May the Record Reflect

A successful motion argument starts with credibility: earn the judge’s trust through preparation, candor, accuracy, and a clear understanding of the relief you’re seeking. Judge Matt Williams offers practical strategies for making persuasive arguments, from leading with what you want and focusing on the strongest facts to knowing your judge, respecting the court’s time, and addressing weaknesses strategically. He also explores how lawyers can use AI to test arguments while safeguarding client confidentiality and meeting their ethical obligations.

Topics

03:51 “Credibility before the tribunal”
05:44 Rules governing credibility before the tribunal
08:46 First thing to do before the bench
12:21 Next steps
17:03 Particulars of your motion
18:37 Stipulations on time
22:37 Making effective arguments
30:03 Weaknesses in your argument
33:22 Practicing with an AI “judge”
42:52 AI hallucinations destroy expert and case
45:44 Impressing the judge
57:15 Signoff question

Quote

“When we think about AI and we think about its impact on the practice of law, it's easy to say, ‘Oh my gosh, we’ve never been in a place like this.' Well, you know, the reality is technology has been influencing the practice of law for as long as human beings have continued to innovate. We have dealt with the use of digital evidence back in the ’70s and ’80s and early ’90s. The idea of digital evidence that could be manipulated changed ― it caused quite a stir in our community. We found ways that it could be used effectively. The introduction of display tools like PowerPoint, the introduction of remote technologies, especially during COVID. And so, as a very human endeavor, the practice of law has always had to deal with technologies.” Hon. Matt Williams

Resources

Hon. Matt Williams (LinkedIn)
AI for Litigators: Practical Tools to Transform Your Practice (book)
Point Well Made: Persuasive Oral Advocacy (book)
Refreshing Recollection and Impeachment, with John Farrell (podcast episode)
Deposition Skills: New Jersey (program)
Building Trial Skills: New Jersey (program)
Deposition Skills: Houston (program)
Building Trial Skills: Houston (program)

It’s often said that a case is won — or lost — during direct examination. Former prosecutor Steve Wood explores why direct really comes down to effective storytelling, ways to organize your direct examination, and how to ask questions that not only elicit good answers but also help the trier of fact follow the narrative. He also touches on how to cut through the inevitable fog of boredom by introducing purposeful change into the courtroom environment.

Topics
2:44 Goals of direct examination
3:37 Why storytelling matters in direct
5:16 Storytelling elements
14:01 Breaking through the fog of boredom
23:11 Sequencing your questions
26:05 Using your voice
28:45 Organizing your direct
31:57 Accrediting the witness
36:18 Telling the story
41:17 Honesty and bad facts
44:24 Questioning the witness
47:02 Phrasing your questions
59:39 Word choice
1:02:00 Witness focus
1:05:51 Plain English
1:09:46 Tenacity
1:12:37 Runaway witnesses
1:16:36 Signoff question

Quote
“One of the things that happens in every trial is that there is a contest for credibility between the advocates. I don’t — and can’t — lose that contest. And if a jury hears something bad from the other side first, they might be thinking I was trying to hide something from them.” Steve Wood

Resources
Steve Wood (LinkedIn)
Building Trial Skills: New Jersey (program)
Top 10 Tips that Make a Difference (podcast episode)
“Don’t Be Boring”: Creating Your Commanding Courtroom Presence (podcast episode)
Cross-Examination: Do No Harm (free webcast)

Whether you’re conducting a new client intake, deposing a witness, running a meeting on Zoom, or defending a client in the trial of their life, you must be an effective communicator. In this episode, Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Chris Whitten is joined by legal communications expert Dr. Karen Lisko to break down twelve communication attributes—six verbal and six nonverbal—that you can polish. All it takes is self-awareness and a little practice, and Dr. Lisko and Judge Witten tell you where to start.

