Kentucky

Sometimes I just like to play catch up on some really good trial and law blogs to  get back to what is good and needed to try cases and practice law.  Well, John Day out of Tennessee has one of those blogs.  After spending four days in court on a case, I thought it would be a good time to decompress over some trial tips and other stuff:

This is the first one I came to, and it reminded me of the flip side of the "constructive cross" which is a cross-examination with no punch or substance asking questions of no consequence and which basically are misleading, irrelevant and a waste of time.  For example, "anything can cause a disk to herniate?".  Well some docs say yes, to include a sneeze, a cough, or whatever.  However, considering the average person has sneezed a gazillion times without adverse consequences, then what is the freaking point?????

By John Day on trial techniques

Elliott Wilcox shares another great post from his Winning Trial Advocacy Tips blog.  I know I rant and rave about how wonderful this blog is and I fear I may be accused of a man-crush on Elliott, a gentleman I have never spoken with, much less met.  But there is so much crap spread by those who think that they know something about trial preparation and trial advocacy that when someone actually shares something of value I feel compelled to applaud it - loud and often.  Elliott gets it and, more importantly, he shares it.

The latest cheer goes out for a post titled "How to Detect Non-Answers During Cross-Examination."  Here is an excerpt:

To become a quality cross-examiner, you must master the ability to critically listen to  witness?s answers and identify the weaknesses, fallacies, and evasions in their responses. 

One of the more common evasions you?ll need to recognize is the ?non-answer.?  Expert witnesses and well-prepped witnesses are the best masters of the ?non-answer.?  At their finest, their responses don?t even appear to be evasive.  They?ll make it sound like they?ve answered your question, but in fact, they?re completely side-stepping it.  They do this by telling you something that you hope to hear or giving you a response that sounds like what you need to hear.

Motorcycle Deaths Decline

"Hospital, We Have a Problem"

"A Remedy for Troubled Doctors"

Is Your Client on Facebook?

Corporate Fines and Justice

Luvera on David Ball's Book

Georgia Supreme Court Strikes Down Damages Cap in Medical Malpractice Cases

Motions To Strike Insufficient Affirmative Defenses

More Proof that the Big Lie is a Big Lie: Medical Malpractice Payments Continue to Fall

Helpful Checklist for Determining Whether A Person is an Independent Contractor or an Employee

CA Court Says Witness Interviews Not Privileged Work Product

The Rule of Completeness

The Tort Reform Movement - Naked

Younger's 10 Commandments of Cross Examination

Lawyer Speaks Out About Allstate Insurance Company

Tips for Managing Witnesses

New Decision on Diversity Jurisdiction

Hospital Acquired Infections in the News

Tennessee Personal Injury Client Advice

Federal Rules of Evidence PDF

By John Day on trial techniques

Those of you over 30 will remember James Carville's message to the Clinton campaign in 1992:  "It's about the economy, stupid."  

Well, trying cases is about persuading jurors to your client's point of view. Sure, you must prove-each-element-of-your-cause-of-action-by-a-preponderance-of-the-evidence, but you must do so in a way that keeps the jury engaged, that motivates them to act favorably to your client.

Maxwell Kennerly, one of my favorite bloggers, has written a great post on this subject.  He explains that a trial lawyer must

• tell the client's story;
• tell the client's story coherently;
• tell the client's story concisely;
• tell the client's story persuasively; and,
• introduce all evidence necessary to the claim or defense in compliance with the rules of evidence;
• one witness at a time.