When properly framed, an appeal to jurors’ “common sense” can be one of the most powerful rhetorical points in any attorney’s closing argument. And in closings at trial over a rear-end collision that injured a Florida woman, Keith Mitnik’s convincing appeal to "common sense" helped set up a seven-figure verdict.
Chantelle Alexander was a 19-year-old soccer player at a Miami college when the Honda Civic in which she was a passenger was rear-ended by a pickup truck. Alexander claims the crash left her with permanent neck and lower back injuries that require regular pain management treatment. The defense admitted fault for the crash but disputed the severity of the injuries, setting up a trial on damages.
During his closing argument for Alexander, Keith Mitnik, of Morgan & Morgan, told jurors the “keystone” argument of the defense, supported by the defense expert’s testimony, was that Alexander had recovered from her injuries within 4-6 weeks of the crash.
But Mitnik contrasted that defense argument with evidence of Alexander’s ongoing medical treatment, walking jurors through a timeline of her medical care both before and after the collision. Mitnik noted she had sought care only once before the crash, compared to more than 140 visits in the years after the wreck, for a range of treatments, including nerve ablation and other pain management procedures.
“Is she really doing all of that for a lawsuit?” Mitnik asked, telling jurors the defense argument defied common sense.
Mitnik then turned back to the defense expert’s testimony, with an eye toward painting how unreasonable that expert’s conclusion seemed.
Visit CVN's Playlist Library - Highlighting Winning Trial Techniques From Top Attorneys
“[Alexander] went to bed, some night, apparently about 4-6 weeks out, with pain in her neck and in her back from the injury sustained in this crash according to [the defense expert], and woke up the next morning with the exact same pain, in the exact same location, only now the crash has got nothing to do with it. It’s all just a big coincidence,” Mitnik told jurors. “That’s why I said ‘common sense.’”
Jurors ultimately returned a $2.8 million verdict, including $2 million for pain and suffering, after concluding Alexander had suffered a permanent injury from the collision.
You can find more of Mitnik’s powerful argument, as well as other winning examples of this rhetorical weapon used on both sides of the courtroom, in CVN’s Playlist - Appealing to Common Sense in Closings.
That playlist is part of CVN’s new and growing Playlist Library, an expert-curated repository of the trial moments and techniques you want to see. Whether you’re looking for powerful ways to frame non-economic damages in your closing argument, strong examples of openings in premises liability cases, or simply want to see openings from our biggest trials each year, CVN Playlists is your ever-growing resource of expert editor-selected video and commentary. It’s a valuable addition to our full video library, and is available only to CVN subscribers.
Check out the Playlist Library now.
Not a subscriber?
Email Arlin Crisco at acrisco@cvn.com.