Topics

5:43 Assertive versus aggressive communication styles
7:51 Adopt a conversational pace
10:34 Pause to punctuate your point
14:37 Replace Your Vocal Fillers
23:49 Amplify Your Volume
28:19 Reach Down for Your Deepest Natural Pitch
39:18 End with a Downward Inflection
40:54 Smile
48:10 Make “Kind Dynamite” Eye Contact
52:13 Literally Lean In
54:41 Use Hand Gestures Well
58:33 Have an Active Listening Face
1:00:26 Try “Hinging” Your Head Periodically
1:04:19 Signoff questions

Quotes

“One of the things that I often find when I deal with someone who lacks confidence is that when they do increase their volume, it has some byproduct advantages. And I can’t explain why from a social science perspective, but it I just keep seeing it, where when someone increases their volume, their face gets more animated, their eyes get brighter.” Dr. Karen Lisko

“As a fact finder, when you don’t give me that pause, especially after important evidence comes in, I find myself thinking or having an internal dialogue about what that just meant. And I miss like half of what the next thing you say is. And so those pauses are just so, so welcome for me when I’m listening.” Hon. Chris Whitten

Resources
Hon. Chris Whitten (LinkedIn)
Dr. Karen Lisko (bio)
Twelve Essentials of Assertive Delivery (free download)
Kind Dynamite (book)
NITA Women in Trial (program)
Advanced Trial Skills (program)
Building Trial Skills: San Diego (program)

Opening statement, direct and cross-examination, and closing argument are the most basic elements of advocacy that a trial lawyer must know. To announce that May the Record Reflect can now be heard on YouTube, we revisited the “Core Four” from our archives. NITA faculty members share their best insights and tips on these four critical competencies.

Topics
4:00 Creating your opening statement
6:23 Workshopping the opening
8:38 Struggling with the right story
10:12 Engaging jurors’ imagination during opening
13:26 Using visual aids
16:47 Objections on openings
19:10 Making your case in direct examination
20:16 The challenges of direct
23:56 How to keep direct interesting
26:34 Humanizing a despicable witness
33:52 Fundamentals of a zinger on cross-examination
40:28 Preparation versus spur-of-the-moment
43:08 The challenges of cross
48:28 Women and cross
53:42 Your advantage in closing argument
55:54 When to start thinking about your closing
56:47 Using visual aids
57:45 Jury instructions
1:00:11 Closings for plaintiff versus defendant

Quote
“Something I always do is I talk to jurors like they are a friend that I’m having a martini with and I’m sitting across the table from. And I’m just talking to that friend about something that’s a very serious, very important issue — and I’m keeping it simple, I’m keeping it concise — so it’s a serious tone, but it’s casual.” Brooke Latta

Resources
May the Record Reflect on YouTube (link)
The Secrets of Opening Statements, with Brooke Latta (podcast episode)
Direct Hit, with Mike Beckwith (podcast episode)
The Tense Trio, with Hon. Amy Hanley and Cheryl Brown Wattley (podcast episode)
Closing Time, with Luke Cass (podcast episode)
NITA Women in Trial (program)

Washington State Supreme Court Justice Sal Mungia shares essential tips for effective trial advocacy, emphasizing credibility, storytelling, and clear communication with jurors. He highlights the importance of authenticity, professionalism, and preparation—from mastering the rules of evidence to building rapport without relying on notes. Blending practical guidance with personal insight, Justice Mungia encourages trial lawyers to practice with integrity, show grace, and ultimately find purpose and enjoyment in their work.

Topics
4:40 Never lose your credibility with the jury or judge
6:59 Tell a compelling, human-centered story
9:33 Speak plainly—avoid legalese and connect clearly
12:32 Professionalism matters—don’t be a jerk
15:39 Show grace, even in high-pressure litigation
19:26 Build rapport—don’t read from notes
21:46 Play by the rules—integrity defines success
23:24 Know the rules of evidence and procedure
25:41 Be yourself—authenticity resonates with juries
27:19 Have fun—find purpose and energy in trial work
28:59 Gaining trial experience
32:42 Signoff question

Quote
“Every time that I tried a case, I was thinking, ‘This is the best thing ever!’ I’m not kidding. ‘I am just eating this thing up. I’m loving this. This is my chance to be creative, to be able to tell my story, to represent my client, to use my wits to figure out whether I should object. If I do object, how do I make that argument? How do I use my exhibits?’ It’s just so much fun. And it’s so nerve-wracking when you’re waiting for the jury, right? That’s when it’s just ‘argh!’ tension-wise. But I always thought, “This was great. I can’t think of anything that I’d rather do.’” Hon. Sal Mungia

Resources
Hon. Sal Mungia (LinkedIn)
Building Trial Skills and Deposition Skills: Seattle (programs)
The Trial of the Chicago 7 (film)
May the Record Reflect on YouTube (link)

In this episode, veteran trial lawyer John Farrell distinguishes between refreshing recollection and impeachment, two essential but sometimes conflated courtroom skills. Learn how to help your own witness recall facts on direct examination through refreshing recollection and how to effectively challenge an opposing witness on cross with a structured, high-impact impeachment technique. Packed with practical language and strategy (and a few demos along the way), this conversation offers clear guidance on when and how to deploy these important skills that every trial lawyer needs to master.

