May 2016
The Elon Business Law Journal is proud to present this part of a three-part interview series with the current presiding Business Court Judges in North Carolina. We had the privilege of sitting down with Judge Louis Bledsoe on April 5, 2016 to get his thoughts on several aspects of being a judge and the North Carolina Business Court in general.
Background
Judge Bledsoe obtained his undergraduate degree from the University of North Carolina as a Morehead (now Morehead-Cain) Scholar and his law degree from Harvard Law School with honors. He also served as a judicial clerk to The Honorable Sam J. Ervin III on the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit before entering private practice with the Charlotte-based law firm Robinson, Bradshaw & Hinson. In his spare time, Judge Bledsoe loves to read, play golf, and head to the beach.
Interviewee: Judge Louis Bledsoe, III, Special Superior Court Judge for Complex Business Cases
Interviewer: Paige Vankooten, Staff Editor for the Business Court Division, Elon University School of Law L’17
PV: You’ve been a judge since June of 2014. What do you most enjoy about being a judge?
LB: There are a lot of different things I enjoy about being a judge. I particularly enjoy being a part of our state’s administration of justice. I have enjoyed the transition from being an advocate, where you’re arguing for your client’s position, to the role of a judge, where you are attempting to determine what the law is, or how the law should be applied in a particular situation, or what is a fair and reasonable result in a particular situation. Assisting in the administration of the civil justice system through the Business Court is probably my favorite part of this job.
PV: What is the most difficult part about being a judge?
LB: I think the most difficult thing is getting it “right.” We work hard, and we’re very committed, and I think a lot of the issues we confront are thorny. Often, there is a lot of independent research to be done beyond what each advocate provides, and the advocates are typically quite skilled and make compelling cases for their client’s position. So I think the hard part is doing everything you can to be sure that you’re reaching your best determination of the “right” answer under the applicable law.
PV: What best prepared you for becoming a judge?
LB: My commercial litigation experience in private practice is the thing that best prepared me for being a Business Court judge. Many of the issues and the types of cases that I face now as a judge are issues and cases similar to those I’ve been involved with as a lawyer. More broadly, I think the best preparation is really just your own life and work experience – the combination of all the various things that make up your life and work experiences. The role of a judge can be uncomfortable at first, and I think there has to be something inside you that ultimately makes you feel that it is okay for you to serve in that capacity.
PV: What would make your job easier?
LB: That’s an easy one. My job will be easier when the Governor and the General Assembly nominate and confirm our fourth and fifth Business Court judges. The General Assembly has authorized the creation of a total of five business court judge seats. It will be really great for the three current Business Court Judges to have two new judges to assist with our substantial workload. Dividing the docket among five judges rather than three will allow us to continue to improve our productivity and the speed with which we can issue written rulings and opinions. I am very much looking forward to the addition of two new colleagues.
PV: You see a lot of lawyers in your courtroom. What is common among the most successful lawyers who appear before you?
LB: I think a common denominator among the lawyers who are most effective in the Business Court is that they are very well prepared. There is really no substitute for knowing your case, both factually and legally, and knowing the law that’s relevant to the motion that you’re advancing. I think all three of us on the Business Court are active questioners. We always read whatever is provided to us, and it is very helpful when the lawyer has the information that is of interest to the judge during the hearing, whether that’s a legal proposition or some aspect of the factual record. It is not necessary to be a TV performer to be successful in the Business Court; it really is about knowing your case.
PV: What advice would you give lawyers who are appearing in the North Carolina Business Court?
LB: Well, it would follow from the last question that they should be prepared; that would be the best thing. Beyond that, I think they should put themselves in my shoes as the judge. Sometimes lawyers come to a hearing and their oral argument is basically a reading or restatement of their brief. I think it would be more effective if lawyers were to put themselves in the judge’s role. I would encourage them to think about what the judge would want to know, what issues are really determinative, and what they think should really be emphasized to the judge. This allows the judge to more easily grasp the particular points that you believe should result in a favorable ruling.
