According to Philadelphia trial lawyers Tom Innes and Mary DeFusco, preparing your witness for testimony is a bit like training a guide dog: the real work happens long before the leash comes off. In this episode, Tom and Mary talk about how to create control in ever-important prep sessions prior to testimony—and they share hands-on, practical tips that will help your witness give their testimony while staying cool and collected, on track, and under control.  
Topics
4:04  Why preparation is the first step
5:38  Deposing Dr. King on The Pitt
8:11  Your witness’s role  
10:30  Organization of testimony, explained
11:50  Under pressure
13:50  Cross prep
15:33  Practice pointers
19:13  Ethical considerations
23:02  Signoff questions

Quotes
“Practice having the witness speak to the jury both on direct and cross. Speak to the jury—even if all you can do is set up some empty chairs as a jury box.” Tom Innes

“It’s a really bad look in front of a jury when the witness answers every question promptly on direct but then very slowly on cross.” Mary DeFusco

Resources
Tom Innes (bio)
Mary DeFusco (bio)
Judge L. Felipe Restrepo (bio)
Building Trial Skills: Philadelphia (program)
Cross-Examination Math (podcast episode)

From forensics to financials and the medical to the technical, trial lawyers rely on expert witnesses to help fact finders understand complicated concepts and issues in their case. But dealing with experts is an expert technique in itself, so in this episode NITA Program Director Gene Tanaka breaks down the battle-tested process that has brought him success. First, he lays out the standards for expert testimony and traps to avoid, then shares steps for direct examinations, issues in cross, and persuasive techniques. 

Topics
04:20  Why experts are important
05:54  Breadth of expert opinions
07:24  Expert traps
11:44  Standards for expert testimony  
15:28  Five steps for direct examination: Introduction and teaser
17:48  Qualifications
20:10  Red flags in an expert’s background
21:28  Opinion
25:24  Basis for opinion
27:39  Difference of experts’ opinions
28:50  Conclusion
30:19  Persuasive techniques
34:10  Conducting cross
42:06  Signoff questions

Quote
“One of the things that we [attorneys] often do is we rely too much on credentials. We look at an expert and we think, ‘Well, this person has this certification and this level of education, and therefore they must be better than the other person who doesn’t have that.’ But you know, a lot that is just lost on everybody – the trier of fact. They can’t tell the difference between one credential or the other. But what they can tell the difference is whether someone is likeable and whether they’re understandable.” Gene Tanaka

Resources
Gene Tanaka (LinkedIn)
Expert Testimony slides (PPT)
Modern Trial Advocacy: Analysis and Practice (book)
Federal Rules of Evidence with Objections: As Amended to December 1, 2023 (book)
Expert Testimony: A Guide for Expert Witnesses and the Lawyers Who Examine Them (book)
Effective Expert Testimony (book)

With most cases settling before trial, depositions have become the real battleground—and few people know that better than Carl Chamberlin. Carl has spent decades taking and defending depositions in private practice and teaching the craft for over 30 years. In a reprise of one of May the Record Reflect's most popular episodes, he’s here to share how to kick things off the right way—from setting the stage with introductory matters to navigating preliminary and substantive questions. 

Topics

3:22   The purpose of depositions
6:20   Difference between gathering information and obtaining information
10:38 Why depositions are important
12:30 Physical settings for remote depositions
14:15 The “usual stipulations”
17:20 Getting commitments
21:27 Commitments in remote depositions
24:42 Preliminary questions
29:51 Structure of substantive questioning
33:30 First demo
36:57 Key phrases for asking open-ended questions
38:25 And ones to avoid
43:01 Drilling down into a substantive topic
44:18 Second demo
1:04:19 Paying attention and listening
1:06:40 Using exhibits
1:10:15 Dealing with interruptions
1:13:56 Carl’s early depositions
1:16:53 The Effective Deposition
1:21:36 Signoff questions

Quote

“We want to make our questions clear and concise. Simple. The clearer the question, the better the answer. The fewer the objections, the more powerful it is.” Carl Chamberlin

Resources

Carl Chamberlin (LinkedIn)
The Effective Deposition, Sixth Edition (book)

Opera and the courtroom might seem worlds apart—but they share a similar stagecraft. In this episode, Anne Fuchs, professional opera singer and Director of Communications for the Indiana Court of Appeals, reveals how posture and breath can transform your voice into a powerful advocacy tool. From mastering vocal control to learning a little Italian, this conversation will help you speak with confidence and command attention when it matters most.

