Simple.
"What were your key takeaways from the program? Keep it simple."
Simple Wins: Stop Trying to Prove the Wrong Things - On Demand CLE
$100.00
Unit price
/
Unavailable
Description
Description
Many plaintiff lawyers use outdated and flawed constructs that favor the defense, and most don't even know it. The fear of not doing enough drives them to try to prove things that are unnecessary and often difficult to establish—both for liability and damages—and it backfires. A misappreciation for what really needs to be proven causes plaintiff lawyers to play right into the defense’s playbook. The good news is that there is an alternative that will greatly improve outcomes both in and out of the courtroom.
Joe Fried is a nationally recognized trial lawyer known for developing innovative strategies and challenging how plaintiff personal injury litigation has been practiced. His popular webinar, Keeping Trial Short, has sparked a nationwide movement resulting in better verdicts by using a more intentional and focused approach. Now, Fried shares his most recent innovations to help lawyers recognize when they are overcomplicating their cases—and what to do instead.
In this webinar, Fried will explain how you can avoid needlessly complicating your case and making it harder to prove by not concentrating on medical labels and diagnoses. Instead, Fried will show you how focusing on your client’s symptoms and limitations will make it more appealing to the jury—and dramatically more difficult for the defense to attack. Finally, you will learn the most up-to-date tactics on how to identify and implement Fried’s revolutionary “light switch” technique to create simple binary choices for the jury.
Don't miss your opportunity to learn this new and surprisingly powerful strategy, which will help you get better results both at trial and mediation.
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 and comply with CLE requirements.
Author
Author
Details
Details
On Demand Program: 75
Original Air Date: 08/30/2023
Accreditation
Accreditation
Approved and Pending Credits
Click Here
Accreditation Not Available
MO, VA
We will apply for accreditation in your state upon request. Please use the form at the bottom of the product description to request accreditation in your state.
Overall rating: 4.8545456 / 5 from 55 reviews.
AI Generated Review Summary
Summary topics
Review topics: [program, tips, cle].
Review highlights
Reviews
Reducing to necessity.
"What were your key takeaways from the program? Reducing to necessity."
I loved it.
"What were your key takeaways from the program? I loved it. Which topics did you find least valuable and why? trying a faster case."
Simplify, simplify, simplify
"What were your key takeaways from the program? Simplify, simplify, simplify"
Try the symptoms
"What were your key takeaways from the program? Try the symptoms, not the labels."
Simple Wins
"Good program."
Consideration of not relying
"What were your key takeaways from the program? Consideration of not relying heavily on medical experts to prove causation Which topics did you find least valuable and why? Reference to trucking cases as that is not my area but that was a very small part of this presentation"
The simplification of the case
"What were your key takeaways from the program? The simplification of the case is something I have been trying to preach to my partners--Joe laid it out so clearly and persuasively, really helpful program. Which topics did you find least valuable and why? Nothing. Even though I don't do trucking cases, I found everything he talked about adaptable to my own cases."
Maybe I can learn
"What were your key takeaways from the program? Maybe I can learn to be more succinct in my cases. Which topics did you find least valuable and why? N/A"
The idea of focusing
"What were your key takeaways from the program? The idea of focusing on the plaintiff's symptoms (often not really subject to dispute) rather than labels and on lay witnesses describing how the plaintiff was hurt/changes rather than an medical explanation for the injuries. Which topics did you find least valuable and why? none"
