The Docket Historical Archives 11-1-1984 The Docket, Issue 3, November 1984 Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/docket Recommended Citation "The Docket, Issue 3, November 1984" (1984). The Docket. 109. https://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/docket/109 This 1984-1985 is brought to you for free and open access by the Historical Archives at Villanova University Charles Widger School of Law Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in The Docket by an authorized administrator of Villanova University Charles Widger School of Law Digital Repository. i la -J - THE E M ,.4 I sirt. \k Vol. XXI, No. 3 DOCKETTHE VILLANOVA SCHOOL OF LAW November, 1984 Judge Aldisert Speaks at VLS Conference by Michael T. McGrath must rely on the oral argument to get its Ruggero J. Aldisert, Chief Judge of the initial bearings on a case. United States Court of Appeals for the Judge Aldisert noted that Justice Felix Third Circuit, delivered a speech on appel­ Frankfurter of the U.S. Supreme Court late advocacy at Villanova Law School Sep­ never read a brief until he had heard oral tember 25. argument in the case. The Judge explained Judge Aldisert's presentation, sponsored that the Third Circuit is a "hot" court and by the Villanova Moot Court Board, fol­ that briefs are usually read six to eight lowed the conclusion of the first Penn­ weeks before oral argument. He said that sylvania Appellate Judicial Conference state courts are more likely to be "cold" held at Villanova Law School. After his courts. speech, Judge Aldisert answered questions Judge Aldisert mentioned that his own from the audience. procedure is to read the brief himself and Named to the Third Circuit in 1968, write a memo setting forth issues and a Judge Aldisert is recognized as one of the probable disposition. He then passes most nation's foremost experts in judicial ad­ of the briefs on to his clerks for considera­ ministration and process. He has been ad­ tion. "I take briefs with me and read them junct Professor of Law at the University of wherever I am. 1 read a lot of briefs in Pittsburgh since 1964. He has also written airports. My time is limited, and I rarely am numerous books and articles on subjects able to read briefs in a distraction-free set­ ranging from judicial administration to ting, so my initial impression is critical," professional responsibility. Judge Aldisert said the Judge. is also Chairman of the Federal Appellate Judge Aldisert firmly believes that a good Judges Conference. brief should contain three points, and no Judge Aldisert's speech covered three more than five. At the same time, he said areas: brief writing, "psyching" a court, that lawyers usually try to compress as and oral argument. many points as they can into briefs. Judge Aldisert makes a point at the recent Appellate Judicial Conference held at Garey Hall. Brief writing is the most important as­ A brief containing seven points or more pect of appellate advocacy, according to the triggers the Judge's "Aldisert Presump­ courts are courts of limited perception in peal," said Judge Aldisert. Judge. He asserted that cases generally are tion" that none of the points are any good. the common law tradition, and they can The Judge outlined the difference be­ won or lost at this stage, regardless of the Explaining why a brief doesn't need several make no inquiries as to facts'. This con­ tween the skills of a good trial advocate and advocate's skills in oral argument. points, thejudge said that a case is usually trasts with civil law, where the first appel­ a good appellate advocate. "The trial lawy­ To explain his point, Judge Aldisert dis­ reversed on only one issue, and never on late court may review facts and take new er's job is to persuade the factfinder to re­ tinguished between "hot" courts, which more than two. testimony. turn with facts supporting his point of have read and considered the briefs care­ Judge Aldisert said that it was important "Under the Seventh Amendment, facts view. The appellate advocate must per­ fully before hearing oral argument, and for the advocate to understand and set ' found by a jury may not be disturbed upon suade a panel of judges that there has been "cold" courts, which usually read the forth for the court the standard of review appeal. If the litigant loses on the facts at an error by the trial court. And all trial briefs after oral argument, and therefore, for each issue. This is because appellate trial, of the time he'll also lose on ap- judges err sometimes,']^ ^—^'Judge AJdisert next^discussed the tri- chotemy in