In this episode of "The Trial Lawyer's Handbook" podcast series, litigation attorney Dan Small explains the importance of maintaining control during cross-examination by asking short, clear questions. Mr. Small advises to avoid the temptation to ask witnesses to agree with characterizations or conclusions and instead to focus on what the witness saw, heard and did. He also notes an effective approach is to build a case "brick by brick," presenting a series of factual questions that lead the jury to draw the desired conclusion on its own.

For more, visit: https://hklaw.com/en/insights/media-entities/2024/08/more-on-cross-examination-building-a-case-brick-by-brick

More on Cross-Examination: Building a Case Brick by Brick

In this episode of his "The Trial Lawyer's Handbook" podcast series, litigation attorney Dan Small discusses effective strategies for closing arguments in trials. Mr. Small emphasizes two key principles: not asking for more than necessary to win the case and clearly articulating what you want from the jury. He stresses not only the importance of clearly explaining the desired outcome but also how to avoid common pitfalls in closing arguments.

For more, visit: https://www.hklaw.com/en/insights/media-entities/2024/10/podcast-in-closing-arguments-dont-forget-to-ask

In Closing Arguments, Don't Forget to Ask

In this episode of "The Trial Lawyer's Handbook" podcast series, litigation attorney Dan Small discusses how to learn the intricate process of trials. He shares valuable advice for attorneys looking to improve their courtroom skills, including reading educational books, observing other professionals in action, seeking guidance from seasoned trial attorneys, honing skills outside the courtroom and gaining experience as an arbitrator or a judge.

This Extraordinary Process Called "Trials"

Everyone has their own unique career path. In this episode of "The Trial Lawyer's Handbook," litigation attorney Dan Small shares his personal journey, highlighting how he initially planned to become a teacher before three developments steered him toward a career as a trial lawyer. Prior to entering private practice, he amassed a wealth of knowledge as a prosecutor in the Criminal Division of the U.S. Department of Justice. Throughout this series, he will discuss these experiences and the lessons he learned from them, offering valuable insights to listeners at all stages of their legal careers.

There Is No Right Path

In this episode of his "The Trial Lawyer's Handbook" podcast series, litigation attorney Dan Small examines the devastating Farmers Export grain elevator disaster, where 18 employees died in a grain dust explosion, and explains how this case fits into the broader history of the prosecution of white collar crime. Traditionally, health and safety violations were addressed through civil lawsuits, leaving managers and similar personnel untouched by the legal system. However, the creation of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) in 1970 introduced criminal penalties for serious violations, signaling a shift in how such cases could be handled. Following a series of fatal explosions in the grain elevator industry, the U.S. Department of Justice launched a grand jury investigation, culminating in the indictment of executives at Farmers Export for violations of the Occupational Health and Safety Act.

The Law as a Force for Change

In this episode of "The Trial Lawyer's Handbook" podcast series, litigation attorney Dan Small breaks down a powerful cross-examination technique for challenging a witness' credibility that he calls "The Three C's": Commit, Credit and Confront. Using a real example from the Farmers Export grain elevator explosion trial, the episode illustrates how to skillfully expose a witness' prior inconsistent statements to undermine their testimony. By first having the witness commit to their current testimony, then credit their previous statement and finally confront them with the contradiction, Mr. Small was able to successfully dismantle a key defense witness' credibility. This episode offers valuable insights for trial lawyers aiming to master effective witness impeachment strategies.

The Three C’s for Addressing Prior Inconsistent Statements

Litigation attorney Dan Small unexpectedly took the lead in prosecuting the high-profile case of the Farmers Export grain elevator explosion, a major incident in Galveston, Texas, that resulted in the deaths of 18 people in 1977. In this episode of "The Trial Lawyer's Handbook," he shares this extraordinary anecdote that threw him into a panic just two years out of law school. The case's lead counsel, who was the chief of the Criminal Division at the Houston U.S. Attorney's Office, had a scheduling conflict, and Mr. Small was told the judge would not grant a continuance. The chief informed Mr. Small that another experienced trial attorney already in the area would step in, but Mr. Small soon realized this attorney was there not to lead, only to assist. So, he prepared for trial.

"Ready for Trial?"

