#350: The Art of Preparing for Trial with Special Guest Elizabeth Larrick

Read this episode: The Art of Trial Prep with Elizabeth Larrick

Dina Cataldo (00:02):

Hello, Elizabeth. It's so good to have you here on Be a Better Lawyer. Can you please let our audience know who you are and what you do?

 

Elizabeth Larrick (00:13):

Well, thank you so much for having me. Excited to be here. I am a former litigator turned trial consultant. Um, I live, work and play in Austin, Texas, but of course, help people all over to get perspective. I love to help people do focus groups, and I love to help people with challenging witnesses. Um, and even just from a big 30,000 foot view, help people organize and think through trial strategy.

 

Dina Cataldo (00:46):

I think that this is such a fun creation that you have in your business that you've done this because I worked in a totally different area, criminal prosecution, and we were really trying to get trials out as quickly as possible with the limited resources that we had. And that would mean quick turnarounds. It might mean that we don't really have a witness prep. And then of course, our witness preps are very different in a criminal prosecution context versus a civil context. So we're very like, it's, it's kind of a hands off yet. I want to make sure that you are presenting like <laugh>.

 

Elizabeth Larrick (01:26):

Yes.

 

Dina Cataldo (01:26):

Uh, someone who can say what needs to be said and do it in an honest way. But I love the idea of having somebody to consult with when you are litigating cases because there's so much you don't think of when you are getting prepared for trial. And it is a very different animal than doing things that are transactional. There are, yes, you might need another perspective when you're doing transactions, but I think in litigation there's so many moving parts and they can move pretty quickly that you need that extra set of eyes and that's something that you get to provide people who work with you. How did you get into this?

 

Elizabeth Larrick (02:13):

Well, I always wanted to be in the courtroom as a lawyer and always found, you know, having a jury decide a case. Really fascinating. Um, I always pursued that in, in my career in the sense of plaintiff's personal injury work is where I mainly went through for my job experience. And I had one pers experience in particular where I was able to work with a nationwide trial lawyer and to see trials, large trials on a large scale get done over the course of a year. So I got to come in as a lawyer and I got to, you know, do the things within courtroom, but also the strategy and the focus groups. And it really just lit me up on the inside. And I didn't really understand it at the time. I just knew I love this and I want to do more of this in my own practice.

 

Elizabeth Larrick (03:06):

And that's what I did. I, you know, opened my own law firm, started to do those things and found that like, it's exactly what you said, so much fun to me and kind of a burden for some other people that are working with <laugh>. And so that's how I started. I just started doing it on my own practice and, uh, collectively with other lawyers here in Austin. We were running focus groups and, and kind of helping each other out. And it just really kind of blossomed from there. And, you know, I took kind of the big leap and just said, okay, you know, I'm gonna start doing this full-time, um, and wind down my practice.

 

Dina Cataldo (03:38):

I think that's beautiful because it can be a scary thing when you are making money in one area and then you are deciding, okay, I am going to go all in on myself, all in on creating my own business. Like what came up for you as you were making that transition?

 

Elizabeth Larrick (03:59):

Well, when I decided to open my own law firm, I took about a month off. And that was, you know, years ago. And in that leap I made several mistakes about, you know, open your own business. And so I had a lot of background of relying on myself and understanding like, okay, it's okay to try this and you love doing this more. So I really had the perspective of a coach looking and saying like, you can do this. You can try this and, and here's what you know about yourself, you can rely on. And so it really, having looked at some of those other mistakes that I made when I went out on my own and was already kind of dependent, I knew, you know what, like this is something I can always fall back on. Like I know how to do it, but why not do this thing that is way more fun to you and seems easy to you and lawyers really love and appreciate, you know, giving an outside perspective and learning more about their case and how to teach others about their case.

 

Dina Cataldo (05:02):

Oh my gosh, there's two things that came up as you were talking about that the first is the mindset that you had going into that new endeavor. So important. And so many of us underestimate that. I know that before I had a coach, I really thought it was okay, I just need to grind and work hard. But so much of that when away and everything became easier when I got that mindset piece of, wait a minute, you can do this, and like you can feed yourself, fuel yourself with those kinds of thoughts to help you do the hard things. It calms everything inside of you so that you can do that work. So I'm really glad that you shared that. And then the other part of that is, is that this was very easy to you. It was something that was fun for you. And I think that as lawyers, we tend to get into this habit of believing that it's just hard that the things that we do, they're just hard all the time.

 

Dina Cataldo (06:02):

And then we've gotta kind of be kind of miserable a little bit. And that's just what it's like, that's what life is like. And it's really important that if you're experiencing that in, and maybe you weren't experiencing that, I'm not saying you were, but if you're experiencing something that's fun and easy on one hand and it's feels light and easy compared to maybe what you're doing right now, consider that it doesn't have to be hard. That that thing that is easy to you, right? If anyone's listening to this, that that thing that's easy for you is maybe the thing that you are supposed to be doing, that you're supposed to have out in the world. And that's very much how I felt about coaching when I started doing it. I could, I was just like, wow, look at the, look at the results. Look at what's happening with people. And it's fun. I enjoy it. It's fun. Yeah. And why not do that? So I just, I just think, I know this is about litigation, but I think this entrepreneurial resourcefulness and understanding yourself when you're building a business, I think is key. Even if you are litigating for a company, like to have those kinds of resourceful attributes for yourself. So good. So I'm glad you you brought those up. Yeah.

