▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬

2017 Seminar Material

▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬

New Jersey Institute for Continuing Legal Education

A Division of the State Bar Association NJICLE.com

THE DEPOSITION COLLEGE:

ESSENTIAL STRATEGIES &

SOLID SKILLS TO HELP YOU

TO MASTER DEPOSITIONS

S0103.17

c

THE DEPOSITION COLLEGE:

ESSENTIAL STRATEGIES &

SOLID SKILLS TO HELP YOU

TO MASTER DEPOSITIONS

Program Coordinator Tommie Ann Gibney, Esq. Certified by the Supreme Court of New Jersey as a Civil Trial Attorney Andres & Berger (Haddonfield)

Moderator/Speaker Christine P. O’Hearn, Esq. Certified by the Supreme Court of New Jersey as a Civil Trial Attorney Brown & Connery, LLP (Westmont)

Speakers Diane L. Cardoso, Esq. Javerbaum Wurgaft Hicks Kahn Wikstrom & Sinins, P.C. (Jersey City) Louis John Dughi, Jr., Esq. Dughi, Hewit & Domalewski, P.C. (Cranford) Eric G. Fikry, Esq. Blank Rome LLP (Princeton; Philadelphia, PA)

In cooperation with the New Jersey State Bar Association Civil Trial Bar

Section and Senior Lawyers Special Committee S0103.17

Michael Maggiano, Esq. Certified by the Supreme Court of New Jersey as a Civil Trial Attorneys Maggiano, DiGirolamo & Lizzi, P.C. (Fort Lee; New York City) Michael S. Raff, Esq. Certified by the Supreme Court of New Jersey as a Civil Trial Attorney Raff & Raff, LLP (Paterson, Maywood) Thomas J. Vesper, Esq. Certified by the Supreme Court of New Jersey as a Civil Trial Attorney Westmoreland, Vesper, Quattrone & Beers, P.A. (West Atlantic City)

© 2017 New Jersey State Bar Association. All rights reserved. Any copying of material

herein, in whole or in part, and by any means without written permission is prohibited.

Requests for such permission should be sent to NJICLE, a Division of the New Jersey

State Bar Association, New Jersey Law Center, One Constitution Square, New

Brunswick, New Jersey 08901-1520.

Table of Contents Page Taking the Discovery Deposition of an Adversary’s Expert Michael S. Raff, Esq. 1 Information Gathering Beforehand 1 Have Goals and Purpose During the Deposition 2 Random Deposition Questions 3 Deposition College: Essential Strategies and Solid Skills to Help You to Master Depositions Tom Vesper 5 The Art of Video Deps and & Exhibits: B’s (B-Movies) Are Bad, BB’s Are Bloody Brilliant! 7 Baker’s Dozen Tips for Better (“Bloody Brilliant”) Video Deps 9 “Expert Witness Deposition Caveats” [Excerpt] Tom Vesper Mark Kosieradzki 13 7 Items in Federal Courts 13 6 Items in NJ State Courts 13 Trial Starts With the Plaintiff’s Deposition & DME (Defense Medical Exam) Tom Vesper Kathy Beers 17 Introduction: 10 Types of Plaintiffs 19 The “Grand Slam” or “4 Corners” of DEP/DME/Trial Prep 21 First Corner: Client Notes, Diagrams & Time Lines 21 Second Corner: Structure is the Secret Not “Free Fall” 23 Third Corner: Role-Playing 26 Fourth Corner a.k.a. “Home Plate”: “All in the Family” or Client “Backup” 27 At Trial: The Real Contest is Afoot + the Jury is Keeping Score 28 Conclusion: The “Grand Slam” or 4-Corner Offense Works 29 About the Participants… 31

Taking the Discovery Deposition of an Adversary’s Expert

Michael S. Raff, Esq.

1) INFORMATION GATHERING BEFOREHAND

a) Discovery requests, i.e., Subpoena Ducus Tecum and

Request for Production of Documents

b) Examples of documents to obtain:

a. Copies of all handwritten medical records and notes

made taken before, during, and after the defense

medical exam (R. 4:19 medical examinations).

b. Copies of all instructions given to any physician(s)

who are asked to examine the plaintiff by the

defendant (R. 4:19 medical examinations).

c. Any materials used for professional lectures /

meetings

d. Expert’s C.V.

e. Certificates, awards, memberships

f. Copy of Ph.D. thesis

g. Articles submitted for publication

h. List of reliable authorities in subject area that is the

basis of the complaint

i. Documents provided for review in subject case

1

c) Google Scholar. Good for articles. Can search by expert’s

name.

d) www.duckduckgo.com. Good for social media searches,

i.e. search for @johndoe; type “!linkedin” following name.

e) Professional trial organizations, such as NJAJ; AAJ, etc.

Great for prior deposition testimony

f) Search for board certifications, i.e., The American Board of

Medical Specialties, www.abms.org

g) Check organization websites to find standards, etc.

h) If expert is professor at university, check out their bio /

course materials

i) Various relevant websites, such as www.osha.gov;

www.healthgrades.com ; www.expertpages.com

2) HAVE GOALS AND PURPOSE DURING THE DEPOSITION

a) The “Miller Mousetrap” Techniques

a. Exhaustion

i. Is that all? Tell me all the reasons …

b. Restating and Summarizing

i. me make sure I understand what you are

saying

c. Boxing In

2

i. Any facts that you might learn from Dr. Jones

that might change your opinion?

d. Learned Treatises

e. Establishing Standards of Care

b) Get concessions / agreements

c) Illustrate bias

d) Show failure to consider important facts

e) Point out any contradictions

f) Potential set up for knocking expert out of case

3) RANDOM DEPOSITION QUESTIONS

a) Who asked you to perform exam, review records, etc.?

b) What do you perceived as your role / function in this case?

c) What further work do you intend to do in this case / or

have been asked to do?

d) Do you have any criticism of plaintiff’s / defendant’s

expert and their analysis?

e) Is your report based on what you received? Would you

agree that if there were other documents that were not

provided to you, you might change your opinion?

3

Deposition College: Essential Strategies and Solid Skills to Help

You to Master Depositions

Tom Vesper

5

THE ART OF VIDEO DEPS & EXHIBITS: B’s (B-MOVIES) ARE BAD,

BB’s ARE BLOODY BRILLIANT ! AVOID BVD’s (Bad Video Deps), MAKE BBVD’s (Bloody Brilliant Video Deps):

A “BAKER’S DOZEN” TIPS FOR BETTER (“BLOODY BRILLIANT”) VIDEO DEPS

By: Tom Vesper

7

THE ART OF VIDEO DEPS & EXHIBITS: B’s (B-MOVIES) ARE BAD,

BB’s ARE BLOODY BRILLIANT !