Sometimes, it can pay off to bend the rules. In this episode of his "Trial Lawyer's Handbook" podcast series, litigation attorney Dan Small reflects on his experience prosecuting the Farmer's Export grain elevator explosion case. He recalls how the defense's grain dust expert struck him as "too brief" and "too smooth." Trusting his instincts rather than simply following standard procedure, he began to rigorously question the witness during cross-examination, asking both open-ended and leading questions to test his expertise. After more than an hour of persistent inquiry, Mr. Small was able to reveal that the expert was not as knowledgeable as he initially seemed, resulting in the breakdown of a key part of the opposing side's case.

Follow the Rules … Most of the Time

In the second part of this special guest episode of "The Trial Lawyer's Handbook" podcast series, litigation attorney Dan Small interviews Ian Ratner, CEO of GlassRatner and B. Riley Advisory Services. Together they delve into the critical topic of expert witness preparation, emphasizing the importance of thorough preparation and knowing the boundaries of the expert's role. Mr. Ratner shares his extensive experience and stresses that even seasoned experts benefit from diligent preparation that helps them understand the case inside out. Mr. Small highlights three pillars of expert testimony — expertise, passion and clarity — and stresses that it's critical to translate technical jargon into "plain old English" that juries can understand. Mr. Ratner also offers insights into common mistakes lawyers make when preparing experts, the trend of overly aggressive depositions and the often lonely nature of the expert witness role.

Part II: Being an Expert Is a Lonely Business

In this episode of his "The Trial Lawyer's Handbook" podcast series, litigation attorney Dan Small recounts a compelling story from Appling County, Georgia, where corruption and drug smuggling under a powerful sheriff threatened the integrity of the community. A local resident motivated by a sense of justice, but lacking law enforcement experience, took it upon himself to run for sheriff. After narrowly winning, he sought federal assistance and collaborated with the FBI and U.S. Attorney's Office in an effort to save his county. The episode highlights the slow, complex federal investigation involving Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organization Act (RICO) charges, undercover operations and community doubt amid procedural delays. In sharing this case, Mr. Small reflects on how legal battles impact real lives and communities.

Walking Tall

In this episode of "The Trial Lawyer's Handbook" podcast series, litigation attorney Dan Small reflects on the dangerous yet invaluable role of an undercover agent, exemplified by the Cammarata Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) case. The Cammarata Organization, like many organized criminal groups, was highly secretive, and building evidence for trial would be challenging without insider testimony. Working alongside the Texas Rangers, Mr. Small befriended skilled undercover agents and learned their strategies for creating a false persona. The episode offers a glimpse into infiltrating a criminal organization, as well as amusing anecdotes from Mr. Small's first attempt at going undercover at a local honky-tonk.

Actors on a Stage

In this episode of "The Trial Lawyer's Handbook" podcast series, litigation attorney Dan Small explains the exclusionary rule, which states that evidence obtained by illegal methods must be excluded at trial. In the Cammarata drugs-and-murder Racketeering Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) case, a voluntary eight-page confession was initially suppressed under the exclusionary rule because the Texas Rangers did not include the arrested individual's last name on the warrant. Mr. Small appealed the decision, and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ruled in his favor, making the confession admissible at trial. The ruling helped establish the "good-faith exception" to the exclusionary rule, which was soon officially adopted by the U.S. Supreme Court.

Bad Facts Make Bad Law

In this episode of "The Trial Lawyer’s Handbook" podcast, litigation attorney Dan Small describes the unnatural environment of the courtroom and the importance of preparing witnesses for the off-putting rhythm of testimony that he summarizes as "question, pause, answer, stop." In the corruption case United States v. Bert Lance, because the defense sought to call numerous character witnesses, the judge limited counsel to four legalistic questions. The most notable witness, Miss Lillian, the elderly mother of then-President Jimmy Carter, had known Lance his whole life and could have played a key role in his defense. However, she was not prepared for the unusual phrasing of the questions and, after an 18-hour flight to get to court, concluded her testimony in about two-and-a-half minutes. Mr. Small reminds the listeners that every witness is Miss Lillian and must be prepared accordingly.

