Trial Techniques

Powerpoint

In this modern age of technological advancement, powerpoint presentations are one of the most commonly used computer programs for meetings, slideshows and in the legal setting, trials. Not long ago, a trial lawyer used only words to tell their client's story to a jury. Now, powerpoint presentations allow the use of visual aids in telling that story. Where complex factors are present, such as rotational acceleration/deceleration or cavitation, showing as well as telling is a crucial difference in the jury’s understanding of the mechanism of the injury. The Scarlett Law Group, in order to assist the jury with complex expert testimony, routinely utilizes powerpoint presentations to drive home the expert’s testimony. Two examples follow:

Rasmussen v. Shade

On August 19, 2002, Kim Rasmussen was driving his Ford F-250 pick up truck in Roseville, CA when he was rear ended by Defendant Robert Shade at 7-12 mph. This seemingly low impact collision caused only $498 damage to Mr. Rasmussen's vehicle. Despite the low speed of the collision, Mr. Rasmussen experienced severe cognitive problems that would forever alter his life. Fault was undisputedly placed upon defendant Shade. However, the central issue of damages was hotly contested. Attorneys for defendant Shade argued that the forces involved in this low impact accident were not sufficient to cause the injuries that Plaintiff Rasmussen alleged. Most everyone has been in some form of a low impact rear end accident and did not suffer from the injuries the Rasumssen did, so Defendant's argument seemed to be strong.

However, through the use of this powerpoint presentation, among many other pieces of demonstrative evidence, the Scarlett Law Group was able to establish that while the linear acceleration forces were quite low, the rotational acceleration forces involved in the accident were in fact strong enough to cause the traumatic brain injury that Plaintiff Rasmussen suffered. On July 7, 2005, the Placer County Jury understood the injuries that Mr. Rasmussen suffered and awarded him $1,248,024.00, allowing him the medical care that he so desperately needed. Please click on the picture below to view the slideshow used during trial.

Herndon v. Parball Corp.

On July 3, 2000, Mr. and Mrs. Herndon were guests at the Flamingo Hotel in Las Vegas, Nevada. Mr. Herndon was playing slots when one of the legs of the stool he was seated upon slipped into a hole in the casino's floor, throwing Mr. Herndon head first into the slot machine table.

Though the hospital records from the day of the accident indicate only a slight bruise and headache, Mr. Herndon developed problems with executive function and social skills. The defense contended that the forces involved were not sufficient to cause a brain injury. The Scarlett Law Group utilized some of the nation's premier experts on brain injury and physics to establish that the forces were, in fact, sufficient to cause the injuries that Mr. Herndon suffered.

Due to the work of the Scarlett Law Group, a substantial settlement was reached prior to trial recognizing the very high probability that a jury would understand that Mr. Herndon did indeed sustain a brain injury. Click the picture below to view a powerpoint presentation explaining the various tests used to establish the forces involved in this accident:

Imaging

X-Rays

X-rays are one of the most common diagnostic imaging techniques used by medical providers to determine injury. Injuries sustained by our clients such as broken bones, disc protrusions and fractures and even foreign objects left in the body can be clearly shown to a jury through the use of X-ray evidence at trial. The Scarlett Law Group routinely presents this powerful demonstrative evidence to paint a vivid picture for the jury of the injuries our clients have suffered.

CT Scan

While X-rays are clearly helpful for the jury to visualize our clients' injuries, they do have limitations. The Scarlett Law Group often utilizes Computed Tomography Scans (CT Scans) to demonstrate hematomas (collections of blood), contusions (bruising) and edema (swelling) in the head/brain or other areas of the body. CT scans are performed by beaming a series of collimated x-ray beams through the tested body and taking measurements of the extent of tissue absorption.

MRI

Magnetic Resonance Imaging examines body tissue by subjecting the atomic nuclei of the tissues to a magnetic field. The atomic nuclei of the tissues are then stimulated by the field. The response of the tissue allows radiologists to determine areas of damage.

It is important to note that not all brain injuries can be shown by MRI. Where there is no hematoma (subdural or otherwise), or no visible lesions, MRI is limited. However, new advances in this important technology have allowed for more accurate depiction of damage done during trauma.

In 2005, The Scarlett Law Group was one of the first law firms to utilize this technological advancement in the courtroom. Mr. Rasmussen was involved in a seemingly minor, low impact rear end car accident. While less than $500 damage was done to his vehicle, our client suffered from severe cognitive deficits due to the rotational acceleration/deceleration forces acting upon his body. Immediately after the accident, a standard Tessla-1 strength MRI was administered. This MRI did not show any lesions on the brain.

