Episode Transcript
Rahul Ravipudi (06:39)
Welcome to the Elevate Podcast. I’m Rahul Ravi Pudi. I saw you walk in and you had a big parka on how cold is it in Maine right now?
Ben Gideon (06:46)
I’m Ben Gideon.
it’s not too bad. It’s in the mid thirties, but ⁓ nothing like the beautiful weather we had out in Scottsdale last week. Great. was very enjoyed that. was good seeing you out there too.
Rahul Ravipudi (07:05)
No, that was awesome. It’s good seeing everybody actually.
Ben Gideon (07:08)
even though very short visit. Everything good with the brother-in-law?
Rahul Ravipudi (07:13)
Yes, yes, we had interesting dialogue while I was with Ben with my brother-in-law, but everything is a okay. my gosh, that’s gonna be a story that we’re not gonna share on the podcast, but we’ll share in person.
Ben Gideon (07:27)
Yeah, I figured it wasn’t shareable, but it’s just the thing when you’re the resident lawyer in the family and anyone has an issue, they call you to try to troubleshoot it. Yeah, with that, we’re thrilled to have Elizabeth Larrick on the podcast today. Elizabeth’s a trial lawyer and a trial consultant. You’re based out of Texas, right?
Elizabeth Larrick (07:39)
That’s right, yep, in Austin, Texas. Thanks for having me.
Ben Gideon (07:53)
and helps trial lawyers all over the country. She also has a very popular podcast that’s there to help trial lawyers prepare for cases and for trial. And she’s gonna talk to us today about trial strategy and the use of focus groups. So welcome, Elizabeth.
Elizabeth Larrick (08:09)
Yeah, thank you. Thank you. Thanks so much for having me. What I’m really curious about is, did you finally get that lobster over? Did you finally ship it?
Ben Gideon (08:18)
Not only did I ship it, but it arrived. The dozen live lobsters Rahul enjoyed along with steak, so he had a big surf and turf party. Oh yeah.
Rahul Ravipudi (08:30)
was wife scared and so we had a bunch of people over and ⁓ I’ve never actually in my life held a live lobster before. So it took a little getting used to even though the rubber bands were around the claws those less around.
Ben Gideon (08:47)
There’s a reason they have the rubber bands there.
Rahul Ravipudi (08:49)
It was awesome, Elizabeth. And I highly recommend that everybody have been sent over 12,000 pieces.
Elizabeth Larrick (08:57)
Well, I thought that was part of the guest, you know, like, hey, welcome. The lobster’s on its way.
Ben Gideon (09:03)
Our best guests do get a dozen lobsters shipped to them. So if you perform exceptionally well, that might happen. We actually, after Rahul got his lobsters, I decided this was kind of a fun little thing. there was a lawyer who’d referred us a case that we sell it for a lot of money. And I sent him a dozen lobsters too. It’s kind of a dilemma because you send the lobster. So I sent it to his law office. He’s also out in California.
Elizabeth Larrick (09:10)
Right, I like the competition.
Ben Gideon (09:30)
And then I started to worry, well, what if the lobsters show up there and nobody opens the package or they’re not prepared for it and they might freak out. So the day before they arrived, I emailed them and said, hey, you got something coming. You should be looking out for it. But it would probably be better if people weren’t ⁓ aware that they were coming. And then they kind of opened the package and found a dozen live lobsters staring back at them.
Elizabeth Larrick (09:55)
I mean, it’d be a good surprise.
Ben Gideon (09:57)
No, I’ve got a good company now that will ship them for me and it’s pretty easy. That was the holdup with Rahul. It only took me three years to pay his bet, but it was just trying to figure out the logistics of it was harder than I expected. So anyway.
Rahul Ravipudi (10:12)
But I have interest along with it because there was a pound of beautiful shrimp that came with the lobster too.
Ben Gideon (10:19)
They threw the shrimp in for free. Yeah. don’t understand that. Yeah. Well, Elizabeth, what’s your specialty there? If you’re going to pay off a bet, are you going to send us like some steaks or what?
Elizabeth Larrick (10:31)
Yeah, you know, think steaks or if I could, I don’t know how well it would really travel, but like some Franklin barbecue would probably be like the best.
