1975, November, Pg. 2115. Certification of Trial Attorneys.

• Author: by Alex S. Keller: Cheirman, Special Cmmittee Trial Lawyer Certification

4 Colo.Law. 2115

Colorado Lawyer

1975.

1975, November, Pg. 2115.

Certification of Trial Attorneys

2115Vol. 4, No. 11, Pg. 2115Certification of Trial Attorneysby Alex S. Keller: Cheirman, Special Cmmittee Trial Lawyer CertificationOn November 26, 1973, Chief Justice Warren E. Burger delivered a lecture at Fordham University Law School entitled "The Special Skills of Advocacy." Although specialization in the legal profession has been discussed for years, this particular lecture polarized opinion on the subject because it focused specifically on the contention by members of the bench that the trial advocate is many times insufficiently prepared or simply incompetent. The lecture was given wide publicity both within the legal profession and through the media. Many lawyers feel that it was an unjustified attack on a profession comprised in large part by highly competent and totally honest members. Nevertheless, following this lecture the American Bar Association and state bar associations gave the question of specialization high priority, and some states began adopting specialization procedures very quickly.

Colorado's Committee

In the spring of 1974 the president of the Colorado Bar Association, Anthony Williams, in compliance with a resolution of the Colorado Bar Association Board of Governors appointed a committee to study the question. The committee consists of Terrance L. Farina, Anthony F. Zarlengo, Charles J. Traylor, Harold A. Feder, Paul D. Cooper, Walter A. Steele, Rollie R. Rogers, and Irvin M. Kent, with myself as chairman.

The committee first studied the plans which had been adopted or were in the process of adoption in numerous other states. We found, generally, that the states fall into two categories. The first, in which California appears to be a leader, requires lengthy and detailed written examinations as a basis for certification. The second, exemplified by New Mexico, uses a self-declaration system in which a lawyer merely certifies that he is a specialist in a particular area (sometimes he must certify as to the percentage of his work devoted to the field), and without any further examination or study he is permitted certification.

Our committee felt that in the area of trial advocacy neither approach would suit Colorado, and that skills in advocacy can only be objectively determined by seeking the opinion of trial court judges, opposing counsel, associate counsel and other judges or commissioners. The committee devised a detailed application form and questionnaires to judges and lawyers. The questionnaires do not seek the mere conclusion of whether the applicant is qualified but also probe the applicant's presentation. It is proposed that the trial court judges of the applicant's own judicial district routinely be sent these questionnaires, as well as judges in other judicial districts listed by the applicant.

It is significant to note here that, under the leadership of Professor James Wallace, the Colorado Bar Association specialization committee has already submitted a plan for the certification of specialists in

2116labor, securities and tax law. However, our committee felt that the approach in trial advocacy could not be the same as the approach in substantive areas of the law.

Reactions to SpecializationIt is difficult today to find a bar association or other professional legal society opposed to specialization. In June of this year the American Assembly on Law and a Changing Society issued its final report (95 S.Ct. Advance Sheet 18, p. 5), in which it stated that "certification of specialization should be encouraged both to assure specialized competence and to aid the public in locating an appropriately skilled lawyer at a reasonable cost;..." This assembly was composed of notable scholars, bar...