Category Archives: Litigation

Can Your Witness Stand Up To Cross-Examination?

01 Friday Aug 2014

Posted by in Cross-Examination, Litigation, Trial Tips and Techniques

≈ Comments Off on Can Your Witness Stand Up To Cross-Examination?

Tags

, , , , ,

Counterpunch: Ten Ways to Fight Back on Cross, by Dr. Ken Broda-Bahm, Persuasive Litigator Blog

http://www.persuasivelitigator.com/2014/03/counterpunch-10-ways-to-fight-back-on-cross.html

A good witness should not see cross-examination as an argument, but neither should that witness see it as a time to be agreeable and passive with opposing counsel. Because the inherent conflict of cross piques the jurors’ interest, it can be a critical time. The two sides are in direct conflict and the jury has the ability to decide first-hand who seems to be winning at that moment. Given the stakes, it is too dangerous for a witness to just be led along by opposing counsel, comforting themselves with the knowledge that, ‘Well, at least I got to tell my side in direct,’ or, ‘My own attorney will give me a chance to fix all of this in redirect.’ Both are valid comforts, but effective direct and redirect will never completely erase the perceptual losses that can occur in cross. Substantively, the problem might be fixed, but jurors will still remember those moments where the witness looked weak, and that cannot help but influence their perception of your case and of the witness’s credibility.

The way I’ve explained it before is that cross-examination is, for the witness, a polite struggle. ‘Polite’ because the witness can’t afford to come off as too combative or uncooperative — ‘I’m just here to tell the truth…’ should be the tone. But ‘struggle,’ because there is a skilled advocate at the lectern whose job is to, at least for the moment, support his story and not yours. A good witness needs to work against that purpose. Like any advice, the message to fight back’ can be taken too far, or not far enough. It is a matter of balance and practice, and it clearly helps to get feedback during a prep session or two to make sure the communication is assertive but not aggressive. With these considerations in mind, here are ten ways witnesses can maintain their own power while being cross-examined. . . .

Bifurcation Explained By An Eleventh Circuit Court Judge.

14 Monday Jul 2014

Posted by in Damages, Litigation

≈ Comments Off on Bifurcation Explained By An Eleventh Circuit Court Judge.

Tags

, , , ,

To B…or Not to B…: B…Means Bifurcation, by Judge David L. Tobin, The Florida Bar Journal, 2000 Volume LXXIV, No. 10.

http://tinyurl.com/p5vkklg

An excellent analysis and explanation. -CCE

From 1997 through May 2000, as judge in the 11th Circuit Court, I have bifurcated hundreds of cases in which the issues of liability and damages were involved. The most surprising statistic is that during this three and one-half years I have tried only one case in which the issue was damages! Do I have your attention?

Sometime in 1997, I was discussing calendar control and judicial efficiency with one of my colleagues, Judge Amy Donner, who said that she was bifurcating most of her cases. After our conversation, I examined the trials in my division for the year 1995 and found that of the 40 jury trials, eight of them were slip-and-fall cases. Of these eight, seven resulted in a verdict for the defendant. It occurred to me that if we tried only liability, between seven and 14 days of jury time would have been saved, enabling us to try several more cases. Accordingly, I then decided to screen our cases and began bifurcating slip-and-fall cases only. I hope that this article will assist judges and attorneys in selecting those cases in which bifurcation would benefit litigants and attorneys, as well as the court. . . .

New York’s New Privilege Log Rule.

13 Sunday Jul 2014

Posted by in Discovery, Document Review, E-Discovery, Litigation, Privilege Log

≈ Comments Off on New York’s New Privilege Log Rule.

Tags

, , , , , , ,

Rule Limiting Privilege Log Practice to Take Effect, by Suevon Lee, New York Commercial Litigation Insider Blog

http://tinyurl.com/p8wwuhq

In an age of exploding electronic discovery that has multiplied the cost and scope of document review, litigants in New York’s Commercial Division will soon have the benefit of revised privilege log practice.