Shortly thereafter, Mr. Rasmussen contacted the Scarlett Law Group for help. Mr. Scarlett agreed to represent him, and recognizing the groundbreaking potential of the newly approved Tessla-3 MRI, sent our client to an imaging center in Las Vegas for such an MRI.

Upon viewing the results, two focal lesions in the anterior and posterior frontal lobes were clearly shown on the T-3 MRI and a conclusive diagnosis of traumatic brain injury was made. In fact, as you can see in the first two images below, when both the T-1 and T-3 MRIs are viewed side by side, one can vaguely make out the lesions on the T-1 that were previously unidentifiable.

PET Scan

A powerful tool for demonstrating brain function is Positron Emission Tomography (PET). While MRI and CT show brain structure, PET shows brain function. In cases where an individual has negative CT or MRI, PET can be useful in nonetheless establishing interruption in normal brain function. PET scans utilize short-lived radioactive isotopes of elements commonly used in brain metabolism. In cases where an individual does not have a hematoma or skull fracture, the use of PET scan technology can demonstrate to a jury that abnormalities exist that are consistent with post concussive syndrome and "mild" TBI. The Scarlett Law Group often uses PET Scans in correlation with neuropsychological testing to convey to the jury the existence and effects of the "invisible injury" our client has suffered.

Click the link below to view a powerpoint presentation which has been kindly provided by Dr. Joseph Wu and the University of California at Irvine Brain Imaging Center.

Powerpoint Presentation Link

SPECT Scan

Single Photon Emission Tomography (SPECT) scans are another commonly used piece of demonstrative evidence. SPECT Scans study circulation and perfusion of the brain, producing regional maps of the distribution of radioactively-labeled tracers in the brain. These maps are of much higher quality and resolution than more commonly applied brain scans, but avoid the high cost and unavailability of PET scans.

The Scarlett Law Group uses SPECT scans to demonstrate brain injury to a jury by showing focal vascular defects due to the brain shutting off its own blood supply to an area of damaged brain tissue. Often times, SPEC scans are also used to help validate neuropsychological assessments.

DTI-Diffusion Tensor Imaging

Diffusion Tensor Imaging is another emerging type of MRI that the Scarlett Law Group is utilizing as cutting edge demonstrative evidence. DTI is able to view portions of the brain which normal MRIs cannot. DTI measures water molecule movement in relation to white track fibers of the brain's white matter. In a normal DTI scan, water molecules move parallel to the white matter tracks. Where traumatic brain injury has occurred, water molecules will move perpendicular to the normal tracks of white matter. The Scarlett Law Group utilizes DTI most often in cases involving Diffuse Axonal Injury where brain damage is not present in just one focal area, but across large portions of the brain. Diffuse Axonal Injury is present in almost half of severe traumatic brain injury, and commonly in mild and moderate traumatic brain injury, so the use of DTI has become a crucial, cutting edge piece of demonstrative evidence used at trial by the Scarlett Law Group to explain complex brain injuries to a jury.

Animations

Computer Enhanced Graphics:

Oftentimes injuries necessitate complex surgical intervention. In order a jury fully understand the extent to which a plaintiff has been forced to undergo life saving surgeries, the Scarlett Law Group routinely utilizes computer enhanced graphics programs during the testimony of the involved surgeons. While this technology is by no means limited to the damage phase of a particular case, its utility in assisting the jury to understand the complex aspects of multiple life saving surgeries cannot be questioned. Though not inexpensive, the Scarlett Law Group routinely utilizes such graphics in order a jury fully understand that which a plaintiff had to endure. Do not forget that trials often occur a year or longer after the plaintiff was forced to endure the life saving surgery. Indeed, at the time of trial, the client may look outwardly as normal as you or I. We find it absolutely critical to take the jury back and have the jury experience as closely as possible that which the plaintiff endured. Two examples follow:

Shi vs. Coach: On April 7, 2005, Celia Shi was struck while walking in a crosswalk by a tour bus making an illegal left-hand turn. As a result of the collision, Ms. Shi sustained multiple skull fractures and internal brain bleeds. The severity of her injuries necessitated four life-saving surgeries performed by neurosurgeons at San Francisco General Hospital. By the time of trial, however, Ms. Shi appeared outwardly normal.

Recognizing the complexity of these surgeries and how crucial it was for a jury to understand what Ms. Shi was forced to go through as a result of the defendants negligent conduct, the Scarlett Law Group utilized the following computer animated recreation at trial.

Click here for a Flash demonstration

Through this animation and other demonstrative evidence presented at trial, the Scarlett Law Group was successful in demonstrating to the jury the injuries and subsequent treatment that Ms. Shi underwent. On March 13, 2007, the jury awarded Ms. Shi $22.8 million for past and future medical expenses, past and future economic losses and past and future non-economic losses.

