Embolden yourself
"Very helpful to overcome personal fears in asking for big money."
Asking for Bigger Verdicts in Jury Selection & Closing - On Demand
$75.00
Unit price
/
Unavailable
Description
Description
Discussing damages—whether in voir dire or closing—is perhaps the most stressful, awkward part of the trial process. The plaintiff’s attorney faces a tough choice: some jurors may bristle at the discussion of big numbers before trial, while others may feel broadsided if a large number is the last thing they hear before they leave to deliberate.
There are so many choices lawyers face when discussing damages in jury selection and closing: Should I mention a specific number? Should I use voir dire to discuss damages or liability? Should I focus on getting potential jurors to admit bias, or should I try to precondition jurors about the value of the harms?
In this webinar, jury consultant Harry Plotkin and trial lawyer David deRubertis discuss the benefits and limitations of different approaches to asking for large awards. Discover unique approaches to handling money in jury selection, and asking juries for huge verdicts in closing.
You will learn:
- How to discuss compensation without rubbing jurors the wrong way
- The right and wrong ways to explain damages in voir dire
- When—and when not—to mention specific numbers to your jury
- How to communicate the concept of millions (without mentioning the word “millions”)
- How to frame damages in a way that motivates conservative jurors to action
Additionally, this webinar will focus on the process of jury selection. Discover:
- Which voir dire questions can mislead you into striking jurors capable of big damages
- How your jurors’ answers to liability questions may be more important than their answers to damages questions
- How to challenge “conventional wisdom” in jury selection, and target only the truly unreceptive jurors for removal
Plotkin and deRubertis will also discuss scenarios where your judge won’t allow specific numbers in jury selection, as well as situations where your noneconomic damages far exceed your client’s financial losses. Don’t miss this opportunity to learn unique strategies for winning bigger verdicts at trial.
Click here for Access Instructions for On Demand Programs.
Each user must register individually as they will need their own login to access the program.
Details
Details
On Demand Program: 98 Minutes
Originial Air Date: 12/13/2024
Overall rating: 4.642857 / 5 from 14 reviews.
AI Generated Review Summary
Summary topics
Review topics: ["style","verdicts","damages","offers","strategies"].
Review highlights
Reviews
The ""logical"" style.
"What were your key takeaways from the program? I appreciated the ""logical"" style of talking about damages. It fits my personality better than some of the other styles I learned about in other programs."
Different strategies.
"What were your key takeaways from the program? Different strategies for admitted liability and disputed liability voir dire. Which topics did you find least valuable and why? All were valuable. What were your key takeaways from the program? Different strategies for admitted liability and disputed liability voir dire. Which topics did you find least valuable and why? All were valuable."
Give a jury your range.
"What were your key takeaways from the program? Give a jury your range early on even in voir dire."
Fully accountable.
"What were your key takeaways from the program? Holding the defendants “fully accountable for the harm caused”. Great phrase! Which topics did you find least valuable and why? Punitive damages, which is not a big aspect of our practice."
Good verdicts.
"What were your key takeaways from the program? Good verdicts are rooted in liability, not damages. Which topics did you find least valuable and why? The program was primarily a case study of David's defamation case, rather than Harry's ideas regarding jury selection. Still good, nonetheless."
Big verdicts.
"What were your key takeaways from the program? Outrageous liability facts make for big verdicts. Which topics did you find least valuable and why? Punitive damages--almost impossible to get in Texas, where most of my cases are."
You have to reject big offers to get big verdicts
"What were your key takeaways from the program? You have to reject big offers to get big verdicts. Which topics did you find least valuable and why? Voir dire considerations."
this program was a great synopsis of how the best in the business do it
"What were your key takeaways from the program? This program was a great synopsis of how the best in the business do it."
Talking to jurors in closing
"What were your key takeaways from the program? Talking to jurors in closing about the philosophical underpinnings behind money damages is more important than the emotional drivers. Also, usefulness of change in the past to show amount of time involved in permanent losses into the future. Tying everything to “holding the defendant accountable for the harm it caused. ” How best to link dishonesty to an effort to avoid accountability. Which topics did you find least valuable and why? I don’t do employment law, so some of the examples were not that helpful. But I do present lots of “general damages” issues where the examples can still be adapted to be useful."