 

Elizabeth Larrick (07:20):

Anything else? Yeah, yeah. Well, I mean, just this, the whole working hard and that's exactly the perspective that I had when I, you're open a law firm, like it's time to grind it out. Like it is time to, you know, make as, make yourself, you know, as small as possible so you can put everything into the law firm. And, and it, you know, there was nothing wrong with it. It was totally working fine, like you said, but I had added this extra fun thing and I realized I spent so much more time on this fun thing <laugh> Yeah. Than I did litigating that I was like, you know, I wonder if, and I had, you know, been getting outside of perspective, but I think it's, we do as lawyers have that mindset, like it's just hard work. Get over. Yeah. It's supposed to be, it's supposed to be hard and some days are gonna, it's gonna, it's always gonna be an enjoyable.

 

Elizabeth Larrick (08:06):

And I just was like, but I have this thing that is fun, and if I get you involved and you get to watch like you come, the light comes on for so many lawyers when they sit and they watch other people talk about their case and they're just like, wow. And I always say, it's gonna spark so much more excitement for you about your case ideas. Like, things are gonna make be easier for you, especially if you're trying to case or gonna mediation or, you know, even if you're just doing this to figure out like, do we even really want to do this case? Um, it, it helps tremendously. Yeah.

 

Dina Cataldo (08:41):

And, and there were two things that came up for me there, which is one of course, perspective, right? Which is really what I think we're gonna focus most of our attention on here in this, in this episode together, is gaining that perspective that you may not have about your case, its strengths, its weaknesses, the witnesses that might be involved, right? So often we might go into a trial and not fully have prepped a witness or understood exactly the personality of a witness. And that personality is important to understand <laugh>. And so the, that's one aspect of it. But then the other is building confidence in yourself and when you have an understanding of the pitfalls to look out for and how you can approach them, even if you know your witness isn't gonna change their personality overnight, right? Like even if they have that, you can spin that kind of a thing for your trial. Like in your argument, you can spin personality in your argument. And I think that we might get caught up in, oh, they were a bad witness and you know, the jury's gonna hate them. And it's like, well, maybe they're not supposed to like your witness. Maybe that's part of the story that you need to share and be honest with and transparent with, with your jury. And when you have the confidence to address those things, I think it makes a big difference.

 

Elizabeth Larrick (10:09):

Huge. And that is definitely one of the biggest feedback points that I get from people when they're like, wow, I had so much more confidence after going through this focus group when I went to go take that expert deposition when I, when we went and actually, you know, turned down that offer. Like people will say like, I just had confidence because I had heard how other people were talking about it, and even if it was different, right? We always come in with our own perspective, you know, our own thoughts about how we think people are gonna talk about things. Mm-hmm <affirmative>. And as lawyers, we, we generally miss the mark 'cause we forget how regular people think <laugh>. So, right. It's, um, it's, it's one of those things where, you know, it's just like you said, people like, oh, it's okay if they don't like this witness. And I'm always like, yes, <laugh>, <laugh>,

 

Elizabeth Larrick (10:56):

Yes, it's okay. You know, if you don't like this witness, that's okay. Somebody on that jury may, and what they have to give is the most important thing you need to keep your eye on the ball about. And that's kind of where it's like, okay, how do we, here's our 30,000 view, you know, don't worry about this one witness that has a personality trait that mm-hmm <affirmative>. You may not be able to communicate well with, you know? Mm-hmm <affirmative>. As long as they get the nugget that they need from that person, like, you're good. Don't worry about it. You know, move on.

 

Dina Cataldo (11:26):

Yeah. It really is a game of putting pieces together when you're thinking about a trial, because yeah, they might say some other things that you don't particularly like, but if they say the thing that's relevant to what you're trying to prove up, that's all that matters.

 

Elizabeth Larrick (11:39):

Exactly. And I think sometimes we as control masters, <laugh>, you know, lawyers wanna control, uh, so many things, but the courtroom is like the wild, wild west. You, once you hit the go button, like you really have to lose and give a lot over to the jury. And, and if you don't get in that, uh, space often, it can really be very jarring. And that's why I really love focus groups to get you into that. It's the best place to learn how to hear things you don't like.

 

Dina Cataldo (12:08):

Oh, yeah. And keep

 

Elizabeth Larrick (12:10):

A straight face <laugh>.

 

Dina Cataldo (12:11):

Oh yeah. Like you have to have a poker face in trial. Right. You can't, you, you've gotta go in knowing that. Yeah. Just unexpected stuff might come out of their mouth and you're like, okay, let's work with that <laugh>.

 

Elizabeth Larrick (12:22):

Exactly. <laugh>. And I'm sure you pled that experience plenty where you're just like, that's not exactly what you told me before, but that's quite all

 

Dina Cataldo (12:30):

Right. Oh my gosh. You're like, oh my gosh. Yeah. Yeah. Um, so I wanna cover some of the biggest things you've seen that lawyers just miss. Like they come to you, they wanna understand their case better, they wanna understand if they have a case. What are some of the things that you see that they miss the most they're not really even looking for?

