Video Library

How does the firm frame the case for the jury?

We feel that we are capable of understanding the intellectual aspects of a given complex case and then boiling it down because frankly, if the jury cannot understand it, it is not going to be successful. So regardless of how complex it is, the challenge for an attorney handling a complex case is to simplify it so that it is understandable. Juries are not always individually capable of comprehending the complexities of a given case. But what you will find is that a 12-member jury, is really more well balanced, even intelligent, experienced, and open minded than an individual. I try my case for the conservative individual in the jury or the conservative that has not even come out in the questioning——the conservative that is latent. Here is my point, people are very skeptical. It is very difficult to get 12 people to agree and come up with a substantial amount in your client’s favor. This is why it is very important to continually repeat the key components of your case and to continually address them as skeptics even up until the closing argument. You have to demonstrate that although this piece of evidence may well have caused you to pause, look at the evidence as a whole and tell me whether or not it has the ring of truth. In today’s skeptical society, you want to basically be able to give them a challenge, give them the tools to learn this area and then find fulfillment by a plaintiff’s verdict. That is the challenge we have done in our cases.

When we take a case we expect it will go to trial and we prepare as if it’s going to trial, sometimes cases settle at trial, or even at the courthouse steps or during trial. We try to demonstrate along the way in the deposition process, or an opening statement, or in mock trial – that we are fully prepared to go to verdict. In the very substantial record-breaking case that we had, the kind of examination I did of our own expert was very compelling, and I wanted it to be. I wanted the defendants to see what they had coming at them at trial because the difference between what a defendant’s questions will be like of our expert at trial is light years away from what our questions will be of the same witness. And there are times when I want the defendant to see that to encourage a settlement. That case, as you know, settled after the close of the plaintiff’s evidence. I can elicit a very different case than the one that is brought out by the defendant in cross examination. By the time the defendants get the case, it is too little, too late. The case is already over.

Select a video from the lists below to load in the video player above.