Becoming a Better Trial Lawyer by Acting the Part
People with big egos often find the simple task of listening to be a challenge (if you doubt that, talk to the spouses of the trial lawyers you know).
June 03, 2019 at 05:13 PM
7 minute read
“This scene is about sex. The whole play is about sex. Act like it.”
That was certainly one of the more unconventional pieces of career advice I heard during my journey towards becoming a better trial lawyer.
A few weeks earlier, I had begun a 'scene study' acting class at HB Studios in Greenwich Village. While not exactly the most typical route towards trial proficiency, learning to act has helped me immeasurably in the courtroom.
My journey towards acting started with Michael Cowen's fabulously informative “Trial Lawyer Nation” podcast. Cowen, a renowned trial lawyer in his own right, interviews leading plaintiffs' lawyers and trial consultants about both innovative and time-tested winning strategies (with a fair amount of war stories thrown into the mix). In one episode, he spoke to trial consultant David Ball about using acting techniques to help attorneys seem less like actors in front of juries. Intrigued, I picked up Balls' book “Acting Tips and Strategies for Trial Lawyers.”
While anything by Ball is a must read for any trial lawyer worth her salt (see “On Damages”), “Acting Tips” is well worth your time. From more commonplace pieces of advice like 'never let a podium get between you and a jury' to some of the best advice on how to successfully voir dire I have ever read, “Acting Tips” is full of valuable gems.
But if I really wanted to “lose the act,” I knew I needed to take the next step and actually dive into the arts.
Coincidentally, my trial practice professor from law school wrote the introduction to Balls' book. After a few emails, I was introduced to Ball who kindly recommended Jim Boerlin, an acting coach at HB Studios. Within days, I was enrolled in a ten-week scene study class that met once a week after work.
During my first day of classes, the initial order of business was loosening up. Apparently, that meant dashing from one end of the studio to the other while pretending to walk across piping hot sand.
As I pranced about the room in a full suit like an idiot, I thought I had foolishly spent a not insignificant amount of money on a mistake. Making matters worse, I had failed to read the fine print on the class description which called for four full hours of rehearsal outside of class each week on top of the three-hour class– an onerous commitment for an already busy lawyer.
Then Jim assigned me my first scene. It was from Richard Painter's “The Lover.” My acting partner and I were a married couple with an odd arrangement where the husband also role-played as his wife's paramour. As you may have guessed, the play is quirky and definitely kind of weird. The exercise eventually led to to the aforementioned sage piece of advice.
I loved it. Acting is, quite simply put, a lot of fun. Moreover, the benefits to the modern trial lawyer are clear.
In order to play your part on stage, you must listen for your cue. That involves, well, listening. As a general rule, your typical trial lawyer is extroverted but egotistical. To an extent, he must be. To take on all of the responsibility that your client has trusted in you and present a case passionately and convincingly during a very public contest takes a great deal of self-assuredness. However, people with big egos often find the simple task of listening to be a challenge (if you doubt that, talk to the spouses of the trial lawyers you know).
When acting, you never say your line before your fellow actor delivers hers. If you fail to do so, the scene falls apart. The result is that an actor is completely focused on his partners' words and actions.
This single-mindedness translates to the courtroom. How many good cross-examinations have been foiled by a trial lawyer too preoccupied with her next question to pay attention to the speck of gold a witness has just given? Instead of digging a little deeper to find the mother load, the trial lawyer marches along with her prepared script.
This happened to me on my last trial before I started my scene study class. On the cross-examination of a business owner, I came very close to missing his admission that the defendant now trains employees to avoid the very practices that resulted in my client's injury. Astoundingly, I moved on to my next prepared question without stopping to appreciate the gravity of his answer. I was so caught up in trying not to look silly in public, I initially stuck to the script despite hearing some of the best evidence to come out at trial.
While evidence of post-remedial repair and training are generally not admissible for policy reasons, the witness had blown open the door on his own. It took me a full additional question and answer by the time I realized that the witness just gave me gold and circled back. However, defense counsel also had time to prepare and was up in arms with objections that the court sustained.
Thankfully, the judge allowed me to sum up on the admission of post-remedial training, and I obtained a favorable verdict. But by not listening fully to the witness' answer before moving onto my next question, I did miss the opportunity to dig up even more gold on the subject.
With acting, you are taught never to march forward blindly with your script. Each time you practice a scene, it's different. That's because even the best actors cannot replicate each and every detail of an interaction with another person. So the actor learns to listen. Really listen. By listening (and reacting) to your partner's lines, you allow your audience to experience a novel, organic scene even if you've rehearsed it with your partner(s) a hundred times before.
When you inquire at trial, never look down at your notes before the witness has finished answering. Maintain eye contact the entire time. You may miss vital testimony if you step away from the task of listening prematurely. Better yet, try not to look at your notes at all. If you are prepared and know the evidence in the case, you won't need to check your notes very often. You likely know your 'script' better than you think.
If you are truly script dependent, try whittling down your script from fully formed questions to bullet points. The best bullet point is a single word or phrase to remind you of the question. That way if you are truly lost, you can reference the bullet points to find your place without engaging in the most dangerous habit of all: reading. It should go without saying that reading during examination should almost never be done unless you are reading impeaching statements or refreshing someone's recollection. There are not many more effective ways to put a juror to sleep than reading. You might as well sing a lullaby instead.
Taking an acting class can also help you with your law practice outside of trial work. I have noticed a marked improvement with my depositions. I hold eye contact for longer, taking care to hear and appreciate every word of each answer and every facial expression that accompanies each word.
My improved active listening skills haven't hurt my marriage either.
Whether you want to become a great trial lawyer or just improve your depositions, listening is imperative. But it takes lots of practice. Though unconventional, acting offers one of the best ways to do so.
Stephen D. Wagner is an associate in the law offices of Louis Grandelli.
|This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllLong Island Midsize Firm and Managing Partner Sued for Sexual Harassment, Discrimination
6 minute readKing & Spalding Adds Veteran Antitrust Litigator From White & Case in New York
3 minute readTroutman Pepper Accused of Inattentive Case Management in $59M Malpractice Suit
7 minute readTrending Stories
- 1'A Horrible Reputation for Bad Verdicts': Plaintiffs Attorney Breaks Down $129M Wrongful-Death Verdict From Conservative Venue
- 2Where Do All the Prompts Go? Generative AI and the Genesis of a New Emerging Data Paradox
- 3Pa. Jury Returns $4.2M Verdict in Medical Marijuana Program Dispute
- 4Impact of New NYS Workers’ Compensation Work-Related Stress Relief on Discrimination Claims
- 5K&L Gates Secures $10.5M Verdict for Washington Meat Retailer in Lawsuit Over 'Boneless' Chicken Product
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250