Drawing from a rich and candid conversation among three distinguished North Carolina judges—the Honorable Robert Christopher Dillon (Chief Judge of the Court of Appeals), the Honorable Matthew Houston (Special Superior Court Judge for Complex Business Court Cases), and the Honorable Aaron Berlin (Superior Court Judge)—this article distills practical wisdom for attorneys seeking to elevate their courtroom presence and advocacy.
1. Preparation Is Power
2. Know Your Audience: The Judge
3. Briefs Matter—Make Them Count
4. Credibility Over Combat
5. Courtroom Comfort Comes with Experience
6. Use Technology Wisely
7. Understand Local Rules & Procedures
8. Preserve Issues for Appeal Thoughtfully
9. Be the Lawyer Others Want to Work With
10. Take Advantage of Training Opportunities
*This article is based on a panel discussion moderated by Jasmine Pitt of Akerman, featuring Chief Judge Dillon, Judge Berlin, and Judge Houston, held during the 48th Annual Meeting on Saturday, June 14, 2025, in Wilmington, NC.
Print Article
by Betsy Keesler, BSN, RN, CLCP
A soundly constructed life care plan is an evidence-based document that comprehensively identifies an individual's current and future care needs as related to a catastrophic injury or chronic health condition. Such needs may include a person's individual requirements for healthcare, educational/vocational services, home modifications, living arrangements, attendant care, equipment, medications, supplies and community services. Many, if not all, of these items require recommendations from a healthcare professional acting within their professional scope of practice. When a life care plan lacks appropriate medical foundation and is determined to be incongruent with accepted life care planning published standards and consensus statements, it will likely be challenged and ultimately may not be accepted into the evidentiary record for the evaluee (subject person).
There are several appropriate avenues a Certified Life Care Planner (CLCP) can utilize to establish solid medical foundation for the life care plan. The most obvious track is direct consultation and collaboration with the evaluee’s treating and/or evaluating medical, psychological, or allied health professionals. Of note, it is essential such consultations be endorsed by the opining healthcare provider through signature, prior to the date of release of the life care plan report. Another appropriate avenue would include directly referencing and utilizing published clinical practice guidelines, empirical research and/or other reliable and credible peer-reviewed publications to identify the standards of care for items applicable to the evaluee’s needs. Equally important, the life care plan should draw clear links between specific statements made within the analyzed medical records and the items or services included within the life care plan. Finally, cited testimony from evaluating and/or treating providers connected with the evaluee’s health care can also serve as appropriate medical foundation.
It is important to understand the subspecialty practice of Life Care Planning has many published consensus and majority statements, relative to the developmental process of establishing solid medical foundation. In 2018, the International Association of Rehabilitation Professionals (IARP), in conjunction with the International Academy of Life Care Planners (IALCP), published a special issue of the peer-reviewed Journal of Life Care Planning which identified current consensus and majority statements for life care planning professionals. These consensus and majority statements were published following completion of a Delphi study of multiple, professional summits across a 17-year period. Of note, the purpose of the Delphi research method is to identify best practice consensus among subject matter experts.
Relative to establishing medical foundation for the life care plan, specific consensus statements address this matter head on.
Life care planning consensus statement 80: “Life Care Planners may independently make recommendations for care items/services that are within their scope of practice.”
Life care planning consensus statement 81: “Life Care Planners seek recommendations from other qualified professionals and/or relevant sources for inclusion of care items/services outside the individual life care planner’s professional scope of practice.”
From the cumulative pool of expert opinions arose the Life Care Planning Standards of Practice, as published by IARP and IALCP, currently in the Fourth Edition, 2022. Standards of practice also address the critical component of evidence-based medical opinion from a healthcare provider that practices/provides the same recommendations they have opined about in the life care plan. In other words, their opinion falls within their healthcare professional scope of practice. The Fourth Edition Standards of Practice provide this guide regarding appropriate medical foundation:
“To address the future care needs, the life care planner collaborates with other professionals in order to develop a transdisciplinary life care plan inclusive of recommendations outside of the individual life care planner’s professional scope of practice. No single rehabilitation or health care professional is trained to have comprehensive expertise in all areas where recommendations may be needed. Even within a profession, there are specialty and sub-specialty divisions, which may limit the life care planner’s ability to independently make all needed recommendations.”
Why do professional guidelines and standards even matter? This question was expertly answered through a 2012 IARP publication entitled “Expert Disclosure: Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 26, 34, & 37.” Dr. Timothy Field and Mr. Kent Jayne emphasized the following to the Rehabilitation and Life Care Planning Professionals as follows:
“The necessary qualifications for the FRC (forensic rehabilitation consultant) have been well established and documented and any forensic rehabilitation consultant should be familiar and comply with the usual and customary guidelines set forth by professional associations for the profession. Association standards, such as statements on scope of practice, professional ethics, and a standard of practice are all important documents and provide significant information of both the necessary credentials and the guidelines for practice.”
