• State of North Dakota
• State of Missouri
• State of Wyoming
• State of Colorado
• State of Montana (currently inactive, but could be reactivated via petition)
• United States District Court for the District of North Dakota
• United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit
• United States Supreme Court

Attorney and Partner, Pearce Durick Law Firm, Bismarck, ND (focusing on courtroom advocacy, especially jury trials)

United States Attorney (presidentially appointed and confirmed by U.S. Senate) for the District of North Dakota (i.e., chief federal prosecutor for ND)

Continuing part-time legal practice as a full-time law professor, including jury trials

Other Information: Certified Public Accountant (though not in an active accounting practice and not handling matters as an accountant)

As a Student:

• Stanford Law School, JD (estimated class rank: top 15%)
• Dickinson State University, BA summa cum laude
• Northland Community and Technical College, AA

As a Faculty Member:

• University of Missouri School of Law Professor
• University of Wyoming College of Law Dean and Professor
• Dickinson State University President

• Mosser v. Denbury Resources, Inc., U.S. District Court for the District of North Dakota Case No. 1:13-cv-148, North Dakota Supreme Court Case No. 20160379, 2017 ND 164, 898 N.W.2d 406. A North Dakota law firm representing a ranch family asked Steve to serve as lead counsel in the federal jury trial scheduled for November of 2016. Just before trial was scheduled to begin, the U.S. District Court Magistrate Judge decided to certify seven questions of state law to the North Dakota Supreme Court. Switching roles from trial to appellate counsel, Steve wrote the briefs and argued the case for the ranch family before the North Dakota Supreme Court. In favor of the ranch family, the Supreme Court held that the surface owner owns the pore space (small holes in rock) underneath the land, that a mineral developer must compensate a surface owner to dispose saltwater in the pore space, that the North Dakota Oil and Gas Production Damage Compensation Act does not limit damages to reduction of market value, and that recovery may be based on what others pay to use pore space to dispose of saltwater.
• Brandon and Constance Jalbert v. Eagle Rigid Spans, Inc., Southwest Judicial District Court, Hettinger County, North Dakota, Civil No. 21-2013-CV-00016 (October 13 to 14, 2015). With co-counsel from a North Dakota firm, Steve represented a farm family that purchased a large steel building from Eagle Rigid Spans. The farm family sought recovery due to the problematic design of the building, which caused substantial roof problems. Eagle Rigid Span claimed that the design was adequate and that the roof would not collapse. The jury found in favor of the farm family, returning a verdict of almost twice the purchase price of the building, plus interest at the maximum allowable rate. After an appeal where Steve’s trial co-counsel represented the farm family, the North Dakota Supreme Court affirmed the judgment for the farm family. See Jalbert v. Eagle Rigid Spans, Inc., 2017 ND 50, 891 N.W.2d 135.
• Cooperative Power Association v. Westinghouse Electric Corporation, United States District Court for the District of North Dakota, Civil No. A1-90-150 (October 18 to 22, 1993). In this commercial litigation case, Steve served as lead trial counsel for Westinghouse, particularly on technical issues involving expert testimony, though a law firm partner was lead counsel for this client for matters before and after trial. A power cooperative sued Westinghouse, claiming that the electrical transformer that Westinghouse sold breached its warranty and caused several million dollars’ worth of damage to its power plant. In its verdict, the jury found that the transformer was not defective. Other claims were dismissed via post-trial motions, and the Eighth Circuit affirmed the dismissal of the case against Westinghouse. See Cooperative Power Association v. Westinghouse Electric Corporation, 60 F.3d 1336 (8th Cir. 1995).
• United States v. Maria Vega (fictional name), Sergeant, U.S. Marine Corps, General Court-Martial, Navy and Marine Corps Trial Judiciary, Southern Judicial Circuit, Marine Corps Recruit Depot, Parris Island, South Carolina (December 5 to 18, 2014). In this general (i.e., felony) court-martial trial, Steve served as pro bono lead (civilian) counsel, pursuant to the request of two of his former students, who were then serving as JAG officers. They asked him to assist them in the defense due to the size of the case—i.e., the large number of allegations and witnesses and the mass (over three hundred pages) of the Command Investigation of the accused. This jury trial lasted two weeks, with the government listing 45 witnesses and calling additional witnesses not on its pretrial list. The client, a Drill Instructor, was accused of 29 counts (“charges and specifications,” in military terminology), including alleged physical and other abuse of recruits, falsification of official records, disrespect to officers, conspiracy to obstruct justice, etc. A pretrial brief by the prosecutor asserted that the defense team was claiming that “somehow the circumstances of the Command Investigation caused nearly 40 individuals to en masse invent allegations against the accused.” Actually, Steve presented the testimony of an expert in memory, who explained the many limitations of human memory that meant that the witnesses were mistaken, but did not assert that the witnesses against the accused were lying. After motions to dismiss, twenty counts went to the jury (“members of the court,” per military terminology). Although guilty verdicts, which at that time could be returned in court-martial trials with only a two-thirds majority, are common in general court-martial trials, the court members returned not guilty verdicts on all twenty charges and specifications. See WYOMING LAWYER April 2015, items starting at 24.
• Winning jury verdicts and convictions (or orders of confinement) in eight out of nine trials as U.S. Attorney (i.e., federal prosecutor) and Special Assistant Attorney General in Missouri, including three against sexual predators (considered by many to be the most difficult criminal cases).
• Winning jury verdicts or judgments in all but one of several jury trials in civil cases, some (particularly early in career) as “second chair” and others as lead or sole trial counsel.
• Successful appeals in six out of seven cases before the North Dakota Supreme Court and the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit (whose jurisdiction includes North Dakota).
• About two dozen North Dakota administrative law judge hearings, with winning results in about two-thirds of these cases.

