Without an effective strategy to address it, post-injury video surveillance of a plaintiff can decimate even an otherwise strong personal injury case. In Lennig v. CRST, however, Brian Panish used his opening statement to blunt video surveillance of his client and ultimately turn the video back on the trucking company defendant, helping secure an eight-figure verdict in the process.

 Stock image. 

Viera, FL—Attorneys battled Friday over whether nicotine addiction and a conspiracy to hide smoking’s dangers caused a Florida man’s lung cancer death as trial opened against R.J. Reynolds. Morse v. R.J. Reynolds, 2008-CA-006848.

Medical center guidelines often form the central legal battleground in cases against hospitals. The defense will use compliance with the guidelines as proof that treatment met appropriate standards, while the plaintiff must show the hospital violated its own protocol or those guidelines didn’t apply. In 2017, Gordon & Doner's Scott Fischer secured a nearly $1 million verdict in a patient fall trial with a closing that hammered the hospital's safety protocol. Harrison v. West Boca Medical Center.

The destruction of key evidence can kneecap a plaintiff’s case, regardless of any adverse inference instruction a judge may give. In 2017's Fournier v. Derazi trial, however, Mark Avera overcame the destruction of vital evidence to win a seven-figure verdict for a college student injured in a fall from a house deck. 

In setting up a $12.5 million verdict against Suzuki at trial last February over a crash allegedly caused by the brake failure on one of its motorcycles, Randy Edwards used a blistering closing argument, and surprising test results, to undercut a theory central to the defense’s case.Johns v. Suzuki Motor Corp., 14SV000043.