There is an interesting post today at Legal Research & Writing Pro Blog about how judges read appellate materials in the ever-expanding age of electronic resources. As the post notes, as federal courts and an increasing number of state courts have moved to electronic filing, judges have also moved toward reading materials, including briefs, on electronic devices such as laptops and iPads.

The post notes that changes in how judges are reading briefs — from paper to electronic — comes with a potential for real differences in impact.  There are studies suggesting that readers tend to skim electronic materials more than they do paper materials, but also that active engagement with the electronic material can substantially improve comprehension.

As the post suggests, there are also some potential new advantages to the prevalence of electronic resources in appellate practice.  Citations can be hyperlinked to research sources so that judges can quickly and effectively jump right to the authority; similarly, annotations to the appellate record can be hyperlinked to the relevant part of the record in jurisdictions that have invested in the necessary software. An April post on Cite Blog included thoughts about those kinds of hyperlinks.

A couple of years ago I presented at a symposium at Washburn Law School where there was a presentation from an attorney who did a great deal of practice in various federal courts across the country.  He talked about embedding digital information in briefs, including hyperlinks to video excerpts from video depositions, hyperlinks to exhibits, etc., in addition to the more conventional hyperlinks that could appear to authorities.  It certainly seems that the continuing development of digital practice would point to a future with vast opportunity to connect the appellate materials in profound ways.

For some additional thoughts, see a post from back in January over at Volokh Conspiracy, with additional discussion in the comments.

Thoughts?  Is the increased use of digital resources by courts impacting the way you present arguments in your appellate briefs?  Have you seen this as a good development, or one with significant pitfalls?  And is legal education keeping up with these kinds of trends?  Share your thoughts in the comments!

Daniel Real

Daniel Real has been a member of the Creighton Law faculty for more than 20 years. He teaches required legal analysis and writing courses for first and second year students, upper level advanced writing and analysis courses, Professional Responsibility, Commercial Contracts, and Sports…

Daniel Real has been a member of the Creighton Law faculty for more than 20 years. He teaches required legal analysis and writing courses for first and second year students, upper level advanced writing and analysis courses, Professional Responsibility, Commercial Contracts, and Sports Law. He is the faculty advisor for the Sports Law Concentration, and he serves as the faculty moderator for the student Sports and Entertainment Law Society. He has been a coach for Creighton School of Law’s highly successful third year National Moot Court Teams since the 2008-2009 academic year, and also coaches other nationally competitive moot court and negotiations teams. He is a member of the Legal Writing Institute, a national organization of legal writing and skills instructors, and is the former chair of the LWI Website and Social Media committee. He served on the diversity committee for the Association of American Law Schools (AALS). He is a member of the Appellate Practice Section of the Nebraska State Bar Association and was one of the organizing editors for the NSBA Appellate Practice Manual.  He is the author of Thompson Reuters Publishing’s Nebraska Appellate Practice and Procedure Handbook and its annual updates.  His other published scholarship and national presentations have focused on written and oral advocacy, appellate practice, implicit bias, bar exam preparation, and sports law. Prior to becoming a member of the faculty, he served as a judicial staff attorney for the Nebraska Court of Appeals for 20 years.

Research Focus

Implicit Bias, Judicial Selection and Retention, Collaborative Learning, Legal Writing, Appellate Practice, Professional Responsibility