I copy a selection of those thoughts here (I’m cherry picking because my tendency to be longwinded is apparently not a recently acquired skill!): I came away from this trial with the same, increasingly strong feeling that I have had after each of my handful of trials since beginning practice as a plaintiff’s attorney: 1) I can do this; and 2) I can do this better next time. Having a positive result certainly does not hurt in the confidence department, but I am a big believer in that there is randomness in trial work that we can’t avoid with even the best laid plans. So, with significant humility, I endeavor to glean what wisdom I can from this case/trial experience while avoiding the strong urge to anguish over mistakes made along the way. My dad (one of many great mentors I’m lucky to have) has always advised the attorneys in our office that you can’t be too happy when you win and you can’t get too down when you lose, your energies are better spent in furtherance of the next fight for another deserving client. I try to follow his lead in that respect, with the caveat that you should try learning from each of these experiences via some thoughtful reflection after the fact. What sticks after several weeks of periodic reflection on this recent trial are the following lessons: You can’t spend enough time preparing for trial. One must learn to resist the urge to deal with mundane B.S. in the weeks that precede trial — you will never regret the time you spent getting intimately acquainted with your case and developing themes — you might regret the wasted week you spent trying to wrap up loose ends to focus yourself (I’m a self-admitted but indulgent procrastinator). I felt more prepared for this trial than I ever have before and still would like to have been more prepared. Yes, this will likely always hold true, but it feels good when your preparedness-meter is trending in the right direction. There must be some correlation between practice and results (even if they are subjective). You don’t need to know everything. But you should know your case, really well. However, you don’t need to have anticipated the legal basis for responsive argument to every evidentiary conundrum that may come up in trial. The desire to do so is a recipe for energetic disaster. I still remember being a judicial clerk and hanging out in Judge Jerry B. Hodson’s chambers on a random assignment during which, in passing, he mentioned that the best attorneys don’t worry about what they don’t know. This was perplexing to me, but certainly got me thinking. I think he sensed this might be good advice for me because I’m the Stories That Linger continued from p. 43 “[Y]ou should know your case, really well. However, you don’t need to have anticipated the legal basis for responsive argument to every evidentiary conundrum that may come up in trial. The desire to do so is a recipe for energetic disaster.” 44 Trial Lawyer | Fall 2024
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy Nzc3ODM=