{"id":7897,"date":"2009-11-09T12:09:06","date_gmt":"2009-11-09T17:09:06","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/law.marquette.edu\/facultyblog\/?p=7897"},"modified":"2009-11-09T12:09:06","modified_gmt":"2009-11-09T17:09:06","slug":"the-verdict-a-very-successful-civil-trial-conference","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/law.marquette.edu\/facultyblog\/2009\/11\/the-verdict-a-very-successful-civil-trial-conference\/","title":{"rendered":"The Verdict? A Very Successful Civil Trial Conference"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"marquette1\"One of this Law School\u2019s most noteworthy legacies is its production of many of the region\u2019s most outstanding trial lawyers.\u00a0 The legacy was fully evident on Friday, November 6, 2009 at the Civil Trial Evidence and Litigation Conference.\u00a0 The sold-out event served as a \u201clast call for Sensenbrenner Hall\u201d of sorts while featuring a panel that well-represented the many fine trial lawyers who have distinguished themselves as Marquette lawyers.\u00a0 It was my privilege to help organize the conference along with Pat Dunphy<\/strong> (L\u201976), who conceived of the idea and was the key to assembling the talented panel of Marquette alumni.\u00a0 In light of Friday\u2019s success, Pat and I have already begun discussing next year\u2019s civil litigation conference, which will be held in the Law School\u2019s new venue in Eckstein Hall.\u00a0<\/p>\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 The presentations spanned a broad array of issues and problems regularly confronted in civil litigation. \u00a0\u00a0The strength of the presentations rested not just in their discussion of doctrine and rules, but in the panelists bringing to bear their experience and insights in preparing and trying cases.\u00a0 \u00a0Links to the written CLE material and the accompanying PowerPoint presentations will be posted on the Law School\u2019s website later this week. <\/em><\/p>\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Starting the day was Michael J. Cohen<\/strong> (L\u201986) of Meissner Tierney Fisher & Nichols SC, who underscored the important relationship between pretrial practice and outcomes at trial.\u00a0 Drawing on his extensive experience as a commercial litigator, Mike addressed the duty to preserve evidence, especially electronic information, when a lawsuit appears on the horizon.\u00a0 Mike emphasized the need to work with the client to understand what the law requires so that discoverable information is not destroyed, inadvertently or otherwise, thereby exposing the client (or counsel) to sanctions.\u00a0 Pat Dunphy<\/strong> (L\u201976) of Cannon & Dunphy SC, addressed a different aspect of pretrial practice, namely, the creative use of requests to admit during discovery.\u00a0 Pat described how he used requests to admit to obtain a binding judicial admission in a major product liability case that proved determinative of its outcome.<\/p>\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Turning from the pretrial to the trial setting, the Hon. Patricia J. Gorence<\/strong> (L\u201977), a federal magistrate judge in Wisconsin\u2019s Eastern District, spoke about the management of exhibits at trial.\u00a0 Judge Gorence particularly emphasized some of the issues that arise in the use of electronic exhibits of various sorts, including the introduction of e-mails, website pages, and CGI animations.\u00a0 Lynn Laufenberg<\/strong> (L\u201975), of the Laufenberg Law Group SC, then undertook the Herculean task of providing an overview of state law governing the admissibility of expert opinion testimony. \u00a0Lynn\u2019s masterful lecture featured his own experience in working with a wide variety of experts, including a seasoned dairy farmer who turned out to be the critical witness in a stray voltage case.<\/p>\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Leading the afternoon session was one of Wisconsin\u2019s most accomplished women trial attorneys, Mary Lee Ratzel<\/strong> (L\u201981), of Peterson, Johnson, and Murray SC.\u00a0 Drawing upon her considerable experience in defending complex civil cases, particularly medical malpractice actions, Mary Lee took up a variety of important issues related to expert testimony, including Wisconsin\u2019s unique expert witness privilege, an expert\u2019s reliance on inadmissible evidence, experts whose opinions \u201cshift\u201d between discovery and trial, and the use of learned treatises at trial.\u00a0 Her partner, James T. Murray<\/strong> (L\u201974) then surveyed the law governing the lawyer-client privilege.\u00a0 Jim focused attention on recurring problems regarding inadvertent disclosures by lawyers, the uncertain contours of the privilege where the client is a corporation, and the sticky problem of contacting employees, officers, and ex-employees of a corporate entity.\u00a0 Closing the day was Timothy S. Trecek<\/strong> (L\u201993), of Habush, Habush & Rottier SC, who discussed two subjects that haunt personal injury litigation in particular: the collateral source rule and the admissibility of \u201cother accident\u201d evidence.\u00a0 Tim addressed recent developments in litigation that have unsettled the long-standing rule that a tortfeasor cannot reap the benefits that might accrue to the plaintiff when, for example, a hospital accepts an insurer\u2019s payment for less than the amount of its invoice.\u00a0 Tim also skillfully laid out the intricate evidentiary steps required when lawyers want to put in proof of other accidents in order to prove causation, notice, or the existence of defects in a product.<\/p>\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Next year\u2019s conference will feature a docket of similarly stimulating issues and distinguished lawyers.\u00a0 We have the good fortune to draw from the very deep well of Marquette trial lawyers to assist us.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

