Ten details that determine whether you are a good lawyer in the eyes of the judge

Mondo Social Updated on 2024-03-07

In the course of day-to-day litigation work, how can a lawyer gain the favor of court staff? The answer, of course, is the details! Experienced lawyers are often able to take care to actively cooperate with the work of court staff and provide a lot of convenience to court staff. Lawyers who are inexperienced and do not pay attention to detail are often unpopular with court staff and add a lot of burden to their work. Good lawyers often have the following common characteristics in their work.

PunctualitySome lawyers do not have a strong sense of time and are often late, the judge arrives, but the lawyer has not yet arrived, if the defendant is late, some judges may directly be absent from the trial, and if the plaintiff is late, the lawsuit may be withdrawn. It is recommended that if you are really late for objective reasons, you must communicate with the judge in advance and explain it well, and the judge will generally understand. Don't fail to explain, even if the judge doesn't ask on his own initiative. Some lawyers are judges and parties have arrived in court, but the ** person has not arrived, and after being late, he does not explain, and directly pushes the door in, making the judge and the other party feel that they are very impolite, and the other is that they do not respect each other, which often buries hidden dangers for the next work. Generally speaking, judges sometimes have to hold several cases a day, such as hearings, conversations, or external transfers, if the lawyer does not arrive on time according to the agreed time in advance, it may affect a series of follow-up work arrangements, if there are more times like this, the judge will lose trust in such a lawyer, if there is a case next time, the judge may not be willing to communicate with the lawyer in advance, but directly summon the summons.

HumilitySome lawyers may be very arrogant in order to show their own difference or excellence, or to show their high level and high level, and if they are too arrogant, they will often receive the opposite effect. This problem is more likely to arise among young lawyers, who tend to be very humble, and their self-confidence and composure no longer need to be shown to the other party through domineering oppression. Of course, not being arrogant does not mean that we should meet each other, but we must adhere to the principles that should be adhered to. Our humility and courtesy are not intended to please others or judges, but rather to be a manifestation of our own mature personality.

Professional and profound, accurate understanding of the lawLawyers must be professional in a certain field, especially in the field they are good at, or even more professional than judges, excellent lawyers do not have to specialize in everything, but must have their own areas of expertise, in fact, the same is true for judges, judges may handle a lot of cases, a mature judge will at least handle thousands of cases, but he does not dare to say that he is familiar with all kinds of causes of action, but he must be very professional in the field he is familiar with. Some lawyers do not have a thorough understanding of the relevant legal provisions, and often make common-sense mistakes that should not occur. For example, if the plaintiff changes the claim after the conclusion of the court debate, will the court allow it? Article 232 of the Civil Procedure Interpretation stipulates that after the case is accepted but before the conclusion of the courtroom debate, if the plaintiff adds a claim, the defendant submits a counterclaim, and a third party raises a claim related to the case, the people's court shall do so for joining. That is to say, if it is not an increase in the claim, but only a change in the amount, or a decrease in the claim, it can be exempted from the restriction before the conclusion of the court debate. There are many problems like this, if we don't pay attention to them, we will always be specious about some issues, and we will often form an unprofessional image, and excellent lawyers often have a very accurate grasp of the relevant legal provisions, and even study the legislative background and purpose, and sometimes even prompt judges to make some omissions in their work. *

Adequate pre-trial preparationSome lawyers do not make preparations before **, and go directly to **, and the judge can't answer anything, especially some basic factual questions, and they don't understand the parties at all. Some lawyers did not bring all the materials, or did not bring the original evidence. Sometimes the original is in the hands of the party, and there is no notice to remind the party to bring all the originals. Some of them forgot to go to the parties to get back the originals, and some of them brought the wrong evidence from different cases. In this way, the work is very passive, and the ** person can only apply for an extension of time to present evidence, but whether it is allowed or not, and the decision is in the hands of the judge. The judge may not allow the party to bear the legal consequences of failing to present evidence and failing to prove it if the time limit for presenting evidence has expired. Excellent lawyers basically do not make such mistakes, they are very well prepared before the trial, and even have a complete plan for a specific detail, and they can often calmly respond to court questions or other parties' inquiries.

Be objective and realisticZi said: Knowing is knowing, and not knowing is not knowing. Excellent lawyers tend to be objective, seek truth from facts, and will not arbitrarily fabricate some facts that do not exist, or do not know the facts. In particular, when it comes to the details of some cases, if you talk nonsense or nonsense, it is easy for people in the know to hear it, and it is easy to cause an embarrassing situation and even cause unfavorable consequences for yourself. For example, in a case of repayment, the ** person said that it was a cash repayment, and the amount was 10 million, and the judge asked her where she repaid it, and she said that on the second floor of a teahouse, the judge asked how many people, and she said that she was alone, and asked how to take it up, and carried it up in a handbag. We thought, 10 million cash weighs about 200 catties, how can a weak woman carry it alone? In civil litigation, the statements of the parties are very important, and careful people will find that the first type of evidence stipulated in the Civil Procedure Law is the statement of the parties, while the first place in the Criminal Procedure Law is physical evidence, and the first place in the Administrative Procedure Law is documentary evidence. In fact, the judge will often form an inner confirmation or prejudgment based on your statements and evidence, which is directly related to the final direction of the case.

