Vermont Bar Journal, Vol. 40, No. 2 Summer 2015, Vol 41, No. 2 | Page 8

President’s Column takes her skill and uses it as part of a moral framework. To put it more simply, a good trial advocate cannot be like Gorgias, she must understand that each trial, each examination carries moral consequences, and a lawyer’s efforts will have an impact on a very real world composed of clients, adversarial parties, perpetrators, and victims. Or to put it in improv terms, we must be aware of the space. Trial Advocacy as the Defining Feature of Our Profession Here is the third principle: what makes us unique as a profession is our role in the court process. Not only does the public expect us to be good at trying a case—it is what separates us from the MBAs, the business managers, the policy wonks, and the administrators. If our role is simply to manage projects, review documents for irregularities, or to contribute an application, then our days are numbered. Here is an example. When I first joined my firm, we, like many others, had a number of cases involving local zoning and ANR permits connected to wells and septic systems. These cases ranged from parties seeking to block the installation of septic systems to disputes about differing distances of well-shields. There was a lot of litigation work to be had because each town seemed to have a different standard that ranged from no standard to overly elaborate systems designed to block development. In 2007, the state of Vermont adopted uniform, technical regulations regarding the siting and construction of septic systems and wells. Our practice in this area dried up overnight. There are now several engineers that make a decent living from shepherding these applications through the highly technical administrative process. 8 Unless we are assisting a developer on a large, integrated proposal, we do not even see the application. Like that, an entire administrative practice was phased out. Now, this was for the best and was the right move for the state to make, but it shows that if we are banking on administrative work or transactional work to sustain our profession, we are in danger of losing what makes us unique, and that unique moral art that we as lawyers practice, must be sustained, developed, and encouraged across the profession. Lessons and Conclusions So how do we build the next generation of lawyers and ensure that the art of trial advocacy remains central to their purpose? In the past, it was simply a matter of letting them try cases. But with the decreasing numbers of cases going to trial, that option is disappearing. In 2014, there were only a 119 jury trials in the state of Vermont. Out of those eighty-eight were criminal, and only thirty-one were civil.3 At least on the criminal side, this represents a 25% decline over the past five years.4 It also means that apart from state’s attorneys, who might have three or four trials a year, the rest of the practice may go anywhere from six months to six years between trials. In the meantime, we are handling cases and settling them, but we are getting very little chance to hone the skills necessary to not just conduct a trial but conduct it in an expert manner with a virtue (and I mean that word in the ancient Greek sense as a synonym for excellence) equal to the obligation. In all modesty, I would like to recommend the following four points to you: 1. We must, as a profession, encourage trial work. THE VERMONT BAR JOURNAL • SUMMER 2015 Too often, we hear young at ѽɹ