While medical malpractice trials often focus on a battle of experts and complicated standards of care, sometimes an argument appealing to a jury's "common sense" can be the most effective way to turn a case. In a med mal trial over a patient’s blindness, Paul Weathington’s forceful close deftly keyed on expectations of treatment and follow-up care responsibilities to help clear a Georgia neurologist. 

Stock image.

Stuart, FL— A Florida state court jury Thursday cleared R.J. Reynolds of responsibility for a long-time smoker’s cancer death. Delancy v. R.J. Reynolds, 2008-CA-000067. 

Stock image.

Stuart, FL— Attorneys Wednesday argued over the root cause of a decades-long Florida smoker’s fatal cancer, as trial opened against R.J. Reynolds. Delancy v. R.J. Reynolds, 2008-CA-000067.  

With widespread knowledge of smoking’s dangers today, plaintiffs’ attorneys in tobacco cases often face a high hurdle when arguing why a smoker from decades ago may not have understood smoking’s risks, or quit in time to avoid disease. That hurdle can be even be even higher when the smoker at the heart of the case started as an adult. But in a recent trial against R.J. Reynolds, Eric Rosen’s memorable rebuttal on closings overcame those issues to help key an 8-figure win for the family of a woman who began smoking in her 30s. 

Explaining the full impact of a traumatic brain injury can be difficult when the effects of that injury aren’t immediately obvious from the jury box. But in a recent trial over the skull fracture a Georgia teenager suffered in a “bubble soccer” game, Brad Thomas’s closing vividly detailed the teen’s lifelong loss, helping seal a seven-figure verdict.