For health care providers defending themselves in court, it can feel like a nightmare scenario. Trial starts and it’s going well. The law is on their side, the medicine is on their side, and the facts are on their side. But then, the plaintiff takes the stand and delivers testimony so sympathetic that half the jury is brought to tears.
Recently, we tried and won a case under these exact circumstances. The injured plaintiff delivered powerful testimony that left several jurors crying. Despite strong defense expert testimony in support of our client’s care and our effective cross-examination of the plaintiff’s expert, there was real concern for a plaintiff’s verdict based on sympathy alone.
Experience has taught us that emotions are the drivers of most decisions. Had we remained objective and analytical and simply applied the law to the facts, the jury may have seen us as hard-hearted and inhuman. Persuading them at that point would have been next to impossible.
Instead, during closing, we spent considerable time acknowledging the plaintiff’s pain and suffering and addressing the natural feelings of sympathy the jury surely had. Our goal was to reassure the jury they could feel empathy for the plaintiff while still focusing on the medicine, science and the law. By making efforts early and often to earnestly acknowledge the plaintiff’s suffering, we were able to take the wind out of the plaintiff’s rebuttal and focus the jury on the truly disputed issues in the case.
Here at Waranch and Brown, we believe that sympathy for an injured patient and a defense verdict are not mutually exclusive. If you need assistance with a legal matter, Waranch & Brown and our experienced attorneys are here to help.