Bianchi v. GTI: On May 3, 2007, Mr. Drew Bianchi's life was forever altered. He was riding in the back seat of his friend's car when two big-rig trucks collided at or near the centerline of State Route 152. One of the big-rig trucks lost steering capability and collided the vehicle in which Mr. Bianchi was a passenger. Mr. Bianchi suffered catastrophic brain injuries and was air-lifted to a nearby hospital for immediate surgical intervention.

As a result of this collision, Mr. Bianchi underwent several brain surgeries in an attempt to treat the severe brain damage. The Scarlett Law Group utilized the following animation to show the jury the extent of the medical treatment Mr. Bianchi was forced to go through, as well as the injuries this collision caused him.

Due in part to this animation and other demonstrative evidence presented at trial, the Santa Clara jury fully understood not only the extent of the injuries, but the cost of care associated with treatment of this devastating injury. On September 23, 2009, the jury awarded Mr. Bianchi $49.123 million.

Other Animations:

In addition to the surgical recreations above, the Scarlett Law Group commonly uses shorter animations to explain to a jury how complex injuries occur. The short animations below make clear the complex nature of sheering, cavitation and more. Feel free to view the videos below to see examples of these animations:

Photos, Graphs & Charts

From the advent of the analog camera to wide spread use today of the digital camera, use of photography has long been the backbone of the trial lawyer in the court room. Sadly, it was not long ago that judges routinely prohibited the use of certain photographs, at trial, on grounds of prejudice. This is especially so where the photograph graphically captures a horrific injury sustained by a plaintiff. Fortunately, today this preclusive prejudice is encountered with less frequency.

Indeed, digital photography today is extremely assistive to the jury. As above, a picture is worth a thousand words. Where different parts of that picture can be "zoomed", thanks to digital technology, matters not previously viewed with clarity can now be seen with ease.

Not surprisingly, most California Highway Patrol officers now carry digital cameras in their cruisers. Officers routinely and extensively photograph accident scenes. In fact, so thorough and helpful can digital photography actually be, that in a recent case the Scarlett Law Group was able, through experts utilizing each of the digital photographs, to actually prove the impact of two big-rig trucks as they collided with one another and thereafter struck the vehicle in which the Scarlett Law Group's client was a passenger.

What follows below are examples of different photographs utilized by the Scarlett Law Group at trial.

Aerial Photos

Aerial photos are a very important piece of evidence in any automobile accident or other personal injury case. We prepare for and go through trial telling our client's story so the jury can truly understand what that client went through. As in any story, the setting is essential to gaining context and connecting with the characters involved. Use of aerial photography allows the jury to gain that context and connect with our client. Pictured below are just some examples of aerial photography recently used by the Scarlett Law Group.

Accident Photos

Whether personally involved or not, many people have had experience with devastating automobile accidents. The accident photos shown below are examples of demonstrative evidence used in almost every automobile case by the Scarlett Law Group. These photos, while shocking, are very powerful pieces of evidence to present to a jury. A jury can hear about the damage done to the respective vehicles in dollar amounts or the massive forces of acceleration and deceleration acting upon each vehicle, but there is perhaps no more powerful way to make the jury truly understand what our clients have been through than showing them visual images of the often times horrific damage that has resulted from a wreck. Please click on any of the images below to bring up a slideshow of various accident photos for each case.

More Accident Photos

Cole....click on any of these images to open a slideshow, use the arrows L/R to move through the slideshow.

Bianchi....click on any of these images to open a slideshow, use the arrows L/R to move through the slideshow.

Charts & Graphs

Charts and graphs are a clear, concise way to convey information to a jury. While charts and graphs can now easily be included in PowerPoint presentations and computer animations, physical charts and graphs have a very distinct advantage. After the use of a PowerPoint presentation, the screen goes blank and lights come back up. Any and all information contained in the PowerPoint presentation is no longer readily accessible to a jury until deliberations begin. Physical charts and graphs, mounted on an easel can remain in direct view of the jury through witness examinations, cross-examinations, closing arguments and rebuttal. This means that a jury will be looking at and thinking about the information we present throughout the entirety of the trial, rather than just a few minutes.

Blowups

While the Scarlett Law Group routinely uses computer enhanced graphics to explain damage done to complex brain structures, it is also helpful to have still images of the brain, blown up to large size, for the jury to repeatedly look at throughout the trial. For instance, where our client has suffered diffuse axonal sheering, we may utilize a blow up illustration of the brain which demonstrates both the brain structure and the process through which axonal sheering occurs. As was the case with charts and graphs, blow ups have the distinct advantage over computer enhanced animations, because they can remain in view of the jury for nearly the entirety of trial, ensuring the jury's understanding.