Rahul Ravipudi (10:40)
Is that the go to versus Salt Lake?
Elizabeth Larrick (10:42)
Yeah, mean, Salt Lake is still, you know, it’s a good it’s good, you know, but Franklin Barbecue’s just got some brisket. just it’s hard to beat.
Ben Gideon (10:51)
Before we get into ⁓ focus groups and stuff, why don’t you give us a little bit of a background, your bio.
Elizabeth Larrick (10:57)
Sure, Yeah, so I basically went to law school like most of us on this podcast, graduated, and started working in a plane of personal injury and really loved it. I always wanted to be in the courtroom. I tried criminal, tried family law. Just wasn’t a really good fit, but personal injury was a great fit. And so started off there and just really…
Made my way eventually back to Texas. I went to University of Oklahoma law school and made my way back. And as most people do, I think they eventually find themselves running their own practice. So ran my own practice for several years, but along the way really just gravitated toward, at the time it was called Reptile, now it’s called Edge, towards that way of setting up cases and trying cases and had an opportunity to actually go work in the Keenan Law Firm. And so I did that for about a year and tried cases all over.
Vegas, Seattle, really got a good eye-opening experience with trying really large cases, know, weeks and weeks of cases. So it was really a great experience, came back and still just ran my firm and really got gravitated towards helping lawyers, doing focus groups. So was doing focus groups on my own, you know, there’s a couple of us here in Austin that would get together and, you know, share some space and get people. And so it was… a great way to just do little snapshots here and there. And people just kind of started gravitoiding and said, hey, we just do this for me. Like, I don’t want to come do it. Will you just do it for me? And so that really kind of took off and then decided right before the pandemic to go all in and do almost all consulting work. And then of course the pandemic hit and just turned everything virtual. that’s really kind of the… The ride of where I got here and just really enjoy helping lawyers make decisions in their case using focus groups or helping difficult clients with witness prep.
Rahul Ravipudi (12:49)
Just going back to your background, why was criminal and family law not really a right fit and why is personal injury something right in your wheelhouse?
Elizabeth Larrick (12:58)
I mean, these are wonderful places where people do amazing work. And I think your heart really has to be in family law. I mean, it’s just, it’s really draining and there’s really no end to it. And obviously with family, I mean, with personal injury, like it’s some people’s their worst time in their life and they need help with all different facets. And I love being able to help with all different kinds of things when it comes to that. But, you know, there comes a point where you actually get them. through, right? Like you finish and they’re in it, you know, they’re able to kind of move into a different place. Family law doesn’t really happen. And criminal, I mean, at the end of the day, you’re really trying to just push a bunch of files either on either side of those things. I worked in a criminal office for a while in undergrad. And so it’s really just, you’re pushing people through your, you know, it’s not really necessarily feel as helpful. And so personal injury really fit that you get to have a great relationship with these clients. You get to help them through sometimes the worst.
you know, things that could ever happen to them and get them on the other side of that. So it’s very, it just felt like more of a helpful place than family law or criminal.
Ben Gideon (14:03)
In terms of your work with the Keenan Law Firm and exposure to the reptiles, is that something that still kind of drives your thought process and philosophy or has there been a progression or change since you left? And then what aspects of that are you still using today?
Elizabeth Larrick (14:21)
Yeah, I mean, think all of it ends up, yeah, definitely still use it. I mean, think smart trial lawyers will continue to learn always, but I think there’s going to be at some place a little bit of a framework that you always kind of fall back to. And I got to teach, you know, how to do this stuff and that significantly increases your ability to do it yourself. So. teaching for almost 10 years there and just really feeling like I wanna pass on what I know, but also, yeah, absolutely that framework, but just adding on. mean, there are a lot of things, there are a lot of great other strategies out there, but a lot of it just comes down to what are you comfortable with when you’re communicating and how does it work for you? But yeah, definitely that’s always kind of the backbone for me as far as thinking about trying cases and strategy.
Ben Gideon (15:12)
So tell us about your process. If a lawyer’s interested in working with you, at what stage of the case would you tend to first get involved and then how do you work and collaborate to help?