Along those same lines, one thing to remember in the Business Court that is different than practice in regular Superior Court is that we are required to write published opinions. So it is important for the lawyers before the Business Court to think about the decision the Court is going to have to write. If you have a case that involves one of the motions that requires a written opinion (i.e. Rule 12, 56, 59, 60 or a final judgment), it would really serve each advocate well to spend some time thinking about what sort of opinion will be coming out of this particular motion, and how each advocate might advance his or her arguments to help the judge in crafting that opinion. The judge is not simply deciding the issue in this case; he is also going to be writing a published opinion that will be on Lexis and WestLaw and will be cited back to him and the other Business Court Judges as persuasive authority. So the judge will be thinking not only about how to resolve the particular motion before him under the applicable law but also about the legal reasoning that he will use for purposes of writing the published opinion and the potential future application of that opinion. That’s a little different wrinkle from regular Superior Court.
PV: What do you expect from attorneys in front of you in the courtroom?
LB: Again, I would expect them to be prepared. I also would expect them to be forthright and honest about the factual record and about the applicable law. If a lawyer isn’t aware or doesn’t recall what a case says, then I would expect the lawyer to be honest about that. Same thing goes for the factual record. I would prefer the lawyer not guess. The hearings are not a test, but rather a search for information. The lawyer will sacrifice his credibility if he does not accurately or truthfully answer the judge’s questions. Don’t squander your credibility unnecessarily. Don’t commit unforced errors of that nature. More broadly, I always expect lawyers to be professional and civil and interact with each other like adults. Happily, lawyers in North Carolina nearly always do that, which is one of the reasons it’s a great place to practice law.
PV: What advice would you give to a lawyer who wanted to become a judge?
LB: I would say if you want to be a good judge then you need to be willing to work hard because I think to be good at this requires hard work. You’re dealing with the law intensively so you’ll also need to enjoy the law. Ultimately, I think the best career advice for a practicing lawyer who wants to become a judge down the road is to be the best lawyer you can be and be available for opportunities as they come.
PV: What is your process for determining your rulings on a case?
LB: Before a motion hearing, I always read the complaint and all of the briefs. I certainly start with the complaint. Then the answer. I’ll review the case file, too. If there have been prior orders or opinions, I’ll certainly want to know what I’ve said concerning the issues in dispute in the case and then I’ll read the briefs that are dealing with the issue that is before me and develop some questions as well as tentative conclusions about how I think I might resolve the motions.
I’ll nearly always talk before the hearing with my law clerk assigned to the case, who has also read everything, and discuss where I think I am on the issues in dispute, what the law clerk’s views are, questions that I have, questions the law clerk has, and develop an idea about what I’m interested in learning at the hearing. Then, I’ll go to the hearing and let the lawyers argue. I want the lawyers to have an opportunity to argue their case before me so I tend either to have no time limits on argument or impose generous time parameters. I don’t go in and say you both have ten minutes and then I’m done. I like to let people argue and I’ll ask the questions that I have on my mind.
My law clerk and I will sit down immediately after the hearing to talk about whether what we heard at the hearing has changed our preliminary views. Sometimes what is raised at the hearing requires some further research, which I’ll talk to the law clerk about. I’ll either ask the law clerk to do that, or I’ll divide it up between us. But, in many cases we will have enough information at that point to decide the matter, and I’ll say here is what I think we ought to do, and then ask my law clerk what he or she thinks. We’ll discuss which points we agree about and which points we disagree about, and then I will usually talk the law clerk through what I think we should do and my reasons for it. This allows us to work together to develop a rough outline for the order or opinion, and then I’ll usually have the law clerk create a first draft. We’ll go back and forth through the editing process, which can be extensive. We can go back and forth with as many as fourteen or fifteen drafts, depending on the matter and the complexity. So it’s a very collaborative, ongoing process.
It typically helps me in deciding motions to mull things over, talk through things, and look at the issues from different angles. A lot of times writing the opinion will help me refine my thinking because good writing is a function of clear thinking. I think all three Business Court Judges have changed our minds as we have written opinions because the original ruling in our minds changed as it was distilled into writing. So I don’t view a case as finally decided until we have published the opinion.
