Persuasive Appellate Brief Writing (WA) (Recorded Package and OnDemand Streaming)

What You Will Learn

Tuesday, March 19, 2024
1:00 p.m. – 4:30 p.m. Pacific Time
(Including Break)
Two-Part Webinar

1:00 p.m. – 1:20 p.m. 
Being Aware of the Audience for the Submission
Philip Talmadge

• Motions for Discretionary Review (RAP 2.3)
• Merits Briefs – Court of Appeals/Supreme Court
• Petitions for Review (RAP 13.4)
• Motions for Reconsideration/Publication

1:20 p.m. – 1:50 p.m. 
Selecting the Issues on Appeal
Cynthia Jones

• Not all issues raised in the trial court can, or should, be argued on appeal
• How should counsel select the issues?
• Creating your Checklist

1:50 p.m. – 2:35 p.m. 
Building Blocks to an Effective Appellate Pleading
Hon. Tracy A. Staab and Hon. Aurora Bearse

• Persuasive (and efficient!) analysis structure
  • How do you want our analysis to go?
  • CREAC/IREAC
  • Common mistakes brief writers make in the “explanation of the rule” and “application” portions of the analysis
  • How to efficiently address counter-arguments
  • RAP format requirements/court best practices

2:35 p.m. – 2:50 p.m.
Break

2:50 p.m. – 4:00 p.m.
Convincing The Court to Want to Rule in Your Favor
Hon. Hailey Landrus and Hon. Jennifer Koh

• Using fundamental principles as persuasive tools—yet another checklist
• The hard part: Tips for predicting what concerns judges might have with your argument and then addressing those concerns
• A strong first impression: Roadmap for an effective introduction

4:00 p.m. – 4:30 p.m. 
Ethical Issues in Brief Writing
Philip Talmadge

• Ethical obligations under RPC 3.1/RAP 18.9(a)
• Client explanation of issues on appeal
• RPC 3.3 requirements regarding citing authorities and extra-record material

Thursday, March 21, 2024
1:00 p.m. – 4:00 p.m. Pacific Time
(Including Break)
Two-Part Webinar

The schedule below is listed to give you an idea of what will be covered in the exercises and throughout the day. The exact start and stop times of each exercise may vary, depending on how the day goes and how much attendee participation occurs.

Faculty:  Hon. Hailey Landrus, Hon. Jennifer Koh, Sidney Tribe

1:00 p.m. – 1:30 p.m.
Faculty to Outline the Program and Case 

1:30 p.m. – 1:35 p.m.
Attendees to Draft an Introduction

1:35 p.m.  1:50 p.m.
Faculty to Review/Discuss Ideal Introduction from Example

1:50 p.m. – 2:05 p.m.
BREAK 

2:00 p.m. – 2:15 p.m.
Faculty to Review/Discuss Ideal Argument Headings

2:15 p.m. –2:30 p.m.
Attendees to Draft Persuasive Argument Headings

2:30 p.m. – 2:40 p.m.
Faculty to Review/Discuss Argument Headings 

2:40 p.m. – 2:50 p.m.
BREAK  

2:50 p.m. – 3:05 p.m.
Faculty to Discuss: Argument

     A. Standard and Scope of Review
     B. Citing and Using Authority

3:05 p.m. – 3:30 p.m.
Writing Tips 

3:30 p.m. – 3:40 p.m.
Drafting the Conclusion 

3:40 p.m. – 3:50 p.m.
Reply Briefs 

3:50 p.m. – 4:00 p.m.
Final Questions

Testimonials

“Excellent program, excellent speakers. Very educational program. Learned some new skills and techniques.” – Dan Young, Esq.

“I found it very useful and informative and thought the time was used well.” – Ashleen O’Brien, Esq.

“Very informative and helpful. I enjoyed a more in-depth view of the brief writing (and reading) process.” – Sophia Palmer, Esq.

“Very informative and think that getting many different judges’ perspectives is really helpful to get a better idea of the reader and what is effective for that reader. A lot of good stuff. I really enjoy the focus on the basics. Can forget a lot of the smaller things – but they make such a huge difference in being a better writer.” – Ryan Pittman, Esq.

“Extremely useful, presenters are obviously knowledgeable, experienced, and skilled. Very worthwhile and informative.” – Ben Milgrom, Esq.

“Informative. Helpful to have feedback from judges regarding what they like to see. Learned more about strategy and starting out from scratch on appellate briefs. Very helpful in terms of strategies, particularly in drafting reply briefs when opposing counsel might tend to mess with the flow of the case.” – Peter Durland, Esq.

