View as Web Page

Arnall Golden Gregory LLP
Henry R. Chalmers and David J. Marmins, Editors-in-Chief
Chesley S. McLeod, Executive Editor 

 Winter 2016


Mock jury exercises, focus groups, and jury research are well-established tools that inform trial strategy and guide counsel and their clients to make educated decisions about their case. But the field is changing. In this issue of Litigation Insights, we explain why attorneys and their clients are utilizing various forms of these tools with greater frequency and long before the case proceeds to trial. We also explore methods to conduct a mock jury exercise without blowing your litigation budget.



An Evolving Frontier: The Use of Jury Research in Litigation
By: Robert L. Rothman and Jennifer L. Shelfer

The use of mock trials and jury research are nothing new. But the field is changing with the times. Attorneys are now regularly involving jury consultants and experts in human behavior at a much earlier stage in the litigation to help make critical decisions about discovery, mediation, settlement, and general trial strategy. And with advances in technology, attorneys are able to test their trial strategies against a larger group of participants and, in turn, obtain more reliable and accurate information. This article highlights a few new developments that are helping counsel and clients make informed decisions about their cases. More >

Mock Jury Trials and the Role of Jury Consultants in Complex Cases
By: Robert L. Rothman and Jennifer L. Shelfer

When the stakes are high, clients typically are willing to expend significant resources to best position their cases for success. And while jury consultants, mock trials, and other forms of jury research can be expensive, counsel and their clients who make good use of these resources often find that the results are invaluable to case preparation and ultimately increase the chance of obtaining a favorable result at trial. This article identifies the benefits of jury research generally, and describes the key role a well-qualified jury consultant plays in trial preparation. More >

The “Do-It-Yourself” Mock Jury: Effective Use of Mock Jury Exercises That Don’t Blow Your Litigation Budget
By: Stephen M. Dorvee and Andrew B. Flake

Let’s face it – not every litigation budget allows for renowned jury consultants and multi-day mock trials. But the invaluable insights gained from a well-constructed mock jury exercise need not be a cost-prohibitive luxury reserved only for high-stakes litigation. In this article, we describe a time-tested and economical approach for conducting an in-house mock jury exercise. More >



SPG International, LLC - Arbitrator Finds for Client in Commissions Dispute 

When a former sales representative filed for arbitration seeking to recover pre- and post-termination sales commissions, AGG attorney Knox Withers preemptively filed a motion for partial summary judgment, arguing that the “procuring cause” doctrine precluded the claimant’s entitlement to post-termination commissions. While common wisdom suggests that arbitrators are loathe to resolve claims through pre-hearing motions, Knox won his motion, and the ruling significantly narrowed the issues for the final hearing and dramatically limited the client’s potential exposure. More >

Travel Incentive Business – Summary Judgment Quashes RICO, Counterfeiting Claims

When a small business owner found himself defending multi-million dollar RICO and counterfeiting claims brought by one of the world’s largest airlines, AGG attorneys Steve Dorvee, Scott Taylor, and Drew Stevens proved that the business owner’s use of two of the airline’s trademarks for several months was inadvertent. And after extensive motion practice and targeted questioning of the airline’s corporate representatives, the Northern District of Georgia granted AGG’s motion for summary judgment on the airline’s RICO and counterfeiting claimsMore >



In this four-part series, AGG partner Scott A. Wandstrat describes the practical implications of the 2015 amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. In particular, Scott walks his readers through the motivations behind the amendments, describes how e-discovery and the age of “Big Data” have fundamentally changed civil discovery, and offers clarity to litigants and their counsel concerning their discovery obligations under a new and evolving regime.

A New Era of Cooperation for E-Discovery Rules?
By: Scott A. Wandstrat

After five years of unrelenting hype, gossipy speculation and dizzying anticipation, we now stand on the precipice of the second edition of e-discovery amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. More >

Proportionality and the Scope of Discovery in 2015 Amendments 
By: Scott A. Wandstrat

This is the second in a series of articles on the practical implications of the 2015 amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Unless Congress takes action to block them, they will go into effect on Dec. 1, 2015. More >

The 2015 Amendments: A Sensible Approach to Spoliation Sanctions? 
By: Scott A. Wandstrat

This is the third in a series of articles about the practical implications of the 2015 amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. They went into effect on Dec. 1, 2015. More >

The 2015 Amendments: An End to Objectionable Objections? 
By: Scott A. Wandstrat

This is the fourth in a series of articles on the practical implications of the 2015 amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. They went into effect on Dec. 1, 2015. More >


Litigation Insights is published by Arnall Golden Gregory’s Litigation Practice Group. The information presented provides a general summary of recent legal and regulatory developments. It is not intended to be, and should not be relied upon as legal advice. For more information about the Litigation Practice Group, please contact Group Co-Chairs Henry R. Chalmers or Scott E. Taylor.
©2016. Arnall Golden Gregory LLP. All Rights Reserved.  Atlanta | Washington, DC

Manage your SubscriptionForward to a Friend | Unsubscribe