Writing a Legal Brief? Try This Easy and Innovative Technique to Deliver Your Argument

Writing a Legal Brief?  Try This Easy and Innovative Technique to Deliver Your Argument
A commonly held belief is that litigation graphics are only for trial; unfortunately, this is applying an ancient approach to a modern day submission.  We asked some of our top clients (who include some of the top law firms in the US) why they use graphics in theirs briefs, and we received a resounding answer: visuals are the best way to communicate large amounts of data into one cohesive point.  When our clients are faced with complicated, convoluted charts or excel spreadsheets full of thousands of points of data, they call us.  The reason we always get this phone call from our most trusted clients is two-fold:

Because we have taught them that one graph (line, bar, or the like) can represent hundreds, if not thousands, of pieces of data in a simple uncomplicated way where the judge can immediately understand our argument

AND

With the limited amount of pages they are allowed in a brief, they understand each page needs to be as impactful as possible.

Below is a perfect example how we assisted a client with their recent brief.  Our client was faced with a very strict page limitation, but needed to include numerous financial data in order to make our argument plausible.  We condensed over 2100 (over 100 pages of Excel entries) pieces of data into one, static, comprehensive graphic that not only told our client’s story, but allowed the judge to understand a key argument with minimal cognitive overload. More importantly, our client was able to maximize the number of pages in their brief to help support their argument, which, in turn lead to a favorable ruling for our side moving forward.

 

Progressive litigators realize the value of utilizing visuals in all aspects of their case.  Visuals are no longer just for trial, but can also be used during motions, hearings, Markmans and even trial briefs.  If you’re using graphics only for trial, you’re already giving your opponent an advantage before stepping into the courtroom.

If you have any questions about gaining a competitive edge over your adversary, feel free to contact me at via LinkedIn.

 

 

The Best Article I Read This Week: First Impressions ARE Written in Stone, BUT Can Be Broken

Expect First Impressions to be Carved in Stone

By Dr. Ken Broda-Bahm:

We’ve all heard the old saying: You never get a second chance to make a first impression. It is true that when meeting someone new, our brain is quickly putting them into a number of categories. Their background, intelligence, friendliness, attitudes, trustworthiness, and a myriad of other aspects of character are all on their way to being locked into some pretty durable assumptions. In a legal setting, where a juror is reacting to a witness on the stand for example, we might want those credibility determinations to be made over time, informed by the full scope of the testimony. But don’t count on it. Our biological impression-formation machine isn’t known for its patience. Even in situations where our goals are to wait and to keep an open mind, we are still forming impressions almost immediately as a natural consequence of the brain’s penchant for making meaning. We can’t help it.

Full Article here:

http://www.persuasivelitigator.com/2014/02/expect-first-impressions-to-be-carved-in-stone.html

 

Are You Ignoring This Simple Tactic in Your Presentations?

Color plays a vital role in the world around us, yet sometimes we forget about it when creating our presentations.  This article addresses a simple, yet effective way to create messages your audience will remember.

7 Things You Never Want to Say in Court

by Ken Lopez
Lawyers say a lot of things in court – but here’s a list of seven things that, for various reasons, you never want to hear yourself saying in court.

Number 1: “Your Honor, could I please have a moment to sort out this technical issue.” The middle of trial is not the place to fix your technical glitches – yet one hears lawyers utter this sentence all the time. With few exceptions, technical problems are almost entirely preventable. And in any case, you always have a backup plan, right? Take a look at these related articles for more background on this:

Number 2: “My client.” I believe the phrase “my client” should be banished from the lexicon of all litigators….

Read more here:

http://www.a2lc.com/blog/bid/68380/7-things-you-never-want-to-say-in-court?source=Blog_Email_%5B7%20Things%20You%20Never%20W%5D

Know the Difference Between Debate and Trial Advocacy

By Dr. Ken Broda-Bahm:

There is a tendency, particularly within law, to equate argumentation and persuasion: How do you persuade? By offering arguments, of course. But that isn’t all of it, or even necessarily the half of it. You win the argument when your point cannot be refuted, but you persuade only when your target is convinced. Over the years, most formats of academic debate have clearly chosen argument over persuasion. No self-respecting debate judge would admit that they are siding with the winner because they more fully understand and accept that side’s advocacy. Instead they will say, often in excruciating detail…

Read more here:

http://www.persuasivelitigator.com/2013/10/know-the-difference-between-debate-and-trial-advocacy.html

Attorneys’ Analogies Are A Lot Like My In-laws Dancing At Weddings (Or, Your “Metaphor” Is Actually A Simile)

By Thomas M. O’Toole, Ph.D.

If there is a complex issue that jurors need to understand, I’m a fan of identifying communication strategies that help jurors understand the issue directly, rather than understanding what the issue is “kind of like.” Visual communication should always be the first resort in this scenario. Graphics can simplify an issue much more effectively than analogies and can often do so in a more persuasive manner, while avoiding the risks that analogies and metaphors present. A graphic is not just a pretty picture; it is visual advocacy. Effective graphics break an issue down into understandable parts, capture the logical flow of the issue, and show jurors how it fits perfectly within the legal framework of the case. This is where the slideshow style of PowerPoint can be particularly helpful. It’s not just one picture but a progressive series of pictures that tie multiple items together in a simple and persuasive manner that both motivates and arms jurors to be effective advocates on complex issues during deliberations.