Starting September 2, new Rule 11-b, signed Tuesday by Chief Administrative Judge Gail Prudenti, will instruct parties to meet at the outset of the case and afterward to discuss the scope and parameters of privilege review. It also will strongly encourage using categorized designations for documents as opposed to itemized listings to help streamline the process.

Parties who resist the categorized approach may be subject to attorney fees upon a showing of good cause by the other side or a protective order from the judge.

Modeled after guidelines set forth in such jurisdictions as the Southern District of New York and Delaware Court of Chancery, the rule offers ‘a meaningful way for courts and parties to assess the assertion of privilege,’ said David H. Tennant, a partner at Nixon Peabody, who co-drafted the language with Jonathan Lupkin, of Rakower Lupkin. They are members of an advisory group charged with proposing changes to Commercial Division practice to offer a more efficient and cost-effective forum for litigants and their business clients. . . .

Casino Valet Service Not Liable For Returning Car To Intoxicated Driver.

08 Tuesday Jul 2014

Posted by in Damages, Litigation, Pennsylvania Superior Court, Summary judgment

≈ Comments Off on Casino Valet Service Not Liable For Returning Car To Intoxicated Driver.

Tags

, , , , , , ,

No Liability for Valet Service for Returning Car to Visibly Intoxicated Patron, by Daniel E. Cummins, TORT TALK

http://www.torttalk.com/2014/07/no-liability-for-valet-service-for.html

In its recent decision in the case of Moranko v. Downs Racing LP, 2014 Pa.Super. 128 (Pa. Super. June 24, 2014 Panella, J., Mundy, J., and Platt, J.)(Op. by Panella, J.), the Pennsylvania Superior Court held that Pennsylvania law does not impose a duty upon a casino’s valet service to withhold the keys from a motorist if that person appears to be visibly intoxicated. . . .

How To Draft Interrogatories.

17 Tuesday Jun 2014

Posted by in Discovery, Insurance Defense, Interrogatories, Litigation, Motor Vehicle, Negligence, Personal Injury, Product Liability

≈ Comments Off on How To Draft Interrogatories.

Tags

, , ,

Drafting Interrogatories, by Megan E. Boyd, Lady (Legal) Writer

http://tinyurl.com/lx5y8ql

There are five types of discovery. Each has its own strength and weakness. Knowing when, and how, to use each effectively narrows the issues of the case and may even provide sufficient evidence for a successful summary judgment motion. This post discusses one of the most common and useful forms of discovery – interrogatories. -CCE

Interrogatories (a fancy name for a list of questions) are sent as part of the discovery process in litigation and allow parties to gain information relevant to the litigation. Many attorneys send interrogatories before they engage in other types of discovery, such as depositions, because interrogatory responses often help an attorney narrow down the types of questions the attorney will ask during a deposition. . . .

Vehicular Black Box Is Admissible Evidence To Prove Speed.

11 Wednesday Jun 2014

Posted by in Admissibility, Authentication, Evidence, Forensic Evidence, Litigation, Motor Vehicle, Trial Tips and Techniques

≈ Comments Off on Vehicular Black Box Is Admissible Evidence To Prove Speed.

Tags

, , , , , , ,

Vehicular Black Box: Superior Court of Pennsylvania Finds Event Data Recorder Evidence Admissible to Prove Speed, by Evidence ProfBlogger, edited by Colin Miller, EvidenceProf Blog

http://tinyurl.com/n6p96kp

Until reading this article from the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, I wasn’t aware that a vehicle has an ‘event data recorder’ akin to an airplane’s ‘black box.’  And now, according to the Superior Court of Pennsylvania in Commonwealth v. Safka, such evidence is admissible to determine a car’s speed at the time of an accident. . . .

Two 2014 Pivotal Supreme Court Cases on Personal Jurisdiction And Their Lasting Impact on Civil Litigation.

