Presentation of Damages (Continued from page 8)
told a story of how when she was first diagnosed, her mother told her that she would never hold down a full-time job. The prospect of being a drain on society frightened my client. So, when she kept getting thrown off the Montgomery County Ride-On Buses with her service dog, the jury understood that my client’s reaction to the possibility of not getting to work on time was not merely the reac- tion to an inconvenience occasioned by a periodic insensitive bus driver. Instead, her reaction was the growing realiza- tion that she might lose her job, and the terror she felt at potentially becoming dependent on welfare. Without that “back story” woven into the fabric of her case, it is easy to see how the damage case might have been less interesting. The weaving of information leading
to damages should occur throughout the case. It should be done deliberately
so that you know you are laying the groundwork for a jury’s award.
7. Do use “frame-of -reference questions” to heighten the sense of immediacy for damage purposes. Many cases go to trial only after a delay
the jury through the events as they are unfolding. With little effort, any attor- ney can turn portions of an examination into a much more dramatic and imme- diate recounting of an event. Here is an example showing the difference between a typical examination and what might be
“To the client, the pain and suffering may seem fresh, but to a jury who hears most everything recalled for them in the past tense, damages can seem less immediate.”
of more than a year. To the client, the pain and suffering may seem fresh, but to a jury who hears most everything recalled for them in the past tense, dam- ages can seem less immediate. It is better, therefore, to use “frame-of-reference questions” to heighten the immediacy. These questions are ones asked in the present tense to elicit a present-tense answer, resulting in the client walking
elicited through a frame-of-reference ex- amination in an automobile-negligence case:
Standard Examination:
Q: So Mr. Client, describe what hap- pened to you on Saturday, June 5?
A: I was out driving in my car, and as I went over the overpass, I was side- swiped by the defendant’s car, which caused mine to hit the guardrail.
Frame-of-Reference Examination:
Q: So Mr. Client, take us back to June 5. Why are you in your car that morn- ing?
Pre Settlement Funding • Law Firm Financial Products
A: I am driving to the grocery store. Q: Just before 11:30, where are you on the road?
A: I am on the overpass, crossing over 270.
John Friedson President
P.O. Box 1339
Rockville, Maryland 20849 (301) 984-0600 Fax: (301) 984-0719
email:
john@creativefinancingsolutions.com www.creativefinancingsolutions.com
Q: While you are on the overpass, what do you see?
A: I look out my window and see this SUV crossing its lane heading right at me on my side.
Q: What are you thinking as you see it coming towards you?
A: I am thinking that I am about to get hit.
Q: What happens next? A: A second or so later, the SUV hits my car, I yelled out, and my car goes sideways towards the guardrail on the overpass.
(Continued on page 12) 10 Trial Reporter Spring 2008
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66