AVOID BVD’s (Bad Video Deps), MAKE BBVD’s (Bloody Brilliant Video Deps): A “BAKER’S DOZEN” TIPS FOR BETTER (“BLOODY BRILLIANT”) VIDEO DEPS

“THE SNOWBALL EVENT”

“Video or trial or any presentation of more than 30 seconds is A SNOWBALL EVENT: the trick

is for you, the presenter or producer/director to keep it moving in the right direction and not get

yourself swallowed up or rolled over by it.” My Uncle Anthony

KOURASAWA v. KING KONG

“Be more like Kourasawa and less like King Kong!” My law partner Kathy Beers, Esq.

GOOD MOVIES

“Good video deps, like good movies, memorably move most jurors.” -- Jerry Baker, Esq.

GORILLA PITCHING

“Don’t be throwing gorilla pitches” – Dominic Vesper

(EDITOR: “Gorilla Pitching” means trying to overpower batters with lots of hard throwing with

little or no sense of game situation, pitch location, “set up” or “finish” or next batter.)

8

BAKER’S DOZEN TIPS FOR BETTER (“BLOODY BRILLIANT”) VIDEO DEPS [ Most of these tips have been culled from video work with LifeNowVideo filmmakers Mitch & Catie Riggs, the documentary videographers for NFL players TBI Class Action, and Vince Maggiano, Dynamic Video.]

1. PRE-PARE WITH A PLAN

2. PRE-STAGE or “CASE THE PLACE”

3. PRE-VIEW YOUR “STAR”

4. PRE-FAB PROPS

5. PRE-ARRANGE THE PLAYERS POSITIONS

6. PRE-SCHOOL YOUR “FILM CREW”

7. PRE-CUT DISTRACTING COMMENTARY BY ADVERSARY

8. PRE-SET REBUTTAL

9. PRE-TEND THE “2-MINUTE DRILL”

10. PRE-EMPT TRIAL OBJECTIONS

11. PRE-QUEL YOUR FILM FOR JURY

12. PRE-PACKAGE YOUR FILM FOR TRIAL JUDGE

13. PRE-VENT D (DULLNESS)

9

THE ART OF VIDEO DEPS & EXHIBITS: B’s (B-MOVIES) ARE BAD,

BB’s ARE BLOODY BRILLIANT ! AVOID BVD’s (Bad Video Deps), MAKE BBVD’s (Bloody Brilliant Video Deps):

A “BAKER’S DOZEN” TIPS FOR BETTER (“BLOODY BRILLIANT”) VIDEO DEPS “I think cinema, movies, and magic have always been closely associated. The very earliest

people who made film were magicians.” –Francis Ford Coppola

1. PRE-PARE WITH A PLAN ON PAPER – “MASTER SHOT” + “TIE-UPS”

“By failing to prepare, you are preparing to fail.” ― Benjamin Franklin

Put your plan into some outline form. Thereby all your objectives for your video dep in concrete

form helps you, your staff, and your entire film crew better visualize your ideas. Know your

“Tie-Ups” (explanatory clip) to educate jurors + “Master Shots” (fad ins/outs)

2. PRE-STAGE or “CASE THE PLACE”

“If life is just a stage, then we are all running around ad-libbing, with absolutely no clue what

the plot is. Maybe that's why we don't know whether it's a comedy or tragedy.”

--- Bill Watterson quotes

Unless you have been to the “studio” before, be sure to scout and scope the exact place where

the video dep will be filmed and all the participants seated.

3. PRE-VIEW YOUR “STAR”

“Life is not a dress rehearsal. / This is your life, not a dress rehearsal. / Life is not a rehearsal.

/ And life ain’t a rehearsal the camera’s always rollin’.” --- Pastor Lawrence T. Holman, Church

of the Nazarene used the expression as title of an evening sermon

One of THE most important steps in preparing video deps is to meet in advance with your

deponent – preferably in person, or virtual Vcon (Skype) – not over the phone.

4. PRE-FAB PROPS

“Yaknow da best prop you got in court – is yer client.” – my Uncle Ant’ny Nicolella

Have all the exhibits, blowups, models, positive Xrays, etc. pre-made, in advance, so that you

can rehearse their use, and get approval and adoption from your deponent.

10

5. PRE-ARRANGE THE PLAYERS POSITIONS

“Where yaz all sit around a table ain’t just for ceremony – it helps wit communicating.” –

my Aunt Mary Carlo from Brooklyn

Place your “star” in “the best possible light” for the jury; yourself behind/next to camera; and all

others, including court reporter in positions that compliment not derail your film.

6. PRE-SCHOOL YOUR “FILM CREW”

“I coached baseball, and if you don’t tell yer guys where to play, they’re gonna cluster!”

– my Cuz Dominic Vesper

Be sure to pre-warn your videographer and court reporter of your filming, staging, and seating

plans. Also be sure you work out some “hand signals” for zooming, shifting, etc.

7. PRE-CUT DISTRACTING COMMENTARY BY ADVERSARY

“You will never reach your destination if you stop and throw stones at every dog that barks.”

― Winston Churchill

Be sure the videographer understands that whenever there is ANY WORD UTTERED by

anyone other than you and the deponent, the camera “STOPS ROLLING.”

8. PRE-LOAD & PRE-SET REBUTTAL

“People's minds are changed through observation and not through argument.”

– Will Rogers

If there is witness/expert who contradicts the video-deponent, consider pre-loading your

deponent, and saving and sequestering rebuttal Q&A session for after the “dep in chief”

9. PRE-TEND THE “2-MINUTE DRILL” – Avoid “GORILLA PITCHING” Questions

“A good speech should be like a woman's skirt: long enough to cover the subject and short

enough to create interest” ― Winston Churchill

Keep your audience interested and involved in your film by making it as “short & sweet” as

possible; but, if subject matter requires more than 45-60 minutes of direct exam, then consider

filming in “episodes” or logical “Part I, II, et seq.”

Avoid “waste pitches” or “dead air” time which gets distracting and dismissive to your

audience, or as my Cousin Dominic likes to say “Don’t be throwing Gorilla Pitches” (that means

trying to overpower batters with lots of hard throwing with little or no sense of game situation,

pitch location, “set up” or “finish” or next batter, . . . or the trial theme).

11

10. PRE-EMPT TRIAL OBJECTIONS OFF-CAMERA

“Cinema is a matter of what’s in the frame and what’s out.” – Martin Scorsese

If there are going to be questions raised as to the admissibility of any exhibits used or

testimony given by the deponent, then try to anticipate and deal with them “off-stage.”

