District of New Jersey Junior Lawyer Participation Incentives

Junior lawyers (first 6 years) encouraged to present arguments.

Judge Salas strongly encourages parties to allow junior associate lawyers (i.e., lawyers in their first six years of practice) to present arguments whenever possible.

Advance notice for junior lawyer arguments may result in extra time and assistance.

If a party provides advance notice to the Court that a junior associate lawyer will present argument, Judge Salas may allow the junior associate lawyer extra time for argument, and may permit more experienced counsel to assist in the argument should the need arise.

Junior attorneys (first 6 years of practice) presenting argument may increase likelihood of oral argument, and more experienced counsel may assist if needed.

Judge Padin strongly encourages parties to allow junior attorneys (i.e., attorneys in their first six (6) years of practice) to present arguments whenever possible. If a party provides advance notice to the Court that a junior attorney will present argument, Judge Padin may be more inclined to permit oral argument, and may permit more experienced counsel to assist in the argument should the need arise.

Junior attorneys (under 5 years) may present oral argument with supervisor assistance.

Requests for oral argument to allow a junior attorney (i.e., under five (5) years experience) to present argument will be liberally granted subject to calendar availability. The Court will permit a supervising attorney to assist the junior attorney at the argument.

Junior attorneys (less than 4 years’ experience) are encouraged to participate, with increased oral argument likelihood, multiple attorneys allowed to argue, and marking required on first page of notices/briefs.

The Court encourages the participation of less experienced attorneys (i.e., those with less than four years’ experience) in all proceedings, including pretrial conferences, hearings on discovery disputes, and oral arguments, particularly where that attorney played a substantial role in drafting the underlying filing. The Court is also more likely to grant oral argument if a junior attorney will present the argument. Therefore, consistent with Local Rule 78.1, a party shall clearly mark on the first page of the notice of notice and/or the brief that a junior attorney will present the argument. The Court is amenable to permitting more than one lawyer to argue for one party if this creates an opportunity for a junior lawyer to participate.

The Court encourages junior attorneys (under 5 years) to participate in proceedings and is more likely to grant oral argument if a junior attorney will argue; multiple lawyers may argue to allow junior participation.

The Court encourages the participation of less experienced attorneys (i.e., those with less than five-years’ experience) in all proceedings, including pretrial conferences, hearings on discovery disputes, and oral arguments, particularly when that junior attorney played a substantial role in drafting the underlying filing. The Court is also more likely to grant oral argument if a party represents, at the time of the filing of the motion or request for argument, that a junior attorney will present the argument. The Court is amenable to permitting more than one lawyer to argue for one party if this creates an opportunity for a junior lawyer to participate.

The Court encourages junior attorneys to take an active role at hearings, especially where they substantially contributed to the underlying filing, provided a senior attorney ensures they are adequately prepared.

The Court encourages junior attorneys to take an active role at hearings so that they may hone their legal skills, particularly where the junior attorney played a substantial role in drafting the underlying filing. However, to ensure speedy resolution of disputes, a senior attorney must ensure that the junior attorney is adequately prepared.

Junior associates arguing motions may increase likelihood of oral argument

Judge Quinn will schedule oral argument on an as-needed basis. That said, if a party believes oral argument is necessary, the party shall file a letter with the Court explaining why oral argument is either needed or would be helpful. Circumstances where the Court may grant such an application include, but are not limited to, the briefing involves a novel issue of law and/or a junior associate will argue the application.