Trial Exhibits was hired by the Law office of Peter G. Angelos to provide 3D animations, graphics and courtroom presentation services.

Click here to read more about the Exxon Punitive Damages Verdict

http://articles.baltimoresun.com/2011-06-29/news/bs-md-co-exxon-spill-verdict-20110629_1_punitive-damages-gas-spill-punitive-award

The Peter G. Angelos firm entrusted Trial Exhibits to 3D animations, trial support and electronic courtroom presentation for the six month trial.

Congratulations to Allen Hossley, Dawn Smith of the Hossley Embry law firm. The Dallas, TX firm with Gene Tullos and Gary King of Tullos & Tullos from Raleigh, Mississippi received the single largest asbestos verdict in the nation. 

The $322 million dollar verdict was award to the plaintiff for working in the oil fields of Mississippi as a roughneck. The plaintiff inhaled asbestos dust while mixing drilling mud for various drilling rigs. The plaintiff now suffers from a condition called asbestosis and is on supplemental oxygen twenty four hours a day. 

The jury found the defendants where liable for failure to provide an adequate warning to Mr. Brown and for manufacturing, selling or distributing defectively designed asbestos products even after they knew the danger and harm they can cause. 

The Hossley Embry firm used a 3D animation from Trial Exhibits, Inc. to demonstrate the working conditions of the plaintiff during his time working on the drilling rigs. 

Oil Drilling Rig showing location of a mud room and drill pipe.

TEI 3D Animation and Exhibit Gallery

Trial Exhibits is proud to provide our new 3D Animation and Legal Visual Exhibit Gallery. TEI has recently launched their new gallery at www.trialexhibitsinc.com 

The 3D Animation and Demonstrative Evidence Gallery will feature the following types of exhibits:
- 3D Animation 
- Interactive Exhibits     
- Settlement Video Samples
- Timelines
- Diagrams
-  Mechanism of Injury
- Charts 
- Trial Graphics
- Legal Video 
- Photography       
- Speciality Exhibits

The TEI 3D Animation and Courtroom Exhibit Gallery is growing daily. Check back often to see the latest samples. Contact Trial Exhibits to discuss your latest case and view any specific legal visual samples.

Never has the risk associated with litigation been so high, for plaintiffs and defendants alike.   In years past, trial lawyers were seen as metaphoric “Old West” gunslingers, fresh off the horse – nothing but six-shooters in hand and ready for an impromptu duel in the courtroom.  Much like the real “Old West” gunslingers, they are a thing of the past.  The successful trial lawyers of today are more akin to modern combat generals: deploying an array of tactics, technology and resources to ensure their victory in the courtroom. 

But now these master tacticians have expanded the battlefield; it’s not just fought in the courtroom anymore.  Litigation technically begins the moment a matter is initiated in court, but the formation of a winning litigation plan begins far before that.   Today, lawyers are seeking support early in the game, enlisting the help of companies such as Trial Exhibits Inc, that specialize in Mock Trials/Focus Groups, Witness Preparation, Medical Illustrations and Animation, Electronic Trial, 3D Animations, Graphics/Timelines, Legal and Day-In-The-Life Videos, Aerial Photography and Trial Boards to strategize for arbitration, mediation, or other pre-trial services, rather than waiting for trial.

As the use of technology and exhibits has pervaded the courtroom and filtered throughout the entire litigation process, Trial Exhibits, Inc. has been on the cutting edge of new techniques.  For example, Trial Exhibits often conducts a series of focus groups during early development of a case to help identify the major case themes.  During focus group research, attorneys are able to identify trouble-spots, test presentation strategies, evaluate witnesses, develop their story, and ready themselves – and their cases – for battle.  It is in this environment that lawyers are able to display customized exhibits that will be used in trial, run electronic presentations, and test reactions to 3d animations in front of focus group participants.  Frequently this information is used in the formation of a settlement package or mediation strategy.

Speaking of settlement negotiations and packages – another tactic and use of technology that is on the rise – is the implementation of graphics, animations and exhibits in a pre-bundled presentation for dissemination to the opposing side.  In the past, a simple demand letter was sent to opposing counsel or a quickly typed-out counter-proposal was submitted, and both sides viewed the process as a formality.  Now it is common for companies like Trial Exhibits to design complete multimedia presentations and electronic materials for attorneys to serve upon the opposing litigants. 

Ten years ago, the use of electronic presentations and exhibits in mediation was relatively sparse.  Today, full blown multimedia presentations are conducted during mediation.  Because companies like Trial Exhibits are brought into the litigation early in the process, they are able to design graphics and animations, videotape depositions, prepare witnesses, produce a “day-in-the-life” video and build a virtual arsenal, allowing the attorney to plant the cross-hairs on the opposition – and fire away.  So, with a considerable technological upgrade, perhaps our “Old West” gunslinger still has a few bullets left in his six-shooter.

