<img height="1" width="1" alt="" style="display:none" src="https://www.facebook.com/tr?id=1482979731924517&amp;ev=PixelInitialized">

For those of us in the persuasion business, the biggest stage in the world is currently on Capitol Hill. Last week, millions watched the start of this country’s fourth impeachment effort with interest and concern. Putting aside politics and the question of who is right and who is wrong, I'm professionally interested in how well the various involved parties are performing rhetorically, visually, and technically -- especially as it affects persuasion. In day one, I watched a classic mistake occur that offers lessons for trial lawyers and the teams who support them. Here, Rep. Eric Swalwell of California, a former prosecutor, questioned a witness and attempted to use video support his questioning. However, when he asked for the video to be played, probably in PowerPoint, there was no audio. He quickly adjusted and read the transcript, but it clearly flustered him. The relevant video is less than a minute long and should cue up to 5:09:45 if you hit play. The error is inexcusable in the modern era -- whether on Capitol Hill or in the courtroom. Like all errors of this sort, it was preventable through practice and preparation. Technical problems happen. Great trial teams and litigation support firms are best judged in these moments. The best teams always practiced enough to anticipate such issues and the response to them. The best teams practice together until first chair and his or her trial technician/hot-seater have formed a bond that allows both to quickly overcome a technical problem. We have written extensively about how to prepare with your hot-seater for the best results, how to practice and prepare properly for trial, and how to avoid a technical snafu in the first place: Why Rapport Between a Trial Lawyer and a Trial Technician is So Important 10 Timely Tips For Trial Preparation The #1 Reason Top Trial Teams Keep Winning What Does Using a Trial Technician or Hot-Seater Cost? Free E-Book Download: How to Find and Engage the Best Trial Technician Why Trial Tech ≠ Litigation Graphics Will using a trial technician make me look too slick and high-tech? Practice, Say Jury Consultants, is Why Movie Lawyers Perform So Well A video of George Zimmerman's lawyers taking a do-it-yourself approach 12 ways to avoid a Superbowl-style tech failure See a video of a trial technician in action 12 Tips to Hire the Right Trial Technician for Your Trial 5 Trial Director Tips for great presentations 6 ways to use video depositions Sample One-Year Trial Prep Calendar for High Stakes Cases In the modern courtroom, trial technicians/hot-seaters are outfitted with redundant technology and have practiced sufficiently with first-chair so that such issues have been anticipated and planned for. A Capitol Hill hearing is a lot like a courtroom -- you only get one try to get it right. Prepare sufficiently or you can damage your credibility and persuasive ability with a simple and avoidable technical problem.

Read More

Share:

At A2L Consulting, we have been providing trial technicians (also known as hot-seat operators) to help our clients display materials at trial since the 1990s. The role of a trial technician is a unique one. These men and women routinely work late nights during a trial to ensure that they are totally prepared for whatever can arise. As we have said elsewhere on this blog, the ideal hot-seat operator must have a very close working relationship with the lead trial attorney and with the other team members, must have a calm demeanor in case he or she is called upon with no notice to provide something critical for the trial, and must have an understanding of the thousands of documents that will inevitably be involved in any trial. Most importantly, he or she must be able to make the trial presentation appear to be seamless and flawless. We have seen instances in which opposing counsel, or their hot-seat operator, stumbled in one respect or another – and their credibility took a dive. We have written in articles like What a Great “Hot Seat Operator” Can Add to a Trial Team and 12 Tips to Hire the Right Trial Technician for Your Trial about the ideal qualities for a hot-seat operator. We've even released a free book on the topic called How To Find and Use Trial Technicians and Trial Technology. Click here to download it. One thing that we perhaps have not discussed as much as we should is that a great hot-seat operator must, from the beginning, become totally conversant with the technology available in the specific courtroom in which he or she will be working. And there are substantial differences: Some courtrooms have expensive, built-in technology that is state of the art. Some will have excellent technology – if this were the year 2003. Some have no technology at all. It is the responsibility of the trial team, and of the hot-seat operator above all, to design an appropriate, modern technology set-up for the courtroom that will serve the paramount goal of persuading the jury. Below we have prepared what should be a very useful directory of the technology available in the 90 federal district courts across the nation and we have linked to each of the courts’ websites.