“This program felt very informative and easy to follow along with. I do a large majority of the appellate writing at my office and learned several tips I had not considered.” – Chloe Grundmeier, Esq.

“Excellent presentation, with great tips and practical advice from the panelists.” – Michael H. Jones, Esq.

“The program was really great. I took away several useful tools that I will employ in my practice on a regular basis. The presentations were very informative and not repetitive of other legal writing trainings I have received.” – Lauren R. Kirigin, Esq.

“Absolutely excellent presentations and substance. Excellent and highly informative even for those of us who appear before appellate courts regularly.” – Duana Kolouskova, Esq.

“It was very helpful and the tips and tricks were beneficial.” – Elena Gutbrod, Esq.

“Very helpful, practical. I am already using many of the tips.” – Tami Arntzen, Esq.

“The interactive writing workshop was packed with information and provided many tips that I’ll be applying in my writing.” – Isaac Prevost, Esq.

“It was very informative. This program was really well done. Great presentations.” – Whitman Koch, Esq.

“Thought it was great and informative, nice to get a glimpse behind the veil from the commissioners.” – Michael Tracy, Esq.

“It was very informative and as a new attorney gave me the basic building blocks I need.”

“Overall, very good. Phil Talmadge in particular provides very useful information.”

“Overall, the topics covered flow together well, and the level of detail is excellent for each section.”

“Very informative. Good format with questions and answers. The speakers were very knowledgeable and had information that I can incorporate into my writing immediately.”

“Very informative, and extremely helpful for organizing my approach to appellate briefing. I needed advice and practical tips on organization and persuasive principles or tools (analytic approaches). Also, the ethics section was really informative.”

“Part 1 was very helpful in that it provided examples of the tips and recommendations given by the speakers. As a newer attorney just getting started in appellate work this CLE was beneficial in hearing from ‘the appellate audience’ what is and isn’t actually persuasive.”

“Helpful and covered good content.”

“The program materials were good and I appreciated comments from appellate judges.”

“Truly excellent. I haven’t had a better CLE.”

“Good content.”

“In general, this was very informative and entertaining. Worth the money. I’m a beginner to the appellate field so it was good to have a broad overview.”

“Very informative and helpful.”

“Very informative.”

“Great presenters who provided info that was easy to understand and could see myself applying their advice.”

“Informative and interesting.”

“The program provided very useful tools to work with to improve my briefing.”

“Day 1 in particular had very useful, helpful information.”

“I benefitted from the hands-on approach to today’s presentation. Also helped to see how others tackled the writing assignments.”

“I found this day insightful, especially the few presentations.”

“Overall, very good.”

“Very helpful!”

“Overall helpful.”

“Thank you and the presenters for the program.”

“Good tips, insight into what the court wants to see.”

“I was able to put some of the information and ideas to use immediately to improve a brief I’m filing tomorrow.”

“Was exposed to a lot of information that will be helpful.”

“I liked the detail on the substance of the brief. especially when it came down to the organization.”

“I thought the speakers were wonderful, and I appreciated the enthusiasm, kindness, and candor.” – Madilyn Bates, Esq.

“I really liked the subject matter and thought the speakers were excellent!” – Alexandra Manno, Esq.

“Well organized, great delivery, concise and informative material. Thank you!” – Melody Claire Tucker, Esq.

“I am especially grateful for time and valuable insights from the two judges on the panel.  I appreciate their willingness to continue to help train bar members to do a better job for our clients (and side benefit to make their jobs easier).  Their perspective was particularly invaluable.”

“Loved the topics, the clear examples, and how knowledgeable the speakers were.” –Sydney Phillips, Esq.

“This was incredibly helpful for me. The examples given in the case study helped me understand the advice being given; a lot of times you know you can do something better, but don’t know exactly how, so I appreciated being shown some examples of how.”

“It was a good program. Helpful to hear a judge’s perspective.” – Ashley Karlstad, Esq.

“It was useful and provided a good discussion of fundamental issues in appellate advocacy.”

“Very, very helpful. I appreciated the specific tips and suggestions, materials to refer back to, and interactive exercise to apply what we learn.”

“Excellent program and excellent speakers.” – Kelly J. Faust Sovar, Esq.

“The program itself was great, precisely as advertised, and great speakers with inside information about appellate processes.”

“The thematic checklist is an excellent tool.” – David Spellman, Esq.

“Incredible panel and presentation of material.” – Kirsten A. Schultz, Esq.

