By Dr. Ken Broda-Bahm: As a witness prepares to testify in trial, the big fear is often cross-examination. While the direct questioning by the witness’s own attorney is seen as the “easy part” (friendly, open-ended questions that allow you to “tell your story”), the cross-examination by the opposing counsel is seen as far more threatening […]
Witnesses, Build Your Cross- Readiness on Direct Read More »
By Dr. Ken Broda-Bahm: We live in uncertain times, and that is becoming a more obvious observation by the day. From the turmoil in the financial markets to the tumult in the marketplaces of ideas, there is a widely felt lack of security, predictability, stability, and foundation: We don’t feel particularly safe. The idea that
Prioritize Safety for Your Gen-Z Jurors Read More »
By Dr. Ken Broda-Bahm: A couple of weeks ago, I was in court to help pick a jury in a high-value case. During that early phase of jury selection, the gallery was full to capacity with potential jurors, the counsel and parties were present, the clerks bustling, but not much else was happening. As we
Attend to Your Jury Read More »
By Dr. Ken Broda-Bahm: Everyone who works with our court systems, including those who work in civil litigation, are invested in the idea of rule of law. Whether our case has to do with governmental powers or not, whether it involves civil rights or not, the procedure and the trial are parts of a noble
Help to Protect the Rule of Law Read More »
By Dr. Ken Broda-Bahm: It is common advice for witnesses in the courtroom or representatives at counsel table: keep a poker face. That advice — avoid scowls, grimaces, and other head-shaking reactions while you’re being observed by a jury — has some obvious common sense behind it. But the advice can also be taken to
Show (a Little) Facial Expression in Court Read More »
By Dr. Ken Broda-Bahm: Something that we see over and over again in mock trials has now occurred in an actual trial. A recent jury in Allegheny County, Pennsylvania entered a defense verdict in favor of Johnson & Johnson, answering “No” to the question of whether the company’s talc powder caused the plaintiff’s injuries… then
Account for a Jury’s Purpose on Damages Read More »
By Dr. Ken Broda-Bahm: Government regulators can often play a role in civil litigation. In some cases, they’re involved as parties. More often, however, their role is as a proxy. In those situations, jurors might look at whether the defendant followed the regulations as a shortcut to determine whether the defendant acted reasonably or not.
Assess Regulator Credibility in Voir Dire Read More »
By Dr. Ken Broda-Bahm: There is a case currently playing out in the Southern District of New York, Major League Baseball Players Inc.,v. Underdog Sports, Inc. There is a common dynamic called out right there in the caption: One side is the “Major League” while the other side is the “Underdog.” A version of this
Manage ‘Underdog’ Perceptions Read More »
By Dr. Ken Broda-Bahm: Early on in the jury selection process, the judge will often ask the panel, “We all know that jury duty can be inconvenient, but who believes they would experience an unreasonable hardship by serving in this case?” Hands will shoot up. In some cases, the claims make an obvious case for
Know When to Go Easy on Hardship Read More »
By Dr. Ken Broda-Bahm: Here’s a scenario we often see when watching deliberations in a mock trial: The subject of the defendant’s alternate damages number comes up, and jurors see it as a weakness. Even when the defense attorney has supplied all of the responsible caveats (e.g., We don’t think you should get to damages,
Defendants, Frame Your Alternate Damages as a Test, Not an Admission Read More »