Employment-related litigations often differ from other legal proceedings because they typically encompass a series of events rather than one isolated incident. Effectively litigating an employment case demands a thorough grasp of the client’s workplace, their responsibilities, and a deep understanding of the client. A strong case is built upon a client who executed their job responsibly, communicated effectively, and above all, is truthful.
An initial assessment should involve connecting with colleagues either confidentially or openly, scrutinizing the client’s documented interactions, and spending ample time understanding them to gauge their potential testimony. Jurors, most of whom have job experience, will often reflect on the compatibility of your client as a colleague.
If you have questions about your own legal situation and require a free legal consultation, contact PLBH at (800) 435-7542 for assistance.
Unlocking the Complete Narrative through Discovery
Oftentimes, clients only possess a fragment of the story when they first approach legal counsel. Vital correspondence and documents are often missing from their cache. It’s crucial to acquire these documents early on, ensuring you have the full context. If these documents unveil unsettling facts, it’s beneficial to understand your client’s perspective on them. The goal is to showcase any negative remarks as biased, suggesting a possible double standard in treatment.
Equipping your client with these documents well ahead of depositions can be the linchpin to keeping the case robust. When gearing them up, underline the major themes and what needs validation. Despite the prohibition on contention interrogatories during depositions, clients should articulate how they faced discrimination or harassment. When cross-examining the defendant’s witnesses, understanding company policies can prove advantageous. Highlighting any deviations the company made from its own policies can be a pivotal strategy.
Defendants often craft their version of the narrative, sometimes sprinkling in untruths about your client. Staying focused on the primary themes and employing them during openings, witness cross-examinations, and conclusions can be a winning strategy.
Deep Diving into Documentation
Documents produced by defendants can sometimes appear to counteract your client’s claims. Yet, there are strategies to debunk or reinterpret these documents. For instance, in an employment case, seemingly disadvantageous emails can be repositioned as evidence supporting our client’s claims.
The Power of Demonstrative Evidence
While handling key evidences, being persistent can tip the scales in your favor. Should a crucial piece of evidence remain unproduced post initial discovery, intensify your demands. When a document finally surfaces but is redacted or lacking crucial details, request an unadulterated version. Defendants might raise a barrage of objections, making motions to compel almost a staple in employment cases. Using these pieces of evidence effectively in trial by visually representing them can be compelling.
Witness Credibility: A Double-Edged Sword
Defendants often introduce unexpected witnesses. It’s imperative to research these witnesses extensively, leveraging any available information. For instance, in one case, a key witness’s prior record drastically impacted his credibility.
Furthermore, depositions are invaluable for contradicting witnesses during trials. The saying, “a liar never remembers what they say,” emphasizes the power of consistent questioning.
Evidence and Witness Instructions: The Jury’s Guide
It’s fundamental to understand that evidence isn’t just material but can be testimonies, opinions, and observations. In civil cases, the plaintiff only needs to prove that the defendant is likely responsible for the harm caused, not establish absolute certainty.
Employment trials can sometimes feel like several intertwined tales of interpersonal conflicts, especially when allegations of racial or sexual harassment are at the core. The trustworthiness of testimonies is paramount for a favorable verdict. Discrediting counter-witnesses while emphasizing the integrity and risk faced by supportive witnesses can shift the balance.