Managing time when time is short, the phone is ringing, and your desk is piled up`

One of the worst problems for busy attorneys is managing their time. It seems that with each day we struggle with emails that never stop, motions that seem to keep coming, phones that ring in the middle of writing that memo or brief that is due tomorrow, and faxes that demand our attention. And somewhere out there is a spouse or significant other who expects to get home on time too. So, how to juggle?

First, each morning you must tackle - and get done - the one thing that is most important to get done that day. With the most important (and often most difficult) task out of the way, the day will only get easier.

Second, block a dedicated time out for your work. And make it the same time frame each day. It doesn’t matter if it first thing in the morning, at the end of the day, or somewhere in between. Block it out and don’t let anything interrupt it. You can’t work efficiently and stay on track to getting a task done if you are constantly being taken off track by every interruption that comes along. It will destroy your concentration, your peace of mind, and ultimately your entire day, if you allow yourself to run from one fire to the next. You are a lawyer, not a fireman.

Third, there are times when you just have to ignore the phone. So ignore it. Let it ring and go to voice mail. You can always pick it up when you get done doing the task that is in front of you. Of course, you can’t ignore it all of the time. Ignore it only when you have to in order to get a task in front of you over and done with. Dealing with telephone interruptions is a balancing act of attending to the business in front of you and attending to the business trying to interrupt you. There is a time and place for the interruption but you should set the time and place. Don’t allow the phone to do it for you. Otherwise, you’ll never get anything done.

And the last thing you should do everyday? Pick the one thing that you absolutely must get done tomorrow. Then pull that file and put it in the middle of your desk so that when you come in the next day, you start right on it and get it done. Of course, you should be prioritizing your work constantly anyway, but at the end of the day you should make the decision on what is the most important thing you need to get done the next day and set it out so that when you come in, there is no thinking, no debating, no effort needed. You can just start right on it and get it done.

More tips are coming in the future, but this will get you on the right track to successfully managing the workload.

Ron Burdge
http://www.thelawcoach.com/

Helping attorneys succeed, every day.

Communicating With Your Jury - Using the Opening Statement Opportunity

Today we are continuing our series on the art of communicating with a jury during your trial. It starts when you walk into the courthourse and continues during voir dire and everything you do throughout the trial but the next step in our discussion is your opening statement and both the direct and indirect communication that takes place in that phase of a trial.

There have been volumes written about what to say and how to say it in an opening statement so we will keep it short here.


From the movie My Cousin Vinny

 First Rule: Never go to trial in a case that you think you will lose. The jury can "smell" a trial attorney’s lack of confidence in their case. If you think you will lose, you will lose.

Your confidence in your case must be on display from the very start. It shows in your stance, your demeanor, the words you say in your opening - and how you say them. By the time you are finished with your opening statement, the jury must have one single "take away" thought - that you believe in your client's case to your very bones.

That level of conviction, displayed solidly and with confidence, will make the jury think to themselves, "if their attorney is that convinced, he must really be right."

 Second Rule: Never give a weak opening. No one wants a wimp for a trial attorney. And, just as the jury can smell your lack of confidence, your opposing counsel can smell blood in the water. If you don't think you can win the case, then you shouldn't be in the courtroom with it.

 Third Rule: Never promise more in your opening statement than your evidence will deliver in the trial. There's an old business rule that goes something like this, under-promise and over-deliver. That same rule should apply to your opening statement. You have to say enought to make the jury realize that you are probably going to win the case, yes. But you should also hold back a little, so that you can impress the jury with your evidence even better in the trial.

Promise the jury about your evidence, yes. But then over-deliver on the evidence necessary to win your case with an even stronger conviction expressed in your closing argument.

 Fourth Rule: Keep strong eye contact with your jury. If possible, try to avoid using any crutches during your opening statement. Nothing spells conviction quite like standing in front of the jury box and delivering your opening statement bare naked - meaning no notes at all, merely telling them what the facts are that you are going to prove and why you ought to win and why your opponent ought to lose.

Fifth Rule: Innoculate the negative evidence before your opponent emphasizes it. Every case has both good evidence for you and bad evidence against you. If it didn't, there probably wouldn't be a trial occuring. So, in your opening you must deal with it.

