9th Annual Advanced Appellate Practice (WA) (OnDemand Streaming and Recorded Packages)

What You Will Learn

Agenda

Part 1: Tuesday November 19th, 2024
1:00 p.m. – 4:45 p.m. PST

Part 1 Practitioners Speaking:  Ian Cairns, Rory Cosgrove, Shannon Kilpatrick and Karl Smith
Part 1 Judges and Commissioners Speaking: Hon. Linda Coburn, Hon. Lori Smith and Commissioner Hailey Landrus

1:00 p.m. – 2:05 p.m.
Discretionary Review
Ian Cairns with Hon. Lori Smith and Commissioner Hailey Landrus commenting

• Discretionary review versus appeal as a matter of right
• Procedure for seeking discretionary review under RAP 2.3
• How to persuasively argue for and against discretionary review

2:05 p.m. – 2:10 p.m.
BREAK 

2:10 p.m. – 3:10 p.m.
Preservation and Other Circumstances that Affect the Scope of Review
Rory Cosgrove and Shannon Kilpatrick with Hon. Linda Coburn Commenting

• Raising new issues on appeal
• Jurisdictional issues
• Mootness
• Standing
• Judicial notice
  • Legislative history
• New arguments on preserved issues
  • If legal
  • In the absence of prejudice
• Questions of law on undisputed facts
  • To facilitate affirmance
  • Discretionary
• Evidentiary issues
• Instructional issues
• Insufficiency of the evidence
• Inconsistent jury verdicts

3:10 p.m. – 3:20 p.m.
BREAK

3:20 p.m. – 3:50 p.m.
On Second Thought: A Judicial Perspective
Hon. Linda Coburn and Hon. Lori Smith

• Statement of Additional Authorities
  • Determining and discussion the subject
  • New cases
  • Your argument

• Motion for Reconsideration
  • Providing specifics
  • What can you do that is not just a briefing argument repeat?
  • Answers and replys – when do you do them?
  • Why judges might deny the motion but still withdraw and resubmit the opinion.

• Motions to Publish
  • Why will a judge say yes?

3:50 p.m. – 4:45 p.m.
Seeking Appellate Injunctive Relief: Best Practices
Karl Smith and Commissioner Hailey Landrus

• Understand the wide scope of appellate injunctive relief, including lesser-known motions
• Hear best practices and lessons learned
• Learn what commissioners find most (and least) persuasive
• Come away with a clear understanding of each step of the process

Part 2: Wednesday November 20th, 2024
1:00 p.m. – 4:45 p.m. PST

Part 2 Practitioners Speaking:  Philip Talmadge, Susan Gelmis, John Querio, Howard Goodfriend, Lila Silverstein and Cynthia Jones

Part 2 Judges: Hon. Kim McLane Wardlaw (9th Circuit) and Hon. Leonard Feldman (WA State Court of Appeals)

1:00 p.m. – 2:05 p.m.
Behind the Scenes at the 9^th Circuit
Hon. Kim McLane Wardlaw, John Querio and Susan Gelmis (Chief Deputy Clerk, Operations, Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals)

• Recent and upcoming rule changes
• New case management system (ACMS)
• Extensions policy update
• Remote hearings update
• Latest court statistics
• The court’s screening panel process
• The court’s motions panel process
• Internal processes for court mediations
• How clerks evaluate cases in chambers
• How judges prepare for oral argument
• Best/worst practices for briefing or argument

2:05 p.m. – 2:10 p.m.
BREAK

2:10 p.m. – 2:40 p.m.
How to Seek Federal Court Certification of Key State Law Issues
Philip Talmadge

• When certification to the Washington Supreme Court in a federal appeal is appropriate;
• Procedure for federal court certification;
• Washington Supreme Court’s handling of certified issues

2:40 p.m. – 3:10 p.m.
Seeking Direct Review From the Washington Supreme Court
Philip Talmadge

• When and how to seek direct review under RAP 4.2
• How does the WA Supreme Court handle direct review?
• What are the best practices for seeking direct Supreme Court review?

