EP 52: The Role Focus Groups Play in Catastrophic Cases

The Role Focus Groups Play in Catastrophic Cases

Welcome to the catastrophic comeback podcast with American Injury Lawyer Clark speaks, helping you find hope, purpose and joy after a catastrophic injury.

Welcome back to catastrophic comeback. I'm continuing my conversation with Jeff Watson managing partner at speaks law firm. Jeff, I want to talk to you about the role of focus groups. And in this process, we've been talking about case value. My opinion is that focus groups are not, not for the purposes of assessing value they can help with with some stuff, but but the purpose of focus focus groups in my, in my opinion is, is to see how juries are going to react to crucial issues in the case of, you know, the idea of liability, the idea of contributory negligence, the idea of gross negligence, those kinds of things. If there's a specific fact about a defendant, if there's a specific fact about a plaintiff, that, you know, make that person, you know, for example, for plaintiff was, if a defendant if a person who caused the accident was drunk at the time, how are they going to? How is the jury going to react to that type of information? What's your impression of focus groups? Are they helpful? Are they not helpful? How are they best used?

Well, you know, you don't want to use them on every case, because there's an expense to them, obviously, you know, if it's a case that's doesn't have a huge value, you because of the client a lot of money for something that you should be able to figure out on your own. But when it's one of these catastrophic cases, and you're trying to, you know, all the details, right, the devils in the details, we've all heard that phrase before, you know, some of these details can sway the case, this side and other other detail may sway it way back over here. So we're trying to figure out what you know, what's, what's the jury going to react to what what matters to them, like, we'll get a a group of people that are in the county where we're going to try the case, that's important, because if you just get a group of people from all over the place, you might have somebody from California that thinks the case is worth 20 million, because it is worth 20 million out there. But in South Carolina, it's worth 1 million, you know, because they're just more conservative, you know, folks there so, you know, we try to get jurors are these sort of mock, you know, focus group, folks, just everyday people, and a different collection of them, you know, different folks, men, women, you know, different races and backgrounds. And you know, we've tried to get a smattering. So we can kind of see how everybody reacts from their different perspectives. We'll have one lawyer, played, you know, the defense lawyer, one player, a plaintiff's lawyer for the injured person, and we won't tell them, we're from the same firm, and, you know, they'll actually sort of many try the case in front of this focus group, and see how they react.

So usually you and I, just to educate our audience, you and I are not actually playing a role of either plaintiff's lawyer or defendants lawyer. We're sort of sitting back taking notes watching how these mock jurors is this focus group is reacting to this, these different pieces of information, and then we're able to ask questions at the end to elicit their opinions about these these issues. And so, I mean, my impression of of those focus groups is that they, and I'm thinking of a couple of examples here recently, where, you know, the, the defense was making his banging on the table about, you know, this contributory negligence, and, you know, this is, you know, and we even had some division in our own office about opinions about, hey, how big of a problem was contributory negligence for us, but this focus group helped us really understand that issue and how a jury how the jury might ultimately resolve that issue. Do you agree with that?

Yeah. I mean, the, the jury, some of the jury found contributory negligence, but what they, what they ultimately and most of them did not, what they ultimately found was or we ultimately saw was, it wasn't really a big issue for these people, even the ones that found contributory negligence weren't going to deny our client, the money that they were after, and the verdicts that they came back with were significantly higher than than we thought. And it also, you know, they also found gross negligence, which was an issue in our own office where there have been some division Well, we shouldn't add gross negligence, maybe we should add it, you know, we decided to add it. You know, that was primarily you and I that wanted to add that in there. And it made a difference, like the jury found gross negligence on behalf of this so I was able to call the the lawyer up and say, We just did the focus group on this and here's what they found. They found gross negligence, punitive damages contrib, they just blew right over that, like, you know, if we try this case, this is what's going to happen, you guys gonna be hit with big verdict. And it Matt, you know, he he knew I've known him for a long time, you know, several decades and he knew if I was telling you this, it was accurate information and, and it it mattered, you know, in some of the things that we did in that case, he actually came back to me and said, these things that you did this focus group, this adding punitive damages, this expert, you know, these things that you did probably added a million dollars worth of value on this case, told me that the defense lawyer told me that,

so we're coming back to character, which I think is important and all of this and, and that is, you know, there's a couple of places where character matters in this case, do you, when you ultimately make a decision to add an ad to do a focus group, you have to have the character to be responsible with your clients resources? Is that a good use of money? Or is that not because ultimately, that's going to be expense to the case? The other thing is, when you say to another lawyer, hey, this is what we our focus group told us, and then and then, and then that lawyer accepts that, you know, that's an indication of a reputation that's built over many, many decades of if I say something is the truth, right, you know, and, and I will say, also, with respect to the lawyers, I'm trying to think if there's an exception to this, but I don't think that there is that do these, these high end cases, these very complex, very difficult injury cases, these cases that are catastrophic injuries, life changing injuries, multimillion dollar cases, you know, if the character is strong on the other side, too, I mean, we don't do the same work, but the people that do those kinds of things, and I can think of probably 2020 25 lawyers in North Carolina that defend these kinds of cases. And, really, it's the same five that we see over and over again, but but but but but still, I feel the same, I feel the same way about those guys, if they tell me something is the truth,

