Advertise on podcast: May the Record Reflect

From forensics to financials and the medical to the technical, trial lawyers rely on expert witnesses to help fact finders understand complicated concepts and issues in their case. But dealing with experts is an expert technique in itself, so in this episode NITA Program Director Gene Tanaka breaks down the battle-tested process that has brought him success. First, he lays out the standards for expert testimony and traps to avoid, then shares steps for direct examinations, issues in cross, and persuasive techniques.  Topics 04:20  Why experts are important 05:54  Breadth of expert opinions 07:24  Expert traps 11:44  Standards for expert testimony   15:28  Five steps for direct examination: Introduction and teaser 17:48  Qualifications 20:10  Red flags in an expert’s background 21:28  Opinion 25:24  Basis for opinion 27:39  Difference of experts’ opinions 28:50  Conclusion 30:19  Persuasive techniques 34:10  Conducting cross 42:06  Signoff questions Quote “One of the things that we [attorneys] often do is we rely too much on credentials. We look at an expert and we think, ‘Well, this person has this certification and this level of education, and therefore they must be better than the other person who doesn’t have that.’ But you know, a lot that is just lost on everybody – the trier of fact. They can’t tell the difference between one credential or the other. But what they can tell the difference is whether someone is likeable and whether they’re understandable.” Gene Tanaka Resources Gene Tanaka (LinkedIn) Expert Testimony slides (PPT) Modern Trial Advocacy: Analysis and Practice (book) Federal Rules of Evidence with Objections: As Amended to December 1, 2023 (book) Expert Testimony: A Guide for Expert Witnesses and the Lawyers Who Examine Them (book) Effective Expert Testimony (book)

With most cases settling before trial, depositions have become the real battleground—and few people know that better than Carl Chamberlin. Carl has spent decades taking and defending depositions in private practice and teaching the craft for over 30 years. In a reprise of one of May the Record Reflect's most popular episodes, he’s here to share how to kick things off the right way—from setting the stage with introductory matters to navigating preliminary and substantive questions.  Topics 3:22   The purpose of depositions 6:20   Difference between gathering information and obtaining information 10:38 Why depositions are important 12:30 Physical settings for remote depositions 14:15 The “usual stipulations” 17:20 Getting commitments 21:27 Commitments in remote depositions 24:42 Preliminary questions 29:51 Structure of substantive questioning 33:30 First demo 36:57 Key phrases for asking open-ended questions 38:25 And ones to avoid 43:01 Drilling down into a substantive topic 44:18 Second demo 1:04:19 Paying attention and listening 1:06:40 Using exhibits 1:10:15 Dealing with interruptions 1:13:56 Carl’s early depositions 1:16:53 The Effective Deposition 1:21:36 Signoff questions Quote “We want to make our questions clear and concise. Simple. The clearer the question, the better the answer. The fewer the objections, the more powerful it is.” Carl Chamberlin Resources Carl Chamberlin (LinkedIn) The Effective Deposition, Sixth Edition (book)

Opera and the courtroom might seem worlds apart—but they share a similar stagecraft. In this episode, Anne Fuchs, professional opera singer and Director of Communications for the Indiana Court of Appeals, reveals how posture and breath can transform your voice into a powerful advocacy tool. From mastering vocal control to learning a little Italian, this conversation will help you speak with confidence and command attention when it matters most. Topics 02:30  Why vocal quality matters 04:03  Assessing your voice and why we hate the sound of it 07:13  Transatlantic accent 08:34  Introverts and extroverts, and skills  13:42  La Postura 21:16  Appoggio 33:05  Legato 41:26  Chiaroscuro 39:41  Nasality and vocal fry 50:20  Opera and the appellate court 55:23  Signoff questions Quote “Confidence is a skill set. It is not a personality trait. And so as much as it might feel like, Wow, that big, loud, bombastic person with that amazing trial experience, and Look at how he just commands the courtroom with that voice—that may be something that’s inherent to him. It may be something that he learned. But it is 100% true that every single person can learn how to use their voice more confidently and more effectively, without being an extrovert, without it being something that just came to them naturally. There are specific skills you can learn, and anybody can do it.” Anne Fuchs Resources Anne Fuchs (bio) Foxy Opera (30-minute private coaching, enter Secret49 for savings) Vocal Warm-Up Exercises (cheat sheet) Point Well Made: Persuasive Oral Advocacy (book)

