You are sitting at counsel table during a jury trial and your adversary gestures toward you and refers to you as a “spin doctor.” Next, your adversary refers to your client, a physician, as someone who “cares more about making money” than about practicing good medicine. You need to quickly decide whether your adversary has crossed the line and whether you should object.
Many attorneys hesitate to object because they fear the jury will react negatively to an interruption or because an objection might make matters worse by drawing attention to the improper remarks. If the comments are made during closing, you might hesitate because you know that counsel is given “broad latitude” in summation and is permitted to advocate passionately for the client. However, there are times when you must object because counsel’s remarks “cross the line beyond fair advocacy and comment.” Risko v. Thompson Muller Auto Group, Inc., 2011 WL 2199497 *10 (N.J. 2011).
This content has been archived.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
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