 

Elizabeth Larrick (12:55):

Yeah. And I would say, you know, naturally we all have blind spots. We just do. We can't take everything in. So, you know, it's just, I think naturally what I see lawyers missing is making assumptions. Mm. Like really making assumptions about how much people know about a topic or even understand. And when we make an assumption like that and we really begin to start to talk over the jury or over our witness, like mm-hmm <affirmative>. It really, it really causes a lot of confusion. And so a lot of times when people come to me and they'll say, well, I want to do this. And I say, well, I think we ought to check the assumption that people even understand like what that even is. Or that there's even a law against it <laugh>. So, right. Sometimes it's, it's kind of that assumptions about what we think, what we, you know, what we think people are gonna see or even understand.

 

Elizabeth Larrick (13:51):

And then all the time, one of the biggest things, somebody may have a piece of evidence, let's say nowadays it's very easy to have a ring camera footage or some surveillance footage, you know, and you have this assumption like, oh my gosh, this is the best piece of evidence. It's super clear, we don't have to worry about it. And I'm like, let's test that, because what you may see, nobody else may see. And so that's one of the really, you know, big things is like with video footage or even pictures like mm-hmm <affirmative>. Uh, that lawyers assume, oh, that's, that's cleared me. And I'm like, that may not be clear to somebody else.

 

Dina Cataldo (14:27):

Oh my gosh. Yeah. We would come across this quite a bit in, um, prison cases. 'cause I would try cases for, you know, we had, uh, CDCR, it's a California Department of Corrections here. And when there was a homicide, if there was an assault, those kinds of things, you'd have like a grainy video <laugh>. Right, right. And, and to us, 'cause we've seen these a million times, oh, we can see exactly what's happening. He is grabbing the shank. He's gonna, he's stabbing the guy <laugh>, like you can see it, right? But it's from a distance. It's not as if they have cameras on the yard. Right. Like they're from a distance from one of those, you know, um, turrets. So like when you're, you're getting that video, we can see it. And I had a case where I thought it was clear as day. I thought I walked them slight, you know, frame by frame even.

 

Dina Cataldo (15:14):

And had a witness, like really say, okay, here's frame by frame. This is what's happening by some massive coincidence. This guy walks away, drops, drops something, and that shank happens to be there, dropped away, and then this victim is stabbed. So it's like, how can you not see it? And it turned out when I, I found this out later that there was one juror who he heard everybody else saying like, I just don't think there's enough. Right. And some of that is like, should we even care about an inmate? And that's part of my job, right? Is to really like, talk about why this is wrong in any scenario. But there was one juror who fought and said, no, no, no, let's go back to the video. And I'm like, thank you for that one juror. But I thought it was all there, whereas 11 out of 12 at first couldn't get there. So I think that is so important that we get that perspective, because even if you think you are doing all the right things, there may be something that you could do to be able to explain it a little better, to bring attention to something a little bit more clearly in a closing argument, let's say. Even if it was just alluded to by a witness, and you go back and you think, oh, I really should have put more emphasis on this point. You can go back and clean some of that up.

 

Elizabeth Larrick (16:40):

Absolutely. And one of the things you, you nailed as well, that people assume is lawyers assume that jurors are gonna care about certain scenarios and they just, you know, we've definitely done focus groups on, on prison scenarios with, you know, very clear videos of people. Like, and it's just, it's really hard to get folks to care. And that happens more often than you think when it's comes down to litigation. And, you know, you kinda need people to be emotionally invested in order to make a decision, otherwise they're gonna sit back there and do the same thing you heard, which is like, well, <laugh>

 

Dina Cataldo (17:12):

Yeah. It's like, well, yeah. And it's really interesting. Like, jurors will do just about anything to get out of making a decision, <laugh>. And so thank you.

 

Elizabeth Larrick (17:23):

So please say that again. So many people don't realize about <laugh>.

 

Dina Cataldo (17:28):

I mean, if you just think about it with us, right? Like if you think about, oh, I'll, I'll do that thing later, right? Like, we'll always tell ourselves later, we're getting out of making a decision about right now. And if we're in a case and we're you say, a jury, a juror on a case, and you're not super invested in it, or you're not even really interested in it, then it's very easy to just say, eh, it doesn't really matter. So that's, it's important.

 

Elizabeth Larrick (17:55):

It's so important. And it's, I mean, it's, it kind of blows my mind sometimes. We, we ask a lot of our focus groups, you know, how much do you care what happened? Just to see like, do people really, you know, care? And I always tell folks when they get really low numbers, like, you, we need to do something else to to, to pump people up, to get them invested, you know? Mm-hmm <affirmative>. Even just a little bit <laugh>. Yeah. What happened?

 

Dina Cataldo (18:19):

You can weave a story, you know,

 

Elizabeth Larrick (18:21):

<laugh> Yes. That

 

Dina Cataldo (18:22):

That's what it's about, right? It's, it's about thinking about, I had this case where it was a, a bank fraud case, right? Where this guy was, you know, having people, he was having other people go to ATMs and cash fraudulent checks. And by the time you get the cash, you can't even trace it. It's like it's gone, right? It doesn't matter. It's out of the bank. So nobody cares. It's like a transactional thing, right? Nobody cares about it. It's like, oh, well the bank's insured, you know, nobody got hurt <laugh>. And it's like, no, I'm going in there and I'm like, look at this master manipulator. He manipulated these people, he got them to do his dirty work. Like you, you've gotta come up with something to grab attention and to really articulate that this does have gravity, that this is a, a, whether it's a crime, whether it's civil litigation, right? There's somebody, a real human that's impacted by what's going on.