Elizabeth Larrick (15:25)
Yeah, I mean, people just come with problems. Most of the time people are at a crossroads of trying to decide, hey, our mediation failed, trial’s still pretty far off, but we’re on the fence still. And so sometimes we just run a really short focus group to help them make that decision, right? Help them with their clients make that decision, get that outside point of view. And sometimes people come to me when they’re on the doorstep of trial and they’re like, we have this big…
nasty problem with liability. we have tried these few things. We think that they work, but we’re not 100 % sure. We want some feedback from a focus group. And so that’s where people come in as well. And then I have some lawyers that before they even file a case, they will run just a very basic focus group to figure out like, does this stick? Do people care? Or is this something that really at the end of the day, people are gonna blame somebody else and you it’s just not gonna be a viable case.
And so the processes typically come in with a problem, you you name it. Hey, we’ve got this really large life care plan and I’m really worried because, you know, there’s a life care plan on the other side and we’ve got just some of these things that are worried about the damages and then with liability, it’s, you know, sometimes it just, it’s really complicated. There’s several different defendants and it’s like how much is it be on each one?
And how do we really, there’s so many details, how do we skinny this down to know what really rings? And so that’s a lot of how we end up just deciding, okay, how long of a focus group do you want? And do you wanna do more than one? And then we just really spend a lot of time planning. I get to know the case and I get to help them really figure out. Sometimes lawyers want to present and that’s great. Sometimes they don’t at all. And so I help do that as well. But typically I always am in there moderating because it’s so hard. as somebody who you put your heart and soul into a case and you’re trying to make the right decision and advise your client and it’s hard to be neutral. So that’s generally where I come in and always ask questions and just get the good information without, you know, maybe tipping the scales along the way.
Rahul Ravipudi (17:31)
So what’s the format of one of your focus groups?
Elizabeth Larrick (17:34)
So we use Zoom and typically it’s eight to 10 people. Sometimes we get a few extra people in there, but really it’s a presentation, whether it’s just the facts or whether it’s an opening or whether it’s a mediation statement, whether it’s just, know, depot clips. And then it’s just, you know, conversation, tell me what you think, you know, what could be missing here, what was confusing. And so we just ended up having kind of really quality conversations with people and then.
be able to ask follow-ups as well. And so that’s kind of where a lot of it, and the lawyers typically, if they’re not presenting, they’ll be in there watching anonymously, that’s typically our format. And they’re one hour, two hour, three hours. Most of the people that I work with don’t have a giant bag of money to work with when it comes with clients or comes with cases, because we’re fronting everything. And so that’s why for me, it’s when we package it in a little bit smaller thing, instead of doing these long all day, in-person focus groups or mock juries. It’s much more manageable for lawyers as well as the amount of information you get out of it. It’s very much, it’s smaller and it allows people to really understand it, grasp it, and then move into action items.
Ben Gideon (18:45)
Where do you get your focus group of jurors?
Elizabeth Larrick (18:48)
I get them from Facebook, Craigslist. We have a pretty good referral program. I mean, I’ve been doing them for almost 10 years. So I had a lot of in-person groups and then basically we really just kind of, you know, work with those people to, hey, give me a referral, you know, have a referral program with them. And occasionally if we have something that’s kind of a one-off, then I will use a recruiter to help get some people in there.
Ben Gideon (19:09)
Are you using jurors from the venue where the case is or does it not matter in your view where they’re located?
Elizabeth Larrick (19:16)
I think it really depends on what you’re doing. ⁓ I think for the most part, it doesn’t necessarily matter, but I mean, I think if I tried to get some people from Maine to tell me about something that happened in California, it be a little bit of a problem, but you as long as you’re kind of in, it’s not like a case that’s super specific to. to geography, but I think as you get closer to trial, you wanna get closer to your venue. But here in Texas, I mean, we have some really small venues where there’s 14,000 people in your jury pool, that’s it. Like, we don’t wanna taint your jury pool, so typically we just try to match it. But for the most part, most of my general ones, we just have kind of a general kind of gathering of people across Texas, Oklahoma, you know, and the surrounding states.
Rahul Ravipudi (20:01)
You’ve done like over a thousand of these, right? Tell us some stories about how somebody used your focus group data and results and then how it out in trial.