For the first time in history, attorneys from as many as five generations can be found practicing law together. From veteran trial lawyers in their 70s and up to Gen Z associates just starting out, the generational diversity in today’s legal workforce is unprecedented. In this episode, Professor Marian Braccia of Temple University Beasley School of Law discusses how generational identity influences legal practice, challenges stereotypes about Gen Z lawyers, and offers insights into fostering understanding and mentorship across age groups. Topics 00:58  Generational span in law offices 04:40  Gen Z stereotypes and realities 05:53  Overview of generations in law 08:35  Defining characteristics by generation 26:37  Gen Z values and “sea change” 29:58  Generational mix in legal workforce 32:02  Authority and leadership styles 36:13  Policies and procedures 39:41  Decision-making preferences 42:55  Communication styles 47:58  Feedback and critique preferences 52:30  Generational tensions and perceptions 58:42  Recognition and rewards 01:01:51  Recommendations for law firms 01:07:20  Signoff questions Quote “We are talking about the success of the profession, we are talking about the longevity of the profession, and we want that to be something that doesn’t have to be reinvented every generation. We want to see continuity, and the only way we can do that is for there to be meaningful collaboration between the generations when it’s time to pass the baton.” Marian Braccia Resources Marian Grace Braccia (bio) The Generations War Comes to the Law Firm (article) Why We Mistake the Wholesomeness of Gen Z for Conservative (article)

Rule 30(b)(6) depositions can be a game-changer in litigation—but only if you know how to use them strategically. In this episode, former Assistant U.S. Attorney and current Wilmington Law professor Veronica Finkelstein shares expert guidance on understanding the purpose and power of a 30(b)(6) deposition, identifying the right corporate representative, drafting precise specifications, and preparing your designee for examination. Whether you're deposing a Fortune 500 company or a little mom-and-pop shop, this episode will fine-tune your approach to corporate testimony. Topics 4:23     What is a 30(b)(6) deposition?    7:11     Why all trial lawyers should know about 30(b)(6) depositions 9:40     How deposing 30(b)(6) witnesses is different 14:27    Meet-and-confer requirement about specifications 17:44    Drafting specifications 20:20    Benefit of taking 30(b)(6) depositions 23:57    Qualities of a desirable corporate designee 25:54    Designees and fact witnesses 29:21    Corporate counsel and deposing counsel preparations 35:40    Who represents the designee? 40:05    Nonresponsive or jerk designees 43:24    Things to be mindful of during examination 45:39    When interrogatories are preferable 46:56    Cases to know: QBE and Marker 49:42    Deposition Skills: Philadelphia 51:53    Sign-off questions Quote “This is one of the few times in litigation when you get to pick your witness, so pick somebody good. Don’t pick somebody who’s the CEO of the company who doesn’t have time to get educated. Don’t pick somebody in HR who’s been following the policies wrong for the last 20 years and you’re never gonna unteach. Pick somebody who’s gonna be a really good mouthpiece on behalf of the company who you can educate properly.” Veronica Finkelstein Resources Veronica Finkelstein (bio) J.C. Lore (bio) Deposition Skills: Philadelphia (program) NITA Women in Trial (program) QBE Ins. Corp. v. Jorda Enters. Inc. (case) Marker v. Union Fidelity Life Ins. Co. (case) Law 360 article (PDF)

Depositions can be a minefield—and not just because of the facts. In this episode of May the Record Reflect, trial attorney Whitney Untiedt returns to share her expert strategies for navigating the disruptive behaviors of difficult counsel and witnesses. From talkers and interrupters to charmers and egomaniacs, Whitney breaks down the types of jerks you’ll encounter and how to stay focused, professional, and in control. Whether you’re taking or defending a deposition, this episode offers practical tools, real-world stories, and a reminder that your attitude is your greatest ally. Topics 4:52     Obstreperous behaviors    9:45      When the jerk is the witness 12:30    Strategies for handling witnesses 16:28    Preparing for opposing counsel 18:27    In-the-moment responses 23:16    Socialized for niceness 27:29    Supporting your client 31:45    What not to do 37:39    Rules about lawyer conduct 43:53    Remote versus in-person depositions 52:51    Why do lawyers act like jerks 57:57    A war story 1:01:01  Florida programs 1:07:01  Signoff questions Quote “The worst jerks are the ones that kill you with kindness than the ones who try to come at you with a butcher knife.” Whitney Untiedt Resources Whitney Untiedt (bio) Deposition Skills: Florida (program) Jayme Cassidy (bio) Building Trial Skills: Florida (program)  