Topics
3:13 Difference between refreshing recollection and impeachment
4:54 What’s wrong with “I don’t know” during examination
6:19 Using documents to refresh recollection
7:24 What’s wrong with “would” during refreshing recollection
8:41 Refreshing recollection demo
10:13 A crucial step to remember
13:21 The point of impeachment
14:37 Step 1 of impeaching by prior inconsistent statement
15:35 Demo
17:52 Why you should sound disappointed
18:50 Demo
19:20 Steps 2–6
23:21 Demo
27:21 Why impeachment better be worth the effort
30:05 Your tone through impeachment
33:16 Impeachment by omission
40:49 Consequences of a bad impeachment
41:56 Again, make impeachment worth your while
44:16 Signoff questions

Quote
“The reason [impeachment] is so important is that if you decide to impeach and you don’t do it correctly or successfully, the witness has just been told they can lie all the time on the stand. You’ve lost control. If you do it really well the first time, and the next time they go off message, they say something else different, and [the witness goes], “Well, no, that’s not right. It was Fact C.” And [you] go, “I don’t think so. Let's go to your depo transcript.” [The witness will] go, “Okay, fine, fine, it was C,” because they don’t want to go through that again. So I think it’s an important tool.” John Farrell

Resources
John Farrell (bio)
Refreshing Recollection and Impeachment (article)
Eight Steps for Handling Deposition Exhibits (podcast)
Deposition articles (1, 2, 3)

Wilmington Law Associate Professor of Law Veronica Finkelstein and law student Dr. Marisa Rauscher discuss what it takes to become an exceptional litigator, from growing your essential hard and soft skills to unconventional ways of developing them, and transforming your personal values into a professional brand. They also explore why maintaining a beginner’s mind — curiosity that never quits — is critical at every stage of a rewarding legal career and recommend their favorite law-related social content that helps them do just that.

Topics
5:24 Why to teach, and why to learn, law
7:60 Lacking skills out of law school
10:01 Various toolkits for trial lawyers
13:39 What new lawyers should focus on
15:37 Importance of writing and motion practice skills
18:28 Going to trial: present and future
27:35 Professional branding and marketing yourself as a lawyer
33:40 Informal CLE through social media
36:17 Younger lawyers have an advantage
45:35 Signoff question

Quotes

“Being an attorney means having a holistic set of skills. A lot of those skills are variations on each other, so the same skill that will serve you well at that Rule 16 conference, when you meet the judge and opposing counsel for the very first time, is an analog of a skill that you would want to have at trial.” Veronica Finkelstein

“Great minds and well-intentioned people have tried to establish rules to play by, that serve all in a just fashion, and I want to be in that game, I really do. I want to know the law, I want to use the law for good, and I also want to cultivate the soft and hard skills of lawyering so that my advocacy rests on a strong foundation of excellence. That’s the goal. Know more, do more.” Marisa Rauscher

Resources

Veronica Finkelstein (LinkedIn)
Marisa Rauscher (LinkedIn)
Veronica in studio71 (podcast, podcast, webcast)
Additional Advocacy Skills (program calendar)
Law-related podcasts, vlogs, and YouTubes (PDF)

Finding the right storytelling angle can be challenge for any trial lawyer, but for those advocating on the right-hand side of the v, it’s often even more so. In representing clients jurors may not automatically find sympathetic, defense counsel must express empathy for harms the plaintiff has suffered without admitting to their liability and present technical data that is critical to their client’s defense but wearisome for fact finders to follow. Good narrative technique can help, and in this episode, legal storytelling specialist David Mann shares the insights he’s gain in over a decade of working with trial lawyers to develop winning case stories.

