|
|
Text B The American Legal ProfessionTask: read the text and get ready to discuss its main points. Technically there is no such thing as an “American lawyer”: every state admits its own, and a lawyer licensed to practice in Florida is strictly speaking a layperson as far as Alabama or Alaska is concerned. Nonetheless, in the aggregate, this is a vast army of lawtrained men and women. The profession is, and always has been, quite diverse. There are many legal worlds. To begin with, there is the world of the big firm. These big firms recruit their lawyers from the “national” law schools – with big reputations and long traditions, like Harvard and Yale. We know in general what the work is: it includes securities law, antitrust law, bond issues, mergers, tax work, international trade. In both big and little firms, up to half the work could be described as “litigation”. Another staple of law practice is real estate: buying and selling houses or office buildings, deals with shopping centers, suburban developments. Estate work is also common to big firms and little firms alike. Big firms handle these affairs for captains of industry and for great old families. Middle-sized do the same for the medium-rich –manufacturers of plastic novelties, owners of restaurants, car-wash companies, apartment buildings. Small-town lawyers and solo practitioners handle farm estates. And so on. Somebranches of practice do tend toward specialization. There are lawyers who work on port trade, on chartering ships, on show business (“entertainment law”), on trademarks and copyrights. However, few lawyers are totally specialized. Big-firm lawyers cover many fields and many problems. But there are areas they definitely do not touch. One is divorce. It is the lawyers in smallish firms and in law clinics, and the solos, who handle “one-shot” clients – couples who want a divorce, victims of car crashes, people arrested for drunk driving. Some lawyers with one-shot clients struggle to make ends meet; others earn heaps of money. Since the early nineteenth century, law has been a prominent way “to get ahead” in the society. For much of American history, a lawyer meant “white male.” Black lawyers were rare birds in American history. Not a single woman was admitted to the bar before the 1870s. Indeed, when women tried to break into this all-male club, they met resistance and reluctance, to say the least. Opinions changed, but slowly and grudgingly. Equality of opportunity is not an easy goal to achieve, especially with regard to barriers of class. The cost of legal education is one of these barriers. Lawyers tend to come from the families of businessmen, teachers, professionals; they are not sons of grocery clerks or coal miners’ daughters. Over 73 percent of the practicing lawyers in Chicago came from “solidly middle-class or upper-middle-class-homes”.Many came from lawyerly or professional backgrounds not from working-class backgrounds. There are law schools in every major city and in almost every state; Alaska is one of the few that lacks this modern amenity. These law schools are both different from each other and much the same. They are remarkably similar in curriculum and method. They also tend to impose the same general requirements: a college degree, and the Law School Admission Test (LSAT). But law schools are quite different in prestige, money and power – and in quality of faculty and students. The stronger older schools are able to “skim off the cream”. Harvard, Yale, Berkley, and Chicago can afford huge research libraries; small schools cannot. Lawyers, like Americans in general, are joiners. They are united into a strong, permanent organization – the American Bar Association, the ABA, in short. There are also state, county, and city bar associations. But the ABA is still not an association of all American lawyers. No one has to join it though it has a huge membership. Law and lawyers are expensive. Many people who want or need a lawyer have trouble paying the price. But the state provides a lawyer, free of charge “public defenders”, to anyone accused of a serious crime who cannot afford to pay on his own. For civil cases, the situation is more complicated. A few lawyers have always made it a practice to do some work free for poor clients. There are now a number of law firms organized for the “public interest”.
Points for discussion: 1. Peculiarities of the American legal profession. 2. The main branches of law practice. 3. Equality of opportunities in legal world. 4. American law schools.
