 |
 |
|
|
|
Judges and arbitrators, like jurors, are selective in what they perceive as the important facts and issues in a case. Judicial Reaction Research identifies the facts and issues that are most important from a judicial point of view; clarifies the facts that are obscured; and identifies the legal principles or case law that judges see as important.
Armed with an understanding of judicial thinking, counsel has the advantage of assessing the strengths and vulnerabilities of the case in advance of trial. Our Strategists analyze this information and then work with counsel to organize and present the case in the most advantageous manner possible.
Judicial Reaction Research begins by recruiting a panel of three former judges or arbitrators, similar in age and experience to the individual hearing the case. After reviewing background information, the tribunal meets at a research facility to hear oral arguments and then retires to discuss their individual decisions. The discussion is filmed and subsequently analyzed. Counsel can observe the proceeding through a one way mirror.
When the judges have come to a decision, counsel is invited to question the panel about areas of the discussion in need of clarification.