Long hours, heavy caseloads, high stakes—such is the modern trial practice. But when lawyers represent survivors of violent or traumatic incidents, they often experience next-level stress caused by empathetic engagement. In this episode, UNT Dallas College of Law professor and JAMS neutral mediator, arbitrator, and special master Angela Downes introduces listeners to vicarious trauma and its effects on body and mind, how vicarious trauma differs from burnout, and how to recognize compassion fatigue in yourself and your colleagues. Most importantly, Professor Downes discusses effective stress-management strategies that would benefit anyone with a busy trial practice. Topics 3:46    What is vicarious trauma?    4:15    Lawyers, vicarious trauma, and burnout 7:31    Indicators of vicarious trauma and getting support 15:49  How firms can help 17:40  Self-care strategies 27:55  ABA studies on lawyer stress 31:02  More strategies 35:09  Recognizing vicarious trauma in others 38:20  New generation attunement to wellness 40:24 Sign-off questions Quote “So many of us are defined by the work that we do, and we are more than that. We are more than just … being attorneys and counselors. Although it’s a big part of us, there are so many sides to what we do and who we are as people.” Professor Angela Downes Resources Professor Angela Downes (bio) NITA Women in Trial (program) Stress, Drink, Leave (article) ABA Profile of the Legal Profession (article) ABA Directory of Legal Assistance Programs (resource)

Depositions are a key building block in legal disputes, especially for cases that proceed to trial. According to veteran trial lawyer John Farrell, properly handling an exhibit so it’s admissible at trial is an overlooked skill that can, and should, be practiced until it becomes second nature. In this episode, John reveals eight crucial steps for handling documents that ensure your deposition flows smoothly and exhibits are admitted for trial. He breaks down the process step by step, gives the exact sample language that ensures exhibits are properly marked and admitted, and suggests ways to keep court reporters and judges pleased with your professionalism.  Topics 3:59  Asking questions before marking a document  5:35  When witnesses want to see a document first 7:48  Making deposition exhibits admissible at trial 8:30  Eight steps for handling exhibits: Step 1 9:36  Step 2 10:35  Step 3 12:08  Demonstrations of marking different documents 25:26  Step 4 , and helping the court reporter 27:59  Step 5, and the important question to ask your witness 29:12  Step 6, and two more important questions 32:15  Step 7 33:37  Step 8 35:35  Three-article series on depositions 37:23  Signoff questions Quote “‘Bears the word’ . . . is the safe phrase that judges like to hear.” John Farrell Resources John Farrell (bio) Deposition articles (1, 2, 3) Refreshing Recollection and Impeachment (article)

Content Warning: This episode discusses, in non-graphic terms, representing intimate partner violence survivors.  Being a trial lawyer is one of the toughest, most demanding professions out there, and when you’re representing family members in distress it’s even more so. Hofstra Law professor Barbara Barron discusses advocacy challenges faced by lawyers working with survivors of intimate partner violence, or IPV. Although some details are particular to IPV survivor representation, trial lawyers in nearly every practice area will find Barbara’s reflections on supporting reluctant or intimidated witnesses during testimony, dealing with pro se opposing counsel, and handling emotional witnesses or clients to be applicable to their own high-stakes cases.  Topics 4:00  What is IPV?  6:56  How IPV survivors differ from other crime victims 11:23  Implicit biases judges or jurors might have about IPV  12:24  Types of evidence 14:39  Special accommodations against intimidation 16:09  Defendant as pro se counsel 19:42  Preparing for direct and cross-examination 23:22  Emotions, or none, during testimony 26:12  Preparing for anxiety 29:16  Counsel and vicarious trauma 31:53  Public Interest Award and advocacy programs  Quote “In the case of the pro se defendant, and dealing with that person and having to answer questions on cross, the questions may not be as pristine as an experienced or talented trial lawyer’s may be, and it may not be as controlling a situation as anticipated. If the questions are such that it allows the witness to answer more than yes or no, where’s the control?” Barbara Barron Resources Barbara Barron (bio) Building Trial Skills: New York–Hofstra (program) Half-Day Intensives: Online (programs)

