By: Review Staff at Gulf Coast Business Review
April 16, 2009



Jack Stein took his skills in graphics and photography and turned them into a successful enterprise, Trial Exhibits Inc., a Tampa company which provides presentation materials for attorneys in court among other services.
 

Trial Exhibits Inc. has taken lifeless courtroom flip charts and chalkboards and replaced them with video and full-color graphics.

During the 1989 fatal boating accident case involving St. Petersburg chiropractor Dr. William LaTorre, graphics expert Jack Stein noticed that a firm was providing the plaintiffs with special displays for their lawyers to use in the courtroom.

So Stein called noted Tampa defense attorney Barry Cohen, who was representing LaTorre, and offered to do the same for him and reconstruct the accident visually.

Cohen accepted, won the case and that seven months of work was the catalyst that created Trial Exhibits Inc., a Tampa company Stein founded in 1989.

Trial Exhibits now has 18 employees and does work all over the country. Besides Tampa, the company has offices in Orlando, Miami and Atlanta.

Its interactive video service stands in stark contrast to the chalkboards and black-and-white flip charts that attorneys used in courtrooms for years.

Today, Trial Exhibits provides flat screen monitors for the judge, jury and both attorneys and broadcasts full-color graphics and video on them.

An expert witness, for example, can walk the jury through an illustration or video; zoom in; rotate or highlight an image; show a document on one half of the screen and a video on the other; and draw on the screen with a light pencil, similar to TV football color commentator John Madden.

In fact, Stein calls it the “John Madden effect.”

“We’ve come a long way in 20 years,” Stein says. “We’ve all seen this on TV, so we’re not that amazed with it anymore.”

Although the technology can be impressive, Trial Exhibits seeks to project a professional tone in the presentations. It doesn’t want the graphics to overwhelm.

“What you want the jury to focus on is your case,” Stein says. “There needs to be an ease of presentation.”

So Trial Exhibits tries to remember the jury’s attention span. It is sitting for eight hours a day. The attorney wants them to read a document. So Trial Exhibits may zoom in and highlight areas of the document on a screen as the attorney is speaking.

Working for others
Stein earned a degree in graphic design and a minor in photography at the University of West Virginia and began working for an engineering firm as its graphics director after college.

After that, we worked for a defense contractor in Saudi Arabia before launching his entrepreneurial career with Trial Exhibits.

The company represents both plaintiffs and the defense. Early on in the business, defense cases didn’t want to use the service for fear of looking too wealthy. But that changed as the graphics became more common in the courtroom.

“They didn’t want to look like they had deep pockets,” Stein says. “What we find is that people are used to seeing these. They are on legal shows and medical shows.”

There are about 50 competing companies in this industry and a majority are small mom-and-pop firms. Because of its four offices, Trial Exhibits is able to cover the east coast of the United States, from Mississippi to New Hampshire, although it gets requests from all over the country.

For example, it has done a lot of case presentation work involving Hurricane Katrina damage in Louisiana and other hurricanes. There was 22 linear miles of damage from Katrina. It also does a number of medical malpractice cases, on the plaintiff and defendant sides. Trial Exhibits has a certified medical illustrator on staff.

Stein says he does not find working with attorneys difficult.

“I’m sure some would disagree with me,” he says. “But you have to understand their personality and the stress they are under. To be successful, an attorney needs multiple cases. They need to multi-task. We respect them and they respect us.”

Besides trial presentations, Trial Exhibits also does mock trails and focus groups; document management; and trial consulting services. The mock trials can help attorneys get ready for a trial by anticipating questions and issues. Trial Exhibits can help scan in materials for attorneys to get a case ready for a presentation.

Testing and retesting
It is crucial that the graphics come up and work instantly, or the credibility of a case could be damaged. Or worse, the client may lose the case.

That’s why Trial Exhibits builds backup systems into its presentation setups. It even brings backup bulbs for projectors.

The staff tapes down and covers hundreds of feet of electric cables. It tests and retests the graphics and video. A staff member with a “switcher” monitor sits in the courtroom and controls the video and graphics on all the screens so everyone is seeing the right thing at the right time.

“It’s very important that everything work perfectly,” Stein says. “I’ve sat in many a trial and have seen competitors at work. The attorney asks for a video and it crashes. The jury is looking at him. This was supposed to be a smoking-gun video.”

He adds: “When we go in, we know we only have one chance in the courtroom.”

It is a business that calls for quick turnarounds and availability. Stein is available all hours of the day. The staff understands that it is a 24/7 business and clients have the cell phone numbers of the staff, including Stein’s.

“We have a staff that is very flexible,” he says. “The needs of the client are No. 1.”

Clients may be scanning documents in on a Friday afternoon and call Trial Exhibits at 4 p.m. for a trial Monday.

“We do a large amount of rush jobs,” Stein says.

Trial Exhibits hopes that a job done well will mean another chance to work with that client and referrals to other firms.

“It’s not about chasing money,” Stein says. “It’s about providing a quality product.”

And part of that involves re-investing in the business at times, getting technology that is better and faster. That’s one of the company’s biggest challenges, keeping up with changing technology, Stein says. He has assigned staff members to continue to research this area.

But Trial Exhibits is careful not to overspend. It is debt-free, Stein says.

Trial Exhibits likes its East Coast base and wants to solidify it. It is looking ahead and planning new offices outside Washington and in Charlotte, N.C. It sees plenty of business in the east and does not feel the need to grow into the Midwest or out West.

“We’re more about providing this service for a reasonable price,” Stein says.

Stein’s biggest CEO lesson is learning to lead by example. If a client needs a photograph, Stein is willing to pick up a camera and get the shot.