Read More

Share:

Law360 is a top legal industry publisher owned by Lexis-Nexis. Its daily newsletters are a must-read for trial lawyers involved in big-ticket litigation. This interview, Trial Consultants Q&A: A2L Consulting's Ken Lopez, was originally published on April 28, 2017, and is reprinted here with permission. Links to A2L articles and resources have been added by A2L in this reprint. Q: What aspect of trial consulting do you and your firm specialize in? What is unique about your firm, compared to other trial consulting firms? A: Founded in 1995, our firm is a leading national litigation consulting firm that helps trial lawyers and other advocates more reliably win complex and high-dollar disputes. We are typically in trial year-round and deliver world-class client-pleasing results in three key service areas: jury research and consulting, litigation graphics consulting, and trial technology consulting. We have recently been voted #1 in each of these categories by major legal publications. The composition of our leadership distinguishes it from other trial consulting and litigation consultant firms. Unlike firms whose origins are rooted in the trial technology business, the engineering business or the marketing/public relations fields, our team is composed of experts in the persuasion sciences. These include former litigators from top law firms, attorney-artists and social science Ph.Ds with decades of experience working with judges and juries. We primarily serve AmLaw 100 law firms and their clients. However, the firm regularly works with boutique law firms and in-house departments. It counts amongst its clients nearly all top law firms and a large portion of the Fortune 500. Most people find A2L through its litigation and persuasion-focused blog, The Litigation Consulting Report. It has nearly 10,000 subscribers and was named one of the top ten blogs in litigation by the American Bar Association. Q: What was the most interesting or memorable case that you worked on? A: The average case at A2L Consulting is a business dispute between global companies with $100 million at stake where we provide jury consulting, a mock trial, litigation graphics, and courtroom hot-seat trial technology support. One of our most memorable cases was entirely — not average. Through a top trial lawyer, we were hired to work on behalf of a surviving family member of the 1996 crash of ValuJet Flight 592 in the Everglades. This was not a plane that exploded or quickly crashed. Instead, oxygen containers in the cargo area helped fuel a fire that caused smoke to fill the plane. Then, the oxygen-fueled fire burned through the passenger cabin floor from below. After some time, controls on the plane were destroyed by the fire. Then, the plane flipped and dove into the Everglades below. No one survived. It took a long time for the tragedy to unfold and the passengers had awareness of what was happened. We know this because the plane was equipped with recording devices in both the cockpit and the passenger cabin. The recording is confidential, but none of us who worked on this case will ever forget what we heard on that recording. To help the jury visualize the experience the passengers had, we could have created a 3-D animation to show what the experience inside of the cabin was like. Instead, we synced that chilling audio with an animation we created that helped tell the tragic story. Once the animation was admitted into evidence, the case quickly settled. Q: Which stage of the trial process is the most challenging, and why? A: While we support all phases of litigation from prefiling to appeal, our firm most often focuses its consulting efforts on the opening statement. Indeed, we speak and write about opening statements often. Perhaps second only to jury selection, the opening statement can make or break an entire case. It provides the framework and narrative upon which the judge or jury will hear the evidence. For many, consciously or subconsciously, the decision about the outcome of the case will be made during opening statement. Because the opening statement is so critical, the best trial lawyers expend enormous amounts of effort preparing for openings. I’ve seen some trial lawyers practice their opening more than 100 times over the course of a year. Not surprisingly, these trial lawyers tend to win their cases. In every type of litigation consulting we provide, the opening statement is a central focus. When we conduct a mock trial, the attorneys present their openings to mock jurors or mock judges. When our senior litigation consultants work with top trial lawyers to refine their trial presentation, we ask them to present their openings as part of that process. When we design a PowerPoint presentation for opening, we ask our clients to do run-throughs of openings. When we introduce one of our trial technicians/hot-seat operators to a trial team, we ask the first chair to practice opening statements so they develop a rapport with the trial tech. Indeed, sometimes, we are asked to draft an opening statement as part of our litigation consulting effort. Opening statements are the most challenging part of the trial process because they should be. Cases are regularly won and lost because of them. Q: How has trial consulting evolved over time? What major differences are there between the industry when you started and the industry now? A: Our firm, now a national litigation consulting firm with jury consulting, litigation graphics consulting and trial technology consulting practices all voted #1 by the legal industry, was started as Animators at Law, an animation and litigation graphics firm for trial lawyers focused on persuasion. Back in the mid-1990s when we started our firm, the idea of using demonstrative evidence/litigation graphics during a trial was new. Today, no serious trial lawyer would go to trial in big-ticket litigation without litigation graphics and nearly all would hire a litigation graphics consulting firm like ours. When we started our firm, PowerPoint did not exist. Most litigation graphics were printed trial boards. Today, trial boards are used as unique emphasis tools that supplement a PowerPoint trial presentation. The practice of jury research has changed too. It has evolved from a guru-dominated practice where gut instinct drove many decisions. Today, there is more scientific rigor among top jury research firms. They let the data speak for itself and supplement that data with advice based on experience. Of course, the trial technology practice has radically changed. In the 1990s, it barely existed. Now, the complexity of cases demands that an experienced trial technician/hot-seat operator run the technology, show the trial presentation and be ready to pull up evidence on a moment’s notice. Q: What are some of the biggest challenges when working with attorneys and their clients? A: One of my colleagues likes to say, “they call it the practice of law, but nobody is practicing.” I agree wholeheartedly. If I could change one thing about the way trial lawyers prepare for trial, it would be the way they practice. The correlation between open practice in front of peers and winning cases is unmistakable. Half of the time, trial lawyers practice extensively and seek feedback from litigation consultants and colleagues. These lawyers tend to win their cases. When we see a trial lawyer who wants to privately prepare their trial presentation on the eve of trial, we worry. It’s not that this approach can’t work. It often does. Instead, we simply recognize that the more a trial team openly practices, the more often that trial team wins.