11. PRE-QUEL YOUR FILM FOR JURY

“I'm a great believer that any tool that enhances communication has profound effects in terms

of how people can learn from each other, and how they can achieve the kind of freedoms that

they're interested in.” – Bill Gates

At trial, if possible, let the jury have some preview of the “up-coming attraction(s).” Use your

opening statement, direct, cross, proffers to forecast what is coming for the jury.

12. PRE-PACKAGE YOUR FILM FOR TRIAL JUDGE

“Without promotion, something terrible happens... nothing!” – P. T. Barnum

If there will be any objections or “special assistance” in the courtroom (e.g., live Video

Conferencing with Courtroom Connect or Skype) be sure to send written “heads up.” Consider

having a “Play Bill” for the trial judge, with transcript page & line referenced.

13. PRE-VENT D (DULLNESS) – USE “PTB” (Precision Timed Blasts)

“It is just like man's vanity and impertinence to call an animal dumb because it is dumb to his

dull perceptions.” – Mark Twain

The worst video deps “drone on” with mono-tonal, monotonous, motionless, as well as

emotionless Q&A. Voice, sound, action, movement, and “eye-candy” will keep viewers

interested and involved. One way to keep audience’s attention is use 3D, i.e., have the video

exhibits present and presented to jury, just as if deponent was physically present.

“People have forgotten how to tell a story. Stories don’t have a middle or an end any more.

They usually have a beginning that never stops beginning.” –Steven Spielberg

“Life is as tedious as twice-told tale, vexing the dull ear of a drowsy man.”

– William Shakespeare

The triumph of directing/editing film is that film/video is both a WINDOW & a MIRROR: both

reveals data to viewer but also releases the inherent views/perspectives of the jury. My

partner Kathy Beers says: what others do/like is no guarantee of try to do something new,

different and interesting for the jury, not “same old/same old – SPIT THE BIT!

12

Excepted from Tom Vesper & Mark Kosieradzki AAJ Deposition Notebook – Form D.18

EXPERT WITNESS DEPOSITION CAVEATS

1. Bring Your Complete & Unedited File, .but, be sure trial attorney reviews it for non-discoverable items

NOTE WELL & KNOW: new Federal Rules of Civil Procedure are followed by NJ & most states:

WHAT IS AN EXPERT SUPPOSED TO DISCLOSE, REPORT & PROVIDE IN A DISCOVERY DEP? (7 Items in Federal Courts & 6 Items in NJ State Courts)

7 ITEMS IN FEDERAL COURTS

i. Complete statement of all opinions the witness will express and. . . ii. The basis and reasons for them; iii. The facts or data considered by the witness in forming them; iv. Any exhibits that will be used to summarize or support them; v. The witness's qualifications, including a list of all publications authored in previous 10 yrs; vi. List of all cases in which, during prior 4 yrs, witness testified as expert at trial or by deposition; and vii. A statement of the compensation to be paid for the study and testimony in the case. [ TOM VESPER Commentary: 2010 Changes to FRCP Expert Discovery are a major revision to FRCP 26 governing

expert discovery; they went into effect 2010. As a result, Rule 26 no longer allows full discovery of draft reports or disclosure of communications between attorneys & experts, as it did since 1993. Now, draft reports + communications between counsel & experts are protected by Attorney Work-Product Doctrine. FRCP 26 still requires fully disclosing opinions + facts/data used.

6 ITEMS IN NJ STATE COURTS

i. A statement of that persons opinions and the basis therefor; ii. The facts and data considered in forming the opinions; iii The qualifications of the witness, including: iv. A list of all publications authored by the witness within the preceding ten years; v. Whether compensation has been or is to be paid for the report and testimony vi. And, if so, the terms of the compensation.

Old Rules: Under old rules, drafts of expert reports and all communications between counsel and experts relating to subject matter of the litigation were fair game in discovery (absent an agreement between the parties that such was off limits). As a result, lawyers and experts often took elaborate steps to avoid creating drafts of expert report and minimize communications between attorneys and experts.

New Rules: Draft Expert Reports +Most Attorney-Expert Communications No Longer Discoverable: The 2010 Amendments to Rule 26 close the door to discovery of draft expert reports and almost all communications between counsel + retained experts. Rule 26(b)(4)(B) now says draft expert reports are protected from any discovery + FRCP 26(b)(4)(C) confers work-product protection on communications between attorneys + retained experts except to extent that communications: (a) relate to compensation for expert; (b) identify facts/data the party’s attorney provided to expert and that the expert considered in forming the opinions to be expressed; or (c) identify assumptions the party’s attorney provided to expert & that expert relied on in forming the opinions to be expressed.

What Impact? These changes to Rule 26 were broadly supported by trial lawyers and bar groups as a step towards reducing costs and contentiousness of litigation; should encourage attorneys and experts to communicate freely with each other without having to engage in time-consuming and wasteful measures to minimize their communications and avoid the creation of draft reports.

13

2. Your “Personal” Opinion IS Not A Professional Opinion

3. “In What Do You Think You Are An EXPERT?”

4. PROBABLE=50.001 percent (More Likely Than Not) Not Possible=.0001 percent

5. PROBABLE is Not Absolute (100 percent Certainty) and Not Based Upon Personal Knowledge

6. New/Different Facts Do Not Necessarily Change Opinions …. May Affect Degree of Certainty in Which Opinions

are Held

7. Define and Understand ALL Relevant “Terms of Art” or legal argot such as:

A. “Attorney Work-Product” Doctrine = protection on communications between attorneys & experts

B. Net Opinion

C. Discoverable communications and Non-discoverable “Collaborative” communications between attorney-expert

D. The “Degree of Certainty” in which the expert holds opinions

E. “Probable vs. Possible”

F. “Reasonably Foreseeable”

G. Negligence = “care commensurate with risk; “The Reasonable Man Standard”

H. Relevant Level of Wrongdoing: Gross Neglect, “Palpably Unreasonable,” Recklessness, Willful & Wanton Disregard

I. “Reasonably Prudent Person . . . . under like circumstances” (X: Driver, CDL-Driver, Doctor, Nurse, etc.)

J. Causation = A Substantial Cause, Not “THE Only Cause”

K. “Intervening or Superseding Cause” (“an independent agency that destroys the causal connection between the defendant’s negligence and the incident/event or injury/loss/harm. To be an intervening cause the independent act must be the immediate and sole cause of the incident/event or injury/loss/harm…” See NJ-MCJC 6.14)

L. “Increased Risk” of Future treatment and expenses

M. “Judgment” = A Reasonable Choice Between 2 Acceptable Courses of Conduct

N. Aggravation, Exacerbation, and Acceleration of a pre-existing medical condition

O. “Life Expectancy” vs. “Work Life Expectancy”

P. The Standard(s) of Care for (X) Defendant

Q. Punitive Damages for Willful & Wanton, Intentional Conduct if relevant

R. The technically precise difference between Risk, Hazard, and Danger (if this is relevant to the case at hand):

i. Risk = simply the odds or probability of injury in percentage terms ii. Hazard = a condition or changing set of circumstances which present an injury potential (e.g. a nail or

board raised ¼ in above walking surface of Atlantic City Boardwalk; an overloaded/unsecured flat-bed tractor-trailer)

iii. Danger = unreasonable, unacceptable combination of hazard + risk (Harry Philo, Sr. loved to say “ANY risk of serious injury/death is unreasonable/unacceptable if reasonable accident prevention methods could eliminate it.”)

