Too often, company witnesses are worried that if they tell the truth it will damage the company’s reputation and chances for success at trial. If jurors conclude that a critical company witness is lying, little else matters.

Every party in a securities case or commercial contract dispute has to confront bad facts. The outcome of the case often depends on the emphasis that is given to these facts and how they are framed for the jury.

It is essential for the trial team to determine what concessions will be made and where a “line will be drawn in the sand.” Once the determination has been made, witnesses need to be prepared to make the concession quickly and confidently.

In punitive damages cases, it is imperative to identify a company witness who can handle the public relations aspect of the testimony at trial. This witness must be able to tell a compelling company story and maintain a consistent demeanor under the scrutiny of cross examination.

Too often, defendants in securities and commercial cases organize their case presentation around a response to the plaintiff’s allegations. Defendants should take the offensive and develop a story of the case that explains the major facts and the plaintiff’s motivation for filing the lawsuit.

Plaintiffs often benefit from presenting alternative damages models that provide jurors with two approaches to valuing the case. In contrast, defendants must decide between presenting an alternative damage theory and an argument that the defendant has not caused any damages.

Plaintiff-oriented jurors often conclude that a defendant committed fraud if inaccurate information was provided or important information was withheld from a party during a transaction. Parties defending a fraud allegation must provide specific instruction on the elements of fraud and burden of proof during the opening statement and closing argument.

Complex commercial litigation can overwhelm jurors and cause them to stop processing evidence and arguments in the case. Consequently, it is important to streamline the case presentations and develop graphics that will help jurors understand the complexities of your case.

Jurors hold investors and corporations to a high standard when considering due diligence. Moreover, once an investment has been made, jurors expect that investors will take an active role in monitoring the investment.

Jurors have a tendency to perceive that large corporations have unlimited knowledge. Many jurors will begin trial convinced that, at the time a critical decision was made, a large corporation had complete and accurate knowledge about current and future market conditions.