“I thought it was very practical. I appreciated the segment where we reviewed two briefs and an opinion together to identify application of the fundamental principles.”

“Love that it was a half day and that you had very high-level speakers.” – Pamela Rohr, Esq.

“Kudos to the speakers for taking the time to be well organized and coordinated.  Almost seamless!”

“All the speakers were excellent.  I particularly appreciated the two judges, who were excellent and had put a lot of effort into their preparation.”

“I appreciated the speakers’ willingness to give specific advice and examples.  Great panel!”

“Quality presentations.” – Todd Renda, Esq.

“High quality!” – Dennis Morgan, Esq.

“There were some great pearls of wisdom, I particularly liked Judge Glasgow’s framework of core values/fundamentals.”

“It was a very good program.  Always good to hear Phil Talmadge.”

“Great topics, presentation, and speakers.”

“The speakers were all fantastic.”

“Great program; good speakers.”

“Just fantastic. Thank you!”

“Great work!”

“Very helpful.”

“Very well-run, right pace, good differing opinions and references to mtls.”

“Great speakers, it was highly informative and well prepared.”

“Speakers were great.”

“Informative program. Great speakers.”

“Very informative, I enjoyed it and learned a lot.”

“Great program!”

“Good job on general concepts.”

“It was great!”

“Good flow, good timing, exceptional speakers.”

“The examples of the briefs in the GMA case were really helpful.”

“Great speakers and good content.”

“Excellent.”

“Wonderful program.”

“Excellent program.”

Faculty

Hon. Tracy A. Staab
Appellate Judge
Washington State Court of Appeals, Division III

 Judge Tracy Staab was elected to the Court of Appeals, Division III in 2020 and took office in January 2021.

Judge Staab graduated cum laude from the University of Puget Sound (now Seattle University) School of Law in 1993. She clerked for Judge Stephen Brown of Division III. She spent the early part of her career in private practice before becoming a public defender, first with the City of Spokane and then with the Federal Defenders. As a Federal Defender, Judge Staab focused on appellate work primarily before the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.

In 2009, Judge Staab was selected as one of the first Spokane Municipal Court Judges, along with Judge Mary Logan and Judge Shelley Szambelan. The three judges developed the new court with the goal of using evidence-based practices with demonstrated results. Within a few short years, the court earned local, regional, and national recognition for its innovative therapeutic courts. Judge Staab worked as a judge on Spokane Municipal Court for twelve years until she was elected to the Court of Appeals.

Hon. Aurora R. Bearse
Commissioner
Washington Court of Appeals, Division II

Commissioner Aurora R. Bearse was appointed as a Court Commissioner for Division Two of the Court of Appeals, effective May 1, 2012. Prior to her appointment, Commissioner Bearse served as an administrative law judge for the Washington State Office of Administrative Hearings. She has also served as a staff attorney for Division Two of the Court of Appeals, as an assistant appellate federal public defender in the Fifth Circuit, as an associate attorney at Weil, Gotshal & Manges (New York and Houston offices), and as a judicial law clerk for Judge Robert R. Beezer (9th Circuit) and Judge William H. Walls (DNJ).

Commissioner Bearse graduated with honors from Rutgers-Newark School of Law. She was the senior articles editor of the Rutgers Law Review. She holds a bachelor’s degree in Religion & History from Rutgers University. She currently is a volunteer judicial member of the WSBA’s Access to Justice Board Rules Committee. Before joining Division Two, she served as president and executive board member of the Seattle Children’s Autism Guild, an all-volunteer organization that raises funds for the Autism Center at Seattle Children’s Hospital. She continues to volunteer with various autism-related organizations to support people with autism and their families.

Hon. Jennifer D. Koh
Commissioner
Washington State Court of Appeals, Division I

Commissioner Jennifer D. Koh was appointed by the Court of Appeals Division One, effective March 2, 2020. Before her appointment, Commissioner Koh focused on appellate practice as Of Counsel with Fain Anderson Vanderhoef Rosendahl O’Halloran Spillane PLLC, served as a staff attorney for Division I, practiced as a trial and appellate attorney in municipal public defense and other criminal and civil matters with a small Seattle law firm, and worked as an associate attorney in employment, education, and labor law in the Bellevue office of a large Seattle firm. Commissioner Koh graduated from the Yale Law School and holds a bachelor’s degree in political science from the University of Washington. Commissioner Koh grew up in West Seattle, where she lives with her husband and three children.