08 Sunday Jun 2014

Posted by in Civil Procedure, Class Actions, Federal Civil Procedure, Jurisdiction, Litigation

≈ Comments Off on Two 2014 Pivotal Supreme Court Cases on Personal Jurisdiction And Their Lasting Impact on Civil Litigation.

Tags

, , , , , , , , , ,

Rhodes and Robertson on the New PJ Decisions, by Robin Effron, Civil Procedure & Federal Courts Blog

http://tinyurl.com/kbepuyd

Interesting implications for both state and federal civil litigation. This article deserves thoughtful study. -CCE

Charles “Rocky” Rhodes (South Texas College of Law) and Cassandra Burke Robertson (Case Western) have posted Toward a New Equilibrium in Personal Jurisdiction to SSRN.

In early 2014, the Supreme Court decided two new personal jurisdiction cases that will have a deep and wide-ranging impact on civil litigation in the coming decades: Daimler AG v. Bauman, 134 S. Ct. 746 (2014), and Walden v. Fiore, 134 S. Ct. 1115 (2014). Bauman eliminates the traditional “continuous and systematic” contacts test for general jurisdiction, and Walden significantly retracts the ability of courts to exercise personal jurisdiction over out-of-state defendants whose actions have in-state effects. Taken together, both cases will make it significantly more difficult for plaintiffs to exercise control over where lawsuits are filed. In some cases — such as large-scale class actions — the new decisions may make it impossible to identify a single forum where multiple defendants can be sued together, and will therefore shift the balance of litigation power from plaintiffs to defendants.

This Article examines the effect that these decisions will have on future litigation and suggests solutions to the problems that will arise in the wake of these decisions. It analyzes how the Court’s new jurisprudence has shifted the balance of power in the jurisdictional framework, and it explores areas of future litigation. . . .

Lowering the Bar Calls for Deposition Transcripts.

28 Wednesday May 2014

Posted by in Depositions, Discovery, Litigation

≈ Comments Off on Lowering the Bar Calls for Deposition Transcripts.

Tags

, , ,

Call for Transcripts, by Kevin Underhill, Lowering the Bar Blog

http://www.loweringthebar.net/2014/05/call-for-transcripts.html

I doubt your clients would approve of sharing a deposition transcript from their case with Kevin, regardless of how hilarious it might be. Don’t worry. Kevin already has quite a collection. -CCE

Last month the New York Times did a fantastic video reenactment of some truly ridiculous deposition testimony. See ‘What Is a Photocopier? (Deposition, Dramatized),’ Lowering the Bar (Apr. 28, 2014) (direct link here). They are looking for more of that kind of thing, which I think is great news, and they asked me for help, which I also think is great. The posts linked below are the ones I recommended as mentioning possible candidates for reenactment, although I unfortunately don’t actually have all of the transcripts. . . .

Trailer Park Duck Is Repeat Offender With Dangerous Propensities.

02 Friday May 2014

Posted by in Animal Law, Damages, Litigation, Personal Injury, Punitive Damages, Torts

≈ Comments Off on Trailer Park Duck Is Repeat Offender With Dangerous Propensities.

Tags

, , , ,

Lawsuit Alleges Duck Attack, by Kevin Underhill, Lowering The Bar Blog

http://www.loweringthebar.net/2014/04/duck-attack.html

KATU in Portland reports that a woman who says she was attacked by a duck at a trailer park has sued the duck’s owner.

Plaintiff alleges in part that said duck was a repeat offender.

According to the complaint (which KATU was kind enough to post), Cynthia Ruddell alleges that she was just stepping out of her motor home ‘on or about May 7, 2012,’ when she was suddenly attacked by a local duck. . . .

Keeping Medical Records Costs Down.

16 Wednesday Apr 2014

Posted by in HITECH Act, Litigation, Medical Records, Motor Vehicle, Negligence, Personal Injury, Product Liability, Torts, Wrongful Death

≈ Comments Off on Keeping Medical Records Costs Down.