 

Elizabeth Larrick (19:22):

Absolutely. And you know, it's, so many times we do focus groups and it feels very neutral and like we're not, and I'm just say, well, you know, when we actually do a little advocacy one, you'll see whether people really get invested or not, or you know, it's always, it, you're many, many times people, how do you inject the golden rule at all times? And I'm always like, well, you know, we get, you know, that's big. No, no, can't do that. Uh, but like you said, it's storytelling. Mm-hmm <affirmative>. It's, you know, there are so many other ways to do that. And that's kind of where just having a little bit of strategy, uh, really can go a long way to help you keep your eye on the target. Like we talked about. You got that witness with a bad personality. We just need that gem from them. We know we need this documented, and here's the thing that we need to know, that needs to be highlighted and more people need to talk about, you know? So it's, once you realize, you know, find some of these weaknesses, it's like, okay, let's make a plan around it. When we heard 12, eight people talk about it and tell us some feedback. Let's how do we squeeze that and, and understand that better?

 

Dina Cataldo (20:27):

Yeah. And I think along the line of what you were talking about in terms of how to really get people to care one, and then also not making assumptions. Another piece of that is sometimes you don't have the evidence that you want. Like, it's just not there. So for the cases that I would work, people always anticipated that there would be fingerprints. And I'm like, there's not always a fingerprint. And so even in jury selection, we've gotta think about what are they gonna want and what do we have <laugh> and how do we question the jury and kind of give them that heads up like, Hey, you don't need fingerprints to come to a guilty verdict if you've got all the other evidence. Right? <laugh>, like, if you've got other evidence that can point them in the direction that they need to go, they don't need everything. Like, tell me your thoughts around that and what your experience has been.

 

Elizabeth Larrick (21:25):

Absolutely. I think we call it the CSI effect. Oh, yeah. But I think everything has a video and everything.

 

Dina Cataldo (21:30):

I need to have a hair

 

Elizabeth Larrick (21:31):

<laugh>. Yeah. Ballistics always, you know? Yeah. It's just like, oh no, I mean, you know, these are, a lot of these are, they're car crashes, you know, nobody's like, you know, where are the, where are the skid marks and where are the, you know, <laugh>? It's just like, no one took a picture of that, you know? It's like, oh no. But you know, it happens, it happens all the time where people have this expectation, oh, well, surely I'm gonna see this. Oh, well definitely they're gonna have this. And you, and as a lawyer, you one, you get really wrapped up in meeting your legal burden. Burden, right? Mm-hmm <affirmative>. And, and you and you think, oh, I've got the facts. So it's totally, you know, and it's like, well, but you may have this other total bubble that's hanging out there that you need to either pop, we don't have it, but <laugh>, can we work with it? Or just say, okay, how do I work around this? And so we definitely see that all the time, especially when you have a commercial vehicle case every time they're like, well, where's the camera? Right? Because they expect

 

Dina Cataldo (22:27):

Everywhere, right?

 

Elizabeth Larrick (22:29):

The commercial vehicle has a camera on the inside, or somebody's got a camera that was, you know, well, where's the police? You know, dash cam footage, footage. And it's just like, uh, you know, so mm-hmm <affirmative>. There are definitely a lot of evidence expectations, and sometimes it's like, okay, do we talk about it? Because talking about it brings attention, right? <laugh>, and if you don't have something, do you wanna pay attention to that? Um, or does it, we have to talk about this and we have to think of, be creative about, you know, where it is or why it isn't there. Mm-hmm <affirmative>. And, um, it's, it's definitely one of those things where if we have a missing piece that we know people want or they tell us, Hey, we wanna see this and we say, don't have it, never gonna have it. Could you ever make a decision? I mean, that's where really in those focus groups, having those really small quality conversations goes such a long way for lawyers. 'cause you could have one focus group about this particular case, but you're gonna learn so much about how people think. Mm-hmm <affirmative>. You can take it along with you for all your cases after that.

 

Dina Cataldo (23:28):

Yeah. And I do wanna talk more about the focus groups, but I, I wanna ask you, because we have this come up all the time where it's essentially one person's testimony against another person's version of events. And oftentimes jurors are like, well flip a coin. So how do you approach those kinds of situations?

 

Elizabeth Larrick (23:50):

Yes. That is like, I mean, it's the death trap for, for car wreck cases, right? I mean, <laugh>, I mean, I, it it is, it is one of those, it is what is the hardest, one of the hardest cases to try as a car wreck case. It's a he said, she said, because people just exactly what you said, they flip a coin. Mm-hmm <affirmative>. Um, or they say it was no big deal. So, I mean, typically what, knowing that going in, it's like, okay, we know this going in that people already have this. So we have to either empower them with their decision making and they're having a role, or we need to help them understand, you know, that yeah, this, you may think this is a fender bender, but this is actually, you know, important key piece of storytelling, right? Mm-hmm <affirmative>. Um, and what we normally do is when we have a, he said versus she said, I know what the defense is gonna do.

 

Elizabeth Larrick (24:39):

'cause they do the same thing every time. But what I have to do as a plaintiff's attorney is get real creative with how do I back up my client's testimony with other things? And it, it can be as simple as literally a Google map. I mean, it's one of those things where we overlook it because we are, we're think, we're so focused on, it's just, it's the testimony, you know? And it's like, well, okay, but how do we back that up? Eyewitnesses the police, you know, even as simple as a, as a Google map, and really sometimes just being a, setting the sage very well, an opening statement can do a huge amount of credibility, lift that, so it's not just left on, oh, I have to decide between what these two people say, like <laugh>. Right? That makes it really hard for them. But if you really are in tune with, okay, this is truly a, he said, she said, how do I really frame, how do I give them so many more tools and lift that credibility up before we even get down to that battle that they're already, you know, they're already leaning one way.