Elizabeth Larrick (20:11)
Yeah, yeah, absolutely. One of the most recent ones that we had, and this happens a lot actually, where people, a lawyer will come to me and they say, hey, we have dash cam footage. We feel like it’s really clear. But of course now liability, they’re flip-flopping, they’re denying responsibility now. So we were going to trial in two weeks. I have no idea what the defense is thinking because they took this really unusual position. And so we ran a two-hour focus group.
And there were definitely some things that they needed to shore up on liability, where it was some explanations they needed on direct exam from the client, and also very specific details that the jury needed to know very upfront. Because even though we’re all familiar with Interstate 35, which is the interstate of Texas speed limit changes, there’s different rules in different places, and they needed to know very specifically. And so in those two hours,
gleaned a lot of things that needed to be added, small tweaks, I would say. And then also he learned that really they weren’t shocked or surprised that the company completely changed their tune. Like that didn’t surprise me, that’s what I would do. That’s just a good lawyer tactic. So they weren’t really bothered by that. And so they were able to kind of tweak their opening and really get into some important things on direct exam with their client. And they ended up settling.
before the jury got it because they had a couple of other issues as far as like getting Excess to come in and things like that They were so glad to have that extra information just to be able to tweak and put things first and What was on their minds and again they thought liability was in the bag because this video but it just wasn’t
Rahul Ravipudi (21:51)
Yeah, it’s like sometimes we’ll circulate some videos in our office and just hearing the different perspectives where some people look at and go, oh, this is a clear winner and others will look at and go, that’s a clear loser.
Ben Gideon (22:05)
So, interesting how.
Elizabeth Larrick (22:08)
And it’s, mean, it’s whenever we have video tests, I mean, video of the crash or, you know, whatever the, or the event, I should say. I mean, it’s always fascinating. And I always tell people like, got to test that stuff because you may think it’s totally clear and they will point out 10 different things you didn’t even think about. And sometimes they create things that are not on the video. You just want to make sure that you dispel and know about before you walk in and, and, you know, go to trial.
Ben Gideon (22:36)
That’s an interesting observation. How you present the video is such a important skill in any case where there’s a video. Rahul, you had that case involving the swimming pool. Yeah. Death, was it a death, right? Yeah. And I remember you had a video and as I recall, you had kind of given ⁓ some kind of background about what you’re going to see and then it really framed it.
so that when you started to watch the video, you were looking for the right things and you watched it in the right way. But if you hadn’t given that framework, maybe you would be looking at it and see something totally different.
Rahul Ravipudi (23:18)
Yeah, part of the just the teaching of a drowning experience. And we had a neurologist in the case who explained how your body reacts. And ⁓ one of the arguments that the defense wanted to go down was that the kid was reckless for being in this situation and that the parents were bad parents for allowing him to go to a school event that was a life-guarded event, even though he was a good swimmer.
And as you started to see this video, could see him waving his hand about 15 times before he finally went under with lifeguards so close by. So, you know, you’re totally right. As Elizabeth was talking, I was just thinking about images like that, videos, but also like trial graphics. I’ve seen some amazing trial graphics or animations videos. And then I’ve seen the exact opposite, where it almost proves the other side’s case and,
why anybody would be celebrating it, makes me wanna scratch my head. Have you dealt with any of that where you kind of see something that a lawyer’s brought in for a focus group to test that out? And maybe even before you tested it, you kind of had a feeling as to how it was gonna play out.
Elizabeth Larrick (24:27)
yeah. yeah. I mean, I think, like you said, you get a feeling pretty quickly when you do a lot of focus groups or do a lot of juries. Like, I think that’s the opposite of what you’re going for. But we’re gonna, we’ll put it up in front of them and see. You know, I don’t want to bet against you before we get in there. But yeah, I’ve definitely had it where it was like, you just nailed their whole tactic.
⁓ in this visual or whether it be an animation or even just as like you said a still graphic but I mean you just say hey the pony and we’re gonna let the ponies run and I’m not gonna get in the way of this and that’s what most of most the focus group is just really getting out of the way to really listen and get everyone to talk in and chime in and you know I’m do you guys use focus groups at all?