Read More

Share:

by Alex Brown Director of Operations A2L Consulting While I was working on a case with one of our clients, it came to light that the opposition was using a trial technician for trial. At first our client did not want to bear the expense and did not feel that the case lent itself to the use of a full-time “hot seat” operator. I asked the client a few questions: What percentage of potential jurors carry a smartphone? Of that group, how many have tablets? Of those people who are “connected,” how many will be impressed by the flash and professionalism of a skilled trial tech? As you would expect, the numbers were high. It was obvious to everyone that if you are on a case and one side is using trial software, you have to match the other side or be left in the dust. People expect to see technology in the courtroom, appreciate the effort if it is made, and do not understand if one side does not use it. If your opposition is using modern technology and you are using the overhead and drawing on flip charts, your message will be lost. In this instance, we helped our client find a solution that did not permit the opposition to make it look unprepared and unprofessional. Here are 10 good rules for using trial presentation software to the best effect. Provide training. Make sure if you are going to use it, know how to use it or find someone that does. The software is designed to make your presentation effective and seamless. If you are not getting that result, bring in someone who can. Use the right tool. Sanction, TrialPad, TrialDirector (laptop or iPad), and OnQue are the top platforms today. Use the one that’s best for you. Ninety percent of trial teams that use this type of software use TrialDirector, simply because it works. This should not take away from the other platforms. Sanction has improved, and OnQue is the new kid on the block and seems to handle video much better than the alternatives. But comfort is paramount, so use the platform that is most comfortable to the one presenting. Remember, you are not the one running the presentation. They are there to support you.

Read More

Share:

by Ken Lopez Founder/CEO A2L Consulting

Read More

Share:

By Ken Lopez Founder/CEO A2L Consulting When your trial technology fails, you fail in the eyes of your jury.

Read More

Share:

by Ken Lopez Founder & CEO A2L Consulting

Read More

Share:

by Ken Lopez Founder & CEO A2L Consulting If you saw the Super Bowl this past Sunday, you saw some interesting things.

Read More

Share:

Why Trial Technology Makes Me Merry

Read More

Share:

by Theresa D. Villanueva, Esq. Director, Litigation Consulting A2L Consulting

Read More

Share:

At A2L Consulting, we believe that the difference between a good result at trial and a great result can lie in the performance of the trial technician.

Read More

Share:

by Theresa Villanueva, Esq. Director, Litigation Consulting A2L Consulting

Read More

Share:

Forty-five states may have mandatory continuing legal education (CLE) requirements for attorneys – but all litigators and litigation support staff, wherever they are located, have a duty to stay informed and maintain their skills. Whether you are a first chair litigator or a litigation paralegal, given the pace of change in trial technology and trial strategy, it can be a challenge just to keep up with the latest trends.

Read More

Share:

Usually, the vast majority of the time that a litigation consultant will spend with a trial team focuses on jury selection, mock trials, witness preparation, opening statement and expert testimony. A litigation consultant will usually spend less than ten percent of his or her time in supporting a trial team in its development of the closing argument. This is very curious, because closing arguments are a critical part of any trial. They are the last words jurors will hear out of your mouth, and they are the punctuation mark on your case and the story you have developed.

Read More

Share: