The Art of the Defense Verdict: How Fowler White Shareholder Rory Jurman Does It
The Fort Lauderdale litigator tells the Daily Business Review it's all in taking the abstract and molding it into something relatable.
January 15, 2019 at 03:53 PM
4 minute read
In 2013, a retired orthodontist trips over a table cloth and falls while vacationing at the Four Seasons Resort in Palm Beach, possibly necessitating serious surgeries later on. A year later, a manufacturing associate residing in North Florida gets her hand caught in a conveyor belt and sustains permanent injuries that she claims prevent her from earning a living.
A cursory scan might register both of these scenarios as open-and-shut cases, just two more examples of bystanders harmed by the negligence of larger entities acting irresponsibly. And yet in December, Fort Lauderdale litigator Rory Jurman was able to persuade juries into siding with parties most would deem impossible to identify with.
“Juries really latch onto common themes that they already believe,” Jurman said. “And you have to be able to deal with them. Those themes are sometimes more important than the actual evidence.”
Jurman, a commercial litigator and shareholder at Fowler White Burnett, recently represented the Four Seasons in a suit brought against the luxury brand by the widow of Dr. Jeffrey Norkin. The suit alleged Jurman's client was responsible for two surgeries Norkin underwent after his fall at the Four Seasons. The complaint also claimed these surgeries prevented Norkin from receiving chemotherapy treatment for his cancer, thereby causing his untimely passing. Likewise, Jurman also served as the defense attorney for Massachusetts-based manufacturer R T Engineering. The company had a suit brought against it by Cheri Nuss, an employee of Carlisle Interconnect Technologies in St. Augustine, after her hand was mangled in a machine built by R T Engineering.
With Jurman's help, jurors returned a defense verdict for the Four Seasons and placed the predominant fault for Nuss's injuries on her employer, rather than R T Engineering, thus producing a far smaller verdict than expected.
Under Florida law, the jury is allowed to apportion fault in a strict liability case to the employer that did not manufacture the machine, said Spohrer & Dodd attorney Keith Maynard. Maynard represented Nuss in her suit against R T Engineering. “So even though the jury found that the manufacturer was strictly liable for manufacturing a defective machine … the comparative fault significantly reduced what the plaintiff will be able to recover for her medical care.”
If there was a common thread between the two cases, Jurman said it's that the plaintiffs in both were understandably sympathetic figures. With that being the case, it fell on the attorney to make his own clients — large corporate entities that carry their own baggage in public perception — to be just as, if not more, relatable in the minds of jurors.
Jurman did this by focusing on the people in the employ of his clients.
“I made it small and I made it personal, so that jurors could relate,” Jurman explains with reference to the R T Engineering case. ”I called three witnesses who were involved in the production and design and set up of the machine, and they resonated as common, everyday people.” He added it was important to do so “respectfully” and in a way “the jurors can relate to them as people and how much they cared about what they were doing.”
Jurman also said the plaintiffs' arguments in both cases fell flat as they “never really brought in evidence or people” that communicated a story beyond a conventional narrative of corporate greed. “It's not running away from the facts, the good and the bad, but putting them all together as one consistent trial theme and story,” he said. “A lot of trial attorneys don't focus on maintaining their own credibility throughout the trial. They'll make an argument because they can, not realizing it could backfire and hurt their credibility if a juror rejects those arguments.”
“So in both trials we made very consistent, credible arguments at all times conceding issues that we needed to concede and sticking to what the jurors may believe in a fashion that they will be with you, so to speak,” Jurman continued. “They were both complex and difficult cases. We had to thread the needle on both of them.”
The attorneys for Norkin's estate, Gregg and Darryn Silverstein of Aventura firm Silverstein, Silverstein & Silverstein, did not respond to a request for comment by press time.
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 AllFlorida Law Firms Brace for Category 5 Hurricane Milton
These Florida Courts Are Closing Amid Category 4 Hurricane Milton
$25M Award: Jury Finds Hospital Negligent After Patient Raped
The 'Biden Effect' on Senior Attorneys: Should I Stay or Should I Go?
9 minute readTrending Stories
Who Got The Work
Dechert partners Andrew J. Levander, Angela M. Liu and Neil A. Steiner have stepped in to defend Arbor Realty Trust and certain executives in a pending securities class action. The complaint, filed July 31 in New York Eastern District Court by Levi & Korsinsky, contends that the defendants concealed a 'toxic' mobile home portfolio, vastly overstated collateral in regards to the company's loans and failed to disclose an investigation of the company by the FBI. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Pamela K. Chen, is 1:24-cv-05347, Martin v. Arbor Realty Trust, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Arthur G. Jakoby, Ryan Feeney and Maxim M.L. Nowak from Herrick Feinstein have stepped in to defend Charles Dilluvio and Seacor Capital in a pending securities lawsuit. The complaint, filed Sept. 30 in New York Southern District Court by the Securities and Exchange Commission, accuses the defendants of using consulting agreements, attorney opinion letters and other mechanisms to skirt regulations limiting stock sales by affiliate companies and allowing the defendants to unlawfully profit from sales of Enzolytics stock. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Andrew L. Carter Jr., is 1:24-cv-07362, Securities and Exchange Commission v. Zhabilov et al.
Who Got The Work
Clark Hill members Vincent Roskovensky and Kevin B. Watson have entered appearances for Architectural Steel and Associated Products in a pending environmental lawsuit. The complaint, filed Aug. 27 in Pennsylvania Eastern District Court by Brodsky & Smith on behalf of Hung Trinh, accuses the defendant of discharging polluted stormwater from its steel facility without a permit in violation of the Clean Water Act. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Gerald J. Pappert, is 2:24-cv-04490, Trinh v. Architectural Steel And Associated Products, Inc.
Who Got The Work
Michael R. Yellin of Cole Schotz has entered an appearance for S2 d/b/a the Shoe Surgeon, Dominic Chambrone a/k/a Dominic Ciambrone and other defendants in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The case, filed July 15 in New York Southern District Court by DLA Piper on behalf of Nike, seeks to enjoin Ciambrone and the other defendants in their attempts to build an 'entire multifaceted' retail empire through their unauthorized use of Nike’s trademark rights. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Naomi Reice Buchwald, is 1:24-cv-05307, Nike Inc. v. S2, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Sullivan & Cromwell partner Adam S. Paris has entered an appearance for Orthofix Medical in a pending securities class action arising from a proposed acquisition of SeaSpine by Orthofix. The suit, filed Sept. 6 in California Southern District Court, by Girard Sharp and the Hall Firm, contends that the offering materials and related oral communications contained untrue statements of material fact. According to the complaint, the defendants made a series of misrepresentations about Orthofix’s disclosure controls and internal controls over financial reporting and ethical compliance. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Linda Lopez, is 3:24-cv-01593, O'Hara v. Orthofix Medical Inc. et al.
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