Education
University of Pittsburgh. University of Pittsburgh School of Law.
(This second edition of the original 1990 version of Opini...)
This second edition of the original 1990 version of Opinion Writing seeks to advise judges on how to improve their writing skills in justifying their decisions. We follow the common law tradition in stating written reasons for our decisions. The common-law tradition demands no more than a clear statement of reasons. The judicial process expects no more. The brief reader and the opinion readers deserve no less. The ability to write clearly and memorably may or may not sometimes be a gift granted at birth. Without question, it can be perfected by studious attention and constant application, much like a muscle that is strengthened by proper and continuing exercise. To do this -- the writing and editing and rewriting required for polished text -- takes time. Time, unfortunately, is severely rationed these days. Even with the word processors, the high-speed laser printer and the computer-contained dictionary and thesaurus, the modem era of the law does not permit the leisurely pace that our forebears apparently enjoyed. As this book develops in detail, every opinion should ideally begin with a clear statement of the flash point of the controversy between the litigants. Judges must identify precisely where the litigants differ and tell the reader whether their clash concerns the choice of the controlling legal precept or the interpretation of an agreed-upon precept or, if there is no dispute over either, a statement that the controversy concerns the application of settled law to settled facts. Having identified these contours, we should then proceed to resolve the difficulty and explain why one choice, or one interpretation or given application, is preferred to another. This discussion explaining the reasons for the decision, the ratio decidendi, must offer more clarity. There must be more exposition of analysis and more selective use of precedent. Lawyers and judges both have an obligation to evaluate the effect of previous cases and to decide which citations they will authenticate and which they will consider simple duplicates, which of them are necessary to the argument and which of them only validate obvious statements of reason In sum, this how-to book guides judges to recognize what critics say about our work, and teaches how judicial opinions can be improved.
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1438982275/?tag=2022091-20
(“Judges come to their robes bearing the stigmata of past ...)
“Judges come to their robes bearing the stigmata of past experience.”If this old saying is true, then this book describes the stigmata of Ruggero J. Aldisert, Senior U.S. Circuit Judge, a distinguished member of the Greatest Generation who’s still active as a judge on the second highest court in the land, just a notch below the U.S. Supreme Court. There is a huge sweep in these pages. Born in 1919, the author takes the reader from his early childhood to 1968, when he first put on robes as a U.S. Circuit Judge.You’ll find no stodgy writing here, nary a “whereas” and “aforesaid,” but it’s what the author says in his preface–a great-grandfather sitting back with the young ones and reminiscing how it was to grow up before dial telephones and when the first radio was a crystal set powered with two batteries and you listened with a set of earphones.But it’s more than family memoirs; there’s a lot of history set in the Twenties, and Thirties, and most of the time it wasn’t to the tune of “Happy Days are Here Again.”Judge Aldisert grew up as the son of an Italian immigrant in a Pennsylvania steel mill and coal mining town, remembers the Twenties when men worked 12-hour shifts, except every other Sunday when it was a 24-hour shift, came face to face with the Great Depression, the spread of world conflict during his 1937-1941 college years, and describes World War II service as Marine Corps officer in the Pacific.He gives an insider’s view of a lawyer who tried both civil and criminal cases, of life as a Pittsburgh trial court judge, and of the rocky road to nomination by President Lyndon B. Johnson and confirmation by the U.S. Senate in 1968.The opening page is a harbinger of things to come. His mother has her arms around the author, then aged three, and his brother one year older. She is sobbing, “Please don’t hurt my babies,” as they peered through her bedroom window at a procession of hooded and robed members of the Ku Klux Klan who walked in a silent circle in the Aldise
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1420816926/?tag=2022091-20
(This Third Edition of Opinion Writing breaks new ground f...)
This Third Edition of Opinion Writing breaks new ground for all writers of trial and appellate opinions--trial and appellate judges, administrative law judges, arbitrators, as well as current and aspiring law clerks. The differences between this edition of Opinion Writing and its predecessors are fundamental. To be sure, four core topics remain the same: (1) theoretical concepts underlying a judicial opinion; (2) the anatomy of an opinion; (3) writing style; and (4) opinion writing checklists. But this edition is more than a teaching text. Instead, it takes opinion writers by the hand and reveals to them step-by-step how to write a judicial opinion. It is more than ''what''; it is ''how.'' Serving for over 50 years on the bench, Judge Aldisert has participated in thousands of opinions written by his colleagues and him. His experience serving in the different U.S. Courts of Appeals across the country--from Atlanta, Georgia, to Seattle, Washington--has provided him a rare opportunity to acquire first-hand knowledge of the operation of the judicial process. This text aims to share that knowledge through personal anecdotes, illuminating opinion excerpts, and even some cartoon illustrations. This book also provides a series of checklists--how to write, test, and shorten the product for all who are charged with publicly justifying a judicial decision. This edition, equal parts teaching manual and compendium of information, is a must-have.