Objective vs. Subjective Tests, Indicia and Signs of Injury

S. Permanency (Probable Permanent Disability, Impairment and/or Symptomatology)

T. Difference between physical “pain” vs. mental/emotional “suffering”

14

U. “Permanent Injury” according to whatever “verbal threshold” is applicable.

V. “Significant Impact on Life” of the Plaintiff, if that is required, e.g., in NJ Tort Claims Act cases.

W. Any Other Legal Terminology or Model Jury Charge Relative to the Expert’s Opinions: e.g., “Product Defect,” “Manufactured vs. Design Defect,” “Consumer Fraud,” “Unconscionable commercial conduct,” “Actual vs. Constructive Notice,” “Adequate vs. Inadequate Warning/Instruction,” “Consumer Expectation,” “Cone of Vision,” “Cost-Benefit Analysis,” “Polk Analysis,” etc.

8. Ignore any Expression of Surprise/Confusion/Disgust by Interrogator

9. Do Not Get INTERRUPTED or DERAILED or DISTRACTED by Interrogator

10. Do Not Get Exhausted, Worn Down or Tired Out: Call Time Out!

11. Applicable “STANDARDS”

12. Minimum “Consensus” Standards

13. What was the History of the Standards

14. Custom and Usage of Industry and Trade vs. “Industry and Trade Standards”: Written Standards are NOT the only Standards: What About Informal “UNWRITTEN STANDARDS?”

15. ANY AUTHORITY, AUTHORITATIVE TEXTS or PUBLICATIONS For Your Opinion(s)?

16. Are there any Recognized “Authorities or Experts” in the Field of Your Expertise? And do they Agree/Disagree with your opinions?

17. “Knowledge” and Experience You Have Had vs What You Now Know

18. Analogous Experiences or Case Studies in your Field/Profession

19. Experience may include “Writings/Publications” which can not be cited “AT THIS TIME “

20. Experience also includes your Good, Honest, COMMON SENSE

21. Beware of Questioning from the GENERAL to SPECIFIC

22. Beware of “Sound Bites”

23. Beware of Distortion of Common Everyday Usage Words like: “Feel/Feeling”, “Think”, “May”, Judgment Call, “Discretion,” and “Possible”, and “I Don’t Know For Sure”

24. Beware of “The Sweep Questions”: e.g. “So you believe ALL X’s would be negligent?”

25. Beware of Hypotheticals: “What if . . .?”

26. Beware of Causation Questions: “So What . . . What Difference Would It (x) Have Made?”

27. Beware of Daubert Questions re Reliability of Scientific “Theory or Technique” Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 U.S. 579, 113 S. Ct. 2786, 125 L. Ed. 2d 469, 37 Fed. R. Evid. Serv. (LCP) 1 (1993).

28. Beware of Kumho Tire Questions re Reliability of Theory or Techniques of Non Scientific, Technical or “Other Specialized Knowledge” Expert Opinions. Kumho Tire Co., Ltd. v. Carmichael, 526 U.S. 137, 119 S. Ct. 1167, 143 L. Ed. 2d 238 (1999).

29. Beware of ANY intentional/careless errors in your Curriculum Vitae/Resume/Advertisements

30. Explain and Understand All the Relevant DISCOVERY RULES regarding Experts and reacquaint the expert with the NO OBSTRUCTIONIST Deposition Philosophy in accordance with FRCP 30 and NJ State Civil Practice Rule 4:14-3.

15

TRIAL STARTS WITH THE PLAINTIFF’S DEPOSITION & DME (Defense Medical Exam):

HOW TO BETTER PREP FOR PLAINTIFF DEP +

DME+DIRECT + REDIRECT, “THE GRAND SLAM OF DEP/DME PREP”

TO BULLET PROOF THE PLAINTIFF or

HOW TO MAKE YOUR PLAINTIFF CLIENT INDESTRUCTIBLE:

From John Whine to John Wayne: Prepping Clients for Better DME’s, Deps & Trials

BY: TOM VESPER & KATHY BEERS

17

TRIAL STARTS WITH THE PLAINTIFF’S DEPOSITION & DME: HOW TO BETTER PREP FOR PLAINTIFF DEP+DME + DIRECT + REDIRECT

“GRAND SLAM OF DEP/DME PREP” to BULLET PROOF THE PLAINTIFF

INTRODUCTION: 10 TYPES OF PLAINTIFFS 1. The “RAMBLER” 2. The “WHINER” or DOOM & GLOOM EEYORES 3. The “CLAM” or YEP-NOPE 4. The “UNAFFECTED INEFFECTUAL” or BRITISH BUTLER 5. The “SCATTER BRAIN” or GOOFEY 6. The LOOSE CANON or “EXTEMPORIZER” 7. The ANGRY BATTLE AXE or “AVENGING ANGEL” 8. The OVERLY EMOTIONAL EMOTER 9. The KNOW-IT-ALL 10. The WEASEL

When it comes to preparing clients for testimony or DME every lawyer has had to bear a "problem

child.” From “Ramblers” who can’t answer questions directly or succinctly to “Whiners” who complain

to the point of becoming intolerably obnoxious and incredible, to our typically nerve-wracked, anxious,

fearful plaintiffs panicked about making mistakes. We all have clients needing help. A pantheon of

Yiddish words describe the ineffectuals of this world: nebekh, nudnick, shlemiel, shlimazl, shnuk,

shmendrick, yold, Chaim Yankel, shlepper. FN1; See The Joys of Yiddish. In our practice we identify 10

character types for easier reference and “ECU” or “ECC” for emergency communication care/upgrade:

1. The “RAMBLER”: This client will not and cannot for many deeply rooted reason answer a question

simply with a “Yes or No.” Even the “I don’t know” answer takes several minutes of ramble.

2. The “WHINER” or DOOM & GLOOM EEYORES: These clients tend to overstate the “end of the

world” or at least their world in situations that most people will not see as catastrophic or “Doomsday.”

3. The “CLAM” or YEP-NOPE: This client shirks from any attempt to be understood and will not

elaborate on anything, even the most important of issues.