Text C Judges Task: read the text and focus on its main points. The judge is the presiding officer of the court. The statutory basis for the appointment of judges dates from the Act of Settlement 17001. Under the original arrangements the districts were grouped into 60 county court circuits, each with its own judge appointed by the Lord Chancellor from barristers of at least seven years’ standing. On the re-organisation of the criminal courts under the Courts Act 1971 the existing county court judges became Circuit judges. Every Circuit judge is by virtue of his or her office capable of sitting as a judge for any county court district and at least one is assigned to each district by the Lord Chancellor. A full-time District judge is barred from legal practice. District judges were formerly called registrars; the change of title reflected the fact that their functions are now judicial. They are responsible for procedural steps in court proceedings. Their administrative functions have now been transferred to substantial staffs of clerks and bailiffs. Judges themselves are not a separate profession: they are barristers who have demonstrated competence in litigation and have been elevated to the bench2, itself a name derived from the part of the Court where they sit. A barrister always enters the judiciary at the lower trial level. He is thereafter promoted, if he proves successful in the initial judicial post. The traditional function of judges is to apply existing rules of law to the case before them. The judge decides the interpretation of the law. After all the evidence has been given the judge summarizes the case, both law and facts, for the jury. This is called his summing up. Judges are capable of “making law” both through the interpretation of statutes and the doctrine of precedent. When an Act of Parliament makes no provision for the case in question and there is no existing precedent, the judge must, if necessity, create a new law. Judges are not under the control of Parliament, or the Civil Service. The independence of the judiciary is a fundamental principle of constitutional law. Closely related to judicial independence is the doctrine of judicial immunity. The professional judges, “High Court Judges”, deal with the most serious crimes. They are paid salaries by the state. Alongside with the professional judges there are unpaid judges. They are called “Magistrates” or “Justices of the Peace” (JPs)3. They are ordinary citizens who are selected not because they have any legal training but because they have “sound common sense”4 and understanding of their fellow human beings. Magistrates are selected by special committees in every town and district. Nobody, even the Magistrates themselves, knows who is on the special committee in their area. The committee tries to draw Magistrates from different professions and social classes. The work of the Magistrates’ Courts5 throughout the country depends on the unpaid services of JPs. Notes: 1 Act of Settlement – акт о престолонаследии 2 be elevated to the bench – возвысить до положения судьи 3 Magistrate, Justice of the Peace (JP) – судья, мировой судья 4“sound common sense” – (зд.) чувство здравого смысла 5 Magistrates’ Court – суд магистратов, мировой суд (рассматривает дела о мелких преступлениях)
Ex. 1. Say if these statements are true or false. 1. The judge is the presiding officer of the court. 2. Every Circuit judge is capable of sitting as a judge for one county court area. 3. A part-time district judge is barred from legal practice. 4. Here was the change of judges titles but their functions remained the same. 5. Judges themselves are a separate profession. 6. A barrister always enters the judiciary at the highest level. 7. The judge decides the interpretation of the law. 8. Judges are capable of “making law” through the doctrine of precedent. 9. Judges are under the control of Parliament. 10. Judicial independence is a fundamental principle of constitutional law. 11. Professional judges are paid salaries by the state. 12. Magistrates are also professional judges but they deal with less serious crimes. 13. Magistrates are selected by special committees in every town and district.
Ex. 2. Here are the answers to some questions on the text. What are the questions? 1. The Act of Settlement 1700. 2. The existing country court judges became Circuit judges. 3. A full-time district judge is barred from legal practice. 4. Registrars are responsible for procedural steps in court proceedings. 5. They are barristers who have demonstrated competence in litigation. 6. If he proves successful in the initial judicial post. 7. The judge summarizes the case for the jury. 8. The judge must, if necessity, create a new law. 9. The doctrine of judicial immunity. 10. The professional judges. 11. Justices of the Peace. 12. The committee tries to draw Magistrates from different professions and social classes. 13. The unpaid services of JPs.
Ex. 3. Complete the following sentences: 1. The judge is ... 2. On the reorganization of the criminal courts … 3. The Lord Chancellor assigned … 4. Registrars are responsible for … 5. The statutory basis for the appointment of judges dates from ... 6. Judges are barristers who ... 7. The traditional function of judges is ... 8. Judge’s summing up is ... 9. Judges “make law” through ... 10. The fundamental principle of constitutional law is ... 11. Judicial immunity means ... 12. The professional judges deal with ... 13. Magistrates or Justices of the Peace are ... 14. JPs are selected by ...