Tags

, , , , , ,

Defeating The Medical Records Paper Copy Scam, by Max Kennerly, Esq., Litigation and Trial Blog (with hat tip to Evan Schaeffer, The Trial Practice Tips Blog!)

http://tinyurl.com/mmpm4sy

Mr. Kennerly explains why obtaining medical records need not be expensive, and provides a sample letter with citation to legal authority. -CCE

Hardly a day goes by without a letter from my office either requesting medical records or paying for them. Some days, I sign more than a dozen. It’s perhaps the most common thread among all my cases: the vast majority of my clients have been physically injured in one way or another, and at a bare minimum, I need the records from their doctors and hospitals to show the diagnoses they have and the treatment they have received.

Every patient has a right to receive their medical records, and by law should be able to obtain those records promptly at no markup, with no padded fees, and no unnecessary charges from the hospital or the records company. But if there’s money to be made, someone will try to make it, and over the past decade a whole cottage industry has developed around the “business” of trying to cheat patients trying to get their medical records. Sometimes health care providers outsource this ‘business’ to third-party companies, and sometimes the hospitals and health systems play the con game themselves. . . .

Using Animation At Trial.

12 Saturday Apr 2014

Posted by in Evidence, Exhibits, Jury Persuasion, Legal Technology, Litigation, Presentations, Trial Tips and Techniques

≈ Comments Off on Using Animation At Trial.

Tags

, , , ,

Animate: Give Your Jurors Three Dimensions, or More, by Dr. Ken Broda-Bahm, The Persasive Litigator

http://tinyurl.com/m75du78

[I]In trial, we know that demonstrative exhibits are often seen as playing a secondary role: second to evidence and second to the verbal explanation. The higher-end animations, however, are often an even more distant second (or third, or fourth) to exhibits that can be created more simply or more cheaply. Understanding that not all, or even most, cases will be able to afford or to merit the higher-end demonstrative animations, it is still worth it to pay attention to the state of the art and to think about how this technology can be brought to bear when it matters most. The good news is that creating sophisticated graphics is easier and cheaper than it has ever been before. Laptops now surpass what the best production workstations could have created in earlier times. A skilled computer animator can take an idea from design to execution in less time and expense than you might think. . . .

The Court’s Plan for Hurricane Sandy Litigation.

05 Saturday Apr 2014

Posted by in Court Orders, Federal Judges, Insurance Law, Judges, Litigation, New Jersey District Court of Appeals

≈ Comments Off on The Court’s Plan for Hurricane Sandy Litigation.

Tags

, , , , , ,

Public Meeting Leads to Plan Speeding Hurricane Sandy Litigation, United States Courts Blog

http://tinyurl.com/obrkuue

Nearly a year and a half after Super Storm Sandy, New Jersey is seeing another wave. This time, it’s a surge in federal cases involving flood insurance carriers.

‘These cases are hitting our docket very hard,’ said Chief Judge Jerome B. Simandle, New Jersey District Court. ‘We have over 600 Hurricane Sandy cases now and we expect the final number could be as many as 2,000.’

With such a large and growing number of cases, Simandle took the lead. He called a public meeting to hear from homeowners, attorneys and other interested groups. On March 20th, the district’s Board of Judges adopted a plan for management of the Super Storm Sandy litigation, contained in a Standing Order and a 15-page Hurricane Sandy Case Management Order No. 1, which are available on the court’s website. . . .

Apologizing Even When It’s Not Your Client’s Fault.

30 Sunday Mar 2014

Posted by in Closing Argument, Cross-Examination, Damages, Defense Counsel, Direct Examination, Jury Instructions, Jury Persuasion, Litigation, Making Objections, Opening Argument, Settlement, Trial Tips and Techniques

≈ Comments Off on Apologizing Even When It’s Not Your Client’s Fault.