In short, the consensus statements and standards of practice are what give vigor and credibility to the life care planning practice.
The following realistic case scenarios illustrate both appropriate and inappropriate practices for the establishment of life care planning medical foundation.
Case #1: An adult evaluee was involved in a head-on motor vehicle collision and sustained a traumatic brain injury (TBI) as well as cervical vertebrae fracture. Fortunately, the evaluee was not paralyzed but was with permanent cognitive functioning deficits and ongoing neck pain and headaches. The evaluee underwent outpatient therapy with a speech language pathologist, an occupational therapist, and a Physiatrist (Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Physician) who oversaw all medical care relative to the injury, as well as pain management modalities. A life care plan was developed by Certified Life Care Planner who also held a Doctor of Chiropractic (DC) licensure. The life care plan included many items, some of which were ongoing spinal injections for cervical pain management and narcotic medication for headaches, all for the duration of a lifetime. During deposition testimony, the doctor expounded upon his education and clinical practice as foundation to justify his ability to opine every future care recommendation within the life care plan.
To analyze this scenario, it is important to understand that not all doctors can provide all interventions that any ill or injured person may need. Some people do not understand this. The Chiropractic field of healthcare, while incredibly helpful for many people, does not perform spinal injections for pain management, nor do they prescribe narcotic medications. Thus, the life care planner was working outside his scope of practice in recommending spinal injections and narcotic medications. Unfortunately, he did not consult with the treating Physiatrist, or the allied health professionals providing current treatment. There was no evidence that an appropriate evaluating healthcare practitioner, such as a Neurologist or Interventional Pain Management Specialist, was retained to provide future treatment recommendations. There was no evidence of connection drawn between the current treatment found outlined in the medical records and what the life care planner recommended. There were no supporting clinical practice guidelines relative to the recommendations made. Ultimately, the life care plan lacked the required credible and reliable data, as well as the overall foundational information necessary, to formulate an evidence-based plan that was consistent with life care planning standards and expert consensus.
Case #2: An evaluee, with a 30-year history of smoking a pack of cigarettes a day, was rear-ended in a motor vehicle collision. Several days afterwards she began complaining of neck pain with radiating pain down her left arm. The first physician she sought treatment from advised rest, Tylenol and physical therapy. Medical reporting outlined she completed only 8 sessions of physical therapy and stated there was no improvement in her symptoms. She sought a second opinion from a Spinal Orthopedist who opined she had failed conservative therapy and therefore was eligible for a four-level spinal fusion surgery. Then, she sought another Orthopedist opinion (third one) who ordered additional MRI studies and a nerve conduction study. He diagnosed her with ulnar nerve compression and mild herniation at the C6-7 level. He then recommended only conservative therapy and did not agree with spinal fusion. Finally, the fourth Orthopedic opinion she sought indicated that she needed Ulnar Nerve decompression surgery, which she completed. Then, the fourth Orthopedist treated her with a cervical spinal steroid injection, which she reported gave total relief of all her pain. Additionally, this same Orthopedist reported clinical research strongly suggested the evaluee’s extensive smoking history predisposed her to significant surgical complications, including a lack of union at the surgical site, if she were to undergo spinal fusion.
However, the life care plan was developed by a Registered Nurse (RN) and CLCP. She provided a future cost analysis for only the four-level spinal fusion surgery treatment opinion. The life care planner did not acknowledge any other medical opinions or successful treatment the plaintiff had received as was documented within the medical records, nor did she acknowledge the clinical practice research citing smoking as detrimental to the success of spinal fusion. The life care planner acted outside her scope of practice by determining that the surgical opinion was the only opinion appropriate for the evaluee. An RN is not an operative practitioner and therefore not in a position to make any surgical decisions. Clearly, she did not consider all the evidence available to make a solid and credible life care plan for the evaluee.
Case #3: An adult evaluee sustained an upper extremity amputation secondary to malfunctioning equipment while working as a machinist. The life care plan was developed by an experienced and licensed certified rehabilitation counselor (CRC) who was also a certified life care planner (CLCP). The evaluee’s treating health care providers included a Physiatrist, a physical therapist, a psychologist, and a prosthetist. The life care plan included recommendations for the specific type, frequency and duration of future psychological counseling, medical care, medications, diagnostic tests, and prosthetic equipment for the evaluation.