3:10 p.m. – 3:20 p.m.
BREAK

3:20 p.m. – 4:00 p.m.
Arguing Against the Grain: How to argue against stare decisis and how to argue against a petition for review when there is a split of authority
Hon. Leonard Feldman and Howard Goodfriend

• Is stare decisis dead, gravely ill, or “doing just fine, thank you”?
• When is stare decisis at its strongest or weakest?
• What tests and factors do courts use when considering reversing established precedent?
• What differences are there between WA and federal courts?
  What factors can be argued that review should not be granted despite a clear split in published case

4:00 p.m. – 4:45 p.m.
Amicus Briefs
Lila Silverstein and Cynthia Jones

• Who do you ask to file an Amicus Brief on behalf of your case?
• Why ask?
• Why do it?
• How do you become an amicus and support someone else’s case?
• Picking the right case
• Pitfalls
• Where can you find resources?
• Can you argue?
• Importance of Amicus to the discretionary appeal
• Getting your case into the WA supreme court
• The institutional amicus attorney

Testimonials

“Terrific presentation by all speakers.” – Eileen McKillop, Esq.

“Good content, very knowledgeable speakers, and valuable insight from the panelists.” – Desmond Browm, Esq.

“I would rate it as an excellent program.” – Frank W. Jenny. Esq.

“Great!” – Craig Wagner, Esq.

“Overall a fantastic program with a great vibe and specific, helpful pointers from many people who love the law and want to help others improve.” – Nathaniel Deakins, Esq.

“Excellent in all respects.” – Dan Young, Esq.

“It was a very informative and helpful program.” – Frank W. Jenny, Esq.

“Strong content, excellent speakers.” – Desmond Brown, Esq.

“Great program!  Thank you.” – Joshua Brower, Esq.

“Great speakers.” – Eileen McKillop, Esq.

“I found this very helpful and the presentations engaging.” – Peter Talevich, Esq.

“This is one of the best, if not the best, appellate CLEs I’ve participated in in a long time. I will pass the word along to other Colorado appellate lawyers.” – Nathaniel E. Deak, Esq.

“Excellent blend of experienced appellate advocates and judicial decision-makers. Makes the rules come alive and is truly informative.” – Gregory Miller, Esq.

“Very good seminar. High-level information provided.” – Scott Samuelson, Esq.

“This was the best CLE I’ve attended in recent memory. It ticked every box I wanted.” – Sharon Blackford, Esq.

“High-level appellate practice seminars with this level of trainers is hard to find.” – Michael Lynch, Esq.

“The program was great. Very good general advice for argument, and the panelists did a good job of wrapping in issues concerning Zoom arguments, etc.” – John P. Kinsey, Esq.

“Very useful, well-presented, excellent content. Very relevant. I used to work in appeals and now am a public defender. I love Pincus CLEs…Your CLEs are always well-organized, filled with useful and relevant content. I have attended others and really enjoyed them. Thank you.” – Anna Samuel, Esq.

“I really liked the oral argument presentations. They were practical and applicable regardless of jurisdiction.” – Brooke L. Bove, Esq.

“Valuable insight from the Court.” – Joseph Jackson, Esq.

“Very good. Excellent content and judicial perspective – very helpful and clear.” – Gregory Miller, Esq.

“My expectations were satisfied/exceeded. I really found this seminar to be enjoyable and useful.” – Tim Higgs, Esq.

“Very Satisfied.” – Christopher Graves, Esq.

“Helpful to hear from judges and commissioners.” – Jennifer Freeman, Esq.

“Excellent.” – Mark J. Carroll, Esq.

“I enjoyed all three sessions; they provided good information. The speakers were clear and to the point on their topics.” – William Jeffrey Davis, Esq.