Tags

, , , , , ,

Show You’re Sorry, Even When You’re Not at Fault, by Dr. Ken Broda-Bahm, Persuasive Litigator Blog

http://tinyurl.com/ntvjm5r

[A]s we’ve noted before, letting jurors, judges, and opposing parties hear an apology can be effective when you are responsible, or are likely to be found responsible, for at least part of the damage at issue in the case. But what about when you’re not? Does that second kind of “sorry,” meaning “I recognize your loss, but without accepting responsibility for it” create a persuasive advantage as well?

According to some new research, yes, it does. . . .

How To – Investigating Traffic Accidents.

22 Saturday Mar 2014

Posted by in Damages, Evidence, Forensic Evidence, Litigation, Motor Vehicle, Personal Injury, Product Liability, Uninsured Motorist

≈ Comments Off on How To – Investigating Traffic Accidents.

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , ,

Evidence Collection in a Traffic Investigation, by Dick Warrington, Forensic Magazine

http://tinyurl.com/nko5m2s

This post is an excerpt from Mr. Warrington’s post, Investigating the Fender Bender (http://tinyurl.com/o979zk5). I recommend it, and the links to more information on this subject that you will find at the end of the post. -CCE

Most of the time traffic accidents are fairly standard—the typical fender bender where one person runs into another. The officer on duty responds, assesses the situation, and completes the proper paperwork. But sometimes officers deal with much more serious, complex situations. Dealing with a hundred car pile-up, for example, is quite challenging, since it’s like carrying out multiple investigations simultaneously. When responding to multiple car accidents, hit and runs, fatalities, and high speed chases, officers can benefit by calling in Crime Scene Officers to assist with the investigation.

Because this type of case usually involves extensive damage to property, serious injuries, and/or fatalities, lawsuits will likely result. Questions of liability, product failure, etc. will also come up. Given these facts, it’s important to work together to conduct a thorough investigation. Since the CSO’s responsibilities include documentation, evidence identification, and evidence collection, we’ll look at each of those areas. . . .

Jury Nullification Secret Sneaking Out Of The Bag.

16 Sunday Mar 2014

Posted by in Jury Instructions, Jury Persuasion, Jury Selection, Litigation, Trial Tips and Techniques

≈ Comments Off on Jury Nullification Secret Sneaking Out Of The Bag.

Tags

, , , , , , , ,

Treat Nullification as a Known Option, by Dr. Ken Broda-Bahm, Persuasive Litigator

http://perma.cc/HWG4-PKHK

Jury nullification is treated as a deep and dangerous secret. The idea that a jury can decide to follow its own moral guidance instead of following the law, is the legal doctrine that dare not speak its name, at least not anywhere near a courtroom. It’s been used as ammo in the war against the drug war, led to accusations of jury tampering, and even served as the basis for a criminal indictment of a retired professor who made it a practice to hand out pamphlets about nullification in front of courthouses. As stories like these become more well-known, the official secret of jury nullification might be turning into something more like an open secret. Based on the viral success of a recent video by CPG Grey — more than 1.5 million viewers in the first month it’s been up — the knowledge of nullification might be well on the way to becoming more common than ever. . . .

Like Us, Judges and Juries Get the “Munchies.”

08 Saturday Mar 2014

Posted by in Appellate Judges, Closing Argument, Cross-Examination, Defense Counsel, Direct Examination, Exhibits, Experts, Federal Judges, Judges, Jury Persuasion, Law Clerks, Litigation, Making Objections, Opening Argument, Oral Argument, Plaintiff's Counsel, Trial Tips and Techniques, Voir Dire, Witnesses

≈ Comments Off on Like Us, Judges and Juries Get the “Munchies.”

