District Court Trial and Evidence Practice Pointers
| Publication year | 2021 |
| Pages | 0047 |
By Megan K. McCarthy and Jason S. McCormick
In September 2019, district courts in Alabama became much more active for a civil lawyer because the district court's jurisdictional limit increased from $10,000 to $20,000. Now district court serves to aid in the resolution of many more cases. Because of this, it is important for civil lawyers to understand how to try a case in district court.
District court is not a court of record, which in practical terms means there is not a court reporter creating an official record of the proceedings. In addition, district court judges will generally not take custody of any evidence, before, during, or after the trial. For the lawyer, who is often under cost constraints in cases brought in district court, this creates certain challenges.
First and foremost, most lawyers perform as a one-person show in district courts. There are rarely senior partners sitting second chair, paralegals handling the evidence, or trial directors managing technology. It is, as they say, "old school." For new lawyers, or lawyers unaccustomed to managing evidence and practicing without support teams, this can be daunting.
This article identifies a few of the most common evidentiary pitfalls and offers practical suggestions to lawyers who find themselves trying a case in district court with only a client sitting in the chair beside them.
Know Whether The Opposing Party Is Pro Se Or Represented
Parties in district court are often pro se because district court is a court that provides fast and cheap resolution of cases. It is important to know whether you are trying a case against a pro se party or a represented party. This may seem like a simple concept, but it is very important because a district court's application of evidentiary rules is often much more lenient than in circuit court, and if a party is pro se, some district court judges often give the party more leniency. Furthermore, it is important to know because you need to prepare your client to be examined or cross examined by the opposing party themselves. Finally, it is imperative to understand whether the opposing party is represented because the limited discovery in district court \\often requires pre-trial agreements on admissibility. You need to know how educated the other party is on the Alabama Rules of Evidence and \tactical trial procedure.
Agree on Admissibility Where Possible
If a lawyer has a particularly important piece of evidence, and it may be too costly to properly establish admissibility, an agreement between counsel is an excellent way to bolster admissibility. Agreements on admissibility of documents often arise in district court on issues such as medical records, medical bills or subrogation liens, photographs, Google Earth images, or videos of accident scenes. It is important to reach an agreement on medical records, medical bills, and subrogation liens because taking the depositions necessary to establish admissibility on issues such as authenticity and medical causation can quickly exceed the amount of the actual medical bills and/or liens. Agreements on admissibility are often convenient for the parties in commercial disputes involving the authenticity of a lease, for example, rather than taking the district court's time by subpoenaing witnesses to establish agreed-upon facts. The district court judge will appreciate agreements on admissibility of evidence because it helps to reduce time in court for a judge who already has a very busy docket.
Discovery Is Limited
The lawyer should check with the district court judge's chambers to determine whether limited discovery is permitted or not. Some courts have a standing order that allows for the parties to exchange 10 to 15 limited discovery questions. If such a standing order does not exist and unless the parties...
To continue reading
Request your trial