Topics
4:01 Changing defense landscape
7:20 Plaintiff’s automatic emotional hook
9:54 Humanizing the defense client
12:13 Importance of storytelling
17:34 Observing versus opining
20:31 Going granular
24:38 Being engaging and persuasive
28:12 Check your blind spots
30:26 Persuasive presence and turning facts into a story
35:03 Signoff question

Quote
“[Defense lawyers] need to be good storytellers, and they are just beginning to see how important that is and how they are now losing where they used to win. They’re also seeing the nuclear verdict problem. So juries are awarding tens of millions and even hundreds of millions of dollars in cases that just a few years ago that would have been unheard of. And now it’s getting to be more and more regular. So that that’s how high the stakes are for the defense.” David Mann

Resources
David Mann (bio)
Turning Facts into a Story (May, November)
Persuasive Presence (October)
Building Trial Skills: New Orleans (program)
The Secrets of Persuasive Legal Storytelling (podcast episode)
Engaging the Jury in the First Two Minutes (free webcast)
NYT 10-Minute Challenge (gift article)

According to Philadelphia trial lawyers Tom Innes and Mary DeFusco, preparing your witness for testimony is a bit like training a guide dog: the real work happens long before the leash comes off. In this episode, Tom and Mary talk about how to create control in ever-important prep sessions prior to testimony—and they share hands-on, practical tips that will help your witness give their testimony while staying cool and collected, on track, and under control.
Topics
4:04 Why preparation is the first step
5:38 Deposing Dr. King on The Pitt
8:11 Your witness’s role
10:30 Organization of testimony, explained
11:50 Under pressure
13:50 Cross prep
15:33 Practice pointers
19:13 Ethical considerations
23:02 Signoff questions

Quotes
“Practice having the witness speak to the jury both on direct and cross. Speak to the jury—even if all you can do is set up some empty chairs as a jury box.” Tom Innes

“It’s a really bad look in front of a jury when the witness answers every question promptly on direct but then very slowly on cross.” Mary DeFusco

Resources
Tom Innes (bio)
Mary DeFusco (bio)
Judge L. Felipe Restrepo (bio)
Building Trial Skills: Philadelphia (program)
Cross-Examination Math (podcast episode)

From forensics to financials and the medical to the technical, trial lawyers rely on expert witnesses to help fact finders understand complicated concepts and issues in their case. But dealing with experts is an expert technique in itself, so in this episode NITA Program Director Gene Tanaka breaks down the battle-tested process that has brought him success. First, he lays out the standards for expert testimony and traps to avoid, then shares steps for direct examinations, issues in cross, and persuasive techniques.

Topics
04:20 Why experts are important
05:54 Breadth of expert opinions
07:24 Expert traps
11:44 Standards for expert testimony
15:28 Five steps for direct examination: Introduction and teaser
17:48 Qualifications
20:10 Red flags in an expert’s background
21:28 Opinion
25:24 Basis for opinion
27:39 Difference of experts’ opinions
28:50 Conclusion
30:19 Persuasive techniques
34:10 Conducting cross
42:06 Signoff questions

Quote
“One of the things that we [attorneys] often do is we rely too much on credentials. We look at an expert and we think, ‘Well, this person has this certification and this level of education, and therefore they must be better than the other person who doesn’t have that.’ But you know, a lot that is just lost on everybody – the trier of fact. They can’t tell the difference between one credential or the other. But what they can tell the difference is whether someone is likeable and whether they’re understandable.” Gene Tanaka

Resources
Gene Tanaka (LinkedIn)
Expert Testimony slides (PPT)
Modern Trial Advocacy: Analysis and Practice (book)
Federal Rules of Evidence with Objections: As Amended to December 1, 2023 (book)
Expert Testimony: A Guide for Expert Witnesses and the Lawyers Who Examine Them (book)
Effective Expert Testimony (book)

With most cases settling before trial, depositions have become the real battleground—and few people know that better than Carl Chamberlin. Carl has spent decades taking and defending depositions in private practice and teaching the craft for over 30 years. In a reprise of one of May the Record Reflect's most popular episodes, he’s here to share how to kick things off the right way—from setting the stage with introductory matters to navigating preliminary and substantive questions.

Topics

3:22 The purpose of depositions
6:20 Difference between gathering information and obtaining information
10:38 Why depositions are important
12:30 Physical settings for remote depositions
14:15 The “usual stipulations”
17:20 Getting commitments
21:27 Commitments in remote depositions
24:42 Preliminary questions
29:51 Structure of substantive questioning
33:30 First demo
36:57 Key phrases for asking open-ended questions
38:25 And ones to avoid
43:01 Drilling down into a substantive topic
44:18 Second demo
1:04:19 Paying attention and listening
1:06:40 Using exhibits
1:10:15 Dealing with interruptions
1:13:56 Carl’s early depositions
1:16:53 The Effective Deposition
1:21:36 Signoff questions

Quote

“We want to make our questions clear and concise. Simple. The clearer the question, the better the answer. The fewer the objections, the more powerful it is.” Carl Chamberlin

Resources

Carl Chamberlin (LinkedIn)
The Effective Deposition, Sixth Edition (book)

Opera and the courtroom might seem worlds apart—but they share a similar stagecraft. In this episode, Anne Fuchs, professional opera singer and Director of Communications for the Indiana Court of Appeals, reveals how posture and breath can transform your voice into a powerful advocacy tool. From mastering vocal control to learning a little Italian, this conversation will help you speak with confidence and command attention when it matters most.