“Excellent. Content covered matters hard to learn in written materials.” – Dan Young, Esq.

“All the Pincus events I’ve attended have been excellent. It’s very good. Excellent CLE.” – Anna Samuel, Esq.

“Very satisfied.” – Jonathan Tebbs, Esq.

“Speakers were all well prepared.” – Jason B. Saunders, Esq.

“Justice Gordon McCloud was excellent. She was engaging and very forthcoming with information regarding the inner workings of the court.” – Emily F. Dahl, Esq.

“Good job!” – Stephen K. Eugster, Esq.

“Excellent seminar. Great content.” – Christopher Kerley, Esq.

“Very satisfied…great program…Ken Masters taught good, masterful guru stuff. Highly relevant.” – Michael E. Johnston, Esq.

“My personal objectives were well satisfied because I have done a lot of appeal work.” – Jerome C. Scowcroft, Esq.

“Great program. I especially enjoyed the first panel because it was a little more boisterous, thanks to the amusing moderations by Mike King.” – Emily F. Dahl, Esq.

“I thought the speakers were well-versed in their areas of law and were very thorough in their explanations of the material they covered and their analysis of the law.” – Frank W. Jenny, Esq.

“Excellent program. Well-informed speakers.” – Joanna Valeri, Esq.

“The program was great – thought that it really brought a wealth of perspective into appellate practice and things to keep in mind.” – Brian Nadler, Esq.

“The practice pointers and insights were more than worth the day’s investment.”

“Great course. I’ve been to several day-long courses. This was the first where I wasn’t bored…Excellent course! The contrasting views of the ethics discussion was really great. It was an excellent way to address the topic.”

“Very qualified and knowledgeable pool of speakers!”

“Lived up to the ‘Advanced’ title of the CLE. Very satisfied.”

“The seminar is excellent. All topics were useful.”

“Very interesting and informative.”

“All of the speakers were outstanding.  So, were the materials.”

“Overall, good content and good presenters.”

“Good mix of the practical and abstract.”

“The first session was the best.”

“Loved the first panel on oral arguments – I learned so much. It was very valuable.”

“Great first day program, first speaker tandem was outstanding about specific tools for oral arguments and what is helpful to judges.”

“Excellent speakers and material.”

“I thought that all of the speakers were very effective and informative.”

“Very interesting.”

“I really enjoyed all the insight of the speakers.”

“The presentation about Appellate Court Briefing was extremely worthwhile and educational.  I learned a lot.”

“Excellent program, with excellent content and first-rate speakers.”

“The length of each section was good, and the depth of the material was excellent.”

“Outstanding program.  Thanks.”

“Extremely helpful content, and the speakers did a great job.”

“Excellent program.  Very impressive and engaging speakers and content.”

“Excellent speakers and material.”

“Overall, an excellent program.”

“The presentations were well prepared with very useful content. The choice of speakers was excellent.”

“These were really great speakers, clearly knowledgeable. It was great to hear from Judges and Commissioners.”

“Great program as usual.”

“It was very good. Michael King was great. Phil Talmadge was good.”

“All good, but particularly hearing from the judges, Phil Talmadge, and from Mike King.”

“Great as always. I think I have been to all seven.”

“Excellent program.”

“Great talk and kept it interesting.”

“The program was great – thought that it really brought a wealth of perspective into appellate practice and things to keep in mind.”

“Very helpful especially the insights by Judge Stephens.”

“Even having handled a number of appeals, I still learned a lot of new, excellent information.”

“The writing section in the morning was incredibly helpful.”

“Great conference. Fantastic content. Everything was relevant.”

“Good speakers, and good selection of them.”

“Learned new concepts for addressing issues.”

“The writing section in the morning was incredibly helpful. There are so few appellate trainings that apply to criminal practice. I was particularly excited this one addressed brief writing and oral argument. It was helpful to have Judge Stephens’ perspective – good information on how to present written argument to the court. Sidney Tribe offered concise and helpful information. Good information from the commissioners.”