 

Dina Cataldo (25:41):

Yeah. And I always like looking at what an amazing coincidence that this all ended up exactly. Like it ended up and always reminding the jury, there's no such thing as coincidences, right? So it's like, here's the breadcrumbs, let me put this in front of you, and there's no coincidence that this is the way the breadcrumbs lined up to point to opposing counsel's client <laugh>. Right? It's like, ah,

 

Elizabeth Larrick (26:08):

Right. So,

 

Dina Cataldo (26:09):

So important.

 

Elizabeth Larrick (26:10):

It is so important. And I think lawyers sometimes shy away from pointing out the obvious, this is not a coincidence. It's not magical that, you know, oh, definitely something happened the day after the rec to cause all this neck pain and this, you know, knee like mm-hmm <affirmative>. Oh, definitely. Right? Like, it just some magical, you know, so it's totally, sometimes you have to be so clear with pointing out the, here's all the other things. It's not a magical coincidence. And a lot of lawyers shy away from doing that.

 

Dina Cataldo (26:39):

Yeah. It, it's a step by step process really thinking about not only what you think happened, but what does opposing counsel, what are they gonna say that happened? What is the jury gonna extrapolate? Because the defense could argue one thing, or opposing counsel could argue one thing, and you could argue one thing, but the jury might come up with a totally different story. That's another thing is just to know they're thinking from a different perspective too, trying to come up with other plausible explanations. And so when they're in the jury room, you don't necessarily, it's not like you're in there able to focus their attention in the room. You've gotta do that in advance by closing off some of these avenues of thought.

 

Elizabeth Larrick (27:23):

Absolutely. And that's just kinda one of those things where, you know, they're gonna start off on a different point of view, and it maybe it matches your client, maybe it matches the, the opposing, but like, or maybe it's completely different. Like, you kinda always gotta be anticipating that and, and speaking to wherever it may be. You know, because if you, if you don't, and they're creating their own story, that's why I say like, if you leave holes, opposing counsel is gonna fill it. But jurors love to come up with all kinds of <laugh>, all kinds of good stories.

 

Dina Cataldo (27:53):

Yes, they do. Um, and this also runs some parallels for litigators listening, also listening to this step-by-step process as you're building your business, for those of you who run your own business, or you have people you're working with and you're directing them to do things, don't make assumptions about what they know. Really think about step-by-step step, what do you need to think of from a hundred thousand foot view? Like your employee is coming to this project for the first time. What do you need them to be thinking about? What do you need them to anticipate so that you can teach them how to think? It's, that's what I teach my clients when I'm, I'm helping them with that leadership aspect. And when you're doing litigation, it's the same thing. You really wanna think about that a hundred thousand view perspective of this is a juror's first introduction to this world. Maybe it's their first time in a courtroom and you are there as their guide to help them think like you do. 'cause you want them to think like you. What do you, what do you see as, um, like what comes up for you when I share that? I'm curious, like where that comes up in your practice.

 

Elizabeth Larrick (29:08):

Sure. Well, I think a hundred percent, we, again, going back to kind of assumptions we make as lawyers, as bosses, as people, running businesses that, that somebody else is gonna think like you. And it's, you know, again, having gone through several, you know, different, uh, versions of my business and, and, and you know, going from legal now, it's, it is always amazing to me how I make such assumptions of people who work for me that I'm just like, okay, I gotta just boil that back down because, you know, and it's always fascinating to stop and just check in and be like, okay. And then just, you know, ask a very open ended question and, and just what you get back, you're like, oh, I totally missed this whole thing. And it's explained to you. Um, you know, and so it definitely, you know, resonates with me in the sense of like, ah, sometimes we gotta go back to, to step one.

 

Elizabeth Larrick (29:58):

And also just knowing like, oh, that point of view tool mm-hmm <affirmative>. What point of view is that person coming in from what point of view do I have on this? What point of view does the judge and the jury like, it's, it's an, it's a wonderful tool to use no matter where you're sitting, whether you're preparing for a case or preparing to onboard a new, uh, client. 'cause they have to have the same, it's just they have the same wonderment and fascination and scaries about the legal world as, you know, a juror for the first time walking into a courtroom. Yeah. It's really helping people where they're at. And I think we lose that sometimes as lawyers because we get wrapped up in doing stuff with each other. <laugh>

 

Dina Cataldo (30:38):

Yeah. Discovery

 

Elizabeth Larrick (30:39):

And conferences and talking to the judge and, you know, going to our, you know, continuing CLE meetings and, and we get talking with each other. Then we kinda, oh wait. You know? And that's why there are definitely people who in their business, like just really shine at talking to clients, right? And it's like, oh, okay, know that you shine at that and then, you know, stick to it. And it's like, that's why one of the things that I know for me, like, oh, I can easily be neutral and reach out neutrally and get information and get more and listen well, and really learn to ask a better question. You know, get more out of that person. Whereas sometimes we lawyers with our, our cross examination minds, <laugh>, no, just end up cross examining people

 

Dina Cataldo (31:25):