“My degree is in graphic design and photography,” he says. “I have no MBA. I lead by example. I come from West Virginia. We don’t use titles. If they need a photo, I’ll do it. It’s not for morale. It’s a team approach.”

The trend in litigation over the past couple of years has been a reduction in jury awards and more defense verdicts.  How does this relate to the economy? Everyone is doing studies, and everyone has a different idea on the subject, but the fact of the matter is that something is going on.

Although it is evident than in tough economic times jurors will be loathe to award the astronomical amounts that have received all the attention in prior years, there is another facet of this trend that is sometimes overlooked.  Jurors are more sophisticated and are looking at the evidence more closely than they have historically.  Attribute it to CSI and similar programs, to our “sound-bite” society, or simply to media attention; whatever the reason, jurors are expecting more out of counsel and those who provide what they are looking for are going to get the desired verdict.

 Focus group research has indicated that as a general rule in this economy, the following is true:

• 8 out 10 people think the economy is bad. 
• A person who is pessimistic about the future is less likely to award high damages to a plaintiff. 
• Older jurors are less pessimistic. Pessimistic and concerned jurors are frequently ineffective jurors and may be more critical of the plaintiff, accepting the stereotype of the plaintiff as a greedy person. 
• Jurors still judge the plaintiff more harshly than they do the defendant.
• Jurors who are most personally affected by the economy are least likely to volunteer this information. 
• Jurors are more willing to help someone who embodies social norms. 
• Jurors may not be receptive to arguments of future wage loss unless the person was horribly injured. 
• After exposure to headlines about corporate wrongdoing, jurors are more receptive to the idea that people do bad things in their own self-interest. 
• The recession causes jurors to look more closely at who caused what problem.
• Jurors are less likely to tag “deep pockets” with large verdicts just because they are deep pockets.
• Jurors want more specific and more reasonably presented demonstrative evidence.
• In complicated cases, jurors are looking more closely at evidence and making decisions they can feel good about.

Focus groups and mock trials have been around for years now, and have been implemented by both sides in an effort to determine what problems may be encountered at trial, what exhibits are most effective, which witnesses are a problem.  It is even more imperative in these tough economic times to have an edge.

The well prepared attorney, either plaintiff or defense, will have focused or mock tried his high dollar case in order to determine what works and does not work with today’s jury.  Surprises at trial are usually not pleasant.

The prevalence of blog sites on the internet has resulted in jurors who are increasingly aware of the ins and outs of the jury selection process…and they don’t like it.  Even jurors who are willing and able to serve are dismayed, distressed and somewhat bored by the process; the length of time involved, the apparently “stupid” questions, and the transparency of the goals set by counsel.  

It was obvious from the following blog that jurors have little understanding of the “whys” of the process; an attorney’s attempt at rehabbing a potential juror was just perceived by the potential juror as stupid and annoying and displaying a lack of attention on the part of counsel.

The logic at the civil trial I was looking at was all too apparent. I knew that the prospective juror who declared he was having his own problems with one of the litigants (a company) would never make it to the jury. It was obvious that the company's lawyer wished that particular guy never made it out of bed that morning, although to be fair, it wasn't the guy's fault the lawyer wasn't paying close attention when the matter first came up. "So you've had this problem for five years now, but it's been resolved?" asked the lawyer.

 "No," barked the juror, having just explained that very thing.

"But you're satisfied with the company's actions in its attempts to resolve the matter?" asked the lawyer.

"Not at all." he said, bending his head toward the mic.

"But you could be impartial toward the company?"

"Of course."

Yeah, right.

Juror complaints about the process are rampant, ranging from the uncomfortable seating during voir dire to the mind-numbing boredom of constant waiting.  Some comments unearthed in recent blogs:

I didn't know court could be so funny. The benches they make the prospective jurors sit on, on the other hand, are not at all humorous…

It was clear from the get-go that this trial would be like pulling teeth.  It reeked of frivolous lawsuit, and every juror used their questioning time during the selection process to voice disgust over the amount being discussed…

…delays, breaks, extended lunches.  The life of a juror is that of sitting around looking bored for a really long time.

…lawyers playing gotcha politics and constantly bickering and repeating themselves, boring us all. 

The plaintiff’s lawyer was a Brooklyn-born guido with OCD, overly emotional with petty childish behavior throughout.  He’d repeat himself constantly… generally came across as the standard cliche’ shyster ambulance-chasing lawyer…

The defendant’s lawyer in contrast was the southern old-timey type, slow-talking and sometimes seeming confused, all the while talking in a condescending holier than thou passive-aggressive mode.  Neither seemed pleasant people that I would ever consider hiring for my lawyer.

I have noticed in the last few years that jurors are becoming increasingly aggravated by the system and are using more and better excuses to get out of jury duty; they’re tired of the whole thing and most of them have no desire or inclination to be there.  The most well-thought out and telling comment addressing this issue was by the blogger who posted:

We live in an age when technology is changing, society is changing, and the public’s perception is changing.  If there is anything that is overwhelmingly evident from the past year or so, it is that the majority of the public is sick and tired of the status quo.  People are sick of politics as usual, they are sick of the old guard way of doing things socially and economically, and they are extremely jaded over the outdated and bizarrely structured legal system we have.  So if you’re going to have a jury trial, recognize that people are sick and tired of gotcha politics and the old guard way of the legal system.  We understand that there is certainly procedure that must be followed, but the bickering over nonsense just causes jurors to become jaded. 

The best advice we can give you is to be aware of your audience.  Keep the voir dire as brief and on point as possible; avoid repetition, boring the venire and losing their attention.    This is your opportunity to establish a relationship with your jury.  Make sure the relationship is not dysfunctional.   Recovering function from dysfunction is usually an impossible task in the limited time frame of a trial.