Confessions of a Washington Trial Attorney l Kirkland Injury Attorney Max Meyers

As a Kirkland Personal Injury Trial Attorney I most often represent people making claims against another driver.  A typical personal injury case has three phases: 1) client treating injuries, 2) pre-litigation negotiations, and  3) litigation.  My job as a plaintiff's trial attorney centers on my litigation skills and experience.  However, there is another factor that I see coming into play more and more, my gut.  In a recent case my gut reaction on the first day of trial was so strong I felt nauseas.

You often here the phrase "Go with your gut" when faced with a difficult decision.  As a young trial attorney that seems crazy, lawyers only go with what they know for a fact.  Lawyers after all do not ask questions in trial that they do not know the answer to already, right!?  Well at least that's the mindset.  Nothing is left to chance or instinct when it comes to trial.

I generally agree with this thinking when it comes to the nuts and bolts of preparing your case for trial.  However, your gut instinct can come into play along the way.

Recently I had a case going to trial.  It was a dispute between two former friends over ownership of certain objects.  In this particular case I was representing one of the defendants in the lawsuit.  There were many ill feelings between the former friends.  One side claimed the other was basically a thief while the other claimed the disputed property was given in trade for work performed. 

Documents were exchanged, depositions were taken, and witnesses were interviewed.  Settlement negotiations in the case had never been fruitful  because of the polarized positions and hurt feelings of the parties.  However, after gathering all of the facts and evidence I strongly recommended my client settle the case.  My client made a small settlement offer in the days before trial but it was refused with no counter offer.  Meaning we were going to trial.

Any trial attorney will tell you that preparing for a trial is a hugely time consuming and stressful endeavor.  Late nights and early mornings are very common in the days leading up to trial.  This case was no different in that respect, but there was something different in how I felt physically. 

As I worked on my cross exam of the adverse party the night before the trial I began to feel a knot in my stomach.  I knew the case would be difficult to win, I thought we had maybe a 50/50 shot depending on which witness showed up and what each of them said.  I wrote it off as normal stress of the case.  The next morning I woke up feeling sick to my stomach, which was not normal.  Normally I have pre-trial jitters because of the adrenaline pumping in anticipation of the start.  But this time it was different.

I knew I wasn't sick with the flu or anything like that, instead it was the trial.  This is a difficult thing for me to admit and no attorney wants to acknowledge in the moment before walking into court on day one of trial, but my gut was telling me that we were going to lose.  No question, absolutely lose.

This had never happened to me in over eleven years of trial work.  The feeling did not pass and as I sat with my client outside the courtroom in the hallway.  I was left with a decision.  Do I tell him or not?  Of course you do, I confided in my client that I felt deeply troubled that he was making the wrong choice to proceed to trial and we should make one last attempt to settle the case.

Luckily, my client trusted me as his lawyer and friend to give sound advice, which in this case was based on a very strong gut reaction.  We made a last minute settlement offer and were able to work out a decent settlement literally at the front door of the courtroom minutes before the trial was to begin.  I later heard the other party calling their witnesses and telling them not to come, two of which would have in all likelihood doomed my client.

Lesson learned, when your gut tells you something in such strong terms, Listen! 

Max Meyers, Esq.

Sotomayor Confirmed as New U.S. Supreme Court Justice l What Can We Expect?

Justice Sonia Sotomayor was confirmed by the U.S. Senate yesterday clearing the last real hurdle to taking a seat on the U.S. Supreme Court.  She will join Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg as the second woman on the bench.  So what influence on the court can we expect from Sotomayor?

Sotomayor will be the first Hispanic and diabetic justice on the court.  A diabetic since childhood she takes daily insulin shots to manage her disability.  She grew up poor in an inner city housing project and is not a wealthy person now.  She is a divorcee without any children but a close extended family.  All agree she is extremely intelligent, graduated 1st in her class from Princeton, and recently was a law professor at UNLV. 

So what does her background tells about future rulings?  Well, it's not hard to guess that the ADA definition of "disability" may get a more broad interpretation than it has now.  She lives with a daily disability and knows what it's like to make your way through life with limits other people may not experience.  She calls herself an affirmative action baby, and we can expect her to find affirmative action is a good law worthy of continuing.  As a member of a minority there may also be an opportunity to influence racial employment related laws, where I would expect to see opinions for expanding or confirming current protections for minorities.

The confirmation hearings have touched very little on her actual viewpoints regarding some hot button issues in the news.  Abortion views are always a hot button issue and I would be shocked if Sotomayor was not a pro-choice supporter.  However, if she turns out to be pro-life, we could see Rowe v. Wade go down in flames.  Many people will be waiting on pins and needles for this one.

Sotomayor should be sworn in in September.  It will be interesting to see how the U.S. Supreme Court shapes up with Sotomayor in the mix.

Seattle Federal Court Jury Swayed By Wife of Cop Juror in Shooting Case

The plaintiff Nicomedes Tubar in a civil-rights case in Federal Court in Seattle has obtained as many as six sworn statements from jurors in a cop shooting case recently decided against Mr. Tubar.  Mr. Tubar was shot by Officer Jason Clift during the investigation of a stolen-car report.

The six juror statements detail how one of the jurors, who was married to a police officer, referenced the fact her husband was a police officer and the training, shooting skills and other procedures he received as a policeman.  U.S. District Judge John Coughenour has been asked to throw out the jury verdict and find in Mr. Tubar's favor, or grant a new trial.

This case is troubling for a trial attorney like myself.  I often tell my clients that you never know what a jury is going to do once behind the closed doors of the jury room.  Juries are given instructions by the judge on what rules they must follow in deciding the case, and for the most part jurors to their very best to follow those rules.  However, on rare occasions a juror with special knowledge may ignore those rules and the judge's instructions and push their own improper agenda on the other jurors.  When this happens it is called juror misconduct.  If that juror is successful in influencing the other jurors improperly the entire trial becomes tainted and a new trial is often needed.

Juror misconduct is a serious problem.  Our system of justice relies on the rule of law.  We trust jurors will uphold and follow the legal rules required in deciding a court case.  If a jury does not do this, then the jury trial is unfairly undermined and our entire system of justice begins to fail.

The U.S. Constitution guarantees a right to a jury trial.  It's a founding principle of our justice system.  As a U.S. citizen great trust and responsibility is place in you when called to be a juror.  You are the foot soldier and foundation of American justice.  If you ignore the rules set in place by our elected officials then our country's foundation begins to crumble.  That is why it is so important in each and every case everything is done to make sure the jury deliberations are conducted properly.

This case is still developing and it will be interesting to see what Judge Coughenour decides to do.