Commercial and Federal Litigation Section Hosts Justice Lawrence Knipel for the Third Session of Webinar Series
On Dec. 13, 2022, the Commercial and Federal Litigation Section hosted the third in a year-long series of monthly webinars featuring conversations between junior attorneys and Commercial Division justices throughout the state. The guest for this event was Justice Lawrence Knipel, who sits on the Commercial Division in Kings County.
Justice Knipel is a graduate of New York University Law School and began his legal career as an intern at the Nassau County Legal Aid Society, Civil Division. In 1978, he went to work as an associate at Van Ginkel & Benjamin, a firm that specialized in tax law. Following a brief stint in private practice, from 1980 through 1990, Justice Knipel served as a law clerk to Judge Martin Schneier (1980-1982) and Justice Jules Spodek (1982-1990). In 1991, Justice Knipel became a judge of the Kings County Civil Court. He held that position until 1998, when he was elected as a justice to the Kings County Supreme Court. In 2013, Justice Knipel was named Administrative Justice for Civil Matters. During his time as an administrative justice, he has implemented many innovative programs, including the inauguration of the nation’s largest and most comprehensive central pre-trial discovery complex.
The event was structured as a “casual” discussion geared toward what young lawyers should know about appearing before Justice Knipel. Viktoriya Liberchuk and Paul Downs served as moderators for the event. Liberchuk is a litigation associate at Farrell Fritz, P.C., where she is an active contributor to the firm’s New York Commercial Division Practice Blog. Downs is a litigation associate at Foley Hoag LLP, where he devotes majority of his practice to commercial and trade secrets disputes.
The Value of Oral Argument
Justice Knipel kicked off the discussion by describing the impact oral argument has on a case. Specifically, he stated that it is a big mistake for attorneys, including young attorneys, to waive oral argument during motion practice. For as much as it is said that oral argument has little impact on cases, Justice Knipel indicated that it still plays a crucial role for him. He noted that oral argument provides a valuable opportunity for attorneys to show how the case should come out in their client’s favor and to clarify any issues in the motion papers. Indeed, Justice Knipel said that without oral argument, he is left to sort out the issues on his own.
A Personal Attack Is Not an Argument
Next, the moderators steered the conversation toward courtroom etiquette. Justice Knipel mentioned that attorneys should not avoid answering questions he asks during oral arguments. He noted that it’s fine for attorneys to admit that they don’t know the answer to a question during oral argument, so long as they don’t allow this mishap to throw off their entire argument. Moreover, Justice Knipel stated that while it’s important for attorneys to have command of their case, he doesn’t expect attorneys to know exact pages where things are located, except for possibly the crucial piece of evidence or issue in the case.
In addition, Justice Knipel advised that any personal attacks during oral arguments or in motion papers are unacceptable and not permitted. In his view, personal attacks are a waste of time and end up deteriorating a particular argument, and potentially an attorney’s reputation.
Legal Writing and Motion Practice: Less Is More
Lastly, Justice Knipel provided some insights on legal writing and his approach to reviewing motions. In terms of legal writing, Justice Knipel said that brevity and clarity are two essential components of a strong legal brief. Highlighting the fact that Kings County Supreme Court is one of the busiest courthouses in the country, he advised that attorneys should avoid irrelevant or “kitchen sink” legal arguments, and focus squarely on the key issues at hand.
In terms of reviewing motion papers, Justice Knipel stated that he always starts by reviewing the reply papers. He noted that reply papers typically provide a clear and cogent presentation of the pertinent facts and issues. He also suggested that attorneys should not get carried away with the preliminary statement, as he tends to jump right into the argument section when reviewing motions.
The moderators closed the event by thanking Justice Knipel for his time and informing the audience that the nextguest for the series would be Justice Joseph Risi from the Queens County Commercial Division.
James R. Maguire is a commercial litigation associate at Farrell Fritz, P.C. His practice focuses on complex commercial disputes in areas including real estate, construction, and contract disputes. James is a frequent contributor to Farrell Fritz’s New York Commercial Division Practice blog.