The CRC/CLCP did not make any recommendations outside of his scope of practice. The life care planner noted the medical records reviewed and included a treatment summary within the life care plan as well as recommendations for future care that were secured in collaboration with the treating providers and signed by them, prior to the release of the life care plan report. The recommendations included in the plan were all evident through the medical records, supporting clinical practice guidelines and endorsements.
Sometimes securing the appropriate credible medical recommendation takes extra leg work, but in the end, it is the foundation for which that life care plan will hold up under close scrutiny.
References:
Field, T. & Jayne, K. 2012. Expert Disclosure: Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 26, 34, 27. Athens, Georgia: Elliott & Fitzpatrick, Inc.
International Association of Rehabilitation Professional & International Academy of Life Care Planners (2022), Fourth Edition. Standards of Practice for Life Care Planners.
Johnson, C; Pomeranz, J. & Stetten, N. 2018. “Life Care Planning Consensus and Majority Statements 2000-2008: Are They Still Relevant and Reliable? A Delphi Study.” Journal of Life Care Planning, 16 (4), 5-13.
Johnson, C; Pomeranz, J. & Stetten, N. 2018. “Consensus and Majority Statements Derived from Life Care Planning Summits Held in 2000, 2002, 2004, 2006, 2008, 2010, 2012, 2015 and 2017 and updated via Delphi Study in 2018.” Journal of Life Care Planning, 16 (4), 15-18.
Preston, Karen, et al. “Standards of Practice for Life Care Planners, Fourth Edition.” Journal of Life Care Planning, 20 (3), 5-24.
Weed R. & Berens D.E., (editors). 2018. Life Care Planning and Case Management Handbook. (4th ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.
Embracing Opportunities Amid Legal Challenges: Highlights from the Annual Meeting Program
This year's Annual Meeting provided members with enriching networking opportunities and impactful continuing legal education sessions. Guests included representatives from our state’s judiciary, law schools, and other bar organizations, adding depth and diversity to informal discussions.
Highlights from the programming included sessions such as 'Recent Decisions of Relevance,' a key practice resource for members, and a panel discussion on 'Navigating the Legal Impacts of the New DEI Executive Orders.' Attendees gained perspectives from a 'View from the Bench' session featuring judges from the Court of Appeals, Business Court, and Superior Court, a keynote address on maintaining professional well-being by Molly Grantham on 'Practice Makes...Progress,' and an ethics discussion centered on lessons from the Murdaugh Case, featuring Judge Clifton Newman. Additionally, breakout sessions led by the Practice Groups provided interactive discussions tailored to specific practice areas of interest.
During the Annual Meeting, the annual membership and business meeting was held, alongside the recognition of professionalism award winners. Bob Sumner, Partner Emeritus of Cranfill Sumner, was honored with the J. Robert Elster Award for Professional Excellence, and Jon Berkelhammer of Ellis & Winters received the Award for Excellence in Trial Advocacy.
At the Business Meeting, outgoing President J.D. Keister reflected on the year’s initiatives and outlined critical areas of focus for the NCADA, including trial skills training programs leveraging experienced trial attorneys, strategies to address nuclear verdicts through a specialized sub-committee, and the adoption of an updated diversity, equity, and inclusion policy. Keister thanked his colleagues for their support during his presidency and commended the Board for their thoughtful handling of these initiatives. (Watch and listen to JD's remarks here.)
The meeting concluded with the election and confirmation of the 2025-2026 Officers and Directors. George Simpson, IV was confirmed as President; Erin McNeil Young was elected President-Elect; Daniel M. Nunn as Executive Vice President; Scottie Forbes Lee as Treasurer; and Nicole B. Slaughter continues her term as Secretary.
The NCADA also welcomed several new members to the Board of Directors for a term through June 2028: Allison Becker, Bruce Daughtry, John Kubis, Jr., John Nunnally, and Jilliann Tate. Continuing Board members were recognized for their ongoing service and contributions: Kara Bordman, Ryan Bostic, Christy Dunn, Joshua Durham, JD McAlister, Kristine Prati, Stuart Stroud, and Robert Young remain integral to the organization's leadership. Ex-officio members including Gary Parsons, Bob Kaylor, Ashley Brathwaite, Ryan Eubanks, and Nathan Hewitt were also acknowledged for their work across key initiatives.
Heartfelt thanks was extended to retiring Board members after their service terms: Denaa Griffin, Scottie Forbes Lee (transitioning into the Treasurer role), Charles McGee, Jasmine Pitt, and Austin Walsh. Chris Kiger completed his term as an officer and is a past president of the NCADA. Each member was thanked for their dedication and contributions to the organization.