19

4. The “UNAFFECTED INEFFECTUAL” or BRITISH BUTLER: This plaintiff is the poster child for

Stoicism; understating every serious problem. As a neuropsychologist told the jury in one of my recent

trials: “There are tests for exaggerating, but none for minimalism or understating serious problems.”

5. The “SCATTER BRAIN” or GOOFEY: This can be a very dangerous characteristic. They lose track

of their answer and the question. They force humor or laugh inappropriately. They go off on unrelated

tangents, which can lead the examiner into otherwise unknown areas to discredit plaintiff’s case.

6. The LOOSE CANON or “EXTEMPORIZER”: This is a dangerous character trait. This person will

actually make things up or ad lib answers “off the top”; they refuse to stay focused or take advice and

may actually engage in self-defeating “off the record” ex parte discussions with other parties or lawyers.

7. The ANGRY BATTLE AXE or “AVENGING ANGEL”: Sometimes for very legitimate reasons and

honest motives this client is or becomes very angry at defending lawyer or defendant party … or both.

8. The OVERLY EMOTIONAL EMOTER: This client – again for very good reasons sometimes – will

become tearful, depressed, overly sad, angry or fearful at what seems to be trivial stimuli.

9. The KNOW-IT-ALL: Many experts, professional clients (especially builders and contractors) seem

to want to “Steer The Case” their way, despite contra indications in the law and the facts.

10. The WEASEL: This poor schlemiel looks like a liar and a thief regardless of clothes or makeup.

My staff and I have tried everything to help our clients give better testimony; worked countless hours

one-on-one, "group therapy" for positive reinforcement, videotaped simulations. Despite efforts rivaling

Hollywood directors of prima donnas we often fail. After hours of practice, positive feedback,

encouragement, clients still lose composure/confidence during cross-exam or probing of long dep.

20

THE “GRAND SLAM” OR “4 CORNERS” OF DEP/DME/TRIAL PREP

ICLE-NJ, ATLA (AAJ)’s Dep & Advanced Deposition Colleges, and work with trial consultants

taught me how to help improve clients’ demeanor & confidence re difficult questions, turning lengthy,

lifeless litany/stream-of-consciousness into interesting, credible descriptions of their situation. I use

“The Triple Paly” or “Trinity of Witness Prep." (1) Urge clients to write & use notes; (2) Show & tell

them how to use outlines to answer stock defense Q’s; e.g., use 4-step method to describe their physical

pains and preparing a "Top 10” list of how life has been significantly affected, (3) try role-playing.

I. FIRST CORNER: CLIENT NOTES, DIAGRAMS & TIME LINES

A. CLIENT NOTES

SHORT & SPECIFIC LEGIBLE HAND WRITTEN OR PRINTED CLIENT’S OWN LANGUAGE “SUITABLE FOR FRAMING”

CLIENT “CLIFF NOTES.” Using handwritten notes eliminates/reduces client’s (+ my) fear of making

mistakes on important dates/facts. E.g., every case plaintiffs need to answer DME/dep Q’s about their

“present problems”+“things they can no longer do/no longer do as well.” DME examinees/Deponents

can easily address many questions with reference to notes. Clients easily do this if they know in advance

that they can use notes; and if clients are foreign-born (many of mine use English as a second language),

he/she will find it a great relief to have personal notes in their familiar, native tongue.

Whenever lawyers or DME query my clients “WHY DO YOU NEED NOTES?” I tell my clients

to remind them good doctors instruct patients to “BRING LISTS . . . TAKE NOTES.” See AHRQ

(Agency for Healthcare Research & Quality) “Tips When Talking With Your Doctor,”www.ahrq.gov

“Bring a “health history” list with you . . . you might want to bring someone along to help you …

TAKE NOTES … bring a tape recorder.” www.ahrq.gov (Emphasis added)

21

B. CLIENT DIAGRAMS

BE ACCURATE AS TO SCALE + PLACEMENT of “X” + DATE of INCIDENT

REVISIT THE SCENE/SITE WITH CLIENT

USE AREALS or AVAILABLE DIAGRAMS/PHOTOS

PREP FOR TIME/DISTANCE/SPEED + CHECK THE MATH

CLIENT “ART WORK” & DIAGRAMS. In any auto case where time and distance are crucial details;

most fall down cases do not have the luxury of police diagrams, but, clients can make a hand-drawn map

with notations to be used as ready, reliable reference. In any fall down case clients need to reconstruct

visually and then recount what happened and where it happened. Accurate location of “point of impact”

or “place where” fall occurred is critical. To be mistaken/incorrect in reciting any traumatic event can be

devastating. In our experience confident, well prepared clients, armed with pre-drawn diagram, scale

drawing, pre-marked Google map/aerial photo always do better than witnesses unfamiliar with scene,

diagram, floor plans, scene photos, who try to start artistic careers at their dep with no practice/rehearsal.

C. CLIENT TIME LINES

CHECK FOR “CONFLICTS” - BE ACCURATE + CHRONOLOGICAL

OBJECTIVE, NON-INFLAMMATORY REPORT OF EVENTS

USE ALL SOURCES OF DATES/TIMES – INCLUDING DEFENSE

CONSISTENT CALENDARS or LISTINGS or “LINES”

SYMBOLS, CIRCLES, & STARS

REVIEW ALL DATES WITH CLIENT

KISS = Keep IT SIMPLE Silly!

CLIENT CALENDAR OF EVENTS. In cases with many critical times/dates we encourage all clients to

prepare in advance (with/without our typing support) and then to bring and use these “Time Lines”

during their DME/depositions. This engenders confidence as well as a more error-free DME/deposition.

22

II. SECOND CORNER: STRUCTURE IS THE SECRET NOT “FREE FALL”

A. STRUCTURE THE “FOUR STEPS OF PAIN”

QUALITY – HOWZIT FEEL? QUANTITY – HOW OFTEN? DURATION – HOW LONG LASTING? RELIEF – WHADDAYADO FOR IT?

STRUCTURE: THE 4 STEPS OF PAIN OUTLINE. Make it easy for clients to recite the gist of their

“complaints” (BETTER TERMS “problem/pains) by using "Four-Step Pain Outline.” It asks following:

1. Quality. Describe what the pain feels like. Don’t just say "it hurts." I force clients to think of

their own descriptive terms for their feelings and sensations of pain/discomfort.

2. Quantity. Tell how often during the day or the week the pain occurs.

3. Duration. Describe how long each occurrence of the pain lasts.

4. Relief. Explain what, if any, medicine or home therapy helps to relieve the pain.

Outlining these four questions in his or her own handwriting will make a client more confident when

describing their situation, whether it involves one or a dozen injuries.

I tell clients when they prepare the "Top 10" list to set out in clear, simple terms the things that have

been lost or impaired as a result of their injuries. Armed with this list, my clients are much more

confident answering the ubiquitous defense question, "Tell me what, if anything, you cannot do at all, or

cannot do as well as you did before?"

