It has been quite some time since I posted anything here. Apparently all it took to drag me back was a term that has annoyed me for years: trial tech. I despise it, not because there is anything wrong with the technology side of this business, but because of what the term says about how the role has changed. When I first started doing this work, the person sitting in the hot seat was more often called a trial consultant, litigation consultant or presentation consultant. That was not just marketing fluff. There was an expectation that you knew the case, understood the evidence and contributed something beyond knowing how to operate the software. You worked with the case team, helped organize the presentation, gave opinions and used your courtroom experience to help make the case easier to understand. As more people entered the field, the market became increasingly competitive. In my experience, some companies competed by lowering the cost of the person in the courtroom. Along with that ...
The above quote from Aristotle (384-322 B.C.) is the Tao of visual communication. It has been a while since I posted here. Returning to law firm life has kept me very busy the last eight months. Additionally, my self-imposed writer’s block prevents me from publishing unless the content is substantive. I abhor bloggers who post one paragraph or a random thought. That just adds to my impending carpal tunnel generated by gratuitous clicking through rubbish. Anyway, I just completed a trial in Philadelphia and witnessed (no pun intended) a stunning example of visual communication at play. It inspired me to return to this blog and write a tad about my experience. For background, our case had a voluminous amount of data, to the sum of several hundred thousand pages. There were many parties involved, and it was a bench trial, much to the dismay of plaintiff’s counsel. Our judge was an elderly but scholarly man who was interested in the facts and not a sideshow. Therefore, we had the task of ...