Rahul Ravipudi (25:14)
Yes, a lot, and I love them. And I think virtual focus groups are fantastic. And I was going to ask you if in hindsight, it probably played out great that you switched to virtual because it’s probably easier to become nationwide and do a whole lot more focus groups over a short time. But I think they’re so valuable in understanding whether you’re framing the case right and those tweaks, like you said, that you have to make.
But I’ve done mainly sort of cloopenings, you know, where you do this closing argument opening statement and then the defense does the same and maybe we’ll have our clients testify and so that the focus groups gets a little flavor as to who they are. But I like what you’re doing.
Elizabeth Larrick (25:57)
Yeah, well those are so helpful I think the clobidding ones because and especially having a little bit of client testimony because for us in our minds that’s the easiest thing for us to understand and I think we as lawyers get a little bit like ooh I maybe I’m not gonna know what they’re saying or they’re gonna say something I don’t understand and I’m like listen, it’s it’s really not like
It’s just being able to sit back and kind of sometimes listen to some of that hard stuff. But most of the things people are really obvious about how they feel and think. So they’re just gonna tell you. And sometimes it takes a little bit more of like, okay, well, let’s go back and think about like what we presented and how we presented and what we’re going forward. And that’s why some of the shorter ones, you know, can be really helpful if you’re just gonna run clips, you know. And I think that’s the easiest thing sometimes if you’re just getting starting out is doing an opening is easy or just running clips of.
you know, your client or the main other fact witnesses to see how they think about these people and how they put the story together based on that testimony.
Ben Gideon (26:56)
So we’ve done a lot of focus groups over the years. In the old days, we used to do the in-person focus groups. And honestly, I miss those a little bit because they’re a good opportunity to be in the same room with people, which we…
do too infrequently these days. And when you get into a courtroom, if that’s the first time you’ve seen other human beings in close proximity in a while, this can be a little ⁓ jarring, know? ⁓ But we’ve moved completely to the Zoom focus groups as well now. And we use them differently now than we used to. And I’m curious on your thoughts about this. So what we do with them now is in every case we have that’s heading towards trial, we do two.
Zoom focus groups in order to issue spot and identify major shortcomings with our case or questions that jurors may have, all for the purpose of making sure that we present the case, both sides of the case as forcefully as we can when we do our big data study. We now have moved to big data more for predictive use and really drilling down on issues in the case because I just feel like with the number of respondents you’re getting in that, it ends up being a little bit more reliable because if you get eight or 10 people in a focus group, it can really skew one way or another. So I’m curious what your thoughts are on the relationship between these Zoom focus groups, small numbers of people versus the big data stuff that’s becoming more popular, I guess.
Elizabeth Larrick (28:38)
Yeah, I mean, I think big data has been there. And I think for us in our minds, it is, like you said, you just drew the exact thing, which is it feels more reliable when you have 3000 people or 400 people who are basically looking at it. And a lot of people can’t afford to do with some of those big data ones. And so that’s kind of where this kind of fits in for people who.
They don’t have that couple million dollar case, but they’re working on the biggest case in their office. And so if you just do one issue spotting focus group and at least open your mind that, I need to look at this. But for people who I always tell them, like, listen, if you want to test reliability, then you need to probably be aiming to do more than one of these things. Again, like you just said, eight to 10 people and they all go with you. Then you can take it to the bank. Like, well, wait a second here. So most of the time, that’s why I say like, because their Zoom is just so easy to turn on. And right now you’re gonna find it’s pretty easy to find eight to 10 folks to jump on and present it, listen to what they have to say, do it again and really be able to just say, okay, all right. What I think most people are still trying to open up the idea in their brains is just to go out and get that outside perspective. And so to try and convince someone like, well, do a data dump, you know, and then, you know, it’s like.
Well, wait a second. there’s always a little bit of people, a rub of people know that they need to be doing it, but there’s a like a resistance there. So that’s why I feel like this is like, yeah, it’s like, this is the gateway, like take a step in, like do a Zoom focus group. And then, you know, as you kind of get really used to getting that feedback, you want more, like you want to get to that large data set and really feel comfortable. And so I know people who kind of combine the same thing, but very much to kind of probably what you guys use them for Ben is like,
Again, taking that issue and going all the way down that rabbit trail with 3000 people and figuring out where they are and then feeling really good like, okay, I’ve shored this up. You know, I feel good about this particular issue.
