How I Manage My Courtroom:    Civil Court.    Criminal Court.  

Back to Top

D)  Reasonable postponements of ADR for good cause will be honored. (e.g. where there are valid discovery issues still pending or where a dispositive motion is under advisement.)


5.  At what point, if any, do you encourage the parties to settle or to exchange settlement offers/demands? 
When reasonably practicable to do so and in every case prior to the pretrial conference


6.  Do you require that a person with the ultimate authority to settle be present at settlement negotiations?
Yes, at least available by telephone if out of state or for other special circumstances. Appearance of a party by telephone must be agreed to by all parties or have prior approval of the court.


7.  How do you expect parties to handle discovery disputes?
A)  Attorneys are expected to follow the Rules and to make every effort to settle the dispute without court intervention. Only after such effort should counsel call the judge’s law clerk for a hearing time.

B)  All discovery motions are heard in the late afternoon, often at 4:30 p.m. or thereafter, by telephone conference call. The attorney seeking discovery shall call the law clerk and schedule an available time for a telephone conference call. The attorney shall then immediately inform opposing counsel of the scheduled date and time and inquire as to his/her availability.

C)  Counsel that is seeking discovery will inform the opposing counsel that letter briefs for both parties, setting forth the discovery issues, are due in the judge’s chambers at least five days prior to telephone conference. Each brief shall fully and concisely set forth the discovery at issue and the parties’ respective positions.

D)  At the appointed time on the chosen day, the attorney who is seeking discovery shall place the conference call.


8.  Do you conduct hearings and motions by phone? If so, please describe the procedure you would like attorneys to use to do so, including how testimony is to be transcribed and who puts the teleconference together. 
Discovery motions by phone are set up in advance with the judge’s law clerk. The conference call is initiated by the moving party. The teleconference may be, but is not usually reported.


9.  Do you have any preferences for courtroom decorum (including but not limited to cell phones, pagers, passing notes, communicating with others at the counsel table, water/beverages at the counsel table, approaching the witness, courtroom attire)?
A)  Attorneys should wear business attire when appearing in court.

B)  Cell phones and pagers that will interrupt the proceedings should be turned off prior to the commencement of any hearing.

C)  The court realizes that counsel at the table will communicate by note or whispered message and realizes that such communication may improve the quality of the representation (two heads being better than one). Counsel should be careful to make this communication as discrete and as considerate as possible. The communication should not be of a nature or length so as to delay or disrupt proceedings.

D)  The court provides water pitchers and styrofoam cups for counsel and clients. Coffee or other beverage in a paper cup is allowed, so long as it does not distract from the dignity of the proceedings.

E)  Such conventions as asking to approach the witness or to approach the bench are appreciated and add to the dignity of the proceedings.


10.  When, if ever, would you consider issuing sanctions, formal reprimands, holding an attorney in contempt, or reporting an attorney for unethical behavior? 
Without speculating as to circumstance that would force me to consider such extraordinary action, I can say that in the appropriate circumstances, I would take action consistent with my authority to maintain security and control in the courtroom that will foster public respect for the bench and the bar.


11.  Under what circumstances do you accept ex parte communications from counsel? Do you consider an attorney’s communication with your clerk a potential ex parte communication?
I do not accept ex parte communication from counsel under any circumstances. My clerks are advised to limit their communication to that necessary to convey procedural information.

12.  What is your practice with granting continuances and under what circumstances would you consider one?
A)  A continuance of cut-off dates set in the scheduling order is frequently necessary and may be granted by the court. Any amendment to the scheduling order should not interfere with the case coming to trial within a year of filing.

B)  A trial will not be continued simply because it may conflict with another trial. When the case is called, if an attorney is already in trial or is scheduled for a "day certain" that conflicts, the matter will be continued to later in the current trial block or shall have priority in the next trial block.

C)  A hearing or trial will be continued if there is a genuine medical emergency.

D)  Where counsel or client(s) has had long-standing prepaid vacation plans, the court will make every reasonable effort to accommodate those plans.


13.  With respect to oral argument, do you prefer an attorney to assume that you have read the supporting memorandum and exhibits and not reiterate written material?
A)  Yes, the Court will be fully prepared for the motion hearing. The Court will have completely reviewed all submission of the parties (except, perhaps, untimely submissions tendered just prior to the hearing). The Court will also have acquainted itself with the relevant law.

B)  It is always the goal of this court to provide Counsel with an opportunity to understand that they have been fully heard. Unfortunately the crowded Court schedule sets realistic and occasionally unrealistic limits on the time available for motions. The Judge takes it upon himself to be extremely well prepared and it is imperative that the attorneys be well prepared, concise, and focused. A hearing is never concluded without the Judge believing that he has adequate pleadings and has heard adequate argument to render a fair and impartial decision.


14.  What do you consider to be the basic requirements of good oral argument (including the amount of time appropriate for oral argument)? 
The argument should be brief and concise. The court will provide Counsel with an opportunity to be fully heard.


15.  What preferences do you have for jury trials? (How do you prefer voir dire to be conducted?)
A)  The Court will provide a venire panel of 14 to 16 potential jurors in civil cases. After giving preliminary instructions, the court shall initially voir dire the panel. The court will question the potential jurors so as to provide a profile as to the facts of the individual’s life (family, occupation, interests, prior experience with legal matters, etc.) and will commence the process of honing in on how the facts of this individual’s life may impact on the person’s ability to serve on the particular case.

