Building a Dream Team: Best Practices for Multi-Law-Firm Trial Teams
Building a "dream team" with lawyers across multiple firms takes structure, planning, and determination on the front end—but the effort is worth it when those efforts serve the common goal of advancing the client's best interests.
August 23, 2022 at 12:17 PM
6 minute read
As more and more trials involve counsel from multiple law firms, it is important to set trial teams up for success. After obtaining a defense verdict in a two-week long trial in Orlando, with seven lawyers from five different states and two different law firms, the authors reflected on what made their trial team a "Dream Team," from both the client and lawyer perspective.
|Who Is Doing What?
One of the most important aspects to maintaining an effective multiple-law-firm team is establishing, early on, who is going to be doing what. It needs to be clear to the team, the client, and (eventually) the jury which attorney, for example, is leading the charge. It is also helpful to clearly designate a point person for talking to the client and talking to opposing counsel throughout trial. Designating an assistant or paralegal or outside vendor to handle the day-to-day logistics is essential so these tasks don't default to senior members of the team (all too often senior women), who should be focused on the most important tasks of trial.
Having designated roles is a simple, but necessary, requirement to maintaining an effective multiple law firm team. To assure success, facilitate discussions early regarding the roles each member will be playing in the case, the tasks they will be taking on, and how key decisions will be escalated to the client. By clearly delineating everyone's role from the start, each member can take ownership of their duties and become comfortable in their position on the team. Such delineation promotes teamwork and collaboration, and it communicates to the client that every item is being efficiently handled.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllA Blueprint for Targeted Enhancements to Corporate Compliance Programs
7 minute readThree Legal Technology Trends That Can Maximize Legal Team Efficiency and Productivity
Corporate Confidentiality Unlocked: Leveraging Common Interest Privilege for Effective Collaboration
11 minute readLaw Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1Tom Girardi's Lawyers Want Next Month's Sentencing Delayed
- 2About the Awards: Florida Legal Awards 2025 Q&A with Regional Managing Editor Katie Hall
- 3Trump Nominates Ex-SEC Chief Jay Clayton to Helm Southern District of New York US Attorney's Office
- 4Steward Health CEO Saga Signals Escalation of Coercive Congressional Oversight Against Private Parties
- 5'They Should Have Tried to Negotiate': Jury Finds Against Insurer
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250