For trial lawyers, “advocacy in a hurry” — injunctions, bail hearings, requests for orders of protection, emergency custody petitions, or immigration orders — calls for making the most of the limited time you have before the court, even if it's just 15 minutes. Former Illinois Eighth Circuit Court Judge Mark Drummond shares seven valuable tips on compressing your case to fit the time available, how to help the judge quickly understand what’s at issue in the proceeding, and what ethics concerns must remain top of mind for all advocates regardless of whether their time before the court is 10 minutes or 10 weeks. Topics 3:43  What is emergency advocacy?   8:00  Circumstances calling for emergency advocacy 16:48  Making the most of the little time you have 17:40  Factors you must prove in your state 18:30  Primacy and recency 21:00  Appeal to the judge 21:47  Written offer of proof 23:15  Persuasive use of numbers 23:53  Offer time limits 27:00  Judges triage 27:39  What judges fear 31:02  Two things to be prepared for 34:11  Your duty of candor to the court 38:06  Signoff questions Quote “You’ve spent a lot of time going through law school. You’ve built a practice. Clients will come, clients will go. You built your practice brick by brick on the decisions you’ve made, the judgments you’ve made, and the choices you’ve made. And it takes a lifetime to do that. But you know, sometimes like a child that knocks down their wooden block tower, it only takes one time to tear all that down. And no single client is worth that.” Judge Mark Drummond Resources Judge Mark Drummond (bio) "Death Penalty Cases in a Traffic Court Setting" (article) "What Judges Want" (article) Ethical duty of candor to the court (newsletter)

As a sitting district court judge and 29-year public defender, NITA Program Director Judge Cynthia McCollum knows a thing or two about jury selection, and in this episode, she opens up about how to get your jurors to open up. She serves up a baker’s dozen of her best tips for getting jurors to talk during voir dire, mistakes she learned from as a public defender, what to know about Batson challenges, and anecdotes about her career trajectory before and on the bench. Topics 3:50  First tip for getting jurors to open up during voir dire 4:47  Second tip 5:45  Judge’s first time in court as a new lawyer  9:48. Third tip 14:24  Fourth tip 18:33  Fifth tip 20:08  Being a public defender, then a judge 24:42  Sixth tip 26:39. Seventh tip 29:28  What it’s like to be a judge 31:48  Eighth tip 33:09  Ninth tip 38:25  Tenth tip 41:31  NITA involvement 45:06  Eleventh tip 48:35  Twelfth tip 50:32  Baker’s dozen tip about Batson 52:39  Signoff questions  Quote “Everyone needs to work on their jury selection. It’s not a natural for a lot of people, because you get nervous about asking those tough questions.” Judge Cynthia McCollum Resources Judge Cynthia McCollum (bio) Batson bonuses (file) Minnesota Deposition Skills and Trial Skills (programs) 

NITA Program Director and former Resource Director Mark Caldwell joins the podcast to chat about how to effectively communicate with the various audiences in the courtroom to ensure they get — and comprehend — the information they need from you. He shares how to talk to jurors about unfamiliar courtroom procedures and substantive information, why sounding like a tv lawyer is a huge turn-off to jurors, and recommends some of his favorite lawyers from pop culture whose techniques can help trial lawyers refine their courtroom communication style. Topics 3:05    The needs of the courtroom audience 7:14    What “talking like a lawyer” means 10:10  Juror impressions of “lawspeak”   13:53  Communicating procedural and substantive complexity 20:06  How not to sound like a lawyer 27:50  Pop culture examples of legal communication 29:00  Why my cousin Vinny is a great trial lawyer 31:42  Movies and a book to recommend 51:55  Implicit bias training Quote “Don’t be a tv lawyer, but take lessons from what you see on television.” Mark Caldwell Resources Mark Caldwell (bio) Colorado Deposition Skills and Trial Skills (programs) Films, shows, and book (list)