Topics
02:30 Why vocal quality matters
04:03 Assessing your voice and why we hate the sound of it
07:13 Transatlantic accent
08:34 Introverts and extroverts, and skills
13:42 La Postura
21:16 Appoggio
33:05 Legato
41:26 Chiaroscuro
39:41 Nasality and vocal fry
50:20 Opera and the appellate court
55:23 Signoff questions

Quote
“Confidence is a skill set. It is not a personality trait. And so as much as it might feel like, Wow, that big, loud, bombastic person with that amazing trial experience, and Look at how he just commands the courtroom with that voice—that may be something that’s inherent to him. It may be something that he learned. But it is 100% true that every single person can learn how to use their voice more confidently and more effectively, without being an extrovert, without it being something that just came to them naturally. There are specific skills you can learn, and anybody can do it.” Anne Fuchs

Resources
Anne Fuchs (bio)
Foxy Opera (30-minute private coaching, enter Secret49 for savings)
Vocal Warm-Up Exercises (cheat sheet)
Point Well Made: Persuasive Oral Advocacy (book)

For the first time in history, attorneys from as many as five generations can be found practicing law together. From veteran trial lawyers in their 70s and up to Gen Z associates just starting out, the generational diversity in today’s legal workforce is unprecedented. In this episode, Professor Marian Braccia of Temple University Beasley School of Law discusses how generational identity influences legal practice, challenges stereotypes about Gen Z lawyers, and offers insights into fostering understanding and mentorship across age groups.

Topics
00:58 Generational span in law offices
04:40 Gen Z stereotypes and realities
05:53 Overview of generations in law
08:35 Defining characteristics by generation
26:37 Gen Z values and “sea change”
29:58 Generational mix in legal workforce
32:02 Authority and leadership styles
36:13 Policies and procedures
39:41 Decision-making preferences
42:55 Communication styles
47:58 Feedback and critique preferences
52:30 Generational tensions and perceptions
58:42 Recognition and rewards
01:01:51 Recommendations for law firms
01:07:20 Signoff questions

Quote
“We are talking about the success of the profession, we are talking about the longevity of the profession, and we want that to be something that doesn’t have to be reinvented every generation. We want to see continuity, and the only way we can do that is for there to be meaningful collaboration between the generations when it’s time to pass the baton.” Marian Braccia

Resources
Marian Grace Braccia (bio)
The Generations War Comes to the Law Firm (article)
Why We Mistake the Wholesomeness of Gen Z for Conservative (article)

Rule 30(b)(6) depositions can be a game-changer in litigation—but only if you know how to use them strategically. In this episode, former Assistant U.S. Attorney and current Wilmington Law professor Veronica Finkelstein shares expert guidance on understanding the purpose and power of a 30(b)(6) deposition, identifying the right corporate representative, drafting precise specifications, and preparing your designee for examination. Whether you're deposing a Fortune 500 company or a little mom-and-pop shop, this episode will fine-tune your approach to corporate testimony.

Topics
4:23 What is a 30(b)(6) deposition?
7:11 Why all trial lawyers should know about 30(b)(6) depositions
9:40 How deposing 30(b)(6) witnesses is different
14:27 Meet-and-confer requirement about specifications
17:44 Drafting specifications
20:20 Benefit of taking 30(b)(6) depositions
23:57 Qualities of a desirable corporate designee
25:54 Designees and fact witnesses
29:21 Corporate counsel and deposing counsel preparations
35:40 Who represents the designee?
40:05 Nonresponsive or jerk designees
43:24 Things to be mindful of during examination
45:39 When interrogatories are preferable
46:56 Cases to know: QBE and Marker
49:42 Deposition Skills: Philadelphia
51:53 Sign-off questions