<laugh>. And I think it's so important that we get out of that because I definitely had that mentality for a really long time. And boy that's fun when you have a relationship is being cross examined by a lawyer, <laugh>. But when you, when you're like, when you're in that work mode and you are work, work, work, and even if you feel very focused and you're, you're in your job doing the things, if you are not present to how you feel, whether you're feeling anxious or stressed out or anything like that, it is going to make your job harder no matter what area of your job. And if you are doing the, the work of discovery and all of the things, and you're a litigator, it's even more important that you become present because you've got these two competing things. Because when you're litigating a case, it takes all of your focus and your other cases don't go away. You've gotta really be able to manage your mind around time. You've gotta be able to manage your mind around different demands. And for me, it was really helpful learning that stuff and then coming away with a plan when I was in trial to help me function at my highest level because I needed to make a plan for all my other work, have that all squared away, and then a plan for me to take care of myself. 'cause I'm not gonna survive off of candy bars and sodas. I, good lord, I would never get

 

Elizabeth Larrick (32:57):

Crackers. Yeah.

 

Dina Cataldo (32:58):

Right. That was, that was definitely past me, not now me, but it's, it, you cannot have a thriving practice where you enjoy your life and your practice if you're not taking care of yourself. And I'm curious if that comes up in your practice where you, you need to have those kinds of conversations.

 

Elizabeth Larrick (33:18):

Absolutely. And you know, I think one of the dangerous, um, thoughts that is still kind of out there in the ether when it comes to plaintiff personal injury work is, or even, you know, employment and is you can go try a case by yourself. Mm-hmm. Go do it. No, you just need to do it. And it just, it, and I, he, I was there. I totally tried a case by myself and it was, it was, it was horrendous <laugh>. I mean, it was, it was terrible. But I, I walked out of that situation, I walked out of that courtroom and I just thought like, I did something so wrong. Like, and, and I didn't know, you know, it takes you a lot of awareness and more experience. But once I then tried cases and worked with other, you know, lawyers and had this other experience, I was like, oh, and then it, you know, then people said, never try a case by yourself.

 

Elizabeth Larrick (34:13):

Like, oh. And so when I hear sometimes just go do it, you just need to go try. You just go do this on your own. I'm just like, wow. That is not how we need to be practicing. And like, you need to make a total plan for, for yourself. And I always tell lawyers like, you know, I have a whole podcast episode on like, you need to plan like where you're eating lunch. Yes. Who's ordering lunch? You know, if you need to have a war room 30 days out, you rent a place, you find a place, you have one person in your whole team that's dedicated to your client for the entire time. So no matter what your client needs that, you know what I mean? Like, you have to plan around those things. But then also, like you said, you need to plan around, okay, if you know you're not gonna eat lunch, that's fine, but you gotta eat. You gotta have some kind of energy and like some kind of wind down time and mm-hmm. I feel like, you know, that's something that is really hard to teach trial lawyers because we have so much extra stuff that happens during trial and we just have been told like, just do it. You know,

 

Dina Cataldo (35:13):

It's very much the suck it up mentality that so many places teach us. But it is not, it doesn't have to be that way. And one thing while we're on this note is the planning that you're talking about, it starts when you get the file. Like when you get the file, this is when you can start marking times on your calendar, right. To get the war room right. Marking what needs to get done. In my case it was, okay, is this a victim sensitive case? Do I have a victim advocate assigned? Do I have communication with the client or the, with the victim? Like which witnesses do I need immediately start subpoenaing witnesses? 'cause I need to make sure I have correct contact information. I gotta make sure that they're available. Do I need to anticipate anything coming up? Like what's the evidence I'm gonna need? How much time am I gonna need to really make sure I have an evidence binder for myself? Like those kinds of things. So when you get a file starting with the plan of here's the checklist of the things I know I'm gonna need every single time I do a case, this is what I need to do or have my assistant do. So that is fundamental. Anything you would add to that?

 

Elizabeth Larrick (36:25):

No, I totally, I totally agree. And you know, we already as lawyers live, breathe, and die about our calendars. Like

 

Dina Cataldo (36:32):

If you use when you would be surprised at how many do not,

 

Elizabeth Larrick (36:36):

That's a good way to miss a hearing and get a <laugh>, get a nasty call.

 

Dina Cataldo (36:39):

It might mark a hearing, but they don't, they don't make the time to actually prep for the hearing. They're just like that.

 

Elizabeth Larrick (36:45):

What I mean by like, you know, if we, we live by our trial dates and our motion dates and our hearing dates, like, go ahead and make a checklist for please have you or your assistant put on like, again, like you said, prep time and a six month check in on the case. And Okay. Once we had this trial, because what I used to do is I had a check once we had a trial date. Mm-hmm. Here's the checklist that has to go in. And it was, you know, the six month out, the 90 days out. Like, and it wasn't just the witness list like you're saying, or subpoenas, it was more like, okay, prep time, think time.

 

Dina Cataldo (37:17):

Yes.

 

Elizabeth Larrick (37:17):

You know, yes. Do I have these, are these witnesses actually gonna say that? You know, like you said, like do I need to keep checking in and always having a team to help you do all those things and delegate <laugh>. Yeah. I mean that's a huge, a huge, and if, you know, if you have to get extra help, do it. Um, yeah. 'cause we can't do everything.