 Don't dwell on it, but explain it away with the same conviction and certainty that you use in talking about your "good" evidence too. You can't ignore it for one simple reason: your opponent will be beating that drum loud and clear because it is all they have got to fight you with.

If you use your opening statement to set the foundation of your personal credibility, then you can begin to build the framework for the jury's acceptance of your truth throughout the trial, as they use your reality of the case to reach their verdict later.



Introduce your trial theme and tell your client’s story in the process. Your trial theme must be appealing, simple and fit the evidence. Most of all, your opening should simply tell your client’s story and explain how the law means that they will find in your favor. "Your favor" is how we put it for one simple reason: When the jury finds in favor of you, they will find in favor of your client.

Ron Burdge

http://www.thelawcoach.com/

Helping consumer lawyers win cases

for over 30 years.

Lawyer Coaching Topics We Cover, click here



The E-Myth Attorney, why most legal practices don't work and what to do about it

I just got back from several days out of town last week and something extraordinary happened during the 6+ hours I was in the air. This is way off topic so grab a cup of coffee and let me tell you about it.

In November 2007 Janet Varnell and I discussed how to apply Michael Gerber’s E-Myth principles to Consumer Law lawyering in a presentation titled “Lawyering E(entrepreneur) Myths” at the annual NCLC Consumer Rights Litigation Conference in Washington DC. Little did we know that within four years Gerber would publish “The E-Myth Attorney: Why Most Legal Practices Don’t Work and What to Do About It,” a companion volume to his original “The E-Myth” book.

We won’t take credit for it, certainly, but it turns out that Janet and I were right in our thoughts on how the E-Myth principles could be applied to Consumer Lawyers and many of the lawyer E-Myth ideas we talked about back then have made it into print.

While they do teach us how to be lawyers, they don’t teach “How to Run Your Business” in law school. Gerber’s new book should be mandatory reading for third year law students. It is that good. And if you are a struggling lawyer looking for a way to free up your life and get on solid financial footing, this book is for you. It is the book that Janet and I should have called Gerber up and offered to help him write.

But we didn’t. That credit goes to Robert Armstrong and Sanford Fisch, two attorneys who were inspired by the first E-Myth book. Now you get a chance to look over their shoulder and find out how to apply the E-Myth principles to successfully running your own practice. It doesn’t matter if you’re a young pup fresh out of law school or an old dog like me — there’s plenty here to apply to every stage of your law career — and it’s never too late to teach an old dog a few new tricks.

This book is full of so many great tips and advice that it should be on every Consumer Lawyer’s night stand. Don’t sit it on your desk and promise yourself that you’ll read it right after you clear that stack of papers next to it. Don’t kid yourself. Get away from the office and grab some quiet time when you can take this thin 178-page volume to heart and mind.

It’s a quick and easy read but the principles in it will both inspire and aggravate you. Inspire you because you’ll likely find yourself saying “Yeah, that is absolutely right” and aggravate you because you add “why didn’t I think of that years ago?” Either way, I promise you will get more out of this book than you likely learned about lawyering in your entire first year of practice. In fact, you’ll probably recognize for the first time some of the many mistakes you made at the start of your legal career and also see, maybe for the first time, how you could have (and will from now on) avoid them.

Some of the chapter titles include “On the Subject of Money,” “Managing the Unmanageable,” “Your Client Loves You, He Loves You Not,” “What time Do You Have?” and “The Reason Behind the Work.” Each of those, and all the other 26 chapters are invaluable.

There are chapters that explain why lawyers aren’t business people and how to fix it, the importance of knowing your numbers, the good and the bad and the ugly of handling people-clients-associates-and-others, the four kinds of money, how to handle a prospective client who asks for a fee estimate at the beginning of a case, why a business plan matters, the importance of time to a lawyer (hint: it’s a lot more than just Abraham Lincoln’s quote), why systems matter in a law practice, what to do when change comes to your practice and to your life, and, of course, the purpose behind your law practice.

The authors talk about so much that this review can’t possibly do the book justice. So instead I’ll just tell you to get the book and then pay particular attention to the wisdom found on these specific pages: 16-22, 26, 29-30, 32-43, 44, 55, 67, 73, 93, 99-100 — oh heck you should pay attention to the wisdom found all thru the book.

At the beginning of this review I said that they should make this required reading for every third year student. Actually that’s wrong.