Quote
“This is one of the few times in litigation when you get to pick your witness, so pick somebody good. Don’t pick somebody who’s the CEO of the company who doesn’t have time to get educated. Don’t pick somebody in HR who’s been following the policies wrong for the last 20 years and you’re never gonna unteach. Pick somebody who’s gonna be a really good mouthpiece on behalf of the company who you can educate properly.” Veronica Finkelstein

Resources
Veronica Finkelstein (bio)
J.C. Lore (bio)
Deposition Skills: Philadelphia (program)
NITA Women in Trial (program)
QBE Ins. Corp. v. Jorda Enters. Inc. (case)
Marker v. Union Fidelity Life Ins. Co. (case)
Law 360 article (PDF)

Depositions can be a minefield—and not just because of the facts. In this episode of May the Record Reflect, trial attorney Whitney Untiedt returns to share her expert strategies for navigating the disruptive behaviors of difficult counsel and witnesses. From talkers and interrupters to charmers and egomaniacs, Whitney breaks down the types of jerks you’ll encounter and how to stay focused, professional, and in control. Whether you’re taking or defending a deposition, this episode offers practical tools, real-world stories, and a reminder that your attitude is your greatest ally.

Topics

4:52 Obstreperous behaviors

9:45 When the jerk is the witness

12:30 Strategies for handling witnesses

16:28 Preparing for opposing counsel

18:27 In-the-moment responses

23:16 Socialized for niceness

27:29 Supporting your client

31:45 What not to do

37:39 Rules about lawyer conduct

43:53 Remote versus in-person depositions

52:51 Why do lawyers act like jerks

57:57 A war story

1:01:01 Florida programs

1:07:01 Signoff questions

Quote

“The worst jerks are the ones that kill you with kindness than the ones who try to come at you with a butcher knife.” Whitney Untiedt

Resources

Whitney Untiedt (bio)

Deposition Skills: Florida (program)

Jayme Cassidy (bio)

Building Trial Skills: Florida (program)

Long hours, heavy caseloads, high stakes—such is the modern trial practice. But when lawyers represent survivors of violent or traumatic incidents, they often experience next-level stress caused by empathetic engagement. In this episode, UNT Dallas College of Law professor and JAMS neutral mediator, arbitrator, and special master Angela Downes introduces listeners to vicarious trauma and its effects on body and mind, how vicarious trauma differs from burnout, and how to recognize compassion fatigue in yourself and your colleagues. Most importantly, Professor Downes discusses effective stress-management strategies that would benefit anyone with a busy trial practice.

Topics
3:46 What is vicarious trauma?
4:15 Lawyers, vicarious trauma, and burnout
7:31 Indicators of vicarious trauma and getting support
15:49 How firms can help
17:40 Self-care strategies
27:55 ABA studies on lawyer stress
31:02 More strategies
35:09 Recognizing vicarious trauma in others
38:20 New generation attunement to wellness
40:24 Sign-off questions

Quote
“So many of us are defined by the work that we do, and we are more than that. We are more than just … being attorneys and counselors. Although it’s a big part of us, there are so many sides to what we do and who we are as people.” Professor Angela Downes

Resources
Professor Angela Downes (bio)
NITA Women in Trial (program)
Stress, Drink, Leave (article)
ABA Profile of the Legal Profession (article)
ABA Directory of Legal Assistance Programs (resource)

Depositions are a key building block in legal disputes, especially for cases that proceed to trial. According to veteran trial lawyer John Farrell, properly handling an exhibit so it’s admissible at trial is an overlooked skill that can, and should, be practiced until it becomes second nature. In this episode, John reveals eight crucial steps for handling documents that ensure your deposition flows smoothly and exhibits are admitted for trial. He breaks down the process step by step, gives the exact sample language that ensures exhibits are properly marked and admitted, and suggests ways to keep court reporters and judges pleased with your professionalism.

Topics
3:59 Asking questions before marking a document
5:35 When witnesses want to see a document first
7:48 Making deposition exhibits admissible at trial
8:30 Eight steps for handling exhibits: Step 1
9:36 Step 2
10:35 Step 3
12:08 Demonstrations of marking different documents
25:26 Step 4 , and helping the court reporter
27:59 Step 5, and the important question to ask your witness
29:12 Step 6, and two more important questions
32:15 Step 7
33:37 Step 8
35:35 Three-article series on depositions
37:23 Signoff questions

Quote
“‘Bears the word’ . . . is the safe phrase that judges like to hear.” John Farrell

Resources
John Farrell (bio)
Deposition articles (1, 2, 3)
Refreshing Recollection and Impeachment (article)

Content Warning: This episode discusses, in non-graphic terms, representing intimate partner violence survivors.