Tags

, , , , , , , ,

Time Your Arguments to the Judge’s Lunch Breaks (and Adapt to All Decision Makers’ “Cognitive Load”), by  Dr. Ken Broda-Bahm, Persuasive Litigator  Blog

http://tinyurl.com/lebleml

It comes as no surprise that a hungry person, be it the judge or members of a jury, find it difficult to concentrate and focus on your client’s case. Long stretches of testimony and argument are hard enough to follow, especially if the case is complex with numerous exhibits and witnesses. Regardless how comfortable the chair, sitting for long periods trying to listen carefully to a case is hard work.

There is more than one way to consider your audience at a trial or hearing. Persuasive argument is one. Excellent trial preparation using technology is another. Considerate and well-timed rest and meal breaks are another tool that can be used to your advantage.

The Rocket Science Blog mentioned in this post can be found at http://tinyurl.com/3dg5e8n. – CCE

Anyone who argues in front of judges knows that human factors can weigh as heavily as the law in determining your judge’s decisions.  But it is still possible at times to be surprised at the degree of influence, as well as the banality of those human factors.  Case in point: lunch and snack breaks.  Recent research discussed in the excellent Not Exactly Rocket Science blog appears to show that judges’ decisions vary as a direct effect of the proximity of their morning snack or lunch break.  In case you are using your morning break or lunch hour to read this post, I’d like to make it worth your while by applying the study findings to the more general issue of your decision-makers’ mental work load and offering some recommendations for anyone who needs to make arguments to a potentially fatigued audience. . . .

E-Discovery Federal Rule Amendments and More.

06 Thursday Mar 2014

Posted by in Bankruptcy Law, Case Law, Court Rules, Discovery, E-Discovery, Federal District Court Rules, Federal Law, Litigation, Mandatory Law, Metadata, Preservation, Primary Law, Regulations, Research, Sanctions, State Law, Statutes, Technology, The Sedona Conference, Trial Tips and Techniques

≈ Comments Off on E-Discovery Federal Rule Amendments and More.

Tags

, , , , , , ,

Category Archives: FEDERAL RULES AMENDMENTS, by Electronic Discovery, K&L Gates

http://www.ediscoverylaw.com/articles/federal-rules-amendments/

 Notice and analysis of electronic discovery federal rule amendments. You can count on this website to be updated promptly and the information and analysis is accurate. Free subscription by RSS feed.

While you are there, it is worth your time to browse the variety of information published by K&L Gates. They are experts on e-discovery. You will find, among other things:

Just poke around. I do not think you will be disappointed. -CCE

Lawyers — First Impressions Stick!

02 Sunday Mar 2014

Posted by in Closing Argument, Cross-Examination, Direct Examination, Exhibits, Experts, Jury Persuasion, Jury Selection, Litigation, Making Objections, Mock Trials, Opening Argument, Plaintiff's Counsel, Trial Tips and Techniques, Voir Dire, Witnesses

≈ Comments Off on Lawyers — First Impressions Stick!

Tags

, , , , , , ,

Expect First Impressions to be Carved in Stone, by Dr. Ken Broda-Bahm, Persuasive Litigator Blog

http://tinyurl.com/org7why

Please note additional links on first impressions, overcoming bad impressions, and using visual images to create a first impression at the bottom of this post at the Persuasive Litigator website. -CCE

We’ve all heard the old saying: You never get a second chance to make a first impression. It is true that when meeting someone new, our brain is quickly putting them into a number of categories. Their background, intelligence, friendliness, attitudes, trustworthiness, and a myriad of other aspects of character are all on their way to being locked into some pretty durable assumptions. In a legal setting, where a juror is reacting to a witness on the stand for example, we might want those credibility determinations to be made over time, informed by the full scope of the testimony. But don’t count on it. . . . 

Google Mistrials – A Continuing Problem.

02 Sunday Mar 2014

Posted by in Internet, Juror Impeachment, Jury Instructions, Mistrials, Research, Rule 606, Trial Tips and Techniques, Verdict

≈ Comments Off on Google Mistrials – A Continuing Problem.