Selected Books:

HOW TO WIN JURY TRIALS: BUILDING CREDIBILITY WITH JUDGES AND JURORS (ALI-ABA 1998) OPPOSING THE ADVERSE EXPERT: A COMPREHENSIVE GUIDE FOR EVERY STAGE OF LITIGATION (American Bar Association Litigation Section 2d ed. 2018) (first edition published in 2009 as ATTACKING ADVERSE EXPERTS)

TRIAL TECHNIQUES AND TRIALS (11th ed. 2021 and 12th ed. 2024, with Thomas A. Mauet) and MATERIALS IN TRIAL ADVOCACY: PROBLEMS & CASES (7th ed. 2011, 8th ed. 2015, 9th ed. 2019, and 10th ed. 2024 with Thomas A. Mauet & The Hon. Warren D. Wolfson)

Law Review Articles: Pieces, including several about expert witnesses, in several law reviews aimed primarily at academic audiences, including the American Journal of Trial Advocacy, Stanford Law Review, the Review of Litigation, Indiana Law Journal, Nebraska Law Review, North Dakota Law Review, Tulsa Law Journal, South Carolina Law Review, University of Richmond Law Review, Gonzaga Law Review, Arizona State Law Journal, SMU Law Review, the Journal of Dispute Resolution, St. Louis University Law Journal, and the University of San Francisco Law Review Chapters in Multi-Author Books: Five chapters in multi-author books, including “Destroying the Credibility of a Professional Products Expert,” “A Defense Attorney’s Guide to Building Strong Relationships with Jurors,” and “Questions To Ask Yourself Before Objecting.”

Bar Journal Articles (for practicing lawyers): Articles, including many about courtroom advocacy, in state bar journals for Michigan, Minnesota, New Mexico, Oregon, Texas, Washington, and Wyoming, as well as national publications for lawyers such as The Federal Lawyer, The Practical Litigator, Trials & Tribulations, Trial, The Trial Lawyer, and Trial Lawyers Guide.

For several decades, Steve has been a featured speaker for the Professional Education Group, the nation’s leading provider of continuing legal education for practicing attorneys. See www.proedgroup.com He has presented hundreds of seminars in dozens of U.S. states and Canadian provinces, including the following:

• In Thinking Inside the Box, Steve teaches trial attorneys to approach a trial from the perspective of jurors, to increase their credibility and persuasiveness.
• In Dynamite Handling of Expert Witnesses, Steve discusses the concepts outlined in his ABA book about expert witnesses, to help attorneys learn how to deal with this challenging, but important, aspect of advocacy.
• In Memory on Trial, Steve teaches attorneys about the unreliable nature of human memory and how to effectively expose the flaws in unreliable accounts from adverse witnesses.
• In Revisiting the 10 Commandments: A Contemporary Update of Irving Younger’s Classic “Credibility & Cross-Examination,” Steve recreates, with permission, a course first presented by a beloved educator of lawyers, focusing on how to effectively conduct cross-examinations of adverse witnesses. Similarly, in Evidence for Trial Lawyers, Steve again uses video clips from the late Professor Younger to review the evidence principles that control courtroom presentation of key information to trial judges and jurors.