Ben Gideon (30:39)
What do think?
Rahul Ravipudi (30:40)
Is the, in your experience, is the main reason or driver for people being resistant to wanting to do a focus group.
Elizabeth Larrick (30:48)
I think there’s couple things, know, rough about people always say costs, right? Like that’s the easiest word that can count of our mouths. Number two is generally we’re just too busy, right? We’ve got too many files, like I don’t have time to do that. I don’t have cases big enough to do that. And I think a lot of it is we as plaintiff personally, like we have to assess the risk for our own office of investing more in a case. And so I think sometimes it feels like more risk. People worry they’re not gonna understand what. The feedback is or how to use it. And that’s why, again, I try to start on, let’s do the basic, you know, and then you’ll really feel better about understanding the issues. But I think those are some of the things I think a lot of people are just waiting for that big case. I’m waiting, once I get one of these cases, then I’ll go do this, all this stuff.
Rahul Ravipudi (31:36)
Right. Right. But I bet a lot of the results and information you get from a focus group when you’re working with a particular lawyer or law firm they can probably apply a lot of that to a lot of their cases.
Elizabeth Larrick (31:49)
Absolutely, absolutely. I always tell people when they come in, we’re gonna do a car wreck case. like, okay, you gotta tell them these five things. I know it doesn’t have anything to do with your K. No one is drunk driving, but please, for the love of Pete, just tell them that. They’re always gonna ask. So absolutely, I find that often with people when they say, they’ll come to me and they’ll say, hey, here’s this case. Don’t forget about that other folks group we did that’s still got really valuable information about the exact same kind of situation.
Rahul Ravipudi (32:20)
Take your playbook to the next level by joining a legal network of all-stars at PSRPlaybook.com. PSRPlaybook.com is a free digital legal library created exclusively for plaintiff lawyers by the nationally recognized personal injury law firm of Panache Ravi Pudi LLP and features video content showcasing the tactics, strategies, and concepts implemented by some of the industry’s most successful trial attorneys.
PSRPlaybook.com promotes learning, shared knowledge, collaboration, and best practices. Get in the game and see for yourself by joining our national network of plaintiff lawyers. Subscribe now at PSRPlaybook.com and learn from the best.
Ben Gideon (33:06)
So you’ve done so many focus groups over, or in a decade. What are the kind of biggest misconceptions and mistakes you think lawyers routinely make about their own cases that then are born out in the focus groups?
Elizabeth Larrick (33:21)
I mean, they’re mistakes that I made. mean, I had, you know, when I had, was like, you know, this case is, you know, worth X amount. And in reality, people just value things differently. And we, think sometimes try to be formulaic about it.
Ben Gideon (33:37)
I lawyers are undervaluing the cases or tend to overvalue the cases. It’s fascinating because I actually had the opposite thought. When we do the big data, the numbers that come back are always higher than what I would have expected. I don’t know. Rahul, have you had any? Yeah.
Rahul Ravipudi (33:57)
Yeah, it’s the same thing that I’ve experienced too, which is, there’s sometimes where it’s undervalued and sometimes that it’s overvalued and it’s been insightful in both ways. But when you undervalue a case, it’s just more mortifying. the perspective of like, I was asked for half of what I should have been asking. It definitely makes you want to commit more to doing the work to get all the data that you can.
Ben Gideon (34:14)
my gosh ⁓ And. Do you think Elizabeth that people, lawyers may be undervaluing the big cases and overvaluing the smaller cases?