“I really appreciated Judge Stephens’ input and perspective.”

“Great! Judge Stephens was the best speaker of the day with the most practical advice.”

“I’m always amazed by the clarity and helpfulness of Judge Stephens’ comments. Michael King was a great speaker for the afternoon. I’ve never been at a training where this specific topic (raising issues on appeal and issue selection) was addressed so specifically. Very helpful. I appreciated the depths that the presenters went into on these topics.”

“Very helpful CLE. I’m very thankful for the nuts and bolts comments describing what is helpful to judges.”

“Excellent course! Extremely useful insight from Judge Stephens. Michael King is an excellent speaker.”

“Judge Stephens’ insight was illuminating.”

“I loved this seminar and learned a lot.”

“Michael King is a great speaker.”

“Satisfied general knowledge and ‘behind the curtain’ information. Practice tips from the current justice were very useful. Very useful information on Critical Appellate Cases.”

“The seminar is excellent.”

“I wanted to learn more specifics and I did. Judge Stephens’ insights on practical matters were great. Phil Talmadge’s style was really good.”

“Very good appellate CLE.”

“Enjoyed the writing and oral argument sessions – very practical and useful.”

“Commissioner Bearse offered great input and practical information. I enjoyed her presentations. Commissioner Schmidt is informative and knowledgeable. Talmadge presents boring rules in an interesting, informative manner.”

“Lots of useful information and top quality speakers.”

“It was a very good CLE. Thank you.”

“This was a solid CLE that I enjoyed.”

“I received a lot of useful information. Judge Stephens and the Commissioners were very helpful. Solid advice from Ken Masters. Well-prepared.”

“Enjoyed the speakers and the content.”

“Today was excellent.”

“Interesting and mostly helpful topics.”

“I was impressed by the speakers I heard.”

“Excellent.”

“Very useful.”

“Very knowledgeable speaker.”

“Dynamic presentation.”

“Very helpful insights.”

“Very helpful.”

“Very practical and useful information.”

“Great ‘behind-the-scenes’ insight.”

“Judge Stephens’ portion of the CLE was the most insightful.”

“Michael King did a nice job moderating. Informative presentation.”

“John Strait gave very helpful, incisive comments regarding ethical aspects of non-record citation.”

Faculty

Hon Kim McLane Wardlaw
Judge
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Judge Kim McLane Wardlaw serves on the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. She was nominated by President William Jefferson Clinton on January 27, 1998. She was confirmed by the United States Senate on July 31, 1998, and appointed to the Court on August 3, 1998. Judge Wardlaw had previously served on the United States District Court for the Central District of California since January 3, 1996. Before joining the district court, she was a litigation partner of the international law firm O’Melveny & Myers, and was based in Los Angeles.There she enjoyed a general business litigation practice, with special emphases in intellectual property and media defense law. While in private practice, Judge Wardlaw served in various offices of the Women Lawyers Association of Los Angeles, the Women Lawyers Public Action Grant Foundation and the Association of Business Trial Lawyers, from which she resigned as an officer upon assuming the bench. Also while in private practice, Judge Wardlaw was involved in numerous community, political and governmental activities, taking leaves of absence from her practice to join the Clinton-Gore Presidential Transition Team, where she worked in the United States Justice Department, and serving as Mayor-elect Richard J. Riordan’s Government Liaison during his mayoral transition.

Judge Wardlaw graduated summa cum laude and Phi Beta Kappa from UCLA with an A.B. in Communication Studies in 1976. She obtained her J.D. in 1979 from UCLA Law School, where she was awarded Order of the Coif and named Outstanding Graduate of the Class of 1979. She was a legal extern during law school for the late Honorable Joseph T. Sneed, III of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit and upon graduation, clerked for Honorable William P. Gray of the United States District Court for the Central District of California.

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.

