The article discusses the importance of lawyers strategically conceding points during legal arguments. While lawyers are often expected to take strong positions to advocate for their clients, judges appreciate when attorneys acknowledge reasonable shortcomings in their arguments. The author recounts personal experiences where conceding on less critical causes of action not only helped build rapport with the judge but also contributed to favorable outcomes for the client. This approach highlights the balance lawyers must strike between zealous representation and practicality in court.
Judges appreciate lawyers who are reasonable and concede points, as this allows them to focus on stronger arguments, ultimately benefiting clients.
In oral arguments, recognizing when to concede can build goodwill with judges, aiding in achieving favorable outcomes, such as dismissing crucial causes of action.
Conceding on lesser points during litigation can demonstrate an attorney's understanding of the case, strengthening their position on more critical arguments.
By making it easier for judges to assess cases, lawyers who concede appropriately can enhance their credibility and represent their clients effectively.
Collection
[
|
...
]