You may be thinking these "cheat sheets" are discoverable. You’re right. In fact, I encourage defense

counsel to obtain, review, and mark them as exhibits. The notes only emphasize my client’s testimony.

23

Do not fear that using notes makes your client look “less credible.” I would rather have a relaxed,

confident client testify than one who is anxious, upset, and frozen with fear that he/she might misstate or

forget something important. I prefer to let my clients speak clearly about what is most important to them

rather than force them to rely on their memory, which may be weakened by stress or fatigue.

Remember and remind your clients and the defense that the Q: “WHY DOES YOUR CLIENT

NEED NOTES?” has a very simple, standard, common sense answer, to wit: most good doctors instruct

patients to “BRING LISTS . . . TAKE NOTES.” See AHRQ (Agency for Healthcare Research &

Quality) “Tips When Talking With Your Doctor,”www.ahrq.gov “Bring a “health history” list with you .

. . you might want to bring someone along to help you … TAKE NOTES … bring a tape recorder.”

www.ahrq.gov (Emphasis); and most good lawyers (and judges?) do take and refer to THEIR NOTES!

Handwritten notes are best with a client who tends to ramble, like the Whiner. I have found that

keeping the notes short--usually just two pages--helps them remain, as the politicians say, "on message."

B. PREP FOR & STRUCTURE THE $64, $64.50, $65 & “TWO-TRICKY-TRIP” QUESTIONS

(1) THE $64 QUESTION

PRIORITIZE “LIST OF FAVORITE THINGS” PRIORITIZE ADL SHORTEN & SUMMARIZE USE CLIENT’S “FIRST LANGUAGE” INSIST ON LIST BEING DEP EXHIBIT PREP CLIENT FOR “TYPICAL DAY/WEEKEND”

The $64 Question is our name for “THE ONE BURNING QUESTION” jurors want answered:

What significant effect(s) has/have your injury(s) had upon your life and your family relationships?

Clients must be prepared to answer this question in answers to interrogatories as well as

deposition. We recommend that they have their written answers to interrogatories AND a short, legible

pre-written structured list which is prioritized for their ready reference.

24

(2) THE $64.50 QUESTION

PREP CLIENT FOR “TYPICAL DAY/WEEKEND”

The $64.50 Question the logical extension of the ultimate $64 Question, to wit: What do you do

with yourself during the typical day or weekend? As with present physical problems and effects on

their lives each client must be ready to answer this Q whether in dep, mediation, arbitration or trial.

(3) THE $65 QUESTION

CONSCIOUSLY AVOIDED BUT UNCONSCIOUSLY ASKED

The $65 Question is my name for “THE UNASKED QUESTION” most jurors unconsciously

want answered: What will plaintiff do with money? or What good will money do for him/her/them?

We as trial lawyers for injured clients or survivors of wrongful death must be prepared to answer

or suggest an answer to this unspoken question in our clients’ answers to interrogatories, depositions and

trial testimony. A painful example of this unasked question is in the wrongful death of a child: in many

such cases there are very well-meaning jurors who will ask silently or out loud “How will money help to

replace this child?” For a rather simplistic economic example, if an injured and permanently disabled

plaintiff needs to have household assistance or substituted services, then the actual cost or economic

“replacement value” for the plaintiff to go out and buy or repay people to help him/her is the answer to

the $65 question – the plaintiff could use X amount of money to be able to live a normal life.

(4) THE TWO TRICKY-TRIP QUESTIONS

USUALLY ASKED OF CLIENTS WHO CLAIM PERMANENTLY DISABLING INJURIES:

A. HAVE YOU GONE ON ANY TRIPS/VACATIONS?

B. SINCE YOU ARE OUT OF WORK/DISABLED WHAT DO YOU DO DURING THE DAY?

Always prepare plaintiffs, esp. those who suffer permanent disability or impairment, to be able to

answer these two lines of interrogation honestly, quickly, concisely and without any “attitude”

25

III. THIRD CORNER: ROLE-PLAYING

IT’S THE CLIENT’S ROLE ... NOT OURS

IT’S THE CLIENT’S INTERPRETATION THAT WILL BE SEEN

IT’S EASY IF IT’S NECESSARY & IMPORTANT TO CLIENT

IT’S EFFECTIVE IF PRACTICED BY CLIENT

ROLE-PLAYING. This can be done inexpensively or expensively. Expensive—which saves a lot

of your time--is to hire a jury consultant who will perform a complete professional overhaul of clients’

appearance, grooming, speech, demeanor. We work with several jury consultants and find they are often

useful and, in some cases, extraordinarily helpful. Good ones make clients more likeable, better witness.

The inexpensive approach involves you and your staff meeting with problem clients and finding a

role model for them to imitate. Believe it or not, this works. If, for instance, a client tends to ramble, ask

who they most admire as honest, straight-talking, and succinct. Tell them to imitate that person. I ask

clients who are prone to whining to think of a brave, stoic person they know of and respect. Clients often

find role models in their own family, American history, books, television, or movies. The source doesn’t

matter. What’s important is that the role model is a good one and that the client can play that role.

I had two elderly clients; both incorrigible “Ramblers.” They could not answer any question in less

than 100 words and regularly went off-track on unrelated topics. They too were frustrated with their own

inability to reverse this trend. I asked each who they most respected, who exemplified their ideal of a

tight-lipped, concise speaker. The husband, a Baby Boomer, I expected to name terse-talking Jack Webb

from the old TV series Dragnet. Instead he chose Superman, who was not only strong and fearless, but

always said the most in few words. His wife picked Golda Meir. With little practice--less than one hour-

-this elderly couple dramatically changed how they handled questions. Each became a better witness.

26

Another time, my staff and I tried for over three hours--using videotape, mirrors, and

demonstrations--to convince one Whiner that his long, drawn-out monody of his problems was

excessive and irritating. Despite our best efforts, he continued to whine. Finally, I discovered that he was

an opera singer. I asked him to think about the toughest, most stoic, character he could play. I felt sure

he would select an Italian opera hero, one with much coraggio. But to my surprise, he said he’d always

admired the movie characters that John Wayne played: men who, despite bullets, shrapnel, arrows,

spears, and whatever else was thrown at them, always picked themselves up and got the job done. I

asked him, could he play such a role? He could and did. He turned himself from John Whine into John

Wayne. And his deposition was a masterpiece.