One of this Law School\u2019s most noteworthy legacies is its production of many of the region\u2019s most outstanding trial lawyers.\u00a0 The legacy was fully evident on Friday, November 6, 2009 at the Civil Trial Evidence and Litigation Conference.\u00a0 The sold-out event served as a \u201clast call for Sensenbrenner Hall\u201d of sorts while featuring a panel […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":43,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"ocean_post_layout":"","ocean_both_sidebars_style":"","ocean_both_sidebars_content_width":0,"ocean_both_sidebars_sidebars_width":0,"ocean_sidebar":"","ocean_second_sidebar":"","ocean_disable_margins":"enable","ocean_add_body_class":"","ocean_shortcode_before_top_bar":"","ocean_shortcode_after_top_bar":"","ocean_shortcode_before_header":"","ocean_shortcode_after_header":"","ocean_has_shortcode":"","ocean_shortcode_after_title":"","ocean_shortcode_before_footer_widgets":"","ocean_shortcode_after_footer_widgets":"","ocean_shortcode_before_footer_bottom":"","ocean_shortcode_after_footer_bottom":"","ocean_display_top_bar":"default","ocean_display_header":"default","ocean_header_style":"","ocean_center_header_left_menu":"","ocean_custom_header_template":"","ocean_custom_logo":0,"ocean_custom_retina_logo":0,"ocean_custom_logo_max_width":0,"ocean_custom_logo_tablet_max_width":0,"ocean_custom_logo_mobile_max_width":0,"ocean_custom_logo_max_height":0,"ocean_custom_logo_tablet_max_height":0,"ocean_custom_logo_mobile_max_height":0,"ocean_header_custom_menu":"","ocean_menu_typo_font_family":"","ocean_menu_typo_font_subset":"","ocean_menu_typo_font_size":0,"ocean_menu_typo_font_size_tablet":0,"ocean_menu_typo_font_size_mobile":0,"ocean_menu_typo_font_size_unit":"px","ocean_menu_typo_font_weight":"","ocean_menu_typo_font_weight_tablet":"","ocean_menu_typo_font_weight_mobile":"","ocean_menu_typo_transform":"","ocean_menu_typo_transform_tablet":"","ocean_menu_typo_transform_mobile":"","ocean_menu_typo_line_height":0,"ocean_menu_typo_line_height_tablet":0,"ocean_menu_typo_line_height_mobile":0,"ocean_menu_typo_line_height_unit":"","ocean_menu_typo_spacing":0,"ocean_menu_typo_spacing_tablet":0,"ocean_menu_typo_spacing_mobile":0,"ocean_menu_typo_spacing_unit":"","ocean_menu_link_color":"","ocean_menu_link_color_hover":"","ocean_menu_link_color_active":"","ocean_menu_link_background":"","ocean_menu_link_hover_background":"","ocean_menu_link_active_background":"","ocean_menu_social_links_bg":"","ocean_menu_social_hover_links_bg":"","ocean_menu_social_links_color":"","ocean_menu_social_hover_links_color":"","ocean_disable_title":"default","ocean_disable_heading":"default","ocean_post_title":"","ocean_post_subheading":"","ocean_post_title_style":"","ocean_post_title_background_color":"","ocean_post_title_background":0,"ocean_post_title_bg_image_position":"","ocean_post_title_bg_image_attachment":"","ocean_post_title_bg_image_repeat":"","ocean_post_title_bg_image_size":"","ocean_post_title_height":0,"ocean_post_title_bg_overlay":0.5,"ocean_post_title_bg_overlay_color":"","ocean_disable_breadcrumbs":"default","ocean_breadcrumbs_color":"","ocean_breadcrumbs_separator_color":"","ocean_breadcrumbs_links_color":"","ocean_breadcrumbs_links_hover_color":"","ocean_display_footer_widgets":"default","ocean_display_footer_bottom":"default","ocean_custom_footer_template":"","ocean_post_oembed":"","ocean_post_self_hosted_media":"","ocean_post_video_embed":"","ocean_link_format":"","ocean_link_format_target":"self","ocean_quote_format":"","ocean_quote_format_link":"post","ocean_gallery_link_images":"on","ocean_gallery_id":[],"footnotes":""},"categories":[88,54,48,13],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-7897","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-evidence","category-federal-civil-litigation","category-marquette-law-school","category-civil-law","entry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/law.marquette.edu\/facultyblog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7897","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/law.marquette.edu\/facultyblog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/law.marquette.edu\/facultyblog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/law.marquette.edu\/facultyblog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/43"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/law.marquette.edu\/facultyblog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=7897"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/law.marquette.edu\/facultyblog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7897\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/law.marquette.edu\/facultyblog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=7897"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/law.marquette.edu\/facultyblog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=7897"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/law.marquette.edu\/facultyblog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=7897"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}