The following is an excerpt from Practice Perspectives: Vault's Guide to Legal Practice Areas.
Kristin Cope is a skilled trial and appellate lawyer. She combines bold stand-up representation with goal-oriented approaches to litigation to protect and advance her clients’ interests. Kristin’s practice focuses on complex litigation, frequently involving high-stakes business disputes and cutting-edge issues in the intellectual property (IP), energy, technology, and financial sectors, and encompassing federal constitutional law, patent law, insurance law, trademark, and federal preemption. She has briefed and argued complex appellate issues and advised on appellate preservation and strategy issues during trial and has represented clients in state and federal trial courts, various Federal Circuit Courts of Appeals, and the United States Supreme Court. Kristin has substantial experience in disputes regarding trade secrets and other IP, breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty, business torts, consumer liability, and class action claims. Kristin serves as the Pro Bono Chair of O’Melveny’s Texas offices and maintains an active pro bono practice. She has received awards for outstanding public service and commitment to the community, is proud of the Dallas team for receiving the Dallas Volunteer Attorney Program’s Gold Award for Pro Bono Service, and actively supports the Leukemia and Lymphoma Society and other charitable organizations.
Describe your practice area and what it entails.
My practice area is extremely diverse, on purpose. I do complex, high-stakes commercial litigation in the IP, energy, technology, and financial sectors and practice in all types of courts—state and federal, trial, and appellate. A unique part of my practice is also “embedded appellate” work, wherein I am part of a trial team but with an eye towards the briefing and appellate preservation issues at play.
What types of clients do you represent?
My clients are also wide-ranging. I do a lot of technology work, but that spans from airlines, energy leaders, social media companies, and leading telecommunications providers to aerospace and others. I also work with everyone from insurance companies to banks and consumer product providers. Every client presents a chance to deeply learn about their business, their industry, and their main legal interests.
What types of cases/deals do you work on?
I tell people that my “specialty” is trying cases and winning appeals. Otherwise, I do many kinds of cases. In particular, I often litigate trade secret and trademark disputes (for both plaintiffs and defendants), complex insurance disputes, false advertising or other class actions, and handle many business torts and breach of contract fights. And of course, I handle these cases at trial as well as on appeal.
How did you choose this practice area?
I’ve always been competitive and was never one to pull back from a fight. But what drew me in is wanting to be an oral advocate. I fell in love with appellate work because it challenges me to analyze complex issues and present our arguments in a way that simplifies, clarifies, and confirms our position. And trial work is similar because, ultimately, my job is to deeply learn the facts and then find a way to tell my client’s story in a way that makes clear that they should prevail.
What is a “typical” day like and/or what are some common activities in your day-to-day work?
I genuinely don’t have a “typical” day, and that’s what I love about it. The early analytical stages of a case differ from the intensive, document-based preparation needed when you are preparing for numerous depositions. The written advocacy really kicks in when you enter hearings and begin important dispositive motion practice. And the storytelling is crafted throughout but culminates with the all-consuming (but amazing) work for trial or oral argument.
What training, classes, experience, or skills development would you recommend to someone who wishes to enter your practice area?
If you want to be a trial lawyer, you need to write and you need to be on your feet. There’s simply no substitute. Take every opportunity to write substantive pieces, learn to write, get feedback on your writing, and try again. And look for any and every opportunity to stand up and advocate: Do it in class, in mock trial, moot court, or local city council meetings—whatever. Ask to take on depositions, attend hearings, and take any role at all in trial. Just start honing your craft.
What do you like best about your practice area?
I love that I am always learning. Every case presents a new industry to understand and a unique area of law that may be complex, unclear, or evolving. And I love being in court. Whether the audience is a panel of judges or a full jury box, there’s nothing like the chance to make your case—live—and being there when your audience “gets it” and your client prevails.
What is unique about your practice area at your firm?
I feel very fortunate that O’Melveny allows me to be a “double major.” I am fully a trial lawyer, who runs complex litigation and shepherds clients from case filings through trial. But I am also fully an appellate lawyer, where I get to author sophisticated briefings and advocate at all levels of state and federal appellate courts. Very few firms are set up in a way that would allow me to excel in both.
What are some typical tasks that a junior lawyer would perform in this practice area?
Junior lawyers are integral members of the team and doing key substantive work. For trial work, that includes claim analysis, case research, witness and deposition preparation, and briefing. Junior lawyers are often covering or even taking depositions as well. For appellate lawyers, I often rely on junior lawyers to craft the outline and then to do an entire draft themselves to start. The process of refining and revising is a team effort, but junior lawyers are key to framing it up. I also really rely on them for case analysis and talking points to prepare for oral argument.
What is your routine for preparing for oral arguments?
It depends on the case. But it always starts with a deep dive into the brief, trying to assess what a “new” reader would wonder based on the papers and trying to tackle that. I want to go in with talking points that emphasize my strong points and frame the case on our turf but then the many topical sound bites on the issues that are most likely to be points of discussion so that I am prepared to be fully responsive no matter which direction the judges wish to take the argument.