Persuasive Appellate Brief Writing (WA) [Two-Part Webinar] (Watch Live or via OnDemand Streaming)

Agenda

Part 1: Tuesday, June 24, 2025
1:00 p.m. – 4:45 p.m. Pacific Time

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
Aaron Orheim

• 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. Aurora Bearse and Hon. Leonard Feldman

• 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

4:30 p.m. – 4:45 p.m. 
Final Questions and discussion re: Exercises to be discussed during Part 2 (Thursday).
Speakers will explain and discuss the exercises that were distributed in the Handout (one week prior to today) will answer questions related to the exercises. Please submit exercises by Wednesday, June 25 at noon.

Part 2: Thursday, June 26, 2025
1:00 p.m. – 4:45 p.m. Pacific Time

The agenda for Part 2’s exercise component will be announced. Attorneys watching the recording will have access to the exercises used and discussed during the live program, but will not be able to submit the exercises, since they will be watching the program after it has been held.

Please be sure to complete your exercises and email them to us by noon, Wednesday, June 25.  A selection of submissions (not all) will be discussed by faculty.

Topics covered in exercises will include:

• Case highlights and issues
• Ideal Introduction and review pre-submitted exercises from attendees
• Argument Headings
• Argument
  • Standard and Scope of Review
  • Citing and Using Authority
  • Persuasive and Unpersuasive Arguments

• Drafting the Conclusion
• Reply Briefs
• Final Writing Tips
• Final Questions

Date/Time/Location

Two- Part Webinar

Dates:
Part 1: Tuesday, June 24, 2025
Part 2: Thursday, June 26, 2025

Times for both sessions:
1:00 p.m. – 4:45 p.m. Pacific Time

We will send your Zoom login details and handout materials about a week before your program.

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. 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. 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. 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. 

Aaron P. Orheim, Esq.

Talmadge / Fitzpatrick

Bio coming soon

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.

Tentative:

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

Discounted rates are available for 3-4 attorneys watching Live or via OnDemand at your firm or agency.
Licenses are available for law firms or agencies that would like OnDemand Streaming for more than four attorneys. Please contact us at info@pincusproed.com or (877) 858-3848.

Pre-order the Recorded Package of this program when you register for only $99 (download or OnDemand) (attendee special only).  

Register now and save $25 on each registration with the Early Bird rate!

Early Bird Rate Expires April 30, 2025!

Your discount is automatically applied at check out – no coupon needed.

Registration fees are per person.

Individual: $429
Individual Sale Price: $404

Group: $404 per person for 2 or more from the same company pre-registering at the same time
Group Sale Price $379

Government employee/Legal Aid* Rate: $380
Early Bird registration $355

Law Student*/Paralegal Rate: $240
Early Bird registration $215

We will send your login details and handout materials approximately one week before your program.

Program materials:

Registration includes an electronic copy (.pdf) of your seminar handbook.  This will be emailed to you a few days before the program.  Be sure to check your spam folder if you don’t see it by then.  Please put info@pincusproed.com in your address book to make sure you receive your pdf of the program handbook.

* Law Student Rate is for current law students only.  Please bring your law school ID to show when you check in for the program.

** Legal Aid attorneys are those attorneys employed by Legal Aid/non-profit firms.  It does not include attorneys who have their own practice, or are employed by law firms, that volunteer their time for non-profit causes or take on pro-bono cases. It also does not include attorneys who serve on non-profit boards.

Full and partial scholarships may be available to a limited number of Legal Aid attorneys, based upon registration. Please call (877) 858-3848 to discuss or email your request to info@pincusproed.com.

CLE Credits

WA General: This program is pending CLE approval in Washington.

OR General: This program is pending CLE approval in Oregon.

CA General:  This program is approved for 7.00 units of General CLE in California.
CA Legal Ethics: This program is approved for 0.5 units of Legal Ethics CLE in California.

NY General: This course is eligible for approval, under New York’s CLE Approved Jurisdiction policy, for 7.00 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.