Hon. Lori K. Smith
Chief Judge
Washington State Court of Appeals, Division I

Judge Lori K. Smith was appointed by Governor Jay Inslee to the Court of Appeals in August 2018. Prior to her appointment, she was a King County Superior Court judge for over six years after having been a King County Superior Court commissioner for six years. While on the superior court, Judge Smith served as the Unified Family Court Chief Judge and served on various committees, including the Executive Committee, the Budget Committee and the Commissioner Selection Committee.

Judge Smith has been actively involved in efforts to improve the judicial system and is currently the co-chair of the Minority and Justice Commission’s Education Committee and the co-chair of the Gender and Justice Commission’s Tribal and State Court Consortium. She is also on the CCYJ Judicial Advisory Board. Judge Smith has taught at Judicial College and has been a presenter at numerous judicial conferences and other CLE programs. Throughout her career, Judge Smith has been involved in mentorship through minority bar associations, private organizations, the University of Washington School of Law and Seattle University School of Law. In 2011, along with her fellow King County Superior Court commissioners, Judge Smith received the King County Washington Women Lawyers Judge of the Year Award.

Hon. Linda W.Y. Coburn
Judge
Washington State Court of Appeals, Division I

Judge Linda W.Y. Coburn was elected to the Washington State Court of Appeals in November 2020 after 15 years at the trial court level either as a career public defender or a judge. She has been a member of the Washington State Supreme Court’s Minority and Justice Commission (MJC) since 2015, the same year she took the bench in Edmonds Municipal Court. She also served on the governing board of the District and Municipal Court Judges Association (DMCJA) from 2016 to 2020.

She led the effort in the creation of the Legal Financial Obligations Calculator as part of a Price of Justice Grant received by the MJC and has taught or presented on the topic of LFOs across the state and nationally. As a member of the DMCJA Diversity Committee, she regularly presented at the biennial pro tempore training event co-sponsored by the Washington State Bar Association. She also has served on the faculty of Judicial College in 2019-2020 and was a frequent presenter at statewide judicial conferences. She also served on the MJC’s Jury Diversity Task Force and the state Pretrial Reform Task Force. Judge Coburn most recently served on the state Supreme Court’s Gender and Justice Commission’s Study Advisory Committee. In 2018, she received the Asian Bar Association of Washington Judge of the Year Award.

Prior to becoming a judge, she was a career public defender. She previously clerked at Division One for the Honorable Stephen J. Dwyer and at Snohomish County Superior Court for the Honorable George N. Bowden. Judge Coburn spent 13 years prior to her legal career as a journalist. She graduated cum laude from Seattle University School of Law in 2005. She holds a bachelor’s degree in communications from the University of Washington and a master’s of science degree in journalism from Ohio University. She is an alum of the Radcliffe Publishing Procedures Course at Harvard University. 

Hon. Leonard J. Feldman, Esq.
Judge
Washington State Court of Appeals, Division I

Judge Leonard J. Feldman was appointed to the Washington Court of Appeals by Governor Jay Inslee in March 2023. Before joining the court, Judge Feldman practiced as a litigation attorney at Heller Ehrman (1992-2008), Stoel Rives (2008-14), and Peterson Wampold Rosato Feldman & Luna (2014-23). As an attorney, Judge Feldman focused on appellate practice before the Ninth Circuit and the Washington appellate courts. He was counsel of record and argued in the United States Supreme Court in City and County of San Francisco v. Sheehan (2015) and County of Los Angeles v. Mendez (2017). From 1991-92, he served as a law clerk to Judge Jerome Farris of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

Judge Feldman currently teaches torts at Seattle University School of Law. He was nominated to receive the Outstanding Faculty Award in 2021 and 2023 and is a co-author of Keeton, Sargentich, Keating, Fleming, and Feldman’s Tort and Accident Law (5th ed. 2023). He is also a frequent writer and speaker on topics relating to appellate practice. Among other articles, he has co-authored three articles with Washington Court of Appeals Judge Stephen Dwyer regarding appellate brief writing, oral argument, and discretionary review.

