Oral Argument in Civil Appeals: Preparation, the Hot Bench, and the Question Counsel Cannot Dodge

This session equips civil appellate practitioners with a disciplined preparation framework covering three interdependent competencies: record mastery, moot court design, and brief verification. Drawing on Ismail Amin’s experience trying and arbitrating more than 85 matters and arguing before multiple federal Circuit Courts of Appeals and state appellate courts, the session focuses on the preparation disciplines necessary to present complex civil, commercial, securities, and contract appeals with precision and confidence. Attorneys will learn how to build a record-to-argument cross-reference, structure an adversarial moot court, and personally verify every citation and quotation before stepping to the podium. The session will also examine how recent sanctions involving inaccurate or nonexistent authorities reinforce the advocate’s responsibility to know and verify the materials presented to the court.

This session covers what happens when appellate preparation meets the pressure of the courtroom: managing relentless judicial questioning, responding to difficult hypotheticals, and protecting the client’s position when a judge presses counsel toward a concession. Drawing on Ismail Amin’s extensive experience in trial, arbitration, and appellate advocacy, including arguments before federal Circuit Courts of Appeals and state appellate courts, the session will examine the distinction between waiver and forfeiture when a statement is made at the podium and the qualifying language counsel can use before making a concession. It will also address the professional responsibility implications of an inaccurate statement during oral argument and the use of FRAP 28(j) and Model Rule 3.3 to address post-argument corrections.