))
Robert Glassman — How Leveling with Jurors Helped Win an $11 Million Verdict
Manage episode 438919672 series 3489912
เนื้อหาจัดทำโดย Dan Ambrose, Trial Lawyers University, Dan Ambrose, and Trial Lawyers University เนื้อหาพอดแคสต์ทั้งหมด รวมถึงตอน กราฟิก และคำอธิบายพอดแคสต์ได้รับการอัปโหลดและจัดหาให้โดยตรงจาก Dan Ambrose, Trial Lawyers University, Dan Ambrose, and Trial Lawyers University หรือพันธมิตรแพลตฟอร์มพอดแคสต์ของพวกเขา หากคุณเชื่อว่ามีบุคคลอื่นใช้งานที่มีลิขสิทธิ์ของคุณโดยไม่ได้รับอนุญาต คุณสามารถปฏิบัติตามขั้นตอนที่แสดงไว้ที่นี่ https://th.player.fm/legal
Robert S. Glassman’s client was driving a motorcycle over the posted speed limit when a city truck cut in front of him from a side street. In the ensuing crash, the cyclist was injured.
On this episode of Trial Lawyers University, hear how Robert presented the facts about his client’s speeding during jury selection to weed out jurors who didn’t think they could be impartial when deciding who was to blame for the accident.
Robert also shares how he relied on the testimony of an expert witness to prove that – even if his client had been going the posted speed limit – the accident still would have occurred, and the injuries would have been the same.
Ultimately, the jury found that Robert’s client was speeding, but that the city truck was to blame for the accident. The verdict: $11 million to Robert’s client.
Train and Connect with the Titans
☑️ Robert S. Glassman | LinkedIn | Email | Instagram
☑️ Panish Shea Ravipudi LLP | LinkedIn | Instagram | X | Facebook
☑️ TLU VEGAS
☑️ TLU On Demand Instant access to live lectures, case analysis, and skills training videos
☑️ TLU on X | Facebook | Instagram | LinkedIn
☑️ Subscribe Apple Podcasts | Spotify | YouTube
Episode Snapshot
- When to tell prospective jurors the facts that could harm your client.
- How Robert’s concession that his client was speeding changed the mood during jury selection and resulted in striking 26 jurors.
- When speaking with jurors about how they feel about the client speeding, ask if they can be impartial while hearing the rest of the evidence.
- When potential jurors express their opinions, ask other jurors if they feel the same way.
- Why a plaintiff’s lawyer can’t go straight to the question of whether a juror can be impartial.
- How to thank the jurors for every opinion they express without becoming combative.
- When suing the government, ask prospective jurors if they worry that making big-verdict awards will increase taxes for everyone.
- How to transition from questions about taxes to caps for awards against a government entity.
- How Robert proved his client would have suffered the same injuries if he had driven the speed limit.
- How the jury concluded that the motorcycle driver was negligent for speeding, but that speeding did not cause the accident.
Produced and Powered by LawPods
56 ตอน
แบ่งปัน