In 2006, Judge Feldman received the Washington State Bar Association’s Pro Bono Award for his work in appeals that raise important civil rights issues. He has also received two Certificates of Appreciation from the Ninth Circuit, one for his work as a District Coordinator for the Ninth Circuit Pro Bono Program and the other for teaching an appellate practice course at the University of Washington School of Law.

Judge Feldman received his undergraduate degree from the University of Washington in 1987. In 1991, he received his law degree from Harvard Law School, where he was twice awarded the Sears Prize (given to the top two students on the basis of grades) and graduated magna cum laude. Judge Feldman and his wife have lived most of their lives in the Seattle area, where they currently reside.

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. 

Susan V. Gelmis, Esq.
Chief Deputy Clerk, Operations
Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals

Susan Gelmis is the Chief Deputy Clerk for Operations at the Ninth Circuit. 

She has been with the court for over 30 years, previously serving as supervisor of the Motions and Pro Se Units in the Staff Attorneys’ Office and as director of the Circuit’s Pro Bono Program for 22 years.

Susan has served on numerous Circuit wide committees and task forces relating to prisoner and pro se litigation, and as liaison to the pro se law clerks in the district courts, organizing and speaking at Circuit wide and national conferences.

Since 2015, Susan has served as Chief Deputy Clerk, overseeing all docketing and filing and calendaring systems and procedures, staffing the Circuit Advisory Rules Committee and Appellate Lawyer Representatives, and organizing and speaking at CLE programs around the Circuit. Susan is a 1987 graduate of NYU Law School and originally a native of New York.

Ian C. Cairns, Esq.
Shareholder
Smith Goodfriend, P.S.

Ian Cairns is a principal of Smith Goodfriend and graduated from the University of Washington School of Law with honors in 2010. Ian focuses on civil appellate practice in state and federal courts across a broad range of subject areas including business disputes, trust and estate litigation, and family law. Ian is the Vice-Chair of the Washington State Bar Association Judicial Recommendation Committee, co-author of the Appellate Practice chapter of the King County Bar Association Young Lawyer Division’s Washington Lawyers Practice Manual, and a former Chair of the King County Bar Association’s Appellate Section. Ian lives in Seattle with his wife Michelle and their two sons, and in his free time coaches and plays lacrosse.

Rory D. Cosgrove, Esq.

Carney Bradley Spellman, P.S.

Rory’s passion is civil appeals in state and federal courts.  He has been counsel of record in over 50 appeals.  He has argued in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit and in all three Divisions of the Court of Appeals of the State of Washington.  He has filed amicus briefs in the Washington Supreme Court on behalf of national trade associations, insurance companies, and the Washington Defense Trial Lawyers.

Rory is proud to have represented many major American companies, including Volkswagen, Graco, Pep Boys, and Comcast.  What distinguishes Rory from his peers is his unwavering commitment to serving and building strong relationships with his clients.  He strives to be his clients’ ambassador of Kwan, so it’s no wonder that his favorite movie is Jerry Maguire.

Rory’s philosophy to service is the same for all his clients: deliver exceptional legal work to exceed his clients’ goals.  Clients can always count on Rory to provide the highest quality legal services.

Rory is routinely hired to serve as error prevention/preservation counsel.  In that role, he assists the trial team in preparing dispositive motions, motions in limine or objections to motions in limine, jury instructions and objections to jury instructions, and pocket briefs (among other things).  Through his efforts as error-prevention counsel, he has helped his clients secure defense verdicts or favorable settlements.  Rory’s deep understanding of appeals strengthens his service to clients in the trial court.

Before joining the firm, Rory clerked for the Honorable James R. Verellen at the Court of Appeals of the State of Washington, Division One, for two years.  His clerkship gave him valuable insight into the judicial decision-making process.  Rory uses that insight to assist his clients.  And while in law school, Rory clerked for the Oregon Court of Appeals in the Appellate Commissioner’s Office.

