Abraham Z Melamed

June 04, 2018 | New York Law Journal

When the primary reason plaintiff seeks to introduce rebuttal testimony is to simply bolster their own case and counter the defendant's, courts generally do not permit the rebuttal testimony.

By Jeff S. Korek and Abraham Z. Melamed

11 minute read

June 07, 2017 | New York Law Journal

Jeff S. Korek and Abraham Z. Melamed write that although the theory is rooted in a U.S. Supreme Court decision more than 130 years old, it is a decision that has never been overturned, and is aged like a fine wine, ready to be trotted out and showcased in an argument that attorneys should be bound at trial by their opening statements.

By Jeff S. Korek and Abraham Z. Melamed

10 minute read

November 23, 2015 | New York Law Journal

Jeff S. Korek and Abraham Z. Melamed write: One extremely effective, yet fairly uncommon method of taking advantage of the first, and likely most important impression an attorney will make on a jury—a method that can potentially win a case from the start—involves the use of visual aids in conjunction with an opening statement.

By Jeff S. Korek and Abraham Z. Melamed

14 minute read

November 20, 2015 | New York Law Journal

Jeff S. Korek and Abraham Z. Melamed write: One extremely effective, yet fairly uncommon method of taking advantage of the first, and likely most important impression an attorney will make on a jury—a method that can potentially win a case from the start—involves the use of visual aids in conjunction with an opening statement.

By Jeff S. Korek and Abraham Z. Melamed

14 minute read

July 17, 2015 | New York Law Journal

Jeff S. Korek and Abraham Z. Melamed write: Oftentimes lawyers become so entrenched in doing the orthodox that they end up losing out on great opportunities to strengthen credibility with a jury. What's more, attorneys can get caught up in the vision of fighting tooth and nail, line by line, and as a result miss out on important perspectives that can help their case simply because they refuse to think outside the box.

By Jeff S. Korek and Abraham Z. Melamed

11 minute read

July 16, 2015 | New York Law Journal

Jeff S. Korek and Abraham Z. Melamed write: Oftentimes lawyers become so entrenched in doing the orthodox that they end up losing out on great opportunities to strengthen credibility with a jury. What's more, attorneys can get caught up in the vision of fighting tooth and nail, line by line, and as a result miss out on important perspectives that can help their case simply because they refuse to think outside the box.

By Jeff S. Korek and Abraham Z. Melamed

11 minute read