the nature of appellate review. IN MEMORIUM "There are issues that tangentially refer to facts, issues that refer to the trial court's On Saturday, September 22, 1984, VLS discrkion, and issues of pure law," he ex­ suffered a great loss. Ed Huber was killed plained. Judge Aldisert again reaffirmed in an automobile accident. The accident occurred in Boston, Ed's hometown, where the necessity of giving the court the proper he had returned to attend the wedding of a scope or standard of review. college friend. Judge Aldisert characterized tangential Eddie was a member of the second year fact review as an argument over "ultimate class-active in SBA and on the Honor facts-mixed questions of fact and law." To Board. He was loved and respected by all illustrate his point. Judge Aldisert used as who were fortunate enough to know him. an example a situation where a car runs The impact Ed had on his colleagues is apparent: "Friends of Ed Huber" have or­ through a red light at seventy miles per ganized to set up an "Ed Huber Memorial hour. "Is he negligent? The jury may decide Scholarship Fund." A, recipient will be that as a matter of fact the driver is negli­ chosen from the first year class, by his or gent. If the trial court agrees that it is a her own peers, based on leadership and question of fact, then the jury's deter­ need. mination is not reviewable. The "Friends" hope to raise $5000. in­ itially for the fund. They are sponsoring a Focusing on the role of the lawyers in car wash and a party to raise money. In such a case. Judge Aldisert said, "the ap­ addition. Phi Delta Phi will donate the pro­ pellant's counsel will argue that there is a ceeds of the Fun Run (to be held in April) to question of law here. A good lawyer for the the scholarship fund. Anyone wishing to appellee will argue that it is a question of make a contribution to the fund should con­ fact." tact Fred Levin or Tricia Buck. Harold Gill Reuschlein: Dean Emeritus. Ed was a dear person who made the halls In trying to convince the appellate court of VLS a little brighter. He will be greatly First Dean of VLS to reverse on discretionary grounds. Judge missed. Aldisert warned against the danger of dis­ guising the issue simply as a question of Reuschlein Returns For Visit law. "The appellate court won't ignore the by Jill Aline Cheilik Notre Dame for a year. From there he lower court. You must convince the appel­ i Harold Gill Reuschlein has a wonderful moved on to Syracuse for one year, and late court that the trial court abused its Ul smile. All you have to do is tap him on the then to the University of Pittsburgh for five discretion (on areas such as evidentiary in shoulder and he turns around and grins years. While at the University of Pitts­ questions , injunctions and requests for a 2 - s9 6 like he'd won a million dollars only yester­ burgh, he revised the Public Health Code new trial). day. Reuschlein is the Dean Emeritus of for the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. "In questions of law, there is plenary s ^ I E I VLS, and after a long absence, he has re­ Then, in 1953, he came here to Villanova to review," said Judge Aldisert. "You try to «« =£ & 3 > e turned to the area with his wife to live start the law school. ("You know," he inter­ persuade the court to accept your concept I permanently. He has had a long and illus­ jects at this point, having just recited the of the proper law. You have to convince the trious career, and now, at age 79, he is still previous background information, "We all appellate court that it has complete author­ going strong. He attended college at the like to blow our own horns. We can pretend ity in the instant case to substitute its judg­ University of Iowa and then went to Yale you got this out of 'Who's Who in America', ment for that of the trial court." He also Law School. He received his S.J.D. (which but, ..." and he continues with his back­ emphasized that brevity and getting to the he calls the "law teacher's Ph.D.") at Cor­ ground info.) point quickly are crucial in these situa­ nell University. He had his first teaching He is extremely proud of bringing the tions. o job before he attended law school; as a pro­ Order of the Coif to VLS, the first Catholic At this point, Judge Aldisert explained fessor of history at New York University. law school to receive it. Dean Reuschlein three situations the lawyer may face. "You o§ After receiving his degrees, Reuschlein has also been knighted by two popes; the should focus on the conflict between the (/) at taught at Georgetown full-time for eight Knight of St.