Howard M. Goodfriend, Esq.
Shareholder
Smith Goodfriend, P.S.

HOWARD M. GOODFRIEND is a principal in the Seattle firm of Smith Goodfriend, P.S., Seattle’s oldest appellate boutique. Howard has argued hundreds of civil appeals in almost every substantive area of the law, representing publicly traded companies, small family businesses, professionals, state and local government, hospitals, and individuals. He is co-editor-in-chief of the Washington State Bar Association’s Appellate Practice Deskbook and author of the Appellate Practice chapter of the King County Bar Association’s Washington Lawyers Practice Manual. Howard is a past president of the American Academy of Appellate Lawyers, is a founding member and past president of the Washington Appellate Lawyers Association, and has been repeatedly recognized by his peers as one of Washington’s top ten appellate lawyers and top 100 lawyers.

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.

Shannon M. Kilpatrick, Esq.
Partner
Stritmatter Kessler Koehler Moore

Shannon practices at Stritmatter Kessler Koehler Moore in Seattle. She handles civil appeals, as well as complex dispositive motions, evidentiary and jury instructions issues, and post-trial motions in both state and federal court. She is a former judicial law clerk to Justice Debra Stephens on the Washington Supreme Court.

For her entire 15+ year career in private practice, Shannon has represented individuals and small businesses in cases involving among other issues government liability, personal injury, wrongful death, premises liability, insurance contract disputes, insurer misconduct, medical malpractice, and consumer protection. Since 2018 she has served as an Arbitrator for the superior courts of King, Snohomish, and Kitsap counties.

A native of the Seattle area, Shannon grew up in Bellevue, WA and earned her BA in History from Whitman College in Walla Walla. She graduated cum laude from Marquette University Law School in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, where she externed for the Honorable John L. Coffey at the US Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit.

Shannon has significant experience volunteering with legal organizations. She serves on the Board of Governors for the Washington State Association for Justice (WSAJ). She was recently appointed to the Washington State Supreme Court Gender & Justice Commission. She served as chair of the Washington State Bar Association (WSBA) Court Rules & Procedures Committee from 2015-2018 and a member of that Committee from 2011-2015. From 2017-18 she served on the WSBA Civil Litigation Rules Drafting Task Force. From 2011-2012, she served on the WSBA Admission to Practice Rules Task Force.

John F. Querio, Esq.
Partner
Horvitz & Levy LLP

Large public companies, small businesses, and trial counsel, as well as significant trade associations, have benefited from John Querio’s proficiency in a wide range of practice areas, including commercial contract disputes; arbitration and class actions; defense of claims based on professional conduct (including the anti-SLAPP statute and First Amendment issues, legal malpractice, and malicious prosecution); defense of insurance coverage and bad faith litigation; products and premises liability defense; civil rights litigation defense; and punitive damages. John works with clients and trial counsel before, during, and after an appeal to preserve issues and position the case for an optimal outcome.

John is a partner at the firm, where he has worked on dozens of civil appeals in state and federal court. He has special expertise in federal civil and appellate procedure and has argued numerous appeals in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. He is co-author of the leading treatise on civil appeals before the Ninth Circuit, the Rutter Group’s Ninth Circuit Civil Appellate Practice . He has also represented parties and amici curiae in numerous cases in the United States, California, and Nevada Supreme Courts.

John has counseled many significant companies on appellate matters, including Ford Motor Company, State Farm, American General Life Insurance Company, Hospital Corporation of America, QBE Insurance Corporation, Travelers, Kiewit, Dow Chemical Company, Philip Morris, and San Diego Gas & Electric Company. He has also represented cities, counties, and peace officers in federal civil rights actions; major hospitals and providers in healthcare matters; and large insurers in coverage disputes. He has worked with major trade associations to position cutting edge issues for appellate review, including the Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America, DRI-The Voice of the Defense Bar, the Washington Legal Foundation, the California Hospital Association, and the California New Car Dealers Association.