Ex. 4. Explain and expand on the following: 1. The judge is a presiding officer of the court. 2. There was the re-organization of criminal courts under the Courts Act of 1971. 3. Judges themselves are not a separate profession. 4. A barrister enters the judiciary at the lower trial level. 5. The judge decides the interpretation of the law. 6. Judges are capable of making laws. 7. Judges are not under the control of Parliament. 8. Alongside with the professional judges there are unpaid judges. 9. Magistrates are selected by special Committees.
Ex. 5. Points for discussion: 1. Long period of standing. 2. Entering the judiciary. 3. Functions of judges. 4. Judicial independence and immunity. 5. The appointment of Magistrates and their work. 6. Professional judges.
Text D Judges in the US Task: read the text, get ready to compare judges in Great Britain and in the US. In the United States judges are, of course, at the core of any court system. They are the decisions makers, the key officials around whom all else is arranged. 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: a person can enter the judicial system at any level, he or she can initially become a judge on the highest court, the lowest court, or any court in between. All American judges have studied law and have been licensed to practise law. Many judges have been litigators, some have been office lawyers or counsels to organizations. Numerous judges have been lawyers in government service as prosecuting attorneys or counsel government agencies. Some judges are former law professors. Lawyers become judges in the United States through four methods: (1) by nomination of the chief executive with confirmation by a legislative body, (2) by appointment of the chief executive from a short list of persons certified by an independent commission to be qualified for the position, (3) by popular election, and (4) by election in the legislature. Terms of office range from four or six years to the term “for life”. All federal judges hold office during good behaviour and can be removed only through impeachment by Congress. A federal magistrate judge is a full-time judicial offise, although in some courts it is filled on a part-time basis. Unlike federal judges, they are appointed by the court, and they hold office for eight years, with the possibility of reappointment. Federal magistrate judges perform two kinds of functions. First, they hold hearings on a variety of motions, such as motions seeking to control lawyers’ conduct of discovery in civil cases. Second, they are authorized to conduct trials in civil cases and in criminal misdemeanor cases if the parties consent. In other words, the parties can choose to go to trial before a magistrate judge instead of a district judge. If so, the magistrate judge is empowered to decide the case and enter final judgement in the name of the district court. The concept of judicial independence means that in deciding cases judges are free from control by the executive and legislative branches of government as well as from control by the popular will of the moment.
Ex. 1. Comparing the information of Texts B and C: Name the common features of British and American judges.
Text E US Attorneys Task: fill in suitable adjectives from the box.
There is a US attorney in each federal __________ district. US attorneys have __________ discretion, which makes them ___________ political figures in the community. Their decision to prosecute or not affects the wealth, freedom, right, and reputation of individuals and organizations in the district.
