This blog post is about an interesting case (not mine) in the arena of Landlord-Tenant law and Negligence that went to trial. It’s an instructional case on trial strategy and the technicalities of evidence rules: tenant sued landlord for negligence for failing to maintain the property, alleging that water from a roof leak accumulated on the tenant’s kitchen floor. The tenant alleged that she slipped on the water puddle, fell and fractured her wrist. 

The tenant’s attorney’s plan: portray the landlord as a slumlord, and present evidence of many other needed repairs that had been neglected in the building. Sounds like a good plan. 

Problem: two days before trial the landlord admitted negligence in failing to repair the roof (a good legal move from the landlord’s side), so the only relevant evidence would be on the cause of the tenant’s injury (did the tenant injure her wrist in a fall or some other way?) and the extent of the injury. The judge ruled that the tenant’s attorney could not introduce information on bad building maintenance (including the leaky roof) or the landlord’s character. 

So, what does the tenant’s attorney do? Present the excluded evidence anyway! 

“Pacing the courtroom, pointing fingers, and puffing out his chest, [the tenant’s attorney] informed the jurors that there was much evidence he had been prohibited from telling them, like other repairs that had gone neglected at the building and how long [the landlord] had waited before admitting responsibility [for the leaking roof].” The tenant’s attorney also withheld PowerPoint slides from the judge and sneakily showed them to the jury. And, something every attorney would like to do: shout “go fuck yourself” to opposing counsel in open court. 

The result? The jury awarded the tenant $430,000.00!! But the judge vacated the verdict and ordered a new trial due to the tenant’s attorney’s inappropriate and prejudicial conduct. 

Lesson: find an attorney who works within the rules of evidence to present the best case possible, and doesn’t use obscenities (out loud). 

DJO LAW BLOG is a Legal Newsletter, and does not constitute legal advice for your specific situation.

The Strategy of Dissociation – Don’t Go To Trial Without It.

Dissociate (to Separate Bad Image from Good Image in Litigation), by Dr. Ken Broda-Bahm, Persuasive Litigator Blog

http://bit.ly/1lJsEka

At the start of their game last Sunday, members of the L.A. Clippers ceremonially left their warmup jackets in a heap in center court, and warmed up with their shirts turned inside-out in order to conceal the name and logo of the team. This act came in response…