Wrapping up the event, incoming President George Simpson shared reflections on his professional journey, stemming from his early career at Cranfill Sumner, where he was encouraged to engage with NCADA by Richard Boyette. Simpson committed to honoring the organization’s legacy and emphasized priorities such as networking, CLE opportunities, amicus work, and legislative efforts. As he steps into leadership, Simpson pledged to build on NCADA's foundation and advance the organization’s mission for the civil trial bar in North Carolina. (Watch and listen to George's remarks here.)
J.D. Keister, President (2024-2025) McAngus Goudelock & Courie LLC
I hope to see you at our upcoming Annual Meeting in just a few weeks. We’re looking forward to hosting the meeting in Wilmington again. With unmatched professional development programming tailored to build skills and meet your practice needs, you will not want to miss attending. Join us June 12-15 to learn and network with peers and colleagues from across North Carolina.
The Annual Meeting is also when the NCADA transitions to new leadership. As I shared in my note when taking office last June, I attended my first Annual Meeting over 20 years ago and was encouraged by firm mentors to get involved in the NCADA. In an era where retention and young lawyer development is such a challenge for our member firms, NCADA is an excellent opportunity for firms to invest in younger lawyers in a similar fashion. I encourage younger members to attend, participate, and get involved! There is not a better way to learn or get connected within the civil defense bar. Go to member socials and events. Write articles. Be on a committee.
Major challenges impacting our firms and practices include generative AI into the practice of law, exploding verdicts, and the training and retention of talent. NCADA is working on programming and resources to support members and firms in these areas to include training newer and mid-level attorneys in essential and advanced litigation skills, information resources on AI and programming at our CLE offerings, and appointing a committee to explore strategies and training for defense attorneys on nuclear verdicts. You are invited to share your knowledge and expertise to volunteer to be involved. Contact me if interested.
Your Association is recognized statewide and nationally with working relationships with the NC Chamber, DRI, the DRI Center for Public Policy and Lawyers for Civil Justice working collaboratively on a tweak to Rule 702 at the General Assembly to align with the federal rule. Our Amicus presence continues to grow, and we are fortunate to have an Amicus Committee led by Duane Jones, Steven Bader, and Jeff Kuykendal vetting cases of relevance.
The state of the Association remains steady and stable. Our membership numbers are consistent, yet we encourage you to invite colleagues and peers to join us. We are fortunate to have strong support from our Litigation Support Partners, and we encourage you to take advantage of their expertise and services.
Many in Western North Carolina are still dealing with the impact from Hurricane Helene last September. We applaud the many contributions of our members and firms in supporting recovery efforts. That same day we held our annual Fall Seminar in Cary and despite the storm had good attendance and an excellent CLE program. This year, we have scheduled the Fall Seminar a few weeks later in October and will consider moving to late October to early November, which was the timing in our early years.
Finally, speaking of our early years, NCADA’s 50th Anniversary is in 2 years and will be celebrating this milestone in 2027. Today’s NCADA is THE organization for those of us on the defense side of the “V.” It is an organization where people can connect, where members can learn, and where knowledge can be passed from trial and industry legends to the next generation. What does the next 50 years look like to you? Let us know.
by Michael Hedgepeth, Hedrick Gardner KIncheloe & Garofalo
No one likes hidden fees – especially when they show up after you thought a claim was fully resolved. Unfortunately, that’s exactly what can happen under North Carolina’s Second Injury Fund statute.
Under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 97-40.1, the North Carolina Industrial Commission has the authority to assess a fee to be paid by Defendants (employers, carriers, and TPAs) whenever an employee is assigned a permanent partial disability (“PPD”) rating. This fee may be assessed regardless of whether the claim is resolved through an Industrial Commission Form 26A or a clincher agreement.
Here’s how it typically works:
Key Points:
Summary: The Second Injury Fund is still a viable statutory mechanism, and while the associated fees are not commonly assessed, they are legally enforceable and must be paid when invoiced. Be aware that the fund exists and budget accordingly in cases where you are resolving a claim involving a PPD rating.
____________ This article was originally posted on the Hedrick Gardner blog and reprinted with permission.
By Bonnie Ruffin, NCCP, CSR, CR
BEYOND THE QUESTIONS: THE ART OF EARNING WITNESS TRUST
One of the biggest challenges I’ve observed during depositions over the years is an attorney getting a witness comfortable enough to speak openly and honestly. Some attorneys are much better at this than others. The ones who come across as genuine, like regular people you'd actually find on a jury, tend to be the most effective.
