ON-DEMAND: THE MAGIC OF ADVOCACY: TAKEAWAY FROM THE 2022 TOP VERDICTS VIRTUAL SEMINAR
Recorded on June 20, 2023 | Online via ZoomGet insight into some of the largest verdicts of 2022 obtained by AAJ members. You’ll get skills-based guidance on opening statements, closing arguments, direct, cross, and more—with examples from top verdict cases involving a range of practice areas, client types, and jurisdictions. Join AAJ Education for an exclusive view into the work of the experienced faculty who handled these cases, with a dedicated Q&A session to ask your questions.
AAJ has filed for CLE/MCLE credit in the appropriate jurisdictions. In many jurisdictions, final approval is not available prior to the program and contingent upon approval from state bars and/or MCLE boards. Total available credit hours may vary by jurisdiction. AAJ Education programs are routinely accredited by states requiring continuing legal education. FAQs on CLE/MCLE and Education programs can be found HERE.
This course contains the webinar recording, full course materials, agenda from the program as well as a certificate of completion for attendees to use when self-applying for general 230 minutes of CLE credit. You will, also, receive $75 off of the Top Verdicts of 2022 Litigation Packet.
| Time (ET) | Participant Agenda |
|---|---|
| 12:00 - 12:10 p.m.
|
WELCOME AND SPEAKER INTRODUCTIONS |
| 12:10 - 12:50 p.m.
|
INFLUENTIAL STORYTELLING AND DIRECT EXAMINATION: TAKEAWAY FROM LAFFERTY V. JONES The plaintiffs claimed the defendant created a profitable business model promoting conspiracy-based fabrications about Sandy Hook for significant financial gain. |
| 12:50 - 1:30 p.m. |
ELEVATING THE CASE THROUGH CLOSING ARGUMENT: TAKEAWAYS FROM MARTINEZ V. SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON After reporting sexual harassment and racist language, the plaintiffs claimed Southern California Edison produced and allowed unbearable working conditions to drive out workers. |
| 1:30 - 2:10 p.m. |
SUCCESSFUL CROSS-EXAMINATION OF DEFENSE EXPERTS: TAKEAWAY FROM KAMUDA V. STERIGENICS U.S., LLC The plaintiff claimed Sterigenics was aware of the risks of ethylene oxide while sterilizing medical equipment, but it continued to use large, unnecessary amounts of the carcinogen without community awareness, leading to serious health conditions. |
| 2:10 - 2:50 p.m. |
PUTTING THE JUROR IN THE PLAINTIFF'S SHOES AND GIVING POWER TO PLAINTIFF TESTIMONY: TAKEAWAYS FROM HOLCOMBE V. UNITED STATES In connection with a mass shooting, the plaintiff claimed the U.S Government was partially responsible for failing to report a gunman's history of domestic violence convictions to the FBI, which allowed him to purchase guns. |
| 2:50 - 3:30 p.m. | INTRODUCING THEMES AND COUNTERING DEFENSES DURING JURY SELECTION: TAKEAWAY FROM KROMPHARDT V. MERCY HOSPITAL After theri son was born with brian damage, the plaintiffs claimed it was due to the failure of Mercy Hospital to respond to signs of oxygen deprivation through the birthing process. |
| 3:30 - 4:00 p.m. | QUESTIONS AND ANSWER SESSION |
| 4:00 p.m.
|
ADJOURN |
Individuals who need a reasonable accommodation under the Americans with Disabilities Act to access AAJ’s conferences or training courses should contact us by one of the following means:
- Write to us at AAJ Education, 777 6th St NW, Suite 200, Washington, DC 20001;
- Call us at (800) 622-1791; or
- Send us an email at education@justice.org.