The court's presentation was succinct and to the pointRelatively speaking, the judge's time is very busy, and he does not have time to listen to your eloquent and long speeches, and excellent lawyers tend to make concise and concise statements. A good lawyer will often prepare a written draft, of course, it is not possible to prepare all situations in advance, sometimes it is necessary to make adjustments according to the situation of the trial, and play on the spot, at this time, it can also be organized, clear and accurate. If it is a matter that you think is particularly important, you will slow down the pace of your speech to make it easier for the clerk to record it, or even repeat it, which is also a reminder to the clerk, and the idea needs to be accurately recorded. The mobility of court clerks is also relatively large, most of them are young girls who have just graduated, and they need to open every day.

Four or five court hearings, one or two hours short, three or four hours long, sometimes it is impossible to ensure that every sentence you say can be accurately recorded, so the important content is concise, slow down the speed of speech, and focus on prompting, which is not only the understanding of the court staff, but also the responsibility for their own work.

Good at summarizing the focus of controversySome lawyers are limited to their own point of view logic, talking to themselves, not paying attention to what the other party is saying, and not paying attention to what the judge is paying attention to. In addition, if the focus of the dispute between the two parties is not summarized, or the summary is not in place, and the focus of the dispute is not listened to by the judge, it often leads to the situation that the speech is interrupted by the judge, and he will feel incomprehensible, and the judge will not care about the fact that the two parties are not in dispute, and will pay more attention to the focus of the dispute between the two parties. Excellent lawyers are good at summarizing the focus of disputes, and pay special attention to the judge's summary of the focus of disputes, and if they think that there are missing matters or matters that are particularly important to themselves in a timely manner, they can effectively guide the direction of the trial. Excellent lawyers have enough sensitivity and accuracy to the focus of the dispute, and will not confuse their roles as the first person and the parties themselves, and the parties are sometimes more in court to be treated unfairly or lost a kind of emotional catharsis, and excellent lawyers from the perspective of legal professionalism to analyze the corresponding legal relations, legal elements, damage consequences and other legal issues, can make complex cases become logical and clear, and the legal elements are complete. A good lawyer pays more attention to the judge's questions, and often accurately grasps the key points and gets to the point when it comes to the judge's questions. In fact, an experienced lawyer can have a rough prediction of the direction of the case through the questions asked by the judge, and there will be no phenomenon of being completely confused at the trial.

Evidence is categorized and collatedEvidence is our most important litigation material, the collation of evidence can often reflect the level of a lawyer, some lawyers do not sort out the evidence, the evidence submitted in court is disorganized, and even in the trial, they have to look for half a day to find the corresponding evidence, which affects work efficiency and leaves a bad impression. The evidence made by a good lawyer is pleasing to the eye, clearly classified, the purpose of proof is clear, and the binding is orderly, and it is not easy for the judge to mess up the order and lose the content when it is turned over, especially in cases with more evidence, these details are very good for lawyers. A good lawyer will memorize the name of the evidence to prevent confusion when turning over the content when making a statement, and the bills will be glued in order on A4 paper, and the number of sheets will be checked and the evidence will be cataloged. It is recommended not to page in the upper right corner of the evidence, because the court clerk file must be numbered in the upper right corner of each page, which can easily cause confusion and cause unnecessary trouble to the clerk. If it is evidence pasted on A4 paper, it is best to leave a binding distance on the left, if there is no binding distance, it is easy for the court to block the main content when it is finally bound. For cases with a large amount of evidence, it is best to submit an electronic version of the table of contents and proof of purpose, which saves the clerk's time and prevents some evidence clerks from making mistakes or omitting to remember.

The cross-examination is comprehensive, not just a formalityThe so-called litigation is to fight evidence, and the final determination of evidence directly determines the final outcome of the case, but some lawyers obviously do not have a sufficient understanding of the importance of evidence, and in the process of cross-examination at trial, just saying that it is not authentic or legal, or not relevant is actually equivalent to giving up their right to cross-examine evidence. For the cross-examination of key evidence, or evidence that may affect the substantive outcome of the case, we must not simply deal with it on the grounds that it is not relevant. Excellent lawyers will often fully express their cross-examination opinions, sometimes, in the course of the trial, may also encounter the evidence submitted by the opposing party in court, at this time the judge will also ask us to express cross-examination opinions, excellent lawyers will often take it seriously, objectively and responsibly publish cross-examination opinions, if the evidence provided by the other party in court is very critical evidence, will take the initiative to apply to the judge to give cross-examination time, if the court is indeed unable to directly issue the final cross-examination opinions, They may also apply to the judge to submit written cross-examination opinions after trial.

Pay equal attention to entities and proceduresSome lawyers, especially young lawyers, are often prone to make the mistake of emphasizing substance over procedure, such as failing to submit evidence to the court within the prescribed time limit for presenting evidence, and may face the adverse consequences of failing to present evidence. Although the amended interpretation of the Civil Procedure Law stipulates that the people's court shall accept evidence submitted late that is related to the basic facts of the case, this does not mean that all evidence can be submitted within the time limit. This situation only applies to evidence related to basic facts, and may also face penalties such as reprimands, fines, etc. A good lawyer will often strictly follow the statutory time limit for presenting evidence, complete the obligation to present evidence within the time limit, and if an extension is required for objective reasons, apply to the judge for an extension of time to present evidence in a timely manner. If it is a mailed document, you must confirm with the judge whether you have received it, especially the important information, it is best to submit it in person and ask for a receipt. For example, some lawyers are accustomed to submitting the appeal petition on the last day of the statutory time limit, and it is no problem if it is submitted to the court on the same day, but some are submitted by mail on the last day, and the court may not receive it until a few days later, sometimes because of the post office, sometimes because of holidays, which will cause unnecessary trouble.

Related Pages