This post was written by Douglas Keene: "By now we all know to tell jurors a story. Articles like this one from Neuromarketing Blog are really not news to us. Tell a story and your sales pitch (or your argument) is more persuasive. Ho-hum. Old news. But here's some news you may not know.

Wear red.

Why? When? And isn't that too bright for the courtroom? So many questions.

Here's what the research says..."

Continue reading this interesting post by clicking on the author's name.

This post was written by Allison Shields: "In this electronic age, lawyers can encounter potential clients in more places and in more ways than ever before. Many lawyers will speak with potential clients by telephone rather than requiring the prospective client to come in to the office for an initial consultation.

More and more often, the lawyer never meets the potential client. But even when the lawyer does meet with the prospective client in person, there is potential for miscommunication and misunderstanding..."

Topics discussed include:

When to use a non-engagement letter

What to include in a non-engagement letter

Avoiding unintended representation

Continue reading this interesting post by clicking on the author's name.

Source: Lawyerist.com, 11 March 2010. © 2007-2010 Lawyerist Media, LLC. Reproduced with permission of the site editor, Sam Glover.

Podcast description from the site: "In this edition of the ESI Report, host Gina Jytyla, Managing Staff Attorney in the Legal Technologies division at Kroll Ontrack, welcomes Doug Cohen, Senior Director of Business Development for Kroll Ontrack/TrialGraphix and Dr. Dan Wolfe, Director of Jury Consulting for Kroll Ontrack/TrialGraphix, to address the challenges faced by legal teams spurred by the increasing demand to perform more with less. The discussion will also include new and efficient ways to prepare for trial in 2010. In the Bits & Bytes Legal Analysis segment, Kroll Ontrack Legal Correspondent, Kelly Kubacki will take a look at the discovery order issued in Pension Committee of the University of Montreal Pension Plan v. Banc of America Securities, LLC.

Podcast: Play in new window | Download (Duration: 25:07 -- 20.9MB)

Related Podcasts

• November 5, 2009 -- Attorneys Tap Paralegal Talent for Jury Selection
• March 25, 2009 -- Persuasive Presentation Technology, Jury Consulting Services & Costly Discovery"

Active links and the podcast are available at the source site listed below.

Source: Legal Talk Network, 2 March 2010

This post was written by Nena Street: "Arguments are the primary tools of our trade and we cannot use them effectively unless we understand and obey the rules of logic. Despite their import, most students do not have an opportunity to study the principles of logic in law school. I find this tragic and believe that logic should be a required course for all law students.

In the meantime, lawyers and law students must take it upon themselves to learn the principles of logic necessary to craft persuasive arguments. In this post, I offer a basic primer on three tools of logic that are particularly important in the practice of law: deductive reasoning, inductive reasoning by generalization, and inductive reasoning by analogy..."

Continue reading this interesting post and reach the active link by clicking on the author's name.

Source: Lawyerist.com, 1 March 2010. © 2007-2010 Lawyerist Media, LLC. Reproduced with permission of the site editor, Sam Glover.

This post was written by Randall Ryder: "Every practicing lawyer, regardless of practice area, needs to be a great storyteller. At some point in the course of representing a client, effectively conveying their story will be critical to their case. When you have the spotlight, make sure you take advantage..."

Continue reading this interesting post by clicking on the author's name.

Source: Lawyerist.com, 4 February 2010, © 2007-2010 Lawyerist Media, LLC. Reproduced with permission of the site editor, Sam Glover.

This post was written by Rita Handrich: "...'Rhetoric', in modern times, is often used dismissively and seen as meaningless and perhaps manipulative as intimated in the phrase "mere rhetoric"...

In the courtroom, you can use the same strategy. Frame opposing counsel's oratory as 'rhetoric' and that becomes a code word between you and the jury for "meaningless and perhaps manipulative". You, on the other hand, have "reality"--a truthful and honest account. (Just make sure you back up that assertion with some facts.)..."

The full text of this post is available by clicking on the author's name.

Source: The Jury Room, 5 February 2010. Reproduced with permission of Douglas Keene.

This post was written by Tom Kane: "A comment to a recent post of mine led me to a book about overcoming America's No. 1 Fear - public speaking. The title of the book Stage Fright: 40 Stars Tell You How They Beat America's #1 Fear by Mick Berry and Michael Edelstein got my attention. It isn't the same as "writer's block" or in my case "Blog Fright," as in I'm suppose-to-do-a-blog-post-today, and haven't done it.

There isn't anything that compares to the pure terror experienced by some people when they have to get up to speak before an audience, especially a bunch of strangers..."

Continue reading this interesting post and reach the active link by clicking on the author's name.

Source: Legal Marketing Blog.com, 2 February 2010. Reproduced with permission of the author.

This post was written by Connie Crosby: "Back in November John Gregory wrote about Dealing with Digital Assets After Death and a New York Times article quoting Montreal marketing consultant Adele McAlear.  Adele happens to be a friend, so I took the opportunity to speak with her in detail about the topic on behalf of Slaw readers. Our full interview (held in December) is below..."

Continue reading this interesting post and reach the active links by clicking on the author's name.

Source: Slaw.ca, 2 February 2010. Reproduced with permission of Simon Fodden, founder of Slaw.

This posted was written by Mark Bennett: "Try this:

Stand up. Raise one foot off the ground. Now shift your weight forward. Don't set your raised foot down. What happens?

You fall down.

But if you do the same thing and set the raised foot down  to stop your fall, you take a step. Raise the other foot off the ground, shift your weight forward, and set your raised foot down to catch you. String a series of these events together, and you're moving across the ground. Walking.

The walking metaphor is so common that it is easy to stop noticing it (when you choose your path in life, know that you can't walk on water, but you can walk the walk and march to the beat of a different drummer--Soundtrack: I Walk the Line). Walking is a model for much of human existence, including the practice of law (which begins, after all, when we pass the bar): a series of controlled falls.

Show me a lawyer who claims not to make mistakes, and I'll show you a lawyer who's either a liar or pathologically unselfaware. We make mistakes (missteps, faux pas). Usually we are able to recover (get back on track), but sometimes our mistakes harm our clients, endangering their futures, their freedom, and their lives..."

Continue reading this interesting post and reach the active links by clicking on the author's name.

Source: Defending People, 22 January 2010. © 2010 Defending People, reproduced with permission of the author.

This post was written by Evan Schaeffer: "A commenter writes--

I couldn't find an answer about how to respond when a requesting party stated many facts in one paragraph, some of which were true and others were not.

Actually, it's easy to admit or deny only part of a request. Here an actual example from a past case--

3. At the time of the purchase of the motorcycle in question, you were present, when Joe Johnson delivered a check on your behalf to the motorcycle dealership in question."

Continue reading this interesting post by clicking on the author's name.

Source: The Trial Practice Tips Weblog, 28 January 2010. Reproduced with permission of the author.