In Episode 62, Philadelphia trial lawyer and NITA Program Director Tom Innes introduces listeners to cross-examination math and how the idea of “less is more” increases the impact of the questions counsel poses to a witness. Control is the name of the game in cross, so Tom also shares how to shepherd witnesses through cross, why to restrict interrogatories in the phrasing of questions, and why less is even more when examining an expert.  Timestamps & More Topics 3:06    How to think about cross 3:53    Objectives of cross 5:05    Rules of cross-examination math  6:41    Why concision helps your finder of fact 9:22    Controlling an adverse or difficult witness 10:15  Cross demo 14:12  Omitting the interrogatory 17:00  Expert versus fact witness 18:11  When to break the “cross math” rule 23:26  Signoff questions Quote “Every word you put into a leading question permits the witness to decide which word they will, or they can, disagree with or work around or give you a hard time about.” Tom Innes Resources Tom Innes (bio) Judge L. Felipe Restrepo (bio) Mary DeFusco (bio) Building Trial Skills Philadelphia (program)

In 2021, former prosecutor Steve Wood told May the Record Reflect that to grow as a trial advocate, he had to accept that he is “insufferably boring.” What did he mean by that? And, how can it help you grow as an advocate as well? In this self-deprecating but entirely serious conversation, Steve and fellow former prosecutor Laurie Gilbertson talk about the neuroscience of boredom, multisensory engagement in the courtroom, telling a compelling story, and how it all adds up to self-confidence and stronger advocacy for your client.  Topics 3:27 What it means to be “insufferably boring” in court 5:55 Neuroscience behind boredom 9:06 Why trials are boring 15:11 Bored judges, bored jurors 28:35 Resting postures for hands 37:07 Role of storytelling 42:42 When storytelling is most important 49:36 Repeating yourself without being boring 57:27 Confidence 1:01:36 Preparation, notes, and delivery 1:14:56 Great Hollywood courtroom performances 1:21:00 Signoff questions Quote “Our task as trial lawyers, as I see it, is to do three things. One, admit that we’re boring — all of us, all the time. Two, with the aid of people like Laurie, do the things that we can do to be less boring. And then three, never fall prey to the conceit that at any given time a majority of the trier of fact is paying attention. Assume the opposite. But what we can do, most primarily, is introduce change into the courtroom environment. That’s our mission.” Steve Wood “. . . what I found often is that jurors who have watched so much tv, who have watched so many movies, who have read legal thrillers, who have maybe listened to true-crime podcasts — some of them, if not many of them, expect to be entertained, and when you, as the attorney, are not kind of doing all these things that Steve is talking about in terms of interjecting that change and keeping them entertained, a lot of the jurors are surprised that court is actually that boring. They expect it to be a lot more interesting.” Laurie Gilbertson Resources Steve Wood (bio) Laurie Gilbertson (bio) Top 10 Tips that Make a Difference, with Steve Wood (episode) Thinking with Your Hands: The Surprising Science Behind How Gestures Shape Our Thoughts (book)

In this rebroadcast of our 2022 interview, we gather all sorts of admissions—about depositions—from NITA NextGen alumni Jason Young. After taking and defending thousands of depositions throughout his career, he’s no-nonsense and has figured out how to make the challenges easier on himself, his clients, and his witnesses. Jason also talks about the crucial work–life decisions all lawyers face as they begin their careers. Topics  3:46 The hard part of taking depositions   5:55 Federal rules related to depositions  9:13 Witnesses, both expert and lay    11:36 Role of social media   15:10 When to video-record a deposition   17:35 The hard part of dealing with witnesses  19:40 Timelines for expert witnesses, plaintiff versus defendant  22:07 Subpoenas  25:00 Obnoxious opposing counsel  30:50 Preparing your witness  34:42 Protecting your witness  37:53 Remote depositions  40:31 Work–life balance and advice for new lawyers  44:35 Signoff questions  Quote “What a lot of inexperienced deposition lawyers have a problem with is they are terrified of the unknown in depositions and afraid to follow up on things, know how to shut things down, and that really scares a lot of people. And I guess the thinking with depositions a lot of times is, you want to know more. If there’s information that’s going to come out that’s going to hurt me, I want to know it in a deposition. If there’s additional facts I need or something I didn’t know, I’d rather find out in a depo than in trial.” Jason Young  Resources Jason Young (bio) Blog interview (The Legal Advocate) Federal Rules of Evidence with Objections (book) NITA Deposition programs (registration)