When a witness feels at ease and genuinely likes the attorney, they’re often more transparent, even when the truth may hurt their case. I’ve seen witnesses willingly disclose damaging details simply because they felt safe enough to be honest.
Attorneys who are most successful at discovering undisclosed information often share a few key traits:
Attorneys who have learned how to connect with witnesses are often able to make them feel at ease, so much so that they may start divulging more information than expected. In contrast, attorneys who come across as stern, rushed, unfriendly, or poor communicators tend to get the least out of a witness. Responses like “not that I recall” become the norm, and meaningful details are rarely shared. Additionally, oftentimes it is obvious if a witness has been prepped for the deposition.
BEYOND WORDS: THE UNSPOKEN KEYS TO WITNESS COOPERATION
Did you know that our verbal communication only makes up a small part of how we communicate? In depositions, communication goes far beyond just the words being spoken. Voice, tone, and body language all play a critical role, and when they don’t align, it’s noticeable. In fact, research shows that verbal communication accounts for only a small portion of what we actually convey. Sometimes, what a person says is completely contradicted by how they say it or how they physically respond.
Like when striving to connect with a jury panel, attorneys often take a similar approach when deposing lay witnesses or interviewees. Building rapport can start with simple, intentional behaviors, such as:
These subtle, human cues can be the difference between a witness who shuts down and one who opens up. Working with each witness is an important piece to every case, and how you connect with them can shape what you learn.
BEYOND THE SCRIPT: FOCUSED LISTENING THAT DRIVES DISCOVERY
Attorneys who listen closely and with intention often veer from their prepared list of questions, not because they’re unfocused, but because they’re tuned in. They pick up on subtle clues, body language, or passing remarks and use them to dig deeper. It’s truly an art form. Watching a skilled attorney pivot seamlessly to explore a topic that was only lightly touched on by the witness is impressive. Often, it’s the unplanned questions, the ones sparked in the moment, that lead to the discovery of the most valuable insights. Once they have exhausted that unexpected line of questioning, they return to their outline and continue the examination with even more context.
In contrast, attorneys who rigidly stick to their list of questions might miss critical opportunities. A witness may offer more than what was asked, dropping subtle hints or revealing unexpected details, but if the attorney isn’t actively listening, those clues are lost. Additionally, the witness’s body language can be a powerful indicator that they have more information on a subject. Tone, facial expressions, and body language can all reveal when a subject has struck a nerve or triggered an emotional response. Ignoring these signs means missing out on the deeper truth that could significantly impact the case.
BRINGING IT ALL TOGETHER
The most effective attorneys understand that successful depositions are not just about asking the right questions, they’re about earning the witness’s trust, reading between the lines, and staying fully present. The attorneys who get to the truth know how to make a witness feel seen and heard. They build rapport through warmth and relatability, they watch closely for tone and body language that may reveal more than words, and they listen with intention, ready to pivot when something important surfaces. In high-stakes cases, having a second set of eyes and ears, such as a paralegal or co-counsel, can help capture those fleeting, valuable moments that might otherwise be missed. When attorneys approach depositions with curiosity, compassion, and attention to detail, they create space for the truth to emerge, and that can make all the difference in a case.
____________________
About The Author: Bonnie Ruffin, NCCP, CVR, CSR
Bonnie brings a wealth of firsthand experience to the legal field, backed by her credentials as a North Carolina Certified Paralegal and Certified Verbatim Reporter, along with a Bachelor’s degree in Criminal Justice. She spent years as a trial paralegal managing complex, high-stakes caseloads before transitioning into litigation support, where she continued to work closely with attorneys and legal teams across a wide range of practice areas. With deep insight into case management, courtroom procedures, and the realities of fast-paced legal work, Bonnie is a trusted resource known for delivering practical, experience-driven guidance. She now serves as a partner at DepoScripts, a North Carolina-based litigation support company committed to providing reliable, client-focused solutions nationwide.
by Robert Strahle, J.S. Held
Introduction
Tariffs have once again become the hot headline that dominates the news. This is not the first time owners and contractors have had to manage the risk associated with tariffs and the related impacts.
This article focuses on the immediate and long-term impacts of tariffs on construction projects and even a company's financial health. It also examines potential key risk mitigation measures that can be implemented to minimize those risks.
What are Tariffs and How Do They Impact My Project?
Tariffs are just one lever countries utilize as a trade policy instrument to “raise revenue for the federal government, to restrict imports and protect domestic producers from foreign competition, and to achieve reciprocity through agreements that reduce trade barriers”.1 Historically, in the United States, tariffs go back as far as the Tariff Act of 1789 signed by George Washington imposing a 5% tariff on nearly all imports to the newly formed United States. Globally, tariffs have been around since ancient Greek and Roman times.
