By: Ryan H. Flax (Former) Managing Director, Litigation Consulting A2L Consulting
By Ryan H. Flax (Former) Managing Director, Litigation Consulting A2L Consulting
Sales and marketing experts know that the sales process includes a multitude of stages – steps that a purchaser normally experiences before making a decision to buy. As our trial consultants see it, litigators also need to “sell” the judge or jury on the correctness of their client’s position. Therefore, it stands to reason that trial lawyers can learn a good deal from salespeople.
We have discussed many situations in which a large company faces a court challenge from a smaller company, from the government, or from a class of consumers or purchasers. Sometimes, those situations will be “David v. Goliath” cases, in which the large company, usually the defendant, must step carefully during the trial to avoid being cast as the “heavy” with all the legal and other resources. Jurors sometimes don’t look favorably on a big company.
A recent study about the best use of litigation graphics during trial reveals some new insights. This study was conducted by Persuasion Strategies, a litigation consulting firm that is part of Holland & Hart, a law firm. The study team was led by Ken Broda-Bahm, a leader in the art of visual presentation in the courtroom. With a doctorate in speech communication that emphasizes rhetoric and legal communication, Dr. Broda-Bahm is a genuine expert in jury consulting.
by Ken Lopez The task of a trial lawyer is to convince a judge or jury to believe in the truth of a client’s case. However, in many complex trials, the underlying facts are not as easily understood by the fact-finder as they would be in, say, a murder case or a traffic accident. A case, especially the type of litigation that we are involved in, often turns on complex issues of science, medicine, engineering, or some other subject that jurors and many judges are not well versed in.
by Ken Lopez In the courtroom, the attorney who has the best chance of winning a case is generally the one who is the best storyteller. The trial lawyer who makes the audience care, who is believable, who most clearly explains the case, who develops compelling narrative and who communicates the facts in the most memorable way builds trust and credibility.
by Ken Lopez Trials are structured in familar segments – opening statements, direct examination, cross-examination and closing arguments. Of those events, I believe that opening statements deserve more emphasis than any other portion of the case.
One type of litigation consulting that is underused is the planning and conducting of a mock trial. A good litigation consultant can put together a mock trial that is every bit as real in appearance and challenges the litigation team as much as an actual trial.
by Ken Lopez As litigation consultants, jury consultants, trial technology consultants and litigation graphics consultants, we have the opportunity to share our decades of experience in over 10,000 cases, working with litigators from all major law firms, with our litigation clients every day. Clearly, this is a valuable service, and I believe great litigators become better litigators for having worked with our firm.
Very often, trial lawyers face what feels like an impossible dilemma. The case that they want to present is extremely complex, intensely tedious or worse yet, both.
Many litigators have developed the excellent practice, while preparing to try a major case, of running all or some their case before a mock jury and then debriefing the jury to see what worked and what didn’t, and to fine-tune their trial presentation accordingly. A mock trial is an excellent investment of money and time when the matter is large and significant enough to permit it. Not only can you test mock jurors’ reactions to alternative arguments and themes but also their reactions to the trial graphics you are considering for trial. As we found in a now well-known three-year study about the differences in the way litigators and jurors naturally communicate, more than two-thirds of jurors prefer to learn visually, and only a very small percentage prefer to learn by only listening. Until recently however, most mock trials tested only arguments, themes and sometimes some rudimentary demonstrative graphics. Increasingly however, we are setting up mock trials, testing alternative arguments and themes, AND we are creating sophisticated trial-ready litigation graphics for BOTH sides of the case. For the right case, this approach offers a more accurate predication of how the entire trial presentation will be received. It is a mock trial best-practice.
Electronic presentation tools such as PowerPoint and Trial Director have changed the way in which lawyers and trial consultants present evidence to juries. These programs and others like them are so flexible and helpful in presenting numerical data, timelines, biological processes, the workings of machinery, and other information that in many ways they have displaced the old-fashioned methods such as printing words and graphics on foam core trial boards.
Share: