judge over more than 300 calendars in civil and probate departments. For the last 3.5 years, he has called the weekly law and motion calendar for the Probate / Mental Health Division.
Before joining the Court, Mr. Heisler was an Associate with the law firm of Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton for approximately 6.5 years, with a practice emphasizing general civil litigation and labor and employment matters. Before that, Mr. Heisler litigated civil and criminal matters as an Associate with the law firm of Sanger & Swysen.
Mr. Heisler received his J.D. from the UCLA School of Law and his B.A. from the University of California, Santa Barbara.