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1611631238/?tag=2022091-20
(Since it was first published over a decade ago, Winning o...)
Since it was first published over a decade ago, Winning on Appeal has been adopted by top-flight law schools for appellate advocacy courses. It also has become a popular desk reference on how to write an effective brief and deliver a persuasive oral argument. In this long-awaited Second Edition, Ruggero J. Aldisert, a forty-year veteran of the federal appeals bench, fundamentally reorganizes the book. By creating twenty-five chapters in place of the previous seventeen, Aldisert creates a wonderfully instructive how-to manual for the appellate advocate and a must volume for those who select appellate advocates. In the Second Edition, Part 1, "The Theory and Criticisms of Written and Oral Appellate Advocacy," retains the same format as the earlier editions except that the tables of statistics are updated. The book continues its unique approach by consolidating current empirical data on the odds of prevailing on appeal or having a case orally argued. Part 2, "Technical Requirements for Briefs" contains a chapter on jurisdiction as well as a chapter on issue preservation and standards of review. The major revisions to the Second Edition appear in Part 3 and Part 4. Aldisert designed the chapters in these sections to identify discrete requirements for an effective brief or argument, and to explain how to meet these prerequisites. Chapter 23, "How Top-Flight Appellate Lawyers Prepare" is new to the Second Edition. This chapter contains advice from outstanding appellate lawyers, true masters in oral advocacy, on how to prepare for oral argument. Throughout the Second Edition of Winning on Appeal, nineteen current chief justices of state courts, nine chief judges of U.S. Courts of Appeals, more than twenty U.S. Circuit judges, and state appellate judges contribute their thoughts on how to write a brief and how to argue a case-information that is not available in any other publication or resource. From cover to cover, Winning on Appeal is the quintessential handbook on how to write a brief and argue an appeal. Like removing the back of a watch to see what makes it tick, this book looks behind the bench in appellate courtrooms and behind chambers’ doors to expose exactly what the judges want to read and hear from lawyers. In an easy-to-read style, Judge Aldisert draws the perfect roadmap for the attorney who wants to win on appeal.
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1556818246/?tag=2022091-20
University of Pittsburgh. University of Pittsburgh School of Law.
Born in Carnegie, Pennsylvania, Aldisert received a Bachelor of Arts from the University of Pittsburgh in 1941. He served during World World War II as a Major in the United States Marine Corps from 1942 to 1946 and earned his Juris Doctor from the University of Pittsburgh School of Law in 1947. He became a judge on the Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County in 1962 and was nominated by President Lyndon B. Johnson to be a United States Circuit Judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit in 1968.
He became Chief Judge from 1984 to 1986, assuming senior status in 1986.
Aldisert was an adjunct professor at University of Pittsburgh School of Law. He wrote a memoir and several books on jurisprudence and law practice, including The Judicial Process (West 2nd ed 1996), Logic for Lawyers: A Guide to Clear Legal Thinking (NITA 3rd ed 1997), Winning on Appeal (NITA 2nd ed 2003), Opinion Writing (West 2nd ed 2009) and A Judge"s Advice: 50 Years on the Bench (Civil Air Patrol Press 2011).
Aldisert wrote a dissenting opinion in FAIR v. Rumsfeld, 390 F.3d 219 (2004), a high-profile case challenging the Solomon Amendment, a federal law that denies federal funding to colleges and universities that prohibit on-campus recruiting by the military.
The majority opinion enjoined enforcement of the law on First Amendment grounds.
Aldisert"s dissenting view was ultimately vindicated by the United States Supreme Court, which granted certiorari in the case and unanimously reversed the Third Circuit and upheld the validity of the Solomon Amendment. In 2005 Aldisert became the first recipient of the "Distinguished Appellate Jurist Award", bestowed by the American Bar Association"s Council of Appellate Lawyers. He died in December 2014.
(This Third Edition of Opinion Writing breaks new ground f...)
(This second edition of the original 1990 version of Opini...)
( This second edition of the original 1990 version of Opi...)
(Since it was first published over a decade ago, Winning o...)
(“Judges come to their robes bearing the stigmata of past ...)
(The Judicial Process includes readings, materials, and ca...)
(Book by Ruggero J. Aldisert)
(2nd)
(3rd)