Teaching Judges: Appellate Expert Cherise Bacalski on Brief Writing and the Human Side of Law
Appellate specialist Cherise Bacalski teaches appellate writing at NYU Law's New Appellate Judges Program, and in this interview we discuss her insights from both sides of the bench and how her background in rhetoric shapes her approach to appellate advocacy.
- Training new judges: At NYU, Cherise teaches newly appointed appellate judges how to make their opinions more readable through proper structure, headings, and organization—skills that help both judges and practitioners.
- The rule is king: What is the rule in your case? Cherise explains that, whatever it is, that rule should inform every part of your brief.
- Write for a “hostile reader”: Reading your brief—your trenchant, brilliant, erudite, sparkling brief—is the last thing any judge wants to do. Forget being brilliant. Just be clear, concise, skimmable, and easy to digest.
- Lead with old information: One of the most effective writing principles is beginning each new point with familiar information to propel readers forward at the speed of thought, reducing the need for excessive explanation.
- The human element: Cherise views the law as fundamentally human. Understand you are talking to humans, not picking a lock.
- AI is an amazing tool, but not a replacement: Use AI to test arguments and identify weaknesses in briefs. But AI sometimes misses critical "smoking gun" evidence in case analysis.
Tune in for a masterclass in appellate advocacy that bridges the gap between academic rhetoric and practical legal persuasion from an attorney who's seen the system from multiple perspectives.