It should be the first thing a new law student reads at the start of law school - so they get exposed to the importance of the business side of practicing law right away.

And it should also be the last thing a graduating law student reads - so that they can then see and better understand the business principles it teaches in the light of the legal training they have completed.

As Professor Kings field said in the 1973 movie, The Paper Chase, to his new law students, “You come in here with a skull full of mush and, if you survive, you’ll leave thinking like a lawyer.” If you read this book, you can start thinking like a business person too. And if you don’t think like a business person too, well, then thinking like a lawyer won’t be enough to save you from yourself.

As I read this book on the airplane last week, I recalled Janet and I saying many of these things to the 50-plus attendees of that Doing Well While Doing Good seminar back in 2007. It felt good to know that Janet and I were right in some of our thinking about the E-Myth principles and their application to Consumer Lawyers. At the same time, there was so very much more to it.

Get this book. Read it. See for yourself.

And if you know someone graduating from law school, give them your copy after you read it. They are going to need it.

Ron Burdge
www.TheLawCoach.com
Helping Lawyers Do Their Best Everyday

Communicating directly with your jury in voir dire

Today we are continuing our series on the art of communicating with a jury during your trial. From the moment you are both in the same room, in fact when you are walking down the hallway on your way to the courtroom, the communication is occurring.

It just isn't as easy as Perry Mason made it look.



We talked about the basics and the importance of your communication before. We followed that with your "indirect" way of communicating with your jury too. Now, let's talk about the direct communication you can do during voir dire.

Of course, your questions and conversation (and that is what it should be) will revolve around the people and issues in your trial and those will often be unique to each particular trial. But there are some general guidelines that can apply to the voir dire in most trials.

Remember foremost that voir dire is the time for you to make friends with your jury. Do not cut it short and ask every question with a smile and warm expression on your face. You may naturally appear surprised at some juror comments but you should never appear dissatisfied, irritated or upset with a response.

You should be genuinely interested in learning all you can about each individual juror so ask open-ended questions that probe responses and promote conversation. Finding the right open-ended question can be extremely difficult so plan your questions out ahead of time so you can minimize the awkwardness of fumbling for the next thing to talk about.
At the same time, though, your manner should be relaxed and appear to be completely "off the cuff" and not planned out at all. The most effective voir dire should leave the jury thinking that you have nothing but a very bare outline of what you were interested in and you didn't stick to it.

One good technique is to outline the topics and areas that you want to cover. Ignore the language you want to use in the exact questions for the moment. Your starting point is just sort of a bullet list. After you are satisfied that you have everything covered, next start writing out the list of questions - phrased as if you were asking it in front of the jury. Write out every question you think would matter. When you are completely done and satisfied that you have covered it all thoroughly, read through your list one more time and put it away. Then, the day before the trial is to start, go over the list again. Finally, throw the list away.

Okay, that will be hard. But remember that it is more important to have the jury like you that it is to cover every question verbatim. Voir dire is about getting to know the jurors, yes, but it is also about getting them to feel comfortable with you and begin to like you and your manner and style. All of that is far more important than covering every little detail in every question on your list. This exercise (writing an outline and then all the questions and then discarding it) is designed to put the material in your mind in an organized fashion and not to give you a paper crutch to use during voir dire.

You can use humor as long as you do so carefully, lightly and tastefully. Be human and show compassion and attentiveness. Listen. If you don’t listen, you don’t learn about your jurors. If you don’t learn about them, you will seat the wrong jurors. And you know what happens when you seat the wrong jurors in the jury box.

Listening and engaging in conversation is critically important. Find out as much as you can about each juror. Use the customary questionnaires as a springboard for more conversation. At the same time, you have to strike a balance between inquiring and appearance obviously probing. The balance should be struck in favor of casual curiosity. Think of it as being a slightly more formal version of a dinner party where you get a chance to meet someone you do not know and learn more about them - and the object is for you to learn about them and not the other way around.
Knowing your case is critical. Keep it in mind and look for the chance to use juror responses as the opportunity to tie in your case proof and claim elements with juror experiences and responses. That can build a bridge between the jury's common experiences and the case you are going to present. The objective in this technique is to make your case personal for the jury, to get them invested in your side of the case so they want to help your client win.
And if your court process has you excuse a juror in front of the panel, always look at the juror and thank them in the same sentence that you exercise your peremptory. The rest of the panel will appreciate your courtesy and professionalism. If you excuse them only while speaking the judge, the rest of the jurors may think you are cavalier or, worse yet, don't care at all about them.
 