 

Dina Cataldo (37:37):

Yeah. I mean, we're not all, like, as a, as a criminal prosecutor, you don't necessarily have those kinds of resources, but as a litigator, you, you can do this in civil practice and oftentimes you have a ton of resources you're just not taking advantage of because you're not delegating big, big there. I wanted to ask you about focus groups and tell me more about them. How do you run them when an attorney comes to you and says, Hey, I'd like to run a focus group, or I'd like to think through this case. Like what do you talk to them about? How do, how does that relationship start?

 

Elizabeth Larrick (38:12):

Yeah, absolutely. Well, a lot of times people think focus group, they think automatically mock jury. Like that's kinda one of what synonymous. Um, and it is not the same thing. <laugh>. Okay. Um, and, and here's really why. You know, when I started to do them again, I was a solo practitioner. We gathered up, I had two other solos and we all brought our resources together, right? Somebody gave us the conference room, somebody brought the camera, you know, I got the people and we, and so it was very much, it's a very cost effective way to get a group of H 10 people. And then we would just run neutral statements about the case or maybe we had witness videos we need to show to get credibility thoughts on. But there really just small pockets of, you know, opinion marketing that you go and get and to help you really solve very targeted problems.

 

Elizabeth Larrick (39:01):

So a lot of people think, oh, focus groups, mock juries, they're just gonna tell you their probability of a win. Mm-hmm <affirmative>. Mock juries do that. Big data does that. But focus groups are so much more of a qualitative conversation, um, about a very specific issue or just, maybe it's just liability or maybe it's just the damages portion. Maybe it's just causation. And, and so when you have it in this kind of a smaller pocket, um, it makes it much more easier for people who were on solo teams, medium sized teams, small teams to put these together on their own. And 'cause that's how I started. And that's really where a lot of my business grew out of was, Hey, are you going to trial? I'm hosting a co come, I'll give you an hour this focus group, come on down and run your opening. Right?

 

Elizabeth Larrick (39:48):

And so once we hit the pandemic, everything went virtual. Mm. And so now it's even easier because we don't have to have a room, we don't have to pay people to eat. And all my participants love it. They never have to leave their house or their pajamas and they just hit zoom. Right? And they're just ready to, to work with you, uh, and tell you what they think. And so, um, that's really what it is, you know, a small qualitative group. And you know, we have a lot of flexibility with focus groups and that's why I love the concept of them versus thinking, oh, it's only a mock jury, right? Mm-hmm. The mock trees are a lot, they're a lot of work <laugh> Yeah. On lawyers and staff. And so this is a much smaller presentation, uh, a lot more focused on getting conversation and, and feedback.

 

Dina Cataldo (40:35):

Yeah. And I'm curious because I've heard both done, right? Like for some of my clients who are litigators, they do mock juries and it's the whole shebang. All the prep, they do the work and then it, it, maybe they get something out of it, you know, because they're getting some, some feedback. But I'm curious, like, because the focus group, when I hear you talk about it sounds like you are getting to have these deeper conversations with different perspectives. I'm just curious how you might compare the two.

 

Elizabeth Larrick (41:09):

Yeah, no, you, you nailed it. So with a mock jury, like I said, you're gonna have a large panel of people. 'cause you're putting together almost a whole case, you know, it's kind of abbreviated, right? But you're, you got both sides opening statements and witnesses and you're pulling them along the way. Paper votes most of the time. And then you have kind of this giant binder of data <laugh>, you know, but you don't really, you get to hear deliberation. Um, but you know, I've done mock juries where the deliberation, they just get in there and draw straws and you're like, oh my gosh, I just spent weeks preparing for this and you're drawing straws, uh, <laugh>. So you, you know, it's kinda soul crushing. Um, but you know, at the end of the day with the mock jury, it is, it's a, it's what's the probability of, of, of, of winning.

 

Elizabeth Larrick (41:54):

And with a focus group, you really dial back the information so that you can dial up the conversation, right? Yeah. So you just, maybe it's, I was talking to some folks today getting ready and um, you know, I always love to create a little PowerPoint for them and we talk through it and walk through it, what does it need? Um, but typically we try to look at, hey, we got an hour. Let's pick three things, okay. And then let's have them enough information to talk about these three things and then just see where the ponies go, right? Mm-hmm <affirmative>. If we have extra time, we'll talk about something else. But typically it's, they're open-ended questions, what do you think? Mm-hmm <affirmative>. Right? And then you, you, the nice thing about having it virtual or you're having small numbers even in person, is like, you have the ability to ask each person and you're not telling them now you have to agree with the person sitting next to you.

 

Elizabeth Larrick (42:42):

Nope. You don't have to. Right? It's, I tell people right off the bat, like, you don't need to agree. And so you really get eight or 10 different perspectives and you're gonna see where they agree and where they disagree and mm-hmm <affirmative>. And so when we talked about that, we don't have that piece of evidence, or maybe we have that piece of evidence, like we could spend a, you know, a good portion of us focus group maybe 30 minutes just talking about that, you know, and getting 10 different thoughts on it. And you would be so surprised at how invested and creative people will get for you. Like, well, why don't you do this instead? Or if you don't have that, ask this question. Like, it's so awesome when people, like, they love turning on that side of their brains because they're helping you solve a problem. People love helping people solve their other problems, not their own

 

Dina Cataldo (43:28):

<laugh>. Right?