Being a trial lawyer is one of the toughest, most demanding professions out there, and when you’re representing family members in distress it’s even more so. Hofstra Law professor Barbara Barron discusses advocacy challenges faced by lawyers working with survivors of intimate partner violence, or IPV. Although some details are particular to IPV survivor representation, trial lawyers in nearly every practice area will find Barbara’s reflections on supporting reluctant or intimidated witnesses during testimony, dealing with pro se opposing counsel, and handling emotional witnesses or clients to be applicable to their own high-stakes cases.

Topics
4:00 What is IPV?
6:56 How IPV survivors differ from other crime victims
11:23 Implicit biases judges or jurors might have about IPV
12:24 Types of evidence
14:39 Special accommodations against intimidation
16:09 Defendant as pro se counsel
19:42 Preparing for direct and cross-examination
23:22 Emotions, or none, during testimony
26:12 Preparing for anxiety
29:16 Counsel and vicarious trauma
31:53 Public Interest Award and advocacy programs

Quote
“In the case of the pro se defendant, and dealing with that person and having to answer questions on cross, the questions may not be as pristine as an experienced or talented trial lawyer’s may be, and it may not be as controlling a situation as anticipated. If the questions are such that it allows the witness to answer more than yes or no, where’s the control?” Barbara Barron

Resources
Barbara Barron (bio)
Building Trial Skills: New York–Hofstra (program)
Half-Day Intensives: Online (programs)

For trial lawyers, “advocacy in a hurry” — injunctions, bail hearings, requests for orders of protection, emergency custody petitions, or immigration orders — calls for making the most of the limited time you have before the court, even if it's just 15 minutes. Former Illinois Eighth Circuit Court Judge Mark Drummond shares seven valuable tips on compressing your case to fit the time available, how to help the judge quickly understand what’s at issue in the proceeding, and what ethics concerns must remain top of mind for all advocates regardless of whether their time before the court is 10 minutes or 10 weeks.

Topics
3:43 What is emergency advocacy?
8:00 Circumstances calling for emergency advocacy
16:48 Making the most of the little time you have
17:40 Factors you must prove in your state
18:30 Primacy and recency
21:00 Appeal to the judge
21:47 Written offer of proof
23:15 Persuasive use of numbers
23:53 Offer time limits
27:00 Judges triage
27:39 What judges fear
31:02 Two things to be prepared for
34:11 Your duty of candor to the court
38:06 Signoff questions

Quote
“You’ve spent a lot of time going through law school. You’ve built a practice. Clients will come, clients will go. You built your practice brick by brick on the decisions you’ve made, the judgments you’ve made, and the choices you’ve made. And it takes a lifetime to do that. But you know, sometimes like a child that knocks down their wooden block tower, it only takes one time to tear all that down. And no single client is worth that.” Judge Mark Drummond

Resources
Judge Mark Drummond (bio)
"Death Penalty Cases in a Traffic Court Setting" (article)
"What Judges Want" (article)
Ethical duty of candor to the court (newsletter)

As a sitting district court judge and 29-year public defender, NITA Program Director Judge Cynthia McCollum knows a thing or two about jury selection, and in this episode, she opens up about how to get your jurors to open up. She serves up a baker’s dozen of her best tips for getting jurors to talk during voir dire, mistakes she learned from as a public defender, what to know about Batson challenges, and anecdotes about her career trajectory before and on the bench.

Topics
3:50 First tip for getting jurors to open up during voir dire
4:47 Second tip
5:45 Judge’s first time in court as a new lawyer
9:48. Third tip
14:24 Fourth tip
18:33 Fifth tip
20:08 Being a public defender, then a judge
24:42 Sixth tip
26:39. Seventh tip
29:28 What it’s like to be a judge
31:48 Eighth tip
33:09 Ninth tip
38:25 Tenth tip
41:31 NITA involvement
45:06 Eleventh tip
48:35 Twelfth tip
50:32 Baker’s dozen tip about Batson
52:39 Signoff questions

Quote
“Everyone needs to work on their jury selection. It’s not a natural for a lot of people, because you get nervous about asking those tough questions.” Judge Cynthia McCollum

Resources
Judge Cynthia McCollum (bio)
Batson bonuses (file)
Minnesota Deposition Skills and Trial Skills (programs)