Update 12/14/2015: Jurors cleared Dr. Stephanie Smith of responsibility for the spinal complications Mittie Anglin claims have left her in pain and severely limited her ability to walk. 

Anglin's attorney, Andersen, Tate & Carr’s Render Freeman had requested more than $6.3 million for Anglin's continuing disabilities. 

Jurors took two hours to reach the verdict, capping a week-long trial focusing on Anglin's condition following the injection Smith performed. Read the full story on the verdict.

CVN will have more details and gavel-to-gavel video of the trial as soon as it is available. 

Lawrenceville, GA—As trial opened Tuesday over a debilitating spinal condition a Georgia woman claims followed a pain management procedure, attorneys debated whether the woman’s post-procedure symptoms required the pain management doctor take further action. Mittie and James Anglin v. Dr. Stephanie Smith, M.D., 12-C-02515-S3.

As critical as a well-prepared closing is, sometimes the moments with the biggest impact are delivered as a counterpunch to a remark by opposing counsel.  That’s how James Butler framed the 60 seconds of silence during rebuttal argument in Walden v. Chrysler Group LLC.

By the time opening statements begin, the average juror has already been overwhelmed with information. Voir dire, instructions from the bench, even the courtroom environment are all new and confusing to many jurors, making it difficult for them to fully understand details delivered in an opening. Under these circumstances, too many charts, models, and graphs intended to explain key terms can, in the wrong circumstances, confuse and distract the overwhelmed juror. Particularly where complex terms and ideas are central to a case, opting for a basic, simple demonstration of a theory can often be a powerful tool. That's the route The Cochran Firm's Jane Lamberti took in explaining the deadly buildup of fluid in a sleep center patient's lungs. 

Larry Stewart tells jurors Gwinnett County's control of a drainage pipe renders it responsible for flood damage to Jay and Lori Swift's property. 

 Lawrenceville, GA—A $189,000 October verdict against Gwinnett County capped nearly a half-decade of litigation by a couple who claimed the county refused in bad faith to pay for flood damage a drain system caused to their property. Swift v. Gwinnett County, 11-C-08314-S2.

When the patient at the center of a medical malpractice case dies following a relatively routine medical procedure, the defense must often overcome a natural tendency among jurors to believe the healthcare staff involved must have committed some error. During closing arguments of Bailey v. Corso, Daniel Huff delivered a powerful appeal to reason that convinced jurors his client, an Emory Healthcare surgeon, was blameless in the procedure that punctured his patient's heart.