 

Elizabeth Larrick (43:29):

So, uh, you know,

 

Dina Cataldo (43:31):

And I do think that, I mean, I have done, like in law school, we had the whole mock trial and I remember they, you watched the jurors deliberate and you're just like, okay, I don't understand what you're thinking about. I've had, uh, lawyers tell me, um, when I was practicing, like they came back out and they were talking about my clothes and what I was wearing. Like this is what I found out. Some of them were talking about. I'm like, oh my gosh. Like how, what are they doing sometimes is what you're wondering. But if you know the information that you need to present, then the other stuff doesn't matter, right? Like if you're, if you're watching a jury deliberate, they're gonna, they're gonna talk about 10 different things, maybe even unrelated to your case. But if you are getting things that are focused on information that is focused on what you need to know in order to best prove up your case, that is just extremely valuable. Valuable.

 

Elizabeth Larrick (44:31):

Absolutely. I mean, the best example I have is there's a individual I worked with this summer and she went to trial and she again is a solo. So she did just these little one hour here and there and there. And what she was able to gather from those focus groups is her opening statement had to have two things. If she got objections and couldn't get anything else out, as long as she got those two things in, she was good. Um, and you know, what do you think happened? Of course they objected and they shut her down on it and she was just like, persevered. I'm getting these two things in. Um, and what she was able to do is feel really confident knowing that's okay. Like, yeah. So, you know, having that calmness and having that confidence in the courtroom and being able to keep that poker face and just be like, I still got this <laugh>. Wow. It was, she said, it just, it really went so far and above and beyond any other trial she'd done of just having that, that confidence. And then, you know, she still used her opening statement. She couldn't get to, she put it in closing and she said, here's what I'm gonna show you that they wouldn't, didn't want you to know. You know, she <laugh> so she got

 

Dina Cataldo (45:34):

Nice.

 

Elizabeth Larrick (45:35):

Um, but yeah, I mean it's, you know, she discredits those focus groups, those little one hour focus groups to really help her hone in on the two things she needed outta the thousands she could have presented.

 

Dina Cataldo (45:48):

Yeah. So important not to waste tons of your time when you can focus in like that. Mm-hmm <affirmative>. When, what would you say is like your ideal person? Like the person that you love working with the most? The, the people who would be per a perfect fit for working in a focus group?

 

Elizabeth Larrick (46:08):

Um, I think lifetime learners and curious people are the best. <laugh>. I mean, 'cause um, there's always a piece of us as lawyers that's a little bit of a know-it-all. Uh, you know, I will raise my hand first. Um, but I think there's always a part of me that is always still very curious and always learning. And so you really have to be an o kind of an open-minded person to be able to sit down and allow a group of eight people to, you know, rip apart your case. Um, but I also love working with people like, you know, again, solo small firm because I get it. I was there. It's really hard when you have a tight budget and, and you're, you're, you can't do that big mock jury you wanna do, but you have this great case and you wanna make it the best possible.

 

Dina Cataldo (46:51):

Mm. Yeah. Okay. Beautiful. Now I wanna just wrap up by I offering you the opportunity to share any words of wisdom that maybe we didn't get an opportunity to, to bring out during this episode.

 

Elizabeth Larrick (47:06):

Sure thing. I think, um, you know, I always a big part of my podcast and a big part of what I always talk about is helping other people start their own focus group systems. Um, and so there's a lot of information on my website about that. There's even a download and you know, I just tried to really put all that information to one place in my podcast. But um, you know, that's probably the best thing that I would say is we didn't really talk about it's easy to do your own. And you know, especially with virtual and, and how people are really gravitate to that, it's very easy. That's one of the greatest things that came outta pandemic is all of our clients, all of our people, they get it. They know how to do it. You know, it's not a foreign concept to them. Um, and so that's just a resource I would really draw people to. If you are interested and you wanna know more, um, that is definitely, I just dropped two really long blogs, <laugh> on my website about how to do your own. There's a part one, part two, and each of those blogs has, uh, the download. I have a free web resource that people have access to, uh, just to get them started.

 

Dina Cataldo (48:11):

Awesome. Okay. So everything that you mentioned, I'm going to put in the show notes, but give us a plug for your podcast. 'cause the people listening to this are podcast listeners.

 

Elizabeth Larrick (48:20):

They are, yes. My podcast is trial lawyer prep. Um, I talk about focus groups, witness pep trial strategy, all these things on my podcast. And typically I'll have, um, folks who have gone through trial and used focus groups come in and just talk about their experience and how it helped, uh, just to give people a real life spin on things you can gather from a focus group.

 

Dina Cataldo (48:43):

I love it. And where can they connect with you on social media?

 

Elizabeth Larrick (48:48):

LinkedIn.

 

Dina Cataldo (48:48):

Perfect. All right. I will make sure to link to all of that in the show notes. And this has been a real pleasure getting to nerd out on trial strategy and talking about all this stuff. 'cause I don't talk to hardly anyone about it anymore. There's the occasional things that come up in my coaching practice, but really, we talk a lot about business and growing business, but getting to have the opportunity to really chat it up around this topic is so much fun. So thank you for being here and helping me learn nerd out a little bit.

 

Elizabeth Larrick (49:19):

Oh, well, thank you for having me on the podcast and, and I love nerd outing on this stuff. I mean, it is, we could go on, I'm sure for a whole nother hour talking about Oh yeah. Funny stories and <laugh>, you won't believe what happened. You know, kind of a thoughts. But yeah, it is definitely, uh, it's definitely been fun. So thank you so much.

 

Dina Cataldo (49:36):

Thank you.