Topics
02:30  Why vocal quality matters
04:03  Assessing your voice and why we hate the sound of it
07:13  Transatlantic accent
08:34  Introverts and extroverts, and skills 
13:42  La Postura
21:16  Appoggio
33:05  Legato
41:26  Chiaroscuro
39:41  Nasality and vocal fry
50:20  Opera and the appellate court
55:23  Signoff questions

Quote
“Confidence is a skill set. It is not a personality trait. And so as much as it might feel like, Wow, that big, loud, bombastic person with that amazing trial experience, and Look at how he just commands the courtroom with that voice—that may be something that’s inherent to him. It may be something that he learned. But it is 100% true that every single person can learn how to use their voice more confidently and more effectively, without being an extrovert, without it being something that just came to them naturally. There are specific skills you can learn, and anybody can do it.” Anne Fuchs

Resources
Anne Fuchs (bio)
Foxy Opera (30-minute private coaching, enter Secret49 for savings)
Vocal Warm-Up Exercises (cheat sheet)
Point Well Made: Persuasive Oral Advocacy (book)

For the first time in history, attorneys from as many as five generations can be found practicing law together. From veteran trial lawyers in their 70s and up to Gen Z associates just starting out, the generational diversity in today’s legal workforce is unprecedented. In this episode, Professor Marian Braccia of Temple University Beasley School of Law discusses how generational identity influences legal practice, challenges stereotypes about Gen Z lawyers, and offers insights into fostering understanding and mentorship across age groups.

Topics
00:58  Generational span in law offices
04:40  Gen Z stereotypes and realities
05:53  Overview of generations in law
08:35  Defining characteristics by generation
26:37  Gen Z values and “sea change”
29:58  Generational mix in legal workforce
32:02  Authority and leadership styles
36:13  Policies and procedures
39:41  Decision-making preferences
42:55  Communication styles
47:58  Feedback and critique preferences
52:30  Generational tensions and perceptions
58:42  Recognition and rewards
01:01:51  Recommendations for law firms
01:07:20  Signoff questions

Quote
“We are talking about the success of the profession, we are talking about the longevity of the profession, and we want that to be something that doesn’t have to be reinvented every generation. We want to see continuity, and the only way we can do that is for there to be meaningful collaboration between the generations when it’s time to pass the baton.” Marian Braccia

Resources
Marian Grace Braccia (bio)
The Generations War Comes to the Law Firm (article)
Why We Mistake the Wholesomeness of Gen Z for Conservative (article)

Rule 30(b)(6) depositions can be a game-changer in litigation—but only if you know how to use them strategically. In this episode, former Assistant U.S. Attorney and current Wilmington Law professor Veronica Finkelstein shares expert guidance on understanding the purpose and power of a 30(b)(6) deposition, identifying the right corporate representative, drafting precise specifications, and preparing your designee for examination. Whether you're deposing a Fortune 500 company or a little mom-and-pop shop, this episode will fine-tune your approach to corporate testimony.

Topics
4:23     What is a 30(b)(6) deposition?   
7:11     Why all trial lawyers should know about 30(b)(6) depositions
9:40     How deposing 30(b)(6) witnesses is different
14:27    Meet-and-confer requirement about specifications
17:44    Drafting specifications
20:20    Benefit of taking 30(b)(6) depositions
23:57    Qualities of a desirable corporate designee
25:54    Designees and fact witnesses
29:21    Corporate counsel and deposing counsel preparations
35:40    Who represents the designee?
40:05    Nonresponsive or jerk designees
43:24    Things to be mindful of during examination
45:39    When interrogatories are preferable
46:56    Cases to know: QBE and Marker
49:42    Deposition Skills: Philadelphia
51:53    Sign-off questions

Quote
“This is one of the few times in litigation when you get to pick your witness, so pick somebody good. Don’t pick somebody who’s the CEO of the company who doesn’t have time to get educated. Don’t pick somebody in HR who’s been following the policies wrong for the last 20 years and you’re never gonna unteach. Pick somebody who’s gonna be a really good mouthpiece on behalf of the company who you can educate properly.” Veronica Finkelstein

Resources
Veronica Finkelstein (bio)
J.C. Lore (bio)
Deposition Skills: Philadelphia (program)
NITA Women in Trial (program)
QBE Ins. Corp. v. Jorda Enters. Inc. (case)
Marker v. Union Fidelity Life Ins. Co. (case)
Law 360 article (PDF)

Depositions can be a minefield—and not just because of the facts. In this episode of May the Record Reflect, trial attorney Whitney Untiedt returns to share her expert strategies for navigating the disruptive behaviors of difficult counsel and witnesses. From talkers and interrupters to charmers and egomaniacs, Whitney breaks down the types of jerks you’ll encounter and how to stay focused, professional, and in control. Whether you’re taking or defending a deposition, this episode offers practical tools, real-world stories, and a reminder that your attitude is your greatest ally.

