Making Your Damages Argument Persuasive
Jurors come to the issue of damages often lacking guidelines as to what is appropriate. In an ambiguous situation, such as the one jurors confront on the issue of damages, attorneys have an opportunity to persuade jurors by using case themes. Case themes are the frontline of defense and can be an effective tool that can be used to help frame jurors’ reactions to issues of responsibility and blame.
Finding Out What Works with a Jury: Developing and Testing Case Themes
Research in a variety of applied fields has demonstrated the significance of themes in organizing information and making decisions. To persuade a jury, an attorney needs to develop case themes that help organize the diverse case facts and convey the case theory. Case themes serve as a bridge and can provide a way for jurors to understand what they are learning during a trial. Themes provide a vehicle to influence jurors on the issues of responsibility, blame, and justice.
The Question Is, When Do Jurors Lean?
The most fundamental lesson to be learned from our research is that every phase of the trial is influential in juror decision-making. Although opening statements are certainly an important phase of a trial, they are not as determinate of the outcome as some observers suggest. By probing when jurors first lean, how they lean on each case issue, and how their leanings evolve over the course of the trial, juror researchers and attorneys will be able to better assess the jury decision-making process.
Mold Litigation: Themes, Mock Trials and Other Tactics
Mold is in the news. This is of concern to those involved in settling and litigating those cases because the media usually sensationalizes the issue and offers a very selective presentation of facts and scientific and medical controversies around the issue of toxic molds. Mold is still a new issue, unlike asbestos claims, for example, so most jurors have had little opportunity to be educated about mold through vehicles other than the sensationalizing mass media.
Standing at the Crossroads of Truth and Advocacy: How to win jurors and influence outcomes through expert testimony
In a ritual setting like a trial, people’s attention is heightened and special rules of conduct, both explicit and implicit, come into play. The official participants—in the case of a trial, the judge, attorneys, witnesses, jurors and parties—have special, formal roles that are unique to that ritual. Part of your job as an expert is to understand what your role is in the larger ritual and to behave appropriate to your role.
Why Jury Verdicts Have Gotten So Big and What You Can Do About It
A jury is a group of community members whose verdict preferences and effectiveness as a decision-making body has much to do with the levels of social engagement and trust in that community. Understanding the role that social capital plays in shaping jurors and their verdicts will help you assess and try cases more effectively, wherever your venue might be.
Post Trial Interviews
In the past, in-depth post-trial interviews were primarily used to investigate instances of suspected juror misconduct or other appealable issues. While this is an important part of some post-trial interviews, the scope of these interviews has widened considerably. In particular, serial litigation has benefitted greatly from juror feedback from trial to trial. Today, many attorneys find post-trial interviews to be an integral part of enhancing and fine tuning their litigation talents.