-
Why Sorry is the Badest Word…
An expression of regret or an apology by a Defendant is nothing new when a case doesn’t settle and finally makes it to trial. However, should this be allowed? Why no! Defendants should be prohibited from expressing any apologies or statements of regret to the jury in connection with a civil case not seeking punitive →
-
Limiting the Damage
So you lose an evidentiary argument and the court allows some potentially prejudicial evidence to be presented for some narrow purpose such as bias, impeachment or to show intent, similar plan, motive or scheme. So what should you do? Indiana follows “the rule of multiple admissibility” endorsed by the evidence treatises of both Whitmore →
-
Readying Your Experts for Traps and Tough Questions
Depositions are dangerous time for your expert. Dangerous traps lies just around the corner. You cannot relax. Here are some thoughts on this important topic. 1. Tendencies of your expert: If you can obtain and read past depositions of your expert to see not only what type of questions are asked but how he reacts. →
-
Screen Your Expert and Treat Your Case Right by Avoiding Any Big Tricks…
An area which is often overlooked is screening your expert. This is important. Treat it like you would a major purchase, because it is. (a) Review and verify Curriculum Vitae. You can devastate an expert if he lies on his CV. I have done this before with experts who had a long history of →
-
When silence is golden… The tacit admission.
Indiana Rule of Evidence 801(A) provides: A “statement” is (1) an oral or written assertion or (2) nonverbal conduct of a person, if it is intended by the person as an assertion.A tacit admission may be made when a person remains silent or makes an equivocal response to an accusation which the person would ordinarily be expected →
-
Motion in Limine: An Effective Pretrial Tool and Weapon – Wrongful Death & Remarriage (Part 6)
The defense oftentimes wants to muddy the waters and misdirect or sway the jury away from a person’s cause with information that is irrelevant or unfairly prejudicial. Wrongful death cases are no exception and remarriage is one of those topics. Fortunately, Indiana court’s have joined the majority of jurisdictions which have prohibited such tactics by →
-
Medical Malpractice: When Common Sense Trumps Expert Knowledge
Medical malpractice cases are difficult and expensive to litigate. However, sometimes experts are not required… Just common sense. Indiana has long embraced the “common knowledge exception” to requirements of expert testimony in certain matters. A physician’s allegedly negligent act or omission can be so obvious that expert testimony is unnecessary. Wright v. Carter, 622 N.E.2d →
-
Practice… We Talking ’bout Practice…
“Practice… We talkin ’bout practice.” – Allen Iverson 2002 Just like Allen Iverson of the Philadelphia Sixers, no one likes to practice, but it is necessary if your witness and you are going to stay in sync. In order for your witness examination to be credible and persuasive, both the questioner and the witness must be →
-
Shutting Off the Defense Doctor’s Flood of Misinformation
In my last post, I discussed an analogy to deal with tactics used by your opponent to muddy the waters. Well, the problem is you have to drag the hogs out of the spring waters and it takes time to clear matters up. What if you could keep them out of the water altogether? Have →
-
How to Use Your iPad and OneNote as a Secret Weapon for Use in Trial
I was looking for a program that could emulate the structure of my paper file system that I use for jury trials. I looked at several programs that were touted as the answer for use on my iPad. I looked at all the Apple App World had to offer to no avail. I download one →
-
Evidence of Subsequent Remedial Measures
Indiana Evidence Rule 407 provides: When after an event, measures are taken which, if taken previously, would have made the event less likely to occur, evidence of the subsequent measures is not admissible to prove negligence or culpable conduct in connection with the event. The rule does not require the exclusion of evidence of subsequent →
-
Admissibility Checklist
QUESTION #1: Is it Authentic? (If Not, How do I Authenticate/Identify the Evidence?) Is the item the “Real McCoy”? Is it what you say it is? To establish that an item is “authentic,” think about the problem from the standpoint of how you determine whether anything you come in contact is “real” versus being a →
-
Running The Back Door Play – Rule 104(a) and Preliminary Questions of Fact
In basketball, a backdoor play is when a player without the ball gets behind the defense and receives a pass for an easy score. This can be executed if the defenders are unaware of the open space behind them. There is such a play available in the courtroom the defense may be unaware of as →
-
Motion in Limine: An Effective Pretrial Tool and Weapon (Part 2)
Here are some additional topics to consider: Unnecessary Medical Treatment. You should preclude or prohibit the defense counsel from alleging or arguing that plaintiff’s accident-related medical expenses are unnecessary or unreasonable. All damages directly attributable to the wrong are recoverable by the victim. The law also typically allows an injured plaintiff to recover reasonable →
/
Tumblr
/
The Barrister's Toolbox 