So, what does that mean for me now? For owners, contractors, and suppliers, the concern is that these new or higher tariffs may add costs, impact the project schedule, degrade margin, cause contractual disputes, disrupt the normal supply chain ecosystem, or add challenges in the bid and estimating phase. Complicating all of the above is the global uncertainty of not just whether the tariffs will indeed be implemented, but also the amount of the individual tariffs, as well as the various downstream reactions of the countries and companies subject to the tariffs. A summary of potential impacts is included below.
Project Level
For those projects that are under contract, the implications may be both short-term (direct cost increase related to the imposed tariff) and long-term (delays impacting the critical path), for which a few examples are provided below.
Corporate Level
Solutions to Mitigate Impacts
Real-time project management techniques can be implemented to manage cost and schedule impacts.
Conclusion
The current uncertainty around tariffs may present immediate and long-term impacts on construction projects and challenges within the industry. Implementing the proper key measures to manage any potential risk is critical to maintaining project stability.
At J.S. Held, we provide expert guidance to help companies adapt to these challenges, ensuring compliance, financial stability, and long-term success.
1Irwin, Douglas A. "Trade Policy in American Economic History". Annual Review of Economics, August 2, 2020.
This paper is the third installment in a series examining the multifaceted impacts of tariff and trade policies. By delving into the nuances of these policies, we aim to provide valuable insights and perspectives that will inform strategic business decision-making and foster resilience in an increasingly volatile global market. Future papers in this series will explore the specific implications for key sectors such as agriculture, energy, and construction, offering targeted analysis and recommendations to help businesses navigate and thrive amidst evolving trade landscapes. Publication Date: April 11, 2025
More About the Author: Robert Strahle is a Senior Managing Director and the US Lead in J.S. Held’s Construction Advisory practice. Robert is a professional engineer and brings more than 35 years of experience in the engineering and construction industry, both internationally and in North America. His experience includes managing complex engineering and construction projects, the resolution of construction disputes including expert testimony, preparation of construction claims, construction cost assessments, construction fraud and forensic investigations, and process controls improvement.
Robert can be reached at rstrahle@jsheld.com or +1 732 221 2639.
by Kevin Kelly, Chartwell Law
INTRODUCTION
Every lawyer has encountered situations where tensions are high, voices are raised, and tempers have flared. This can occur during phone calls, over email, in depositions or mediations, and even in court. Understanding that the loudest voice is rarely the most persuasive is a key skill that every young lawyer must learn.
WHY IT MATTERS
The legal field is one full of disagreement and many practicing lawyers spend their entire careers arguing each and every day. The mental strain that comes with letting a professional disagreement seep into your personal life, and even worse, letting it happen regularly, will lead you to resent your career choice and burn out rapidly. If every disagreement leads to a shouting match, every day will wear on you. The longer this goes on, the hard it will be to break the cycle and the less you will be prepared to help your clients. While arguments are bound to happen, learning to speak calmly to opposing counsel, deposition witnesses, judges, and even difficult clients will help you to curb the strain that comes with constant disagreements. Not only will you avoid the stress that comes with flaring tempers, but you will also be able to advocate more effectively. When your thoughts are collected, you are more articulate, you think on your feet quicker, and you will get your point across clearer. Most importantly, it will help you keep work at work and your personal life personal. If you spend every night grinding your teeth about the way an opposing counsel talked to you or how a judge ruled against you, sooner rather than later you will want to give up the profession you worked hard to enter.
HOW TO DO IT
Take a breath. Early in my practice an opposing counsel sent an email at 9:00pm the night before a big holiday weekend suggesting that my conduct was unethical, belligerent, abusive, malicious, and a host of other adverbs simply because I did not agree with his legal analysis. In that moment I had two choices, (1) spend my evening furiously typing away a response to the outlandish accusations; or (2) take a deep breath and close the email. I chose the latter. When I revisited the email with a clear head the next day, my response was concise and effective. I was proud to simply reply “we will have to agree to disagree and let the court decide.” The decision to take a breath and walk away saved me hours of stress, and strain on my mental health. This decision was also an example of how to practice the techniques that become habits. Simply put, when you find yourself writing an angry email or starting to raise your voice in a deposition, walk away, take a step back, and breathe. Even a few minutes can be enough time to compose yourself and the next steps you take will always be more effective.