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , ,

Stealing the Verdict: Eastern District of North Carolina Allows Jury Impeachment Regarding Internet Research, by Colin Miller, EvidenceProg Blog

http://tinyurl.com/mkk48a8

“Google mistrials” have been a problem for some time. Here are two examples – one in 2014 and another in 2011 — in which a juror used Internet legal research during the trial and discussed it with fellow jurors, causing a mistrial. -CCE

An emerging problem in the American justice system is jurors conducting internet research about a case, leading to the Google mistrial. And, when such research is not discovered until after trial, as in United States v. LaRoque, 2014 WL 683729 (E.D.N.C. 2012), it leads to jury impeachment.

 Mistrial by Internet A Growing Concern, By Bob Kalinowski (Staff Writer), citizensvoice.com

 http://tinyurl.com/mge3nqk

Legal experts have coined them ‘Google mistrials.’

Curious jurors seeking to conduct their own research surf the Internet about facts presented in court, bringing a halt to important court cases and tainting the outcome.

Sometimes it’s done unwittingly. Other times it’s done against a judge’s specific directions.

Can A Prisoner Get An Expert Witness Under Federal Rule 706 For His Medical Condition?

02 Sunday Mar 2014

Posted by in Appellate Law, Criminal Law, Evidence, Federal Rules of Evidence, Rule 706, Summary judgment

≈ Comments Off on Can A Prisoner Get An Expert Witness Under Federal Rule 706 For His Medical Condition?

Tags

, , , , , , , , , ,

Is There a Doctor in the House?: 11th Circuit Remands After Lower Court’s Erroneous Rule 706 Ruling, posted by Colin Miller, EvidenceProf Blog

http://tinyurl.com/n57dzzo

This post discusses an Alabama District Court’s and 11th Circuit Court of Appeal’s interpretation of Rule 706(a) of the Federal Rule of Evidence in a prisoner’s lawsuit in which he claims that he has Hepatitis C, his illness is not being treated and, without treatment, he will become sicker and die. -CCE

Federal Rule of Evidence 706(a) provides that:

On a party’s motion or on its own, the court may order the parties to show cause why expert witnesses should not be appointed and may ask the parties to submit nominations. The court may appoint any expert that the parties agree on and any of its own choosing. But the court may only appoint someone who consents to act.

As you can see from the language of Rule 706(a), there is nothing in the Rule’s text limiting expert appointment to either criminal or civil cases. So where did that leave the plaintiff in Gillentine v. Correctional Medical Services, 2014 WL 701575 (11th Cir. 2014)?

 

Litigator’s Self-Assessment Legal Writing Test.

24 Monday Feb 2014

Posted by in Bad Legal Writing, Brief Writing, Legal Writing, Legalese, Litigation, Trial Tips and Techniques

≈ Comments Off on Litigator’s Self-Assessment Legal Writing Test.

Tags

, , , , , , ,

Are You A Crappy Litigator? A Self-Assessment Test! by Mark Herrmann, Above The Law Blog (with hat tip to Raymond Ward at the (new) legal writer blog!)

http://abovethelaw.com/2014/02/are-you-a-crappy-litigator-a-self-assessment-test/

Not exactly the words I would choose to make the point, but I agree that the emphasis on short, clear sentences and paragraphs is more persuasive. -CCE

It’s so hard to judge yourself.

Deep in your soul you know that people who criticize you are idiots, and people who praise you are wise and sagacious.

How can you possibly tell if you’re any good at what you do?

I have the answer for you! I’ve created a litigators’ self-assessment test! Now you’ll know if you’re any good!

Here’s how it works: Take out the last brief you filed.

Do it. Now. You won’t learn anything if you don’t follow the rules. . . .

More On Why Lawsuits Are So Expensive.

22 Saturday Feb 2014

Posted by in Cross-Examination, Damages, Exhibits, Experts, Litigation, Motor Vehicle, Personal Injury, Plaintiff's Counsel, Product Liability, Trial Tips and Techniques, Video Deposition, Witnesses

≈ Comments Off on More On Why Lawsuits Are So Expensive.

