Effective Appellate Advocacy: Advice from the Bench (Seventh Circuit Day, Part 2)

7th Court
Professor Anne Berleman Kearney (left) moderates a question-and-answer session for students with Seventh Circuit Judges Michael Brennan, Diane Sykes, Frank Easterbrook, and Michael Scudder in Marquette Law School’s Lubar Center on Sept. 25, 2025.

What constitutes effective appellate advocacy? As part of Seventh Circuit Day in Eckstein Hall on September 25, 2025, Marquette Law School students heard answers firsthand from a group of judges of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit. These were Chief Judge Diane S. Sykes and Judges Frank H. Easterbrook, Michael B. Brennan, and Michael Y. Scudder. (Judge Brennan became chief judge a few days later, on October 1, upon Judge Sykes’s taking senior status.) Earlier in the day, students attended oral arguments before the court in the Law School’s Lubar Center, as described by Dean Kearney in the first of this series of blog posts. Those attending the midafternoon Q&A session, moderated by Professor Anne Berleman Kearney, were primarily upper-level students taking Appellate Writing and Advocacy.

Chief Judge Sykes started the discussion by stating that briefs are 95 percent of persuasive advocacy on appeal. Oral argument then amplifies, tests, and probes the strengths and weaknesses of the parties’ arguments. First, regarding the factual history in a brief: tell the facts in a story form. Make the factual narrative efficient, readable, and quickly understandable. Judges are generalists who need to ramp up quickly on the facts and procedural history. The facts should read like a good magazine article. Second, regarding the argument: select issues carefully. Pick the most salient issues. Present a well-organized package for pivot points that may be decisive. Help a court understand why the rule advocated for is the right one.

Continue ReadingEffective Appellate Advocacy: Advice from the Bench (Seventh Circuit Day, Part 2)

Jenkins 2025 Final Round

Please congratulate the winners of the 2025 Jenkins Honors Moot Court Competition: Aaron Steines and William Welder. Congratulations also go to finalists Suzanne DeGuire and Connor Reed.

Aaron and William received the Franz C. Eschweiler Prize for Best Brief. Aaron received the Ramon A. Klitzke Prize for Best Oral Advocate.

Special thanks to the judges of the final round: the Honorable Paul Thissen, the Honorable Shelley Grogan, and the Honorable Rachel Blise. The time and support of all our judges is greatly appreciated.

Continue ReadingJenkins 2025 Final Round

Jenkins Competitors Advance to Finals

The teams in the 2025 Jenkins Honors Moot Court Competition have distinguished themselves in their excellent advocacy. Many thanks to John Caucutt and Daniel Underwood and the Marquette Moot Court Association for organizing the competition well. We appreciate all the judges who grade briefs and come to the Law School to hear the oral arguments; we could not host this competition without their assistance.

The following teams advanced to the quarterfinal round:

Team 9 – Sydney Kojis and Mikayla Collins

Team 10 – Elizabeth Hansen and Rachel Sweet

Team 19 – Ava Mares and George Certalic

Team 28 – Reese Gee and Anna Pyle

Team 36 – Mario Hernandez and Isabella Gonzalez

Team 40 – Isabella Barnard and Ananda Deacon

Team 41 – William Welder and Aaron Steines

Team 51 – Connor Reed and Suzy DeGuire

The competition was especially fierce at the quarterfinal and semifinal rounds. Two teams—William Welder and Aaron Steines, and Connor Reed and Suzy DeGuire—emerged successfully from those rounds and will compete on Tuesday evening at the Lubar Center.

Best of luck, teams!

Continue ReadingJenkins Competitors Advance to Finals