These are only some of the current advances in modern litigation.  In the following series, we will share with you more pre-trial trends, including the use of new technologies during trial, as well as a glimpse of what the future will hold in leveraging technology for litigation.

Legalmedicalexhibits.com homepage image.

Trial Exhibits is proud to announce the unveiling of our medical illustration and animation library exhibits: LegalMedicalExhibits.com . These demonstrative exhibits are available  in electronic or printed form and can be purchased stock (“as is”), or they can be modified to fit your case specific needs. This library is growly daily. Please check back for more illustrations.

Please visit: www.legalmedicalexhibits.com or you can go the Trial Exhibits’ main website: www.trialexhibitsinc.com

Types of exhibits available:

Anatomical Drawings
Stock Medical Procedure Illustrations
3D Medical Animations
Colorized Diagnostic Films
Interactive Medical Exhibits
Animated Fetal Heart Monitor Strips
Marketing Graphics

The jury award $2.1 million, but the comparative negligence lowered the award to $1.7 million.

Mr. Martino employed Trial Exhibits to assist him in trial and provide the following services: Custom medical injury summary board to show the extend of all the injuries the plaintiff has suffered, jury selection,  and electronic trial presentation services in the courtroom.

Trial Exhibits, Inc. was proud to sponsor the 2010 Georgia Defense Lawyers Association (GDLA) Annual Conference in Ponte Vedra, Florida.  The conference was lead by GDLA President Mr. Staten Bitting (Fulcher & Hagler) and Mr. Steve Kyle (Bovis, Kyle & Burch) who was acting Chairman of the GDLA Board of Directors.  Trial Exhibits is an advocate of the topics discussed which included: “Ethics and Professionalism of Motions in Trial”, “Jury Selection through the use of Focus Groups” and “Turning the strategy of the plaintiff for your advantage”.  We acknowledge the formal avenues of training, sharing of techniques and social camaraderie embodied by the GDLA and look forward to the continued partnership between the GDLA and Trial Exhibits.

Recently, Trial Exhibits, Inc. conducted a focus group in which a major purpose of the research was to assess mock juror reactions to a plaintiff in a wrongful death suit. The plaintiff, a parent whose son had been killed in a tragic automobile accident, sought damages for pain and suffering. In a deposition viewed by focus group participants, the plaintiff’s emotional display evoked sympathy from participants, several of whom were brought to tears upon hearing a tormented mother discuss her depression due to the loss of her child. Juror sympathy toward a plaintiff is associated with greater attributions of responsibility toward the defendant (Bornstein, 1994), which is promising for the plaintiff’s case.

However, focus group participants noticed quickly that the plaintiff was not simply a parent of a deceased child, but was also a convicted felon. In the video-taped deposition, the grieving mother wore an orange jumpsuit and sat in a room lined with cinder-block walls. She was questioned repeatedly about her past crimes and convictions and the lengthiness of her criminal record became apparent. The plaintiff’s attorney was concerned whether a jury would view the plaintiff as a grieving mother or a greedy convict with little credibility. The concern was warranted.

The (perhaps) surprising finding was that focus group participants indicated that the plaintiff’s testimony was helpful to her case, despite her criminal history. A review of qualitative responses by participants indicated that the plaintiff’s criminal history was not viewed as related to the event in which her son’s life was ended, and she, thus, still deserved to be compensated for such a tragedy. The plaintiff’s description of her recent work toward rehabilitation most likely mitigated some of the negative views that a criminal history elicits among jurors. In this case, the benefits of presenting this plaintiff’s testimony appeared to outweigh the disadvantages.

Of course, experimental research testing the effects of witness criminal history on juror perceptions can tell us more about whether the awarded damages to the plaintiff would have been decreased by presenting her testimony as compared with a control condition of the plaintiff’s testimony being withheld from jurors. Few experiments addressing the question of whether to present a witness with a criminal history have been conducted, but one recent publication provides preliminary data on the subject. Jones and Harrison (2009) conducted an experiment in which a criminal case transcript was provided to mock jurors who read one of four variations of the case. In the first condition, the defendant did not speak on his own behalf. In the other three conditions, the defendant did take the stand. In the testifying conditions, the defendant had no criminal history, a criminal history related to the current charge, or a criminal history unrelated to the current charge. The findings of this more internally valid study mirrored those of the focus group research described above. Mock jurors did not appear to be influenced by the criminal history of the defendant. This was true even when the criminal history was related to the current charge!

The research on juror perceptions of witness criminal history, while providing some preliminary evidence that juries focus on the evidence of the case rather than the witness’s past, is still preliminary. Additionally, as attorneys are well aware, there are intricacies to each case that bring about a complexity of issues not likely to be assessed in controlled experiments. Therefore, the best advice to attorneys facing the question of whether to place a witness on the stand is to conduct a research study specifically designed to test jurors’ reactions to the particular aspects of their case. Focus groups or mock trials may be the best route of determining whether or not to place a risky witness on the stand.