they're high character as well. And they're good at what they do. And, you know, there's so many nuances, these focus groups, like, you know, I was thinking back to a recent case that we did, and there were some phrases that our lawyers used when they were doing their opening statement of their closing statement. And I remember the jurors talking about and, like, those phrases kept coming up. And so sometimes it was bad. Like that phrase, like, we were, like, taking this like, don't use. Other times, it was good, like, they really latched on to that, like, yeah, that needs to be front and center, what we're saying. And then it was also different results, like we were able to, you know, look at and say, okay, all the white females sort of went this way with it, you know, all the African American males sort of went this way with it all the, you know, the older folks went this way, all the younger folks went, you know, and so you can sort of see, now you're starting to see, okay, well, here's what I want in my jury, like, I don't want this in my jury, because that's, that's a, that's gonna be a problem for my client, you know, and so you're able to, there's all these little nuances we can determine in his focus groups is pretty good.

You can't you can't make jury selections based on best based on race, but But your point is well taken in. And so I remember, early in my career, I remember going to a trial skills. You know, like a continuing education kind of workshop thing, it was like a week long thing at Duke. And I remember going through this, and, and we, when we put on our trials, or whatever, and then we, we were able to sit back in another room and watch them deliberate. And I saw that exact scenario play out. And that's the first place I'd seen this where, where the young person saw the whole case, through the eyes of the young witness, the old person saw the whole case, through the eyes of the old witness, the male saw the case through the middle aged male saw the case through the eyes, you know what I mean? And everybody sort of picked the person who looked like them the most. And sort of that was there a starting place for the case. And I thought that was absolutely fascinating. And I think we see a lot of that same thing play out in these focus groups when we use them. And that helps us be able to assess how these things are going to play out in front of a diverse jury when we get to when we get to court, which in turn helps us give good quality, comprehensive information to plaintiffs who then might make the best decision for themselves and for their family. So I find these focus groups to be unbelievably valuable. And if the financial, you know, criteria is there to so it makes sense for the client, then I think they're absolutely critical to the whole process. Thank you, Jeff. I appreciate you talking to me about that. And we'll continue with another topic next. Thank you for joining us, and we'll see you next time.

The Role Focus Groups Play in Catastrophic Cases

Welcome to the catastrophic comeback podcast with American Injury Lawyer Clark speaks, helping you find hope, purpose and joy after a catastrophic injury.

Welcome back to catastrophic comeback. I'm continuing my conversation with Jeff Watson managing partner at speaks law firm. Jeff, I want to talk to you about the role of focus groups. And in this process, we've been talking about case value. My opinion is that focus groups are not, not for the purposes of assessing value they can help with with some stuff, but but the purpose of focus focus groups in my, in my opinion is, is to see how juries are going to react to crucial issues in the case of, you know, the idea of liability, the idea of contributory negligence, the idea of gross negligence, those kinds of things. If there's a specific fact about a defendant, if there's a specific fact about a plaintiff, that, you know, make that person, you know, for example, for plaintiff was, if a defendant if a person who caused the accident was drunk at the time, how are they going to? How is the jury going to react to that type of information? What's your impression of focus groups? Are they helpful? Are they not helpful? How are they best used?

Well, you know, you don't want to use them on every case, because there's an expense to them, obviously, you know, if it's a case that's doesn't have a huge value, you because of the client a lot of money for something that you should be able to figure out on your own. But when it's one of these catastrophic cases, and you're trying to, you know, all the details, right, the devils in the details, we've all heard that phrase before, you know, some of these details can sway the case, this side and other other detail may sway it way back over here. So we're trying to figure out what you know, what's, what's the jury going to react to what what matters to them, like, we'll get a a group of people that are in the county where we're going to try the case, that's important, because if you just get a group of people from all over the place, you might have somebody from California that thinks the case is worth 20 million, because it is worth 20 million out there. But in South Carolina, it's worth 1 million, you know, because they're just more conservative, you know, folks there so, you know, we try to get jurors are these sort of mock, you know, focus group, folks, just everyday people, and a different collection of them, you know, different folks, men, women, you know, different races and backgrounds. And you know, we've tried to get a smattering. So we can kind of see how everybody reacts from their different perspectives. We'll have one lawyer, played, you know, the defense lawyer, one player, a plaintiff's lawyer for the injured person, and we won't tell them, we're from the same firm, and, you know, they'll actually sort of many try the case in front of this focus group, and see how they react.