We could go on a long time about the importance of voir dire and the many books and articles that have been written, but we hope these few tips are enough for now.
 
Next time we will talk about your direct communication with the jury in your opening statement and why you need to be wary of the jury's sense of smell.
 

Ron Burdge

http://www.thelawcoach.com/

Helping attorneys win cases for their clients for over 30 years.

Communicating with your Jury the Indirect Way is important too

At different stages of a trial, the trial attorney gets to directly address the Jury, but you have to mindful of the indirect communication that is constantly occurring throughout the trial between the attorney and the Jury. This is the second part of our series on communication techniques and tips for the trial attorney.


Throughout the trial, always show utmost respect and courtesy toward the jury and the judge. Jurors expect it and anything less will offend the jury, even if the judge overlooks the missteps that will occur in the heat of a trial.

A level of “professional” courtesy and respect should always be shown to your opponent and all other persons in the courtroom. This is not the same thing as “utmost” courtesy and respect. Jurors know that in a civil lawsuit the two sides do not agree on something and are fighting each other over it, with the expectation that it commonly involves money.

The result is that the jury expects to see a fight. A courteous and professional fight with words, yes, but a fight nonetheless.

Control your communication with the jury. A trial is about the evidence and witnesses that are presented to the jury for their consideration. Although it should not be about the attorneys or their personal styles, human beings can not help but notice and, at times, be influenced by nonessential and extraneous information. At all times, control your dress, style and mannerisms.

If the jury thinks you are not genuine and sincere with others in the courtroom, then they may not accept your evidence as genuine and sincere - or as truthful. The result is that you may have great difficulty communicating your evidence to the jury in an accepting manner. And that indirect, subtle communication may have occurred without the attorney being fully aware of it at all.

Next time we'll talk about the direct communication with the Jury that occurs in a trial, starting with the Voir Dire questioning of the prospective jurors - where the jury gets their first view and impressions of the attorneys in the case. And the Judge.

Ron Burdge

www.TheLawCoach.com

Helping lawyers win cases for over 25 years.

Communicating with your Jury starts before you talk and continues after you sit down

Today we'll start a series about Communicating With Your Jury in a trial. It happens in several different ways and at several different specific times too.

When does it begin? Your communication with the Jury starts before you talk. From the moment you are both in the same room, in fact when you are walking down the hallway on your way to the courtroom, the communication is occurring.

Every physical aspect of you is being inspected by the jury pool. Your clothes, hair, demeanor, face, attitude, gait, style - everything. Before the trial starts, you are on display and the Jury’s perception of your competency is already on trial. You are “on trial” from the moment you arrive at the courthouse, long before you enter the courtroom, and long before you stand up to begin your voir dire. Knowing that fact can make a difference before your trial even begins.

Your acceptance and your credibility with a jury starts with how you look and how you act. It solidifies with what you say and how you say it.

As a trial attorney, you are both an actor and the director of the stage play that is the trial itself. The jury is the audience. Whether the audience applauds you with a verdict (you win) or throws tomatoes at you (you lose) will depend on how well you present both yourself and your version of the play. The version of the play that you present, of course, is your client’s version of the truth.

Ironically, your opposing counsel is presenting his or her own version of the same play (and their truth) and the Jury is watching both of them unfold in roughly the same time frame. Ultimately, they will applaud only one side’s presentation. They will only believe one side sufficiently to award their verdict.

The prevailing side’s version of the truth becomes, in the process, the truthful reality that is accepted by the Jury and on which they award their verdict.

In most courtrooms you will have three chances to communication directly with the Jury - voir dire, opening statement, and closing argument. You may also get a rebuttal argument, for a final and fourth opportunity. Each of those presents a uniquely different chance to communicate from the communication that will occur during the vast majority of the time that the trial will consumer each day. For that reason, the indirect communication that occurs during a trial must not be ignored. We'll talk more about that next time.

Ron Burdge

www.TheLawCoach.com

Helping lawyers win cases for over 25 years.