Boyd & Jenerette Shareholder Kansas Gooden was quoted in an article featured in The Florida Bar News titled, “Lack of Oral Arguments Prompt Proposed Changes to Certification Process,” published on March 16, 2021. The article highlights a recently proposed amendment to Rule 6-13.4 Recertification (Appellate Practice), to reduce the number of oral arguments required to maintain board certification in appellate practice. Kansas, a board certified appellate lawyer, serves on the Board Legal of Legal Specialization and Education Committee and presented the amendment to the Florida Bar’s Board of Governors.
Excerpt from the article below:
“The proposed amendment would reduce from five to three the number of oral arguments required for an initial recertification. The number would drop to two for subsequent recertification cycles. Applicants, however, would still be required to meet the five oral argument requirement to become board certified.
The move is designed, in part, to address a decade-long trend by the appellate courts to grant fewer oral arguments, said Miami attorney Kansas Gooden, a BLSE member.
“It has become apparent on the applications,” Gooden told the PEC.
The proposal is designed to do more than help veteran practitioners maintain board certification.
Without the proposed change, senior attorneys will be less likely to allow junior associates to present oral arguments, a trend that would disadvantage beginning, women and minority lawyers, Gooden and others warn.
“The hope is to basically grow the next level of appellate attorneys,” Gooden said.
Gooden said appellate judges have been less willing to grant oral arguments as their workloads have increased.
“It’s just a case of the judges not having enough time because the number of filings is going up,” she said.
Fewer trials during the COVID-19 pandemic means fewer opportunities to request oral arguments, appellate lawyers say.
The proposed amendment represents a compromise. At one point, the Appellate Practice Certification Committee voted to do away with the oral argument requirement for recertification entirely, at least on a temporary basis.
But the BLSE wasn’t willing to go that far, Gooden said.
“It was one of the liveliest debates that I can ever remember,” she said.
The Appellate Practice Certification Committee’s proposal was prompted by concern over a rules petition the Board of Governors filed February 4 with the Supreme Court in Case No. SC21-164.
The proposed amendments would standardize Legal Specialization Rules, and among other things, eliminate the Appellate Practice Certification Committees’ discretion to waive certification and recertification requirements.”
To read the full article, please click here.