IV. FOUTH CORNER aka “HOME PLATE”: “ALL IN THE FAMILY” or CLIENT “BACKUP”

IMMEDIATE FAMILY

FRIENDS

ADVISERS

As with any performance, contest or public exhibition a DME or deposition is like a trial in open

court. The people being examined (even in defense doctor’s office) or deposed are still being put “on

display.” Most people being questioned have a sense of being “all alone.” Many, if not all, deponents

feel some pressure or sense of importance about their DME or sworn testimony. Often their memories

are challenged, meanings critiqued, motives criticized, and the merits of their claims condemned. People

unused to the deposition or DME process can get “stage fright.” Lawyers tend to believe they are

champions for their clients, and they are. But even champs need to have “backups” and friends “in their

corner.” Our clients have longer, deeper relationships with family and friends than they do with us and

our legal team. Therefore, we encourage all our clients to bring someone with them to sit in the DME

exam or dep room, with whom they have a special and close relationship of trust and confidence.

27

Clients who do have family or friend sitting with them during deposition, DME, or trial appear to

be (and may in fact be) more confident and relaxed. Whether “backup” is a spouse, child, lover, sports

coach, karate sensei, rabbi, or spiritual guru, if the person sitting in the room is giving off “good vibes”

for the client, then that person is an asset to be used for the best interest of your client. In my opinion,

having one or two close friends/family sitting in with clients during the dep results in two very positive

effects on clients’ cases, their settlement or jury verdict value and our attorney-client relationships:

1. It puts clients at ease by creating a friendlier atmosphere and another source of facts; and

2. It sends a message to the opposition: this client has a life with friends and a “support group.”

V. AT TRIAL: THE REAL CONTEST IS AFOOT + THE JURY IS KEEPING SCORE

CALL FOR “BACKUP” PRACTICE RELAXATION TECHNIQUES STAGE REHEARSAL(S) PREP FOR THE “DAYLIGHT” IN THE DEFENSE THE ART OF RE-DIRECT

As discussed above, always have family and friends with the client to provide moral support and

help during the stress of trial. We invite our clients to bring family and close friends who not only help

fetch coffee/tea/water but also can be very helpful during jury selection due to their community contacts.

As with any physically challenging contest (combat?), try to teach your client to take some type

of deep breathing, stretching or calming exercise(s) that work, before starting up to the witness stand. A

relaxed and calm witness is usually a more effective witness: calm, not careless or unconcerned;

confident, not arrogant; authoritative, not condescending; assured in the truth of the accuracy of their

memory, not cocky or smug.

28

Before trial, dep or DME, be sure the client understands every defense has “holes.” Prime your

client for any such “openings” in the defense, through which the theme of your client’s truths may flow.

Finally, be sure to reinforce the fact that your client is confident in the knowledge that “even if

they make a bad mistake” you can correct it on re-direct exam or Supplemental Answer to Interrogatory

Letter (I like the acronym SAIL). They should not feel they are going to be “trapped” on cross-exam or

at the DME and let swinging in the breeze with no ability to explain or fully describe their answers or

prior dep/interrogatory answers or some minute insignificant hand written note in some prior hospital or

doctor’s medical records. That is what trial lawyers call “The Art of Re-direct Examination.” And, that

is a subject for another paper at another ICLE Seminar..

CONCLUSION: “THE GRAND SLAM” or 4-CORNER OFFENSE WORKS

These four rather simple techniques—notes, structured lists, role-playing, and client back-up— really do

work. My partners and I have seen the results with our clients, clients of colleagues, and with our work

as and with jury/trial consultants. So next time your clients have difficulty saying what needs saying, tell

them to take notes, make outlines, pick a role model, and tap a friend/family member to team up with

them for their dep, DME or trial . . . Then tell them: Break a leg!

29

About the Participants… Diane L. Cardoso is a Partner in Javerbaum Wurgaft Hicks Kahn Wikstrom & Sinins in Newark, New Jersey. She concentrates her practice in the litigation of personal injury matters involving automobile negligence, products liability and construction site negligence. Ms. Cardoso is admitted to practice in New Jersey and New York, and before the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey. A Trustee of the Hudson County Bar Association, she sits on the Civil Arbitration Selection Committee and Civil Practice Committee in Hudson County. Ms. Cardoso is a member of the Board of Governors of the New Jersey Association for Justice and is Co-Chair of the Association’s Education Committee. She is also a member of the Revitalization Board of Governors of the American Association for Justice. She has lectured for ICLE, the Hudson and Essex County Bar Associations and the New Jersey Association for Justice. Ms. Cardoso received her B.A. from Seton Hall University and her J.D. and Certificate in International Law from Pace University School of Law. Upon graduation from law school she served a Judicial Clerkship with the Honorable Dennis F. Carey, III and the Honorable John C. Kennedy, Judges of the Superior Court of New Jersey. Louis John Dughi, Jr. is a founding Partner of Dughi, Hewit & Domalewski, P.C. in Cranford, New Jersey, where his practice includes physician and hospiital law; medical, dental and hospital malpractice; product liability defense; and complex civil litigation. Mr. Dughi provides legal counsel to hospitals, physicians and other health care professionals involved in disputes concerning licensing, hospital privileges and fraud investigations. He has tried more than 225 cases on behalf of health care professionals in federal and state courts. A Fellow of the American Board of Trial Attorneys (ABOTA), Mr. Dughi is a member of the Defense Research Institute. He is active in community and charitable organizations including serving on the Board of Trustees on the Kent Place School since 1988. He has been a faculty member of the New Jersey Trial Advocacy College, a lecturer on trial techniques for ICLE and has lectured to physician groups on how legal trends impact their profession. Mr. Dughi received his B.A. and J.D. from Cornell University. Eric G. Fikry is a Partner in the Princeton, New Jersey, and Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, offices of Blank Rome LLP, where he concentrates his practice in commercial litigation. Mr. Fikry represents owners and operators of gaming facilities, lenders, investment funds, corporate licensees, key employees, principals, vendors and individuals in connection with licensing investigations as well as other regulatory issues, and also handles a wide variety of complex commercial litigation matters for gaming industry clients. He represents companies seeking licenses to conduct internet gaming in New Jersey, including several that were issued transactional waivers authorizing them to be the first to offer legal, online casino gaming within the United States. Admitted to practice in New Jersey and Pennsylvania, and before the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey and the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, and the Third Circuit Court