Miss Lillian "Testifies": The Importance of Witness Preparation

In this episode of "The Trial Lawyer's Handbook" podcast series, litigation attorney Dan Small delves into the debate on using interpreters for witnesses in the courtroom. In some instances there is no choice: A witness who cannot understand English requires an interpreter. But when it's a gray area, some lawyers argue that an interpreter diminishes the connection between the witness and the jury. Mr. Small disagrees and offers a humorous anecdote from the corruption case United States v. Wallen, which he prosecuted, to support his pro-interpreter stance. He closes by reminding the listeners that misunderstandings often hurt your case and that interpreters help minimize them for both sides.

The Benefits of Using an Interpreter

In this special guest episode of "The Trial Lawyer's Handbook" podcast series, litigation attorney Dan Small talks with Miami litigation attorney Jose Casal about his recent experience serving as a juror in the Miami-Dade courthouse. Mr. Casal states he wished he had the opportunity to serve on a jury at the beginning of his career because of the perspectives it gave him on how the jury thinks and operates. Sitting on the other side of the bench made him realize that tactics such as objections and impeachments were often seen by jurors as annoying and ineffective, merely slowing down the trial and distracting from its main points. Similarly, the case featured numerous claims and objections, resulting in a 22-page verdict that Mr. Casal found confusing even as a trained lawyer. Based on this experience, Mr. Small and Mr. Casal agree that presenting your case simply and clearly is far more beneficial and convincing for Juror No. 6 than legal technicalities they do not understand. 

The View from the Jury Box

In the first part of this special guest episode of "The Trial Lawyer's Handbook" podcast series, litigation attorney Dan Small is joined by Partner Eric Alexander, who leads the firm's Product Liability – Life Sciences Team. Mr. Small talks with Mr. Alexander about the transition from being in the back row of a trial team to having a stand-up role. After reflecting on the beginning of his legal career, Mr. Alexander offers advice for young litigators on how to prepare for a trial and how to best support the attorneys on your team, plus some important don'ts to avoid in the courtroom. Mr. Alexander also emphasizes that there is no one way to approach a trial. Taking an approach that fits your case and fits who you are is important and will help you to come across as genuine.

Part I - Going from Young Associate to Veteran Lawyer

In the second part of this special guest episode of "The Trial Lawyer's Handbook" podcast series, litigation attorney Dan Small is once again joined by Partner Eric Alexander, who leads the firm's Product Liability – Life Sciences Team. This episode's conversation focuses on product liability trials and how they differ from other types of litigation, as well as recent shifts in juror attitudes and the effects on expert witness selection and preparation.  Mr. Small shares an anecdote to emphasize that getting the jury to like you isn't just a part of trial, it's the only part of trial. For his part, Mr. Alexander suggests that changes in juror dynamics were likely accelerated by COVID-19 and the associated shutdowns. The attorneys agree that a strong expert nowadays is defined more by the ability to speak "juror's English" than by degrees or professional experience. The dialogue offers a behind-the-scenes look into the world of product liability litigation and the factors that can determine success in the courtroom.

Part II - Recent Changes in Jury Dynamics and How to Prepare Your Expert Accordingly

In this episode of "The Trial Lawyer's Handbook" podcast, litigation attorney Dan Small explores the complexity of federal corruption cases. He highlights a matter he handled as an assistant U.S. attorney in the Boston U.S. Attorney's Office Public Corruption Unit: a case in Brockton, Massachusetts, in which the IRS uncovered corrupt relationships between contractors and Frank Wallen, the city's superintendent of sewers and then-commissioner of public works. Mr. Small shares insights into how the case arose, what work his team focused on and why it was so difficult to prosecute.

The Challenge of Corruption

In this episode of his "The Trial Lawyer's Handbook" podcast series, litigation attorney Dan Small emphasizes the importance of providing the jury with all relevant facts to help them discern the truth. At times, however, court decisions can hinder a party's ability to tell the whole story. This was true in the United States v. Anzalone case, which Mr. Small prosecuted. Ted Anzalone was charged with extortion and money laundering, but because both charges involved secret cash transactions, it was difficult to present non-circumstantial evidence to the jury. To make matters worse, the defense counsel persuaded the judge to sever the two charges, making it nearly impossible to corroborate the evidence. This episode highlights the importance of always fighting to tell the full narrative.

New tracks tagged #Dan Small