So usually you and I, just to educate our audience, you and I are not actually playing a role of either plaintiff's lawyer or defendants lawyer. We're sort of sitting back taking notes watching how these mock jurors is this focus group is reacting to this, these different pieces of information, and then we're able to ask questions at the end to elicit their opinions about these these issues. And so, I mean, my impression of of those focus groups is that they, and I'm thinking of a couple of examples here recently, where, you know, the, the defense was making his banging on the table about, you know, this contributory negligence, and, you know, this is, you know, and we even had some division in our own office about opinions about, hey, how big of a problem was contributory negligence for us, but this focus group helped us really understand that issue and how a jury how the jury might ultimately resolve that issue. Do you agree with that?

Yeah. I mean, the, the jury, some of the jury found contributory negligence, but what they, what they ultimately and most of them did not, what they ultimately found was or we ultimately saw was, it wasn't really a big issue for these people, even the ones that found contributory negligence weren't going to deny our client, the money that they were after, and the verdicts that they came back with were significantly higher than than we thought. And it also, you know, they also found gross negligence, which was an issue in our own office where there have been some division Well, we shouldn't add gross negligence, maybe we should add it, you know, we decided to add it. You know, that was primarily you and I that wanted to add that in there. And it made a difference, like the jury found gross negligence on behalf of this so I was able to call the the lawyer up and say, We just did the focus group on this and here's what they found. They found gross negligence, punitive damages contrib, they just blew right over that, like, you know, if we try this case, this is what's going to happen, you guys gonna be hit with big verdict. And it Matt, you know, he he knew I've known him for a long time, you know, several decades and he knew if I was telling you this, it was accurate information and, and it it mattered, you know, in some of the things that we did in that case, he actually came back to me and said, these things that you did this focus group, this adding punitive damages, this expert, you know, these things that you did probably added a million dollars worth of value on this case, told me that the defense lawyer told me that,

so we're coming back to character, which I think is important and all of this and, and that is, you know, there's a couple of places where character matters in this case, do you, when you ultimately make a decision to add an ad to do a focus group, you have to have the character to be responsible with your clients resources? Is that a good use of money? Or is that not because ultimately, that's going to be expense to the case? The other thing is, when you say to another lawyer, hey, this is what we our focus group told us, and then and then, and then that lawyer accepts that, you know, that's an indication of a reputation that's built over many, many decades of if I say something is the truth, right, you know, and, and I will say, also, with respect to the lawyers, I'm trying to think if there's an exception to this, but I don't think that there is that do these, these high end cases, these very complex, very difficult injury cases, these cases that are catastrophic injuries, life changing injuries, multimillion dollar cases, you know, if the character is strong on the other side, too, I mean, we don't do the same work, but the people that do those kinds of things, and I can think of probably 2020 25 lawyers in North Carolina that defend these kinds of cases. And, really, it's the same five that we see over and over again, but but but but but still, I feel the same, I feel the same way about those guys, if they tell me something is the truth,

they're high character as well. And they're good at what they do. And, you know, there's so many nuances, these focus groups, like, you know, I was thinking back to a recent case that we did, and there were some phrases that our lawyers used when they were doing their opening statement of their closing statement. And I remember the jurors talking about and, like, those phrases kept coming up. And so sometimes it was bad. Like that phrase, like, we were, like, taking this like, don't use. Other times, it was good, like, they really latched on to that, like, yeah, that needs to be front and center, what we're saying. And then it was also different results, like we were able to, you know, look at and say, okay, all the white females sort of went this way with it, you know, all the African American males sort of went this way with it all the, you know, the older folks went this way, all the younger folks went, you know, and so you can sort of see, now you're starting to see, okay, well, here's what I want in my jury, like, I don't want this in my jury, because that's, that's a, that's gonna be a problem for my client, you know, and so you're able to, there's all these little nuances we can determine in his focus groups is pretty good.

You can't you can't make jury selections based on best based on race, but But your point is well taken in. And so I remember, early in my career, I remember going to a trial skills. You know, like a continuing education kind of workshop thing, it was like a week long thing at Duke. And I remember going through this, and, and we, when we put on our trials, or whatever, and then we, we were able to sit back in another room and watch them deliberate. And I saw that exact scenario play out. And that's the first place I'd seen this where, where the young person saw the whole case, through the eyes of the young witness, the old person saw the whole case, through the eyes of the old witness, the male saw the case through the middle aged male saw the case through the eyes, you know what I mean? And everybody sort of picked the person who looked like them the most. And sort of that was there a starting place for the case. And I thought that was absolutely fascinating. And I think we see a lot of that same thing play out in these focus groups when we use them. And that helps us be able to assess how these things are going to play out in front of a diverse jury when we get to when we get to court, which in turn helps us give good quality, comprehensive information to plaintiffs who then might make the best decision for themselves and for their family. So I find these focus groups to be unbelievably valuable. And if the financial, you know, criteria is there to so it makes sense for the client, then I think they're absolutely critical to the whole process. Thank you, Jeff. I appreciate you talking to me about that. And we'll continue with another topic next. Thank you for joining us, and we'll see you next time.