New York City
NYC related…

nyc schools closed due to snow

nyc schools closed due to snow

The Appellate Division recently overturned a jury's $ 300,000 claim for damages caused by misuse of the applicant's lawyer a PowerPoint presentation during his closing argument. In this case, Anthony Romano filed a lawsuit against Michael Stubbs, in the context of an altercation that took place in court Bergen County on February 23, 2006.

At that time, Stubbs was in court for a hearing in a domestic violence complaint filed by his wife and determining whether a temporary injunction should be permanent. While in court, an officer has Stubbs came up and said the order had been issued for his arrest by alleged violation earlier in the day of the temporary prohibition order. Romano, who was an officer in the courtroom, assisted in the arrest of Roman after resisting arrest. During the altercation, Roman Stubbs fell on his elbow on the floor forcing Stubb. Stubbs ultimately pleaded guilty to a crime under disturbing the peace of this altercation.

Romano said that after this incident, he suffered an injury to the ulnar nerve at the elbow that required surgery. In addition, Romano said he hurt his neck to justify a spinal fusion. Romano, in turn, filed a negligence lawsuit against Stubbs.

The question in this case was the attorney for the applicant to use a PowerPoint presentation during his speech. During the pause between the argument of counsel and the beginning of plaintiff's attorney closing argument, was reported for the first time that the applicant intends to use a PowerPoint presentation during the closing. The defense attorney objected to the attorneys the applicant with the PowerPoint presentation at this time. The trial judge allowed the use of the PowerPoint presentation to find a lawyer that the applicant do not throw nothing, said in his argument.

During the trial, counsel for the plaintiff used the PowerPoint presentation to support its argument that the decision Stubbs for the trial reflects a bad temper and refusal to accept responsibility for the occurrence of the incident. In addition, the plaintiff's attorney argued that Stubbs and lawyer has acted in concert to blame Romano. Moreover, during the Board presentation, the applicant plans to words that indicate that Stubbs was a criminal, had a propensity for violence and that the jury should "send a message." Ultimately, the jury returned a verdict of $ 300,000 to compensate for Romano their injuries.

In considering this issue, the Appellate Division noted that closing General arguments based on evidence is admissible but that the arguments "divert the jury's attention from a fair assessment test, instead of following a course designed to inflame a jury, calling several times for improper considerations and not irrelevant. "The Court recognized that while" the council is empowered to passionately defend their clients' cases, In short, there are clear limits. "

Overall, the Court concluded that the plaintiff's attorney had presented arguments wrong with using your presentation PowerPoint. The Court concluded that the words to discuss and plan the following: (1) requires the jury to send a message, (2) Stubbs was a violent person, (3) Stubbs was a criminal, (4) Stubbs the decision to stand trial was evidence of bad character, and (5) Stubbs and his attorney were "Work" to blame Roman presented arguments wrong. As such, the Court held that "the cumulative impact of multiple violations of the applicant presentations gives us confidence the fairness of the compensation awarded. "

Consequently, the damage was reversed and the case was referred to court for retrial damages.

- Erik Anderson, Esq.

Reardon Anderson is a Tinton Falls, New Jersey based law firm which represents the interests of businesses, insurance companies and individuals throughout New Jersey and the metropolitan New York City area. Please visit our website at http://reardonanderson.com to learn more about our firm.

Fun with Snow – Snow Day NYC – Feb 10, 2010


Tags: , , ,

Leave a Comment