John is active in the legal community, authoring articles and making presentations at client venues, other law firms, and bar events. He has been a member of the Board of Governors of the Los Angeles Chapter of the Association of Business Trial Lawyers, which brings together plaintiff and defense lawyers with judicial officers to promote civility, collegiality, and the fair and efficient administration of civil justice. In that capacity, he served as co-editor of the ABTL Report, which is the association’s quarterly publication dedicated to legal developments and civil practice issues.

Lila J. Silverstein, Esq.

Washington Appellate Project

Lila Silverstein is passionate about protecting the constitutional rights of individuals and ensuring equal access to justice for all. An appellate public defender since 2006, Lila represents indigent clients in the Washington Supreme Court, all three divisions of the Washington Court of Appeals, and the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. Her most notable case is State v. Gregory, 427 P.3d 621 (Wash. 2018) (with co-counsel Neil Fox). Lila commissioned a statistical study on race and the death penalty in Washington and argued the death penalty was unconstitutional because it was imposed in an arbitrary and racially biased manner. In 2018, the Washington Supreme Court agreed and invalidated Washington’s capital punishment scheme.     

Outside of case work, Lila volunteers her time presenting CLEs, writing amicus briefs, and serving on bar committees. Lila wrote significant sections of Washington’s General Rule 37, which provides strong protection against race discrimination in jury selection and is being emulated in other jurisdictions. She has served as chair of the King County Bar Association’s appellate practice section, and is an invited member of the Washington Appellate Lawyers Association and the American Academy of Appellate Lawyers. For her work, Lila has received the King County Bar Association’s Outstanding Lawyer of the Year Award, the William O. Douglas Award from the Washington Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, the Kathleen Taylor Civil Libertarian Award from the ACLU of Washington, the Distinguished Service Award from the Civil Rights Section of the Washington State Bar Association, President’s Awards from both WACDL and the Washington Defender Association, and the Abolitionist of the Year Award from the Washington Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty.

Karl D. Smith, Esq.
Deputy Solicitor General
Washington State Attorney General’s Office

Karl Smith is a Deputy Solicitor General in the Washington State Attorney General’s Office. He regularly represents the State before the Washington Supreme Court, Washington Court of Appeals, and the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals and routinely reviews and edits appellate briefs by other attorneys in the Attorney General’s Office. In addition to appellate work, Karl also advises and represents the Elections Division of the Office of the Secretary of State. Before joining the Solicitor General’s Office, he advised and represented the Washington Department of Social and Health Services from 2012 through 2019.

Karl began his legal career as a law clerk to Justice Susan Owens from 2009 through 2012. He graduated with honors from the University of Washington School of Law and completed his undergraduate education at the University of Washington.

Karl lives in Olympia with his wife and two daughters.

Fees

CLE Credit

WA General: This program is approved for 7.0 units of General CLE in Washington. (Expires 11/19/2029)

OR General: This program is approved for 7.0 units of General CLE in Oregon (Expires 11/19/2027)

CA General:  This program is approved for 7.0 units of General CLE in California.

CA Participatory Certified Legal Specialist:   This program is approved for 7.0 hours of Legal Specialization Credit in Appellate Law   (Expires 11/18/2026)

CA Self Study (only) Certified Legal Specialist: This program is approved for 7.0 hours of Legal Specialization Credit in Appellate Law   (Expires 11/18/2029)

NY General: This course is eligible for approval, under New York’s CLE Approved Jurisdiction policy, for 7.0 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.

This program is approved for CLE in the state listed above.  Upon request, Pincus Pro Ed will provide any information an attorney needs to support their application for CLE approval in other states other than what is listed above. Many attorneys ask for this and are approved in other states.