Quit taking it personally. Many times, when speaking with an opposing counsel, they know details about their client’s life that bring emotion into the discussion. Not every judge will agree with your position. There is a reason it is called legal analysis and not legal calculation. You will not always be right. During every deposition there will be answers you do not like or expect. When you are in a disagreement it is critical to remember that this while it may seem like the end of the world, everyone is just doing their jobs. Learning to let an opposing counsel rant without responding or accepting a judge’s ruling when you disagree will help to avoid stress and allow you to enjoy the time you spend outside of work.
Consistency builds a habit, and respect. Earlier this year I was talking to an opposing counsel that I litigate against on a regular basis. In this case, we agreed to multiple extensions, and he asked about one more. I told him calmly that my client would not permit me to grant another extension and that we needed to move the case forward. His response was simply that “he didn’t blame them, and that he would probably say the same thing in my shoes.” This lawyer could have shouted that I was not giving him professional courtesy or he could have yelled that he would go to the judge anyway, and the entire conversation could have devolved into an argument, but that did not happen. In cases I have gone against this lawyer, I have always spoken calmly, I have always acted professionally, and it showed up in this situation. He knew that I was not disagreeing because of a personal spite or to try to get ahead, the time had just come to move the case along. In another situation, I had a disagreement with a client about the strength of their case. We went back and forth for almost an hour, but at the end of the call, he told me that he appreciated my willingness to debate. There was no animosity that I disagreed with him or that I saw the facts differently, he was happy to get a different perspective. When you have consistent, reasonable conversations, you gain trust amongst colleagues and opponents, and that trust leads to respect, even when having difficult conversations. Practice makes perfect is an old saying for a reason, it works.
FINAL THOUGHTS
You may not enjoy fighting the urge to shout back, saying that “we will have to agree to disagree” instead of arguing your point again, or putting in the work it takes to create a habit of composure, but you will be thanking yourself in five, ten, or twenty years when you can still say you enjoy the work you do. Whether these techniques resonate with you or not, what I hope you take away is to find ones that do. There is no shortage of disagreement in the legal field but learning to be calm, cool, and collected during those disagreements will help you succeed sooner rather than later.
Print This Article
This article was originally posted in DRI's April 2025 issue of "The Briefcase". Reprinted with permission.
Trailblazing Together: How Outside Counsel Can Drive Success for In-House Teams*
Legal departments rely on outside counsel for expertise, guidance, and representation. The effectiveness of this relationship can significantly impact legal outcomes and business objectives. This paper examines the key factors that contribute to a successful collaboration between in-house counsel and outside counsel, with a focus on selection, industry expertise, performance evaluation, partnership development, and communication.
I. Locating and Selecting Outside Counsel
The process of selecting outside counsel involves multiple considerations beyond legal expertise. In-house counsel typically identifies new firms through referrals, prior experience, or professional networks. Some organizations utilize a formal Request for Proposal (RFP) process to evaluate potential firms based on their expertise, experience, and cost structure.
Insurance carriers may also play a role in approving outside counsel, particularly when cases involve coverage under company policies. In these cases, in-house counsel must align their selection process with the insurer’s requirements while ensuring that the chosen firm can effectively address the legal challenges at hand.
II. The Importance of Industry Expertise
Legal issues do not occur in a vacuum. Each case is shaped by the specific industry in which it arises, and outside counsel must demonstrate a deep understanding of the business environment, regulatory landscape, and industry-specific risks. This expertise allows them to craft arguments and defenses that align with broader business strategies.
A well-rounded legal strategy must also consider the various areas of law that intersect in a given case. For example, a dispute may involve elements of contract law, employment law, regulatory compliance, and corporate governance. Outside counsel must navigate these complexities while also anticipating the broader impact of the case on the company’s operations, reputation, and regulatory standing.
III. Evaluation of Performance
Successful legal representation extends beyond case outcomes. In-house counsel assesses outside counsel based on multiple criteria, including the quality of their work product, adherence to deadlines, cost-effectiveness, and overall responsiveness.
Value-driven representation is critical. Outside counsel must provide not only legal analysis but also practical, business-oriented solutions. Firms that deliver proactive insights, anticipate legal risks, and adapt strategies based on client feedback strengthen their relationships with in-house teams. Moreover, clear and well-structured work products that require minimal revisions enhance efficiency and build trust between legal teams.
IV. Becoming a True Partner
Outside counsel that operate as true partners to in-house teams invest time in understanding their client’s industry, corporate culture, and strategic priorities. This involves more than legal expertise—it requires a commitment to ongoing education about the client’s business operations, key stakeholders, and evolving legal needs.
Building a collaborative relationship means going beyond transactional interactions. Outside counsel should actively seek opportunities to add value, such as by offering training sessions, sharing industry insights, and providing strategic guidance beyond the immediate legal matter at hand. Ensuring that all members of the firm’s client team remain informed and aligned with the client’s expectations fosters continuity and strengthens the relationship over time.
