Creative demonstratives can powerfully frame an argument. However, attorneys sometimes shy away from using creative demonstratives in bench trials, perhaps out of fear of annoying the judge trying the case. In closings against Johnson & Johnson over its alleged role in Oklahoma’s opioid epidemic, however, Bradley Beckworth’s “game show” memorably framed key evidence during a long bench trial, and helped lead to a nine-figure judgment. 

In a med mal trial’s battle of the experts, sometimes it’s what an expert doesn’t say that may swing  a verdict. At trial against a California physician over his off-label use of a spinal implant, Dennis Ames cleared his client with a closing that turned the spotlight on what one expert never said.

A colorful analogy can better connect jurors with terms and issues they’re not naturally familiar with, and serve as a memorable hook to a key element of a case. In closings of a 2019 talc trial against Johnson & Johnson, Chris Panatier used an ice cream shop analogy to argue his point on asbestos test terminology and help set up a blockbuster verdict. 

Stock image.

Atlanta, GA— In a ruling this week that overturned a decade-plus-old decision, the Georgia Supreme Court expanded counterclaimants’ potential rights to recover attorney fees and costs. SRM Group, Inc. v. Traveler’s Property Casualty Co. of America. 

Even when injuries are catastrophic, jurors can be reluctant to hand down a large award for pain and suffering. But at trial against two Florida bars over the devastating brain damage a teenager suffered in a late-night crash, Mark Avera’s vivid closing conveys the enormity of the crash victim's loss and sets up a massive verdict.