Photo Logs

In addition to the use of select photos of the accident scene and aerial views, photo logs are also very helpful in telling our client's story. Taken every few feet on a roadway, photo logs display the roadway in segments, putting the jury in the driver's seat in the moments immediately preceding an often devastating collision.

The photo logs below, used by the Scarlett Law Group in a recent case, did exactly that. The jury was able to visualize the approach of the vehicles immediately prior to impact. These photo logs helped to establish that the State of California maintained a dangerous condition on public property, which lead to a substantial settlement prior to trial. The Scarlett Law Group went on to utilize these photo logs at trial against the remaining defendants and obtained one of the largest, non-punitive, single plaintiff verdicts in the history of Santa Clara County.

Visibility Studies

Visibility Study

In California, Defendants often argue that a Plaintiff was comparatively at fault for the accident occurring. Often times, the Defendant will allege that the Plaintiff could and should have been able to avoid the accident had they themselves not been negligent in their actions.

The video below was used in a case where our client was riding as a passenger in his brother's pick up truck on their way to work early in the morning. They came upon a grape harvesting operation in which a gondola had been left partially on the roadway, with no warning lights or other safety precautions. Though Plaintiff and his brother were traveling within the speed limit for the roadway, the low visibility on that dark morning did not allow them sufficient time to avoid a devastating collision.

To recreate for a jury the conditions as they would have been the morning of the accident, the Scarlett Law Group went to great lengths to produce the following visibility study. This would allow the jury to be in the vehicle as it travelled down the roadway. They could clearly see that by failing to utilize proper warning lights and reflectors, Defendants put our client in an impossible situation. Because of the low visibility of the gondola, our client had no chance to avoid the accident.

The video has three segments. First, a test run is done at 55 miles per hour without a gondola present. Next, the actual accident conditions are recreated to show what our client and the driver of the vehicle would have seen the morning of the accident. Here it is clearly shown that with the conditions that morning, the driver had no opportunity to avoid the collision.

In the third segment of the video, the appropriate safety devices are in place and another test run is performed. It is clearly shown that with the use of these safety devices, our client would have had time to slow to a point where the collision could have easily been avoided and no injury would have occurred.

The fourth and final segment of the video displays a side by side comparison between the test run where the actual accident conditions existed and the test run where the proper safety precautions were present. This comparison clearly shows that if the Defendants had used the required safety precautions, the collision could have easily been avoided.

The visibility study assisted settlement with numerous defendants in this particular case.

Videos

Settlement Brochures:

As mentioned above, a picture is worth a thousand words. It is said that a video, however, is worth millions. Though not inexpensive, the following settlement brochures are powerful tools in telling our clients' stories. In creating these videos, the Scarlett Law Group has family members, friends, teachers and where possible, the plaintiff himself or herself interviewed to describe, through their own eyes, the devastating effects of an accident or injury. Where accident pictures, charts and imaging can often be effective, the pain and sadness in the voices of our client's loved ones can be immensely more powerful. These videos portray our clients as more than just the injuries they have sustained. They portray our clients as real people, allowing the jury to connect with them on a much deeper level. Please take your time viewing the settlement brochures below. Check back often as we constantly update this page with new settlement brochures used in our cases.

Brain Gel

Brain Gel:

For years, the medical profession has scientifically used a material commonly known as "Brain Gel" in order to better study trauma impact to the human brain. In 2005, Randall H. Scarlett, through work with his experts, was the first lawyer in the United States to successfully utilize Brain Gel in a biomechanical stress demonstration of forces acting upon the human brain. Plaintiff was involved in a rear end collision. The G-forces involved were slight, and agreed to by all parties. The issue for Mr. Scarlett was how to best demonstrate for a jury what those forces did, within the skull, to Plaintiff. Accordingly, the seat in which Plaintiff was seated at the time of the collision was removed from the vehicle, Brain Gel was placed in a skull, open at the top. Dots were placed on the Brain Gel in order to better visualize brain movement within the skull itself. An accelerometer was utilized to verify the forces subjected to the seat and skull. Lastly, a high speed camera was utilized to film the movement of the Brain Gel (and thus brain) within the skull. Interestingly, the vector path of the forces upon Brain Gel directly correlated to a T-3 MRI which evidenced two focal lesions, one anterior, and one posterior, in Plaintiff's frontal lobes.

Click on the presentation images below for such demonstration (will open slide show...click NEXT to proceed to see the movement of the Brain Gel).