Topics

4:52     Obstreperous behaviors   

9:45      When the jerk is the witness

12:30    Strategies for handling witnesses

16:28    Preparing for opposing counsel

18:27    In-the-moment responses

23:16    Socialized for niceness

27:29    Supporting your client

31:45    What not to do

37:39    Rules about lawyer conduct

43:53    Remote versus in-person depositions

52:51    Why do lawyers act like jerks

57:57    A war story

1:01:01  Florida programs

1:07:01  Signoff questions

Quote

“The worst jerks are the ones that kill you with kindness than the ones who try to come at you with a butcher knife.” Whitney Untiedt

Resources

Whitney Untiedt (bio)

Deposition Skills: Florida (program)

Jayme Cassidy (bio)

Building Trial Skills: Florida (program)

Long hours, heavy caseloads, high stakes—such is the modern trial practice. But when lawyers represent survivors of violent or traumatic incidents, they often experience next-level stress caused by empathetic engagement. In this episode, UNT Dallas College of Law professor and JAMS neutral mediator, arbitrator, and special master Angela Downes introduces listeners to vicarious trauma and its effects on body and mind, how vicarious trauma differs from burnout, and how to recognize compassion fatigue in yourself and your colleagues. Most importantly, Professor Downes discusses effective stress-management strategies that would benefit anyone with a busy trial practice.

Topics
3:46    What is vicarious trauma?   
4:15    Lawyers, vicarious trauma, and burnout
7:31    Indicators of vicarious trauma and getting support
15:49  How firms can help
17:40  Self-care strategies
27:55  ABA studies on lawyer stress
31:02  More strategies
35:09  Recognizing vicarious trauma in others
38:20  New generation attunement to wellness
40:24 Sign-off questions

Quote
“So many of us are defined by the work that we do, and we are more than that. We are more than just … being attorneys and counselors. Although it’s a big part of us, there are so many sides to what we do and who we are as people.” Professor Angela Downes

Resources
Professor Angela Downes (bio)
NITA Women in Trial (program)
Stress, Drink, Leave (article)
ABA Profile of the Legal Profession (article)
ABA Directory of Legal Assistance Programs (resource)

Depositions are a key building block in legal disputes, especially for cases that proceed to trial. According to veteran trial lawyer John Farrell, properly handling an exhibit so it’s admissible at trial is an overlooked skill that can, and should, be practiced until it becomes second nature. In this episode, John reveals eight crucial steps for handling documents that ensure your deposition flows smoothly and exhibits are admitted for trial. He breaks down the process step by step, gives the exact sample language that ensures exhibits are properly marked and admitted, and suggests ways to keep court reporters and judges pleased with your professionalism. 

Topics
3:59  Asking questions before marking a document 
5:35  When witnesses want to see a document first
7:48  Making deposition exhibits admissible at trial
8:30  Eight steps for handling exhibits: Step 1
9:36  Step 2
10:35  Step 3
12:08  Demonstrations of marking different documents
25:26  Step 4 , and helping the court reporter
27:59  Step 5, and the important question to ask your witness
29:12  Step 6, and two more important questions
32:15  Step 7
33:37  Step 8
35:35  Three-article series on depositions
37:23  Signoff questions

Quote
“‘Bears the word’ . . . is the safe phrase that judges like to hear.” John Farrell

Resources
John Farrell (bio)
Deposition articles (1, 2, 3)
Refreshing Recollection and Impeachment (article)

Content Warning: This episode discusses, in non-graphic terms, representing intimate partner violence survivors. 

Being a trial lawyer is one of the toughest, most demanding professions out there, and when you’re representing family members in distress it’s even more so. Hofstra Law professor Barbara Barron discusses advocacy challenges faced by lawyers working with survivors of intimate partner violence, or IPV. Although some details are particular to IPV survivor representation, trial lawyers in nearly every practice area will find Barbara’s reflections on supporting reluctant or intimidated witnesses during testimony, dealing with pro se opposing counsel, and handling emotional witnesses or clients to be applicable to their own high-stakes cases. 

Topics
4:00  What is IPV? 
6:56  How IPV survivors differ from other crime victims
11:23  Implicit biases judges or jurors might have about IPV 
12:24  Types of evidence
14:39  Special accommodations against intimidation
16:09  Defendant as pro se counsel
19:42  Preparing for direct and cross-examination
23:22  Emotions, or none, during testimony
26:12  Preparing for anxiety
29:16  Counsel and vicarious trauma
31:53  Public Interest Award and advocacy programs

 Quote
“In the case of the pro se defendant, and dealing with that person and having to answer questions on cross, the questions may not be as pristine as an experienced or talented trial lawyer’s may be, and it may not be as controlling a situation as anticipated. If the questions are such that it allows the witness to answer more than yes or no, where’s the control?” Barbara Barron

Resources
Barbara Barron (bio)
Building Trial Skills: New York–Hofstra (program)
Half-Day Intensives: Online (programs)