Legal profession in the usa

Warming-up:

1. In your country, are there different kinds of lawyers? If so, define them.

2. Can you describe the way lawyers become qualified to practice law in Ukraine?

3. Can you name all functions of Ukrainian lawyer?

Vocabulary notes:

attorney	аторней, уповноважений, юрист, адвокат
trial court adjunct	помічник суду першої інстанції
grist	зерно, кількість
mill	млин
bench	суд, судді, склад суду, судова присутність
promotional pattern	система просування по службі
litigator	спеціаліст, який проводить судовий процес
office lawyer	судовий виконавець
counsel	адвокат, який бере участь у справі
promise	договірний обов’язок
litigant	сторона судового процесу
adversary	протилежна сторона судового процесу
the American Bar Association	Американська асоціація адвокатів
legislature	законодавча влада
affiliate	входити до складу, приєднувати(ся)
eligible	той, який має право
reciprocity	взаємність

Judges in the usa

The multitudinous judicial systems in the United States are operated by a variety of persons. Judges are at the core of any court system. They are the decision makers, the key officials around whom all else is arranged. However, there is a vast supporting cast. Most intimately connected with the judges are those who assist them in the process of deciding issues and cases: law clerks, staff attorneys, and trial court adjuncts. Beyond these are the clerical and administrative personnel: secretaries, clerks of court and their staffs, judicial educators, and court administrators. Outside the court systems are numerous organizations whose functions are to assist the courts in various ways. Finally, there are the lawyers who present cases, thus supplying the grist for the judicial mill.

Because American judges sit on courts of widely varying types and come from a variety of backgrounds and experiences, it is difficult to generalize about them. Two generalizations, however, are possible. First, judges in the United States initially come to the bench from other lines of legal work and after a substantial number of years of professional experience. Second, once on the bench they do not, in the main, follow a promotional pattern through the ranks of the judiciary.

Compared to the English and civil-law systems of judicial recruitment and promotion, the methods used in the United States are quite varied. These procedures generally lack means of assuring professional quality. Moreover, the American judges’ backgrounds are much more diverse than those of the English and civil-law judges. With the relatively minor exception of some lay judges on state courts of limited jurisdiction, all American judges have studied law and been licensed to practice law.

Although most judges have actually practiced law, the nature of that practice can be quite varied. Many judges have been litigators, but some have been office lawyers or counsel to organizations such as corporations or private associations. The types of law practice that judges have experienced range from small-town general practice to specialized fields in large metropolitan firms. Numerous judges have been lawyers in government service as prosecuting attorneys or counsel to government agencies, either state or federal. Some judges are former law professors, but their number is small. Many judges have earlier been active in political affairs, often as legislators, political campaign managers, or party committee members or chairmen. Indeed, many American judges can be described as former lawyer-politicians.

Another feature of the American judiciary that sharply distinguishes it from that of civil-law countries and other common-law countries is that persons can enter the judicial system at any level. A lawyer can initially become a judge on the highest court, the lowest court, or any in between. There is no system or pattern about this. In other words, a lawyer who has never been a judge can become a judge on a court of last resort or an intermediate appellate court or trial court, in either a state or the federal system. Lawyers who come on the bench at the trial or intermediate appellate levels have no real promise of moving to a higher court, although some may have hopes in that regard. Some judges do move up, but most spend their entire judicial careers on the same court. There is no system of promotion and no substantial sentiment among American lawyers, judges, or politicians that such a system would be desirable.