Tags

, , , , , , , ,

Why Lawsuits Are So Expensive, Pt. II, by Gregory H. Haubrich, Foshee & Yafee, Butter’s Blog

http://greghaubrich.com/2014/02/13/why-lawsuits-are-so-expensive-pt-ii/

In my previous edition of Butter’s Blog, Part I explored why lawsuits are so expensive. In Part II, we are going to break down the costs of getting your case to trial. To get a rough estimate of what your law firm may spend handling the case,  we must first look at what kind of case it is.

How Skillful Are You At Mediation?

16 Sunday Feb 2014

Posted by in Alternative Dispute Resolution, Intellectual Property, Litigation, Mediation, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

≈ Comments Off on How Skillful Are You At Mediation?

Tags

, , , , , , ,

Beyond Biglaw: Mediation Matters (Part 1), by Gaston Kroub, Above The Law Blog

http://tinyurl.com/kv9d9ag

Mediation. For some lawyers, it is a great way to spend a day; for others, it is an interminable bore, and ineffective to boot. It is easy to imagine that lawyers who have had successful mediation experiences are more likely to fall into the former category than the latter. What is more certain, however, is that mediation skills are increasingly important for a litigator to have, for a number of reasons. . . .

$17 Million – Likely Largest Ever Wrongful Workplace Death Settlement.

13 Thursday Feb 2014

Posted by in Damages, Employment Law, Evidence, Government, Litigation, Negligence, OSHA, Settlement, Wrongful Death

≈ Comments Off on $17 Million – Likely Largest Ever Wrongful Workplace Death Settlement.

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Philadelphia Electrician’s Widow to Receive Record $17 Million in Wrongful-Death Settlement, by Josh Cable, EHS Today

http://tinyurl.com/mx9kqq5

The widow of an electrician who died in a crane accident at Veolia Energy’s Schuylkill steam plant in Grays Ferry, Pa., will receive $17 million, in what is believed to be the largest wrongful-workplace-death settlement in Philadelphia County history. . . .

U.S. Supreme Court’s “Instruction Manual” on Class Action Litigation.

11 Tuesday Feb 2014

Posted by in Appellate Law, Arbitration, Class Actions, Class Certification, Consumer Contracts, Contract Law, Credit Repair, Employment Law, Litigation, United States Supreme Court

≈ Comments Off on U.S. Supreme Court’s “Instruction Manual” on Class Action Litigation.

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Recent Developments For Litigation Risk Mitigation: The U.S. Supreme Court’s Prescription, by Daniel P. Shapiro, Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP  

(This piece is adapted from Daniel P. Shapiro’s article published in the November 2013, issue of AHLA Connections. © 2013 American Health Lawyers Association.)

Read Mr. Shapiro’s analysis of recent U.S. Supreme Court cases that have created an instruction manual of sorts for reducing litigation risks for American businesses, as stated below in the excerpt to his post.

There is a hyperlink at the end of the article that will take you to the original article. -CCE

 http://tinyurl.com/ldd7s2o

Over the past three years, since mid-2010, the Supreme Court has handed down a series of related decisions that, taken together, constitute an instruction manual for American business on how to reduce litigation risk. As the world has ‘flattened’ and trade has increasingly globalized and become borderless, it has been impossible to ignore that only in the U.S. economy is litigation such a prominent line item for business. This is particularly true with regard to class action litigation. No other country has the sort of class—or collective—action rules that the United States does. Perhaps in response to these facts, the Supreme Court has made it clear that through a combination of arbitration (as opposed to litigation) and class action waiver clauses properly used, businesses can contract out from under a great deal of litigation risk for the future and fundamentally change their litigation environment.

The new Supreme Court decisions offer instruction on how, exactly, to use arbitration clauses and class action waivers to mitigate litigation risk.