B)  Each attorney then has their opportunity to interview members of the panel individually, focusing in on their earlier statements in response to the Judge’s questions, as well as ask any proper question of their own that the judge may not have raised.

C)  After the entire venire has been interviewed the attorneys will be provided a list of the sitting panel and will alternately indicate their peremptory challenges on that document. Any potential jurors who are supernumerary (at the bottom of the list after all peremptory challenges have been exercised) will be excluded from the panel.

Back to Top

Back to Top

Back to Top

David M. Duffy
Originally published in the September/October 1987 issue.
Author: William R. Kennedy

"Enthusiastic" and "hard-working" are the words most often used by his friends and colleagues to describe new Hennepin County District Court Judge David M. Duffy. It was his enthusiasm that led David to the law initially.

Born in Boston, Massachusetts, and raised in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, Judge Duffy graduated with honors from Villanova University with, of course, an "independent" major in Arts and Sciences. He moved on to the law school at Villanova and earned his Juris Doctorate in 1972. While there, he worked with the Villanova University Law Associates, a program representing indigent juvenile defendants. According to Judge Duffy, "This was an exciting time in the development of juvenile law. The implementation of the Gault decision was taking place in Philadelphia. I enjoyed the juvenile trial work and realized I enjoyed people and people-oriented activities. My clinical instructor, Lisa Richette, author, nationally known lecturer, and presently a judge in Philadelphia, impressed upon me the need for effective representation of the client, whether rich or poor."

While maintaining a full-time job, Judge Duffy was also a staff writer for the Law School newspaper where he wrote such timely and diverse articles as those based on interviews with the King of Torts, Melvin Belli, and with Dr. Davis Smith, Director of the Haight-Ashbury Medical Clinic.

After graduation, the "wanderlust" influenced Judge Duffy to move to San Francisco. After passing the California Bar, he began a general law practice as a sole practitioner in Mill Valley, California. He handled administrative, corporate, civil, criminal, contract, and family court matters. "Nothing in the world is as satisfying as helping someone with a problem," Judge Duffy remembered. "I enjoyed my first years as a sole practitioner; it was an experience I’ll never trade. I learned much about the ‘business’ of law and how difficult the business side can be."

In 1977, Judge Duffy came to Minnesota. "My family was here" he says, "and family is very important to me. My mother, who instilled this quality in us, even takes pride in the fact that my great-great uncle, Charles Bennison, embalmed General Grant. Our family has always known who was buried in Grant’s tomb," he said with a chuckle.

Judge Duffy joined the staff of the Hennepin County Public Defender’s Office in 1977. "It was amazing. It was like the job was created for me — fast-paced, people-oriented, challenging. I really loved it. I had the opportunity to work with and against some of the finest trial attorneys around. In my first year in the office, Jim Krieger and I worked on State v. Mack, which kept an alleged victim’s hypnotically induced testimony out of the Minnesota courtrooms . . . rather timely when you consider this year’s United States Supreme Court decision in Rock v. Arkansas, which held that a defendant’s hypnotically refreshed memory was admissible based on her constitutional right to testify on her own behalf."

Judge Duffy has always maintained a commitment to civic obligations. He is a member of the State Bar Criminal Law Committee, a member of the Legal Advice Clinic, and a guest lecturer at both the University of Minnesota and the William Mitchell College of Law. He is also a member of the California, Minnesota, Hennepin County and Federal Bar Associations. It is Judge Duffy’s belief that "you owe an obligation to society to do something to pay people back for the advantages you’ve received. Not everyone is as fortunate as we are. Even a small assist is better than ignoring this obligation. I’ve been proud to be a lawyer in Minnesota where lawyers have taken the lead in pro bono activities. I am especially proud to have been a Hennepin County Public Defender representing this community’s poor."

Working as a trial lawyer was Judge Duffy’s great love until, in 1984, he received a transfer to the Appeals Division of the office. Although, to most, this might appear to be a deviation from his "people-orientation," it wasn’t to David Duffy. He explained that he still had a lot of people contact, but he also had more of the intellectual challenge of the law. This position made Judge Duffy clearly aware that while one case in trial can help one person, one appeal can change things for more people.

David’s experience in the Office of the Public Defender was diverse, ranging from performing administrative duties to practicing trial and appellate law in both civil and criminal areas before all levels of courts in this State. A typical day found him arriving at the office early and working on an appeal, taking phone calls from the public, and responding to legal questions from office staff. He often left the office late. "Our law clerks hid from me after four-thirty. I don’t know why," Judge Duffy grins.

Judge Duffy’s enthusiasm extends to his personal life. In addition to a daily workout in lieu of lunch, he plays tennis, sails, and is a sometime golfer. Friends fortunate enough to be invited to dinner also know him to be an excellent cook. Even while cooking, though, he maintains a conversation about his first love—the law.

With his background, experience, ability, hard work and, above all, enthusiasm, we can all expect that Judge David M. Duffy cannot help but excel. Best wishes, Duff, from all of us. We expect and know that you will give your very best!

Back to Top

Back to Top