Sen. John Kennedy, a Republican from Louisiana, began his portion of the questioning by asking the group if any had ever tried a case to verdict. One nominee, Federal Election Commissioner Matthew Spencer Petersen, was the lone person to indicate that he hadn't.
Sheldon White/Twitter |
You can watch the 5-minute video clip here. And it id definitely worth the view.
Let me be clear, I can't speak for Petersen's qualifications in his present job, and I'm sure he is a fine lawyer. He is, however, not a trial attorney (by his own admission). That is a problem because he is nominated to become a trial court judge in a very busy court.
When asked if he knew about a motion in limine (which, for our non-lawyers, is a very common motion filed and heard at the start of trials), Petersen fumbled through with his response and admitted his "background is not in litigation."
As a trial court judge here in Fort Lauderdale once said, "When people begin their response to a question without giving the answer, I know they don't know the answer."
After being asked again about the motion in limine, Petersen responded "I would probably not be able to give you a good definition right here at the table."
Other essential trial qualifications that Petersen lacked: Never tried a civil or criminal case; never tried a bench trial; he hasn't taken more than a couple depositions on his own, if that; he hasn't reviewed the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure or Rules of Evidence since at least law school; and he is not aware of the Daubert standard. All of these are essential for a trial attorney and trial judge.
The exchange between Sen. Kennedy and Petersen is brutal. Thankfully Sen. Kennedy revealed these issues. No one, regardless of their political persuasion, would want a judge hearing and presiding over a trial in their case who lacked such fundamental qualifications.
George C. Palaidis is a criminal defense and personal injury attorney practicing in Miami, Fort Lauderdale, and the South Florida region.
No comments:
Post a Comment