It took 2004 Woodland Park High School graduate Jeff McCoy, an attorney, just 45 minutes to present oral arguments before the U.S. Supreme Court Nov. 30, but it took several months for him to prepare for those 45 minutes.

Since before graduating from high school, preparation has been a major feature of McCoy’s life. In high school, he took speech and joined the forensics and debate teams. He earned a bachelor’s degree in philosophy and political science and a Jurist Doctorate from the University of Colorado at Boulder.

Most attorneys will never have a chance to argue a case in the Supreme Court.

The court takes about 90 cases per year, and many are argued by repeat attorneys, McCoy said, adding, “The Solicitor General keeps a list.”

Chances of arguing a case before the Supreme Court go up for attorneys in certain law firms, he said. Over the past 50 years, 18 attorneys at McCoy’s current firm, Pacific Legal Foundation, where he is a staff attorney, have done so.

According to the foundation’s website, pacificlegal.org, “At PLF, we believe in individual liberty: that when people are free to live peacefully and productively, without interference by government, they improve themselves, their families, and their communities. We represent hundreds of Americans, free of charge, giving them a day in court to protect their rights.”

McCoy said his career as an attorney has been focused on defending private citizens rights against governmental overreach. “I want the government to follow their own rules,” he said.

The case McCoy argued was Wilkins v. United States, Supreme Court docket No. 21-1164.

Some background on the case: Larry Steven Wilkins bought property near Bitter Root, Montana. The previous owner granted a limited easement to the U.S. Forest Service. The forest service was allowed build a road across the property that could be used for firefighting, logging, etc. Contrary to the original contract, the forest service opened the road to the public, McCoy said.

“The increased use caused erosion,” he said. “There is speeding, illegal hunting, trespassing — someone even shot his (Wilkins’) cat. The forest service went beyond its agreement, but when Wilkins went to them for help, they said it wasn’t their problem. When he filed suit, they argued that he filed too late. The case was dismissed before it was even heard.”

According to the National Law Review, the Wilkins case is a quiet title case: “The federal Quiet Title Act authorizes suits against the federal government ‘to adjudicate a disputed title to real property in which the United States claims an interest’ but provides that such a suit ‘shall be barred unless it is commenced within twelve years of … the date the plaintiff or his predecessor in interest knew or should have known of the claim of the United States.’ The dispute in Wilkins concerns whether this time bar is jurisdictional.”

The Ninth Circuit Court says these cases are jurisdictional, which means that the 12-year time bar applies. This decision is the direct opposite of a decision by the Seventh Circuit Court in an earlier case that these cases are non-jurisdictional, and the time bar doesn’t apply.

“With Wilkins, the Supreme Court has now agreed to resolve this circuit split, and its answer could have consequences far beyond the Quiet Title Act. Indeed, how the Court answers the question could be even more important than the answer itself,” the law review states.

The Supreme Court only agrees to hear oral arguments for about 70 cases each term from roughly 7,000 to 8,000 petitions submitted each year, McCoy said.

“By accepting this case, the Supreme Court can clarify how private citizens can resolve disputes over the federal government’s claim to use of private property,” he said.

Preparing for a case like this takes time. The case was added to the Supreme Court Docket on Feb. 23.

“(PLF) is good organization and I have helpful colleagues,” McCoy said. “They helped me prepare the opening brief and the second brief we submitted in October. We had practice sessions with co-workers and with students at the Georgetown University Law Center.”

With two small children at home, McCoy’s wife Sarah took on many family responsibilities while he prepared for his 45-minutes in the spotlight.

“Two young kids can be a handful,” he said. “She got more than she was expecting.”

Oral arguments are over, but now it’s time to wait. It’s nerve wracking, McCoy said.

“We’re expecting an answer in March,” he said. “It’s hard to predict what the court will decide. It seemed like the opposing counsel had more pushback, so we’re hopeful, but it’s hard to wait.”

McCoy and his family live in Roxborough Park, south of Littleton.

Jeffrey McCoy