In the previous article, we talked about the fab model, that is to say, when explaining the legal service plan to the client, we must identify the client’s needs and describe our What benefits can legal service products bring to them and solve the pain points of customers? This is the key node that we as lawyers must first find.
In the scenario where litigation lawyers provide legal services, judges can also be our clients. Now we can communicate with them, report the basic case information, and present it to them on behalf of the parties. Speech skills can also be actively used when mediating and explaining the case.
I read a book a while ago, Report Up, which summarized some superficial understanding of the difference between public speaking and reporting to senior executives.
Public speaking, such as his speech, needs to be mastered within 15 minutes, so you can describe the details of the scene from a storytelling perspective to give the audience a sense of involvement. When reporting to senior executives, you should get to the point. , let executives know loyalty and employee priorities in the shortest possible time.
So in this scenario, the judge is actually similar to a company executive.
Now, combined with the daily work scenarios of litigation lawyers, we regard judges as "senior managers" of lawyers and talk about how to use clear language and logic to convey opinions to judges simply and directly in a short time. Presentation skills influence audience decision-making.
In the process of reporting to the judge, we need the following aspects. To help, start by analyzing your audience. Say the important thing. Third, build a framework. Only in this way can there be logic and hierarchy. Commitment to present our views and ideas to the judge within a short period of time.
In this case, the judge is compared to an executive because judges and executive officers have some common characteristics:
1. I am very busy. I hope the lawyer can be straightforward and concise, I don’t have time to listen to the lawyer’s nonsense;
Everyone may have this experience, especially at the end of the year, a judge may have five or six court sessions a day, arriving every half hour It will be opened once an hour. trial, so they don't have that much time to listen to lawyers. Talking endlessly, crying about his case like a client
2. Very smart, hoping that the lawyer can objectively state the facts and the client's claims, and hating the lawyer challenging his authority;
Don't underestimate the intelligence of any judge. Maybe when our lawyer said the first sentence, he already knew what we were going to say next, so there was no need to emphasize too much or beat around the bush. We need to get straight to the point and make our points like foreigners think.
. 3. Understand the law and understand lawyers, even better than lawyers. I hope lawyers can provide clues and context for fact-based legal support, and I hate lawyers talking about the meaning of the rule of law.
Judges, like us lawyers, mostly study law, and their legal knowledge is even more solid than ours, because they have saved many more cases of the same type over a long period of time than our lawyers, so they His grasp of laws and judicial interpretations will be much more solid than ours. Where's the lawyer? Don’t talk too much about the meaning of the rule of law, but actually express our views to the judges. This may win more approval and applause.
I understand what the judge needs, what needs to be resolved, and what needs to be resolved quickly. After that, the next step is to draw conclusions. Let’s talk about the key points first.
Whether you are communicating with the judge before the trial or stating your views during the trial, you should first make a conclusion and then list some points to support the conclusion. It is best to use a "total-subtotal" structure.
I remember that I handled a divorce lawsuit. When I expressed the client’s request for mediation to the judge before the trial, I said this:
Hello, judge, my client agrees. Mediation.
First of all, the custody of the child belongs to the woman, and the man pays the child support. The specific amount of the maintenance fee can be negotiated with the other party;
Secondly, there are two mediation options for real estate. The first option is balabala; the second option is balabala.
Please do more mediation work before court to facilitate mediation.
When I said this, it took no more than 1 minute to express our client’s willingness and mediation plan to the judge concisely and directly, and the judge understood it immediately.
But my client cried and talked to the judge for an hour and a half, and everything he said was actually the meaning of this minute. He can explain his dissatisfaction or grievance fully but emotionally, but the lawyer should be more rational. He should explain to the judge the client's needs and the problems to be solved concisely and clearly on behalf of the client. Therefore, the judge's needs have been understood and fully analyzed, and a logical conclusion should be drawn.
No matter what you say to the judge, if you say more than three sentences, you must set the framework in advance. The point of building a framework is to express complex problems in relatively simple language.
The schema could be Total-Subtotal, 1.2.3, First, Second, Last. Doing so will not only allow lawyers to have ideas, logic, and quality when making statements to the judge, but will also make the judge less tired and easier to understand. It can even use language to magically help the judge make decisions.
I remember that once when the appellee submitted supplementary representation opinions to the court in the Intermediate Court, the judge first raised six questions in his mind. After I clearly remembered these six questions, I took these six aspects as supplementary institutional opinions. What are the representation opinions raised after each litigation focus? Then, under each attorney's opinion box, the specific facts and laws were elaborated from the 1233 level. Such a supplementary attorney's opinion was recognized and agreed by the judge. Therefore, whether it is in language or in the written litigation materials we submit, we must draw conclusions. We must first understand what the judge wants to resolve, and then explain our matter in layers and angles. This is a point of view. A legal perspective. Such a logical and clear structure will definitely play a positive role in court.
Einstein once said that if you can't explain it simply, you don't fully understand it.
Therefore, when a lawyer makes a statement or "report" to the judge, he should first draw conclusions based on familiarity with the case, set a framework, and simplify complex issues. If the lawyer "reports" to the judge in straight to the point, simple and clear language, the judge will definitely agree with you in his heart, and maybe even give you a big thumbs up~
——END——
Now, my new challenge is to write an essay of more than 100 words every day. Thank you for coming to witness my persistence!
Tianjin Wei Rui Law Firm? Lawyer
WeChat ID: luoyilvshi