Hon. Hailey Landrus
Commissioner
Washington State Court of Appeals, Division III

Commissioner Hailey Landrus serves as a court commissioner at Division III of the Washington State Court of Appeals.  Before she became a judicial officer, Commissioner Landrus practiced general civil litigation, taking on a broad range of cases in areas of law including appellate, family, juvenile dependency, business/partnership, real property, administrative, guardianship, probate, employment, and insurance subrogation, while also doing simple estate planning work.  She recently returned to Division III where she began her legal career as a judicial law clerk for now-retired Judge Dennis J. Sweeney.  Commissioner Landrus is a graduate of Seattle University School of Law and Washington State University. 

Cynthia B. Jones, Esq.
Founder
Jones Legal Group, LLC

Jones Legal Group, LLC is headed by Cynthia B. Jones, a dedicated legal professional well-versed in appellate practice and litigation. Cynthia concentrates her practice on civil and criminal appeals and civil litigation, including constitutional and criminal cases in federal and state courts.

Ms. Jones was appointed by the Western District of Washington United States District Court to serve a three-year term as Lawyer Representative to the Ninth Circuit. Lawyer Representatives are chosen to serve three-year terms representing attorneys practicing in each of the Ninth Circuit’s 15 districts in nine western states and two Pacific Island jurisdictions. In 2022, she was elected Vice Chair of the Ninth Circuit Lawyer Representative Coordinating Committee (LRCC) 2022-2025 and will serve on the Judicial Conference Executive Committee (CEC) during her term as Vice Chair of the LRCC.

Philip Talmadge, Esq.
Founder
Talmadge/Fitzpatrick

Phil Talmadge is a former Washington Supreme Court Justice. 

He is a member of the American Academy of Appellate Lawyers and the Washington State Appellate Lawyers Association.  Phil has been named Super Lawyer in Washington Law & Politics and was a Washington State Senator. 

He practices exclusively in the areas of Appellate Law and Attorney Ethics.  Phil received his B.A. from Yale University and his J.D. from the University of Washington and has been an attorney since 1976.

Sidney C. Tribe, Esq.

Carney Badley Spellman, P.S.

Sidney grew up in Spokane and Seattle, and graduated magna cum laude from Willamette University in 1994 with a B.A. in English Literature. At Willamette she was a G. Herbert Smith Scholar and two-time recipient of the Dona Adams Rothwell Award. She received her J.D. from the University of Washington in 2002, where she was Executive Articles Editor of the Washington Law Review and President of the Moot Court Honor Board. She is also a member of the Order of the Barristers.

Sidney was fortunate to serve as a law clerk for the Honorable William Baker at the Washington State Court of Appeals Division I from 2005 to 2007. Before joining Carney Badley Spellman, she was a partner at Talmadge/Fitzpatrick focusing primarily on appellate practice. 

Sidney is a member of the Washington State Bar Association, the King County Bar Association, the Washington Employment Lawyers Association, and Washington Women Lawyers.  She has done pro bono work for the Unemployment Law Project, the King County Bar Association Newcomer’s Project, and the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals Pro Bono Program.  She has also been a Director at Facing the Future, a nonprofit that helps teachers integrate global issues into their core curriculum.  Sidney’s incredible husband Mick is a geographer/GIS business analyst, and they have two adorable dogs, Tazzy and Jake.

Fees

Three Recorded Package options to choose from:

Video (with sound)* Recording & Materials Package – CD or Download:  $429

Audio Only* Recording & Materials Package – CD or Download:  $429

Order both the Video* and Audio Only* Packages for only $50 more – CD or Download:  $479

For CDs, please add $8.50 shipping and, in CA, sales tax.

This program was recorded live on March 19 & 21, 2024

*The Video recording is a video of the webinar (with sound). The Audio recording is audio only, for those who wish to listen to it without visuals (such as in the car).

Note: All downloads must be downloaded to a computer first, before transferring them to another device. 

On-Demand Streaming with Materials is also available now – $429

CLE Credit

WA General: This program is approved for 5.75 units of general CLE in Washington (Expires: 03/18/29).
WA Ethics: This program is approved for 0.50 Ethics units (Expires: 03/18/29).

OR General: This program is approved for 5.25 units of General CLE in Oregon.
OR Ethics: This program is approved for 0.50 Ethics units.

CA General:  This program is approved for 6.25 units of general CLE in California.
CA Ethics: Approved for 0.50 Ethics units.

NY General: This course is eligible for approval, under New York’s CLE Approved Jurisdiction policy, for 6.00 CLE units. Pincus Professional Education is a CA Accredited Provider, which is a NY approved jurisdiction. See Section 6 of the New York State CLE Board Regulations and Guidelines for further information.