V. Effective Communication
Communication is the foundation of a successful outside counsel-in-house counsel relationship. In-house teams often prefer overcommunication rather than a lack of updates. Regular check-ins, clear and concise status reports, and proactive outreach help maintain transparency and prevent surprises.
Developing trust requires consistent, open dialogue. Outside counsel should be forthcoming about challenges, risks, and potential changes in case strategy. Keeping all key players informed, including executives, business teams, and insurance carriers when applicable, ensures that the legal strategy remains aligned with business objectives.
The relationship between in-house counsel and outside counsel is most effective when it is built on mutual understanding, strategic alignment, and strong communication. By carefully selecting firms with the right expertise, evaluating performance beyond case outcomes, fostering true partnerships, and maintaining clear communication, in-house legal teams can maximize the value they receive from outside counsel. These collaborative efforts not only improve legal outcomes but also contribute to broader business success.
*This article is adapted from panel presentation at the Southeastern Women Litigators Seminar on March 21, 2025 moderated by Kendra Stark, Gordon Rees (NC), and panel members Whitfield Caughman, VP-General Counsel, Paradies Lagardère (GA); Katherine Tebrock, Vice President, Associate General Counsel Regulatory Compliance, Wellpath (TN); LaKeshia Banks, Assistant General Counsel, Duke Univ. (NC)
Conquering the Summit: How Legal Professionals Can Overcome Vicarious Trauma to Achieve Success*
I. Introduction to Vicarious Trauma (VT)
Definition and Psychological Impact:
Vicarious trauma (VT), also known as secondary traumatic stress, refers to the emotional and psychological effects experienced by professionals who are indirectly exposed to others' traumatic events. Legal professionals, particularly those working with clients who have endured significant trauma, are susceptible to VT. This exposure can lead to symptoms akin to post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), including anxiety, emotional exhaustion, and intrusive thoughts. Over time, repeated exposure to traumatic narratives can alter a lawyer's worldview and diminish their sense of safety and trust.
The Raging River Analogy:
Consider the analogy of a lawyer standing at the convergence of multiple raging rivers, each representing a client's traumatic experience. The cumulative effect of these intersecting "rivers" can overwhelm the lawyer's capacity to cope, leading to VT. This analogy underscores the importance of recognizing and addressing the compounded impact of multiple traumatic exposures in the legal profession.
II. Understanding Vicarious Trauma
Differentiating VT from Other Conditions:
Symptoms and Manifestations:
III. The Ethical and Professional Consequences of VT
Duty of Empathy vs. Professionalism:
Lawyers are required to empathize with their clients to provide effective representation. However, excessive empathy without appropriate boundaries can lead to VT, impairing judgment and professional conduct. Managing this balance is crucial to uphold ethical standards and ensure competent advocacy.
Ethical Obligation to Address VT:
The American Bar Association (ABA) emphasizes that self-care is integral to a lawyer's professional responsibility. Ignoring VT not only jeopardizes the lawyer's well-being but also compromises their ability to serve clients effectively, potentially leading to ethical violations.
IV. Strategies for Managing and Overcoming VT
Personal Strategies:
Professional Strategies:
V. Coping Strategies and Practical Tools
5-4-3-2-1 Reset Exercise (Grounding Technique):
This grounding technique helps individuals refocus during moments of stress:
This exercise anchors individuals in the present moment, reducing anxiety and promoting calmness.
Reaffirming Meaning and Finding Joy:
Lawyers should actively seek activities and moments that bring joy and fulfillment outside of work. Engaging in hobbies, spending time with loved ones, and pursuing interests can counterbalance the emotional toll of legal work. As poet Audre Lorde aptly stated, "Caring for myself is not self-indulgence, it is self-preservation, and that is an act of political warfare."
VI. Resources and Further Reading
For a deeper understanding of VT and strategies to manage it, consider the following resources:
VII. Conclusion and Call to Action
Vicarious trauma is an inherent risk in the legal profession, particularly for those working closely with traumatized clients. However, by proactively implementing personal and professional strategies, legal professionals can mitigate the impact of VT. It is imperative for lawyers to recognize the signs of VT, seek support when necessary, and prioritize self-care to maintain both their well-being and the integrity of their practice. Embracing these strategies not only enhances personal resilience but also ensures the provision of ethical and effective legal representation.
*This article is adapted from a presentation at the Southeastern Women Litigators Seminar on March 20, 2025 led by Jillian Tate, Davis & Hamrick (NC) and Rebecca Bandy, Director, Henry Latimer Center for Professionalims (FL).