31

of Appeals, Mr. Fikry is President of the Asian Pacific American Lawyers Association of New Jersey, President-Elect of the Camden County Bar Association and a member of the Asian Pacific American Bar Association of Pennsylvania and the New Jersey State and Pennsylvania Bar Associations. He was reappointed to serve as Chair of the Pennsylvania Bar Association’s Gaming Law Committee, serves on the Board of Trustees of the New Jersey State Bar Association and is Past Co-Chair of the New Jersey State Bar Association’s Diversity Committee and a former Chair of the Camden County Bar Association President’s Commission on Diversity. He also served as a panel Chair of the New Jersey District IV Fee Arbitration Committee. In the Spring of 2017, Mr. Fikry is scheduled to teach Introduction to Gaming Law as an adjunct instructor at the University of Pennsylvania Law School. He is the recipient of several honors, including being recognized by the Rutgers-Camden Asian Pacific American Law Students Association for his efforts in promoting diversity and supporting the Asian-American legal community. Mr. Fikry received his B.A. from New York University and his J.D. from Rutgers University School of Law-Camden. Tommie Ann Gibney, Certified as a Civil Trial Attorney by the Supreme Court of New Jersey, is an attorney with Andres & Berger, P.C., in Haddonfield, New Jersey, where she represents victims of spine and brain injury, surgical errors, anesthesia errors, cancer misdiagnosis, nursing home neglect and wrongful death. Ms. Gibney is admitted to practice in the District of Columbia, the state and federal courts of New Jersey and Pennsylvania, and before the United States Supreme Court. She is Past President of the New Jersey Association for Justice (NJAJ, formerly ATLA-NJ) and has served as Co-Chair of the Association’s Women Trial Lawyers Caucus and on several committees. She is a Trustee of the Camden County Bar Association and a member of the New Jersey State Bar Association, where she serves on the NJSBA Judicial and Prosecutorial Appointments Committee. Ms. Gibney is a frequent lecturer for ICLE, ATLA-NJ and other organizations on damages, tortious conduct, negligence and insurance coverage issues. Her articles have appeared in the New Jersey Lawyer and other publications, and she is the recipient of the NJAJ’s prestigious Gold Medal for outstanding service to the legal profession. Ms. Gibney received her B.A., cum laude, from Seton Hall University and her J.D. from Seton Hall University School of Law, where she was Articles Editor for the Seton Hall Law Review. Michael Maggiano, Certified as a Civil Trial Attorney by the Supreme Court of New Jersey and the National Board of Trial Advocacy, is a Partner in Maggiano, DiGirolamo & Lizzi, P.C. with offices in Fort Lee, New Jersey; and New York City. He concentrates his practice in complex plaintiff personal injury litigation with a focus on construction accidents and medical negligence. Mr. Maggiano is admitted to practice in all state and federal courts in New Jersey and New York and before the United States Supreme Court. A Fellow of the American College of Trial Lawyers and Past President of the New Jersey Association for Justice, he is a member of the American, New Jersey State and Bergen County Bar Associations, the Trial Attorneys of New Jersey, Trial Lawyers for Public Justice and the National Board of Trial Advocacy. He is Past

32

President of the Melvin M. Belli Society, an advocate member of ABOTA and a Civil Justice Foundation Champion member. A Master of the Justice Brennan and Justice Morris Pashman American Inns of Court, Mr. Maggiano has lectured for ICLE, the AAJ, NJAJ and other professional organizations, and is a published author on trial advocacy. He is a member of the Million Dollar Advocates Forum and the recipient of the 2004 Trial Bar Award from the Trial Attorneys of New Jersey and the 2013 Alfred C. Clapp Award from ICLE, among other honors. Mr. Maggiano received his B.S. from Farleigh Dickinson University and his J.D., with honors, from ITT-Chicago Kent College of Law. Christine P. O’Hearn, Certified as a Civil Trial Attorney by the Supreme Court of New Jersey, is a Partner in the Westmont, New Jersey, office of Brown & Connery, LLP, where she concentrates her practice in labor and employment and complex civil litigation. She defends individuals and management in all employment-related matters, including claims of discrimination, harassment and hostile work environment and retaliation under the NJLAD, Title VII, ADA, CEPA, ADEA, FMLA and NJFLA. She also represents many public entities as labor counsel and in defense of litigation claims. Ms. O’Hearn is admitted to practice in New Jersey and Pennsylvania, and before the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey and the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals and the United States Supreme Court. A Fellow of the American College of Trial Lawyers (ACTL), she is a member of the American, New Jersey State, Pennsylvania and Camden County Bar Associations.

Ms. O’Hearn has lectured on employment issues and is the author of several articles which have appeared in the New Jersey Law Journal. She formerly served as an adjunct professor of law at Rutgers University School of Law-Camden, where she taught employment law, and is the recipient of several honors, including being featured in the New Jersey Law Journal’s “Women and Minorities in the Legal Profession.” Ms. O’Hearn received her B.A. from the University of Delaware and her J.D., cum laude, from Temple University School of Law, where she was a member of the Moot Court Board and the recipient of the Best Oral Advocate Award. Michael S. Raff, Certified as a Civil Trial Attorney by the Supreme Court of New Jersey, is a Partner in Raff & Raff, LLP, with offices in Paterson and Maywood, New Jersey. He focuses his practice exclusively on representing individuals and their families throughout northern and central New Jersey on a broad range of personal injury cases, including automobile collisions, wrongful death, construction accidents, premises liability, medical malpractice and products liability. Mr. Raff is a member of the Passaic County Bar Association, the American Association for Justice (AAJ) and the American Board of Trial Advocates (ABOTA), and serves on the Board of Governors for the New Jersey Association for Justice (NJAJ). He lectures extensively for the New Jersey Association for Justice (NJAJ) and other organizations on personal injury/wrongful death matters.

33

Mr. Raff received his B.A., magna cum laude, from New York University, where he was elected to Phi Beta Kappa, and his J.D. from Fordham University School of Law Thomas J. Vesper, Certified as a Civil Trial Attorney by the New Jersey Supreme Court and as a Civil Trial Advocate by the National Board of Trial Advocacy, is a Partner in Westmoreland, Vesper, Quattrone & Beers, P.A. in West Atlantic City, New Jersey. He concentrates his practice in serious personal injury and wrongful death cases, and his litigation specialties/trial experience includes professional negligence, premises liability, negligent security, auto negligence and consumer fraud. Mr. Vesper is Past President of ATLA-NJ (now NJAJ) and a Fellow of the International Academy of Trial Lawyers. He is also a founder of Trial Lawyers for Public Justice and a founder and Executive Director of the Aletheia Institute. Mr. Vesper is the author of several dozen books or chapters and more than 250 articles, including his book of quotations, Uncle Anthony’s Unabridged Analogies, 3rd ed. (2012) as well as the AAJ Trial Notebook, 6th ed. (2012) and the AAJ Deposition Notebook, 4th ed. (2012). He writes and lectures on wrongful death, products liability, truck/bus accident reconstruction, discovery, case evaluation, settlement, trial techniques, and trial and deposition notebooks. Mr. Vesper received his B.A., cum laude, from Villanova University and his J.D. from Rutgers University Law School-Camden, where he was a member of the Rutgers Camden Law Review. He also served in the United States Marine Corps Reserve for 23 years.

34