Bottom line, it’s time to put the brakes on the use of analogies and metaphors by attorneys at trial. My aunt-in-law Josephine’s dancing is amusing because we only have to witness it every few years. The same can be said about attorneys’ use of metaphors and analogies: they are best when used sparingly or not at all.  There are many better routes to persuasion that metaphors, and each one starts with visual communication.

 

Read more here:

Six Lessons to Live By

Consider How You Come Across With the Volume Off

By Dr. Ken Broda-Bahm:

We know communication is visual and not just verbal. But when litigators think of that, they tend to think of demonstrative exhibits and technology. But what about themselves? As a speaker, you’re making a visual impression as well. Most know the basics: stand up straight, look the jury or judge in the eye, use a few gestures. But in practice, attorneys want to expect that in court, content is king and what we say matters more than how we look when we say it. But some surprising research shows that more than we expect is coming through the visual channel.

The studies use the technique of asking research participants to assess a communicator without the aid of sound. Watching a music competition with the sound off, for example, (Tsay, 2013) both amateur and professional musicians were able to correctly predict the competition winners, and did so at a level that was better than those who heard and those who both heard and saw the performance. Similarly, experimental participants unfamiliar with the candidates were able to identify the election winner after simply watching ten-second silent video clips of a gubernatorial debate (Benjamin & Shapiro, 2009). As with the music competition research, turning the sound on tended to worsen the accuracy.

 

Read more here:

http://www.persuasivelitigator.com/2013/09/consider-how-you-come-across-with-the-volume-off.html

Will Being Folksy and Low-Tech Help You Win a Case?

by Ken Lopez
Founder/CEO
A2L Consulting

“I generally delegate the preparation of litigation graphics, and I tend to keep things pretty low-tech anyway.”

To be fair, this is the way cases have been tried for a very long time, and the partner had had a great deal of success with this approach. So, what’s wrong?

What’s wrong is that jurors’ expectations have changed enormously in just the last few years. Jurors expect a trial presentation to be polished and more like the nightly news than like a corporate PowerPoint. They expect a trial lawyer to be polished and well-practiced, more like Brian Williams than a dull CLE presenter. This rural Arkansas jury said it better than I ever could when they responded to a question about the use of trial technology by saying, “Today is technology. That’s what it’s all about.”

Read more here:

http://www.a2lc.com/blog/bid/67259/will-being-folksy-and-low-tech-help-you-win-a-case?source=Blog_Email_%5BWill%20Being%20Folksy%20an%5D

Nailing a Presentation in the First 60 Seconds

Whether you are making a presentation at your local library or to senior executives at your firm, the first 60 seconds set you up for success or failure.

Everything most precious to me in this world is the result of the first 60 seconds of a speech I gave on a cold day in Philadelphia. It was my turn to speak during a Wharton MBA Toastmasters program; I would be given a topic, and then would have to begin without advance preparation.

My topic: explain why MBAs aren’t all greedy jerks.

Terrified of boring the audience, I decided to flip the topic and embrace the dark side. My speech was a rant about how MBAs are all-powerful masters of the universe (note to readers: I was kidding.)

The first 60 seconds you spend in front of an audience are pivotal. If you’re nervous or too excited, time can be a blur. But this is when the audience decides whether or not they like you, and it’s your best opportunity to get in a groove that will guide you through the rest of your presentation.

I’d like to make the following suggestions:

Plan your opening in advance. You should know exactly…

Read more here:

http://www.linkedin.com/today/post/article/20130918033719-36792-nailing-a-presentation-in-the-first-60-seconds

Know Your Fallacies When Presenting in Court

By Dr. Ken Broda-Bahm:

Remember the list of fallacies? For many of us, it might fall in the category of things we learned at one point in our lives, probably in a logic or communication class, and then mostly set aside in our practical lives. After all, it can seem a little pedantic, or even arrogant, to call them out. “Hey, that’s a fallacy!” isn’t likely to work when examining a witness or persuading a jury. You could point out, “Your honor, opposing counsel is resorting to the common tu quoque or, ‘you too’ fallacy, in pointing to my discovery behavior in order to defend his own.” That isn’t likely to get you very far either. So is it worth it to remember and use the fallacies at all?

Some Common Fallacies of Legal Persuasion

Fallacies are ways of arguing that seem to offer proof or persuasive merit, while not actually contributing support. In that sense of being pleasing counterfeits, they’re as much psychological as they are logical. Here are the ones that I think are most common in our context.

Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc: ‘After this, therefore because of this’ or, as the book refers to it, ‘Not a cause, for a cause.’

Shortly after the product redesign, that’s when the complaints and incidents started to occur…

Read more here:

http://www.persuasivelitigator.com/2013/09/know-your-fallacies.html