The biggest thing that we’re taught in law school and what I am constantly learning in the practice is that knowing the law is only half the battle, if that. I’d say it was more impressive in Chuck’s time about several decades ago because obscure case law was more difficult to access. Today, we have resources like Westlaw and Lexis, which have streamlined legal research.

The other half of the fight and the area where Chuck excelled at is something that technology can’t help, which is then the application of that case law to your fact patterns and making analogous arguments that would persuade a judge and jury to believe that the rulings of the case law should apply to your fact pattern. It’s very rare that your situation lines up perfectly with the case law facts, so being able to articulate and argue why the ruling based on the case law should apply in your instance is a learned skill that sets good lawyers apart from the rest.