Dialogue 1. Lawyers who want to start their own practice Task:read the dialogue and reproduce it a) abridged b) in the form of a monologue. This is the conversation between an experienced lawyer Dr. Howard and a graduate of law school Richard Warner. Richard Warner: Dr. Harward, I’ve just graduated from law school and I’m at a loss, I don’t know whether to start my own practice or to work for a firm. What do you think the pros and cons of private practice are? Dr. Howard: You see, there are many reasons why I prefer to be self-employed. First of all freedom is very important. The opportunity to turn down cases and clients when you disagree morally with the legal principles expoused by the clients. Richard Warner: Is legal practice secure enough? Dr. Howard: No, there is no such thing as job security in legal practice. But still you feel much more secure when you are your own boss and don’t depend on the success or failure of the firm you work for. Richard Warner: Dr. Howard, did you face any difficulties when you started your private practice? Dr. Howard: Sure! One of them was getting an office. You know, some lawyers work at home. But I don’t think it’s a good idea. You should have business relations with your clients. And home atmosphere might spoil them. Anyway, if you can’t get an office you can use the attorney conference room in the local courtroom or meet the client at his or her place of business. Richard Warner: What is your attitude to a sole practice and partnership? Dr. Howard: Well, you see, they both have some economic and psychological advantages and disadvantages. When I started my own practice I had a shared office arrangement. That means that I could remain a sole practitioner, get the second opinion any time I needed and paid much less for the rent. Richard Warner: It must be not easy for a starting lawyer to get clients. Dr. Howard, did you have to advertise your services? Dr. Howard: What is important for any business is the location of the office. It should be in the area where there is a need for it. My first clients were my friends and relatives. If fact it happens with every lawyer starting his own practice. Later they advertised my services to their friends and so it worked for some time though it was not enough. And I had to advertise my work in local newspapers. Richard Warner: Dr. Howard, thank you very much for your recommendations and advice. I think I’ll be self-employed. And the difficulties I’m going to face will be justified by the rewards. Dr. Howard: I think you’ll manage. Good luck! Notes: pros and cons – за и против Ex. 1. How is the following expressed in the dialogue? 1. protected against danger or risk; 2. a state of being a partner, esp. in business; 3. a person who pays a professional person, esp. a lawyer, for help and advice; 4. personal, not shared with others; 5. earning money from one’s own business and not as pay from an employer; 6. to meet an unpleasant state of affairs; 7. to make services known to the public; 8. a favourable moment or occasion; 9. a sum of money fixed to be paid for a room or a building; 10. belonging or allowed to no other, unshared.
Ex. 2. Study the dialogue and make a list of expressions the speakers use to: · ask for suggestions; · make suggestions; · express preferences.
Ex. 3. Translate and activate the following sentences in your speech: 1. Каковы «за» и «против» частной практики? 2. Я предпочитаю работать на себя. 3. Возможность отказаться от каких-либо дел и клиентов привлекает меня. 4. Ты чувствуешь себя более защищенным, если сам являешься своим боссом. 5. Риск существует в любой деятельности особенно, если нет опыта. 6. Снять хороший и недорогой офис – большая проблема. 7. Преимущества и недостатки есть как в партнерской деятельности, так и в работе самостоятельно практикующего юриста. 8. Вам следует снять помещение совместно с другой юридической фирмой. Dialogue 2. Legal Education Task:study the dialogue between Law students from the USA and from the Belarusian State University, Law Faculty.
Ex. 1.Speak about legal education in the USA using the following words and word-combinations. to be approved, to be available, private, state support, to last, academic year, trimester, curriculum, entirely, to be prescribed, Common Law course, civil procedure, Criminal Law, general constitutional course, practical work.
Ex. 2.Fill in the blanks with the appropriate derivatives from the box: special – specialize – specialized; quality – qualified – qualification; investigate – investigation – investigator; notary – notarized – notarial. 1. Did you have to do any ________ action of your own during your practice? 2. _______ industrial courts deal with disputes over contracts on employment matters. 3. The advocate ________ the judge’s opinion as erroneous. 4. Your will is not valid unless it is _______. 5. He was disclaimed his ______ because he violated some moral rules. 6. What branch of law do you _______ in? 7. Your case will be tried by a ______ judge. 8. The Law Society ______ complaints against lawyers by their clients. 9. Only __________ lawyers can work in the Procurator’s office. 10. A _______ has the authority to witness signing of legal documents. 11. The _________ carefully examined the scene. 12. In the US there are a limited number of ______ offices established by law.
Ex. 3.Sum up the information you have learnt from the dialogue. Compare the process of getting legal education in Belarus and the USA. Focus your attention on: · types of universities; · terms of studies; · curriculum of studies.
Revision Translation Task: translate into English. |
|
The Justice Department is responsible for _________ execution of the laws under the president’s authority. The main administrators of ________ law enforcement are the ninety four US attorneys, appointed by the president on the advice and consent of the Senate. Unlike federal judges, they are _________ appointees who serve at the pleasure of the president and are expected to relinquish their positions with the government changes.