PV: You practiced law for 29 years, from 1985 to 2014 at Robinson Bradshaw prior to becoming a judge. What did you most enjoy about private practice?
LB: I enjoyed my colleagues at Robinson Bradshaw the most. I’ve got a number of very close friends at the firm, and I enjoyed my friendships and my practice there immensely.
PV: Is there a highlight from those years in private practice? A case that still resonates with you?
LB: In the summer of 2001, I was on a team of lawyers from Robinson Bradshaw that worked with Sullivan & Cromwell and together we represented First Union through its merger with Wachovia. SunTrust Bank was attempting to derail the merger so it could merge with Wachovia. We successfully prevailed in that litigation, which was actually in front of Judge Tennille in the Business Court, and First Union and Wachovia succeeded in merging with one another. That was a highlight because we all recognized at the time that this merger was a very significant event in the history of the state.
PV: What was most difficult about transitioning from private practice to being a judge?
LB: One big difficulty was leaving the firm where I’d been for twenty-nine years. I wanted to be sure I transitioned my clients to other lawyers in the firm so the clients I had enjoyed working with for so long were comfortable. That side of it was very important to me.
As far as the transition, when you become a judge, you have to get used to everybody calling you judge [laugh]. One challenge to the transition that stands out in my mind was the difference in orientation. As a lawyer, my job was to advocate for my client’s position so the responsibility was to develop the most persuasive arguments to advance my client’s cause. But as a judge, I am deciding how the law applies to the facts of each case. I’m actually making the decision, and this required me to shift my perspective.
PV: What are the qualities of a great law clerk?
LB: I think a great law clerk is certainly a great writer and researcher because those are necessary skills. A great law clerk needs to have an intuitive feel for litigation and strategy because it helps to understand what’s going on in each case. For me personally, I need to have people who are not afraid to engage with me about the cases. It’s important that they’re very comfortable giving me their ideas, receiving my ideas, telling me when I’m wrong, and allowing me to tell them when I think they’re off base. It is a very collaborative back-and-forth exercise. I am best served when my law clerks feel free to engage with me in a productive back and forth exchange of ideas.
PV: How do you choose law clerks?
LB: I go through an application process. We typically use the process that I think most of the law schools sign up for, Symplicity. I accept applications through July and then I have interviews in August and September. One of my law clerks now is finishing in August of 2016 and the other one is a two-year law clerk finishing in 2017. I have a law clerk coming in August of 2016 to replace the law clerk that is leaving his clerkship and she is staying for one year. So I’ll hire for a one-year or a two-year term, depending on the circumstances.
PV: You clerked for former Hon. Sam J. Ervin III on the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit prior to entering private practice. In your opinion, what are the benefits of clerking for a judge and what did you take from this experience?
LB: I think clerking for a judge is a marvelous experience. I wouldn’t trade my clerkship with Judge Ervin for anything. He was a magnificent person and a great judge, and he left us way too soon when he passed away in 1999. I think a good judicial clerkship is, in a lot of ways, a bird’s eye view on how lawyers practice law, on good methods of practice and bad methods of practice. I think the Business Court clerkship is one of the best experiences a young lawyer can have if he or she wants to be a business litigator in North Carolina. You get to see some of the very finest lawyers and firms in the state because they regularly litigate in the Business Court. You get to see people who do it well. You’re able to assess and evaluate their tactics and approaches, and you can see what is effective and what isn’t. You have an intensive one- or two-year engagement where you’re watching these cases get litigated and you’re seeing how claims are brought, how defenses are mounted, how discovery is conducted, how motions are argued, and how trials are conducted. I think it is a really, really terrific post-graduate fellowship before you begin your law practice.
PV: What are your hobbies? What do you do to relax?
LB: I love to read! But I also like to play golf and visit the beach when I can.
Those are all the questions we have for you today, Judge Bledsoe. Thank you kindly for your time and for all of the contributions you’ve made to the great state of North Carolina in both business and law.