Elizabeth Larrick (34:35)
Yes, I mean, I think what happens is there’s a false equivalent. I’ve got a life care plan that’s worth seven million there for my cases. And it’s like, well, yeah, but it’s just not an automatic for folks. Like lost wages, those are just not, I it’s not an automatic value upgrade. And that’s kind of sometimes where I think people are like, ⁓ well, we have these things. And I’m like, well, yeah, but what I always hear constantly from focus groups is like,
Well, but what does their wife say? But what does their coworker say? Like, what is their, you know, they want those things that are more relatable in their lives to help back it up. But, and there are definitely places where people come in and completely undervalue their case. And I’m just like, ⁓ I could just tell you before we even get in there, like that’s not, you’re not valuing it in the right place. But I think we just, when you look at it every day, all day, and there’s so much.
things, where’s the life care plan? Where’s the expert for this? Where’s, know, we kind of sometimes forget like, ⁓ some of the easiest, smallest things that inject value, we just sometimes overlook because, ⁓ we’re not before trial yet. So why would I go get before and afters? Why would I go think about talking to, you know, the coworkers or the boss or, you know, that kind of stuff where it’s sometimes just, again, opening their minds to being curious and being listening and, ⁓ that’s something super simple I can do. and it doesn’t cost me anything and it will significantly help the value in the case.
Ben Gideon (36:07)
About on liability side, win-loss, have you seen a trend over time in one direction or another? Well, I mean, we’re seeing, we’re hearing about more plaintiff’s verdicts today than we used to, and it seems like there was at least a trend towards more receptive juries, at least in certain parts of the country. Is that reflected in the focus groups you’re doing or you’re not seeing that?
Elizabeth Larrick (36:14)
Tell me more about that question.
I think so, mean, it’s typically sometimes it’s just split, you know, but I think that there are elements of cases that people can get behind. And I think that, you know, the plaintiff’s far is really good about sharing information about how they’re trying cases and what is happening. And I think that that significantly increases everybody’s ability to get the verdict. But, you know, as far as being able to say, because we do so many different styles of focus groups, we don’t.
I don’t force people into doing like this is how this is the one form and I do and that is it I mean I really try to be flexible with what is the issue you’re trying to solve or or maybe you’re just brand new and we’re just gonna do you know, just a real basic one that Significantly helps people but it’s hard for me to say well, we always do a win-loss in every, focus group We just don’t always do that because that’s not always the purpose of the focus group
Rahul Ravipudi (37:26)
Often is the purpose what you’re going to ask for at trial.
Elizabeth Larrick (37:30)
Pretty often, because that’s one the number one things people come to me, because they’re terrified. They want to know how to ask for it, and they want to know is this a good number or not. It’s pretty frequently that people come to me with questions about value.
Rahul Ravipudi (37:48)
How do you teach how to ask for it, the how part?
Elizabeth Larrick (37:51)
Well, everyone’s a little different on this. So I don’t necessarily always teach people the how, but typically what we do is when we have somebody who comes in and they say, I really want, I’m curious about value. Here’s what I think, here’s what the defense is doing, and here’s our alert evidence. Typically what we’re gonna get back is, know, people are way off the mark or I don’t get it. And it’s sometimes hard to, put it into a vacuum because even if we do the best mark.
Elizabeth Larrick (38:25)
there are still elements of trial that significantly help with value that we can’t imitate in a focus group. I mean, what I tell people is typically like, here’s the hole that you’re having. And again, what I see a lot of times is people just over relying on the life care plan. And there’s a hole in the life care plan. And I’ll tell people like unless your person is 100 % using this particular thing or you kinda need to take that out of your life care plan. Or you need to have somebody come and explain. Or the loss wage is always one of those places. Or hey, you need to go get a coworker to talk about these different things. So typically what I do is say, okay, this is the value you want, here’s what we heard, here are the ways to put this in there. So that when you get to closing, you’re have.
you’re gonna feel comfortable with that number. Here in Texas, we have a pretty significant Supreme Court case that really we had people who were, nothing wrong with this, know, hey, this is how much we pay for a fighter jet pilot. This is, know, we value the life over the plane. That’s not the exact argument by the way, but I’m just giving an example. But in this Supreme Court case, it was like, okay, you have to tie it. Like the number even for everything has to be tied back to something specific in testimony. So people are like, really fine-tooth combing things, which I think is great. We should be doing anyhow, like so that we don’t get those verdicts taken away. so, know, teaching people how to do the number, like I said, several approaches to that and people have to get so comfortable like with their number. And that’s kind of half the battle is like, okay, are you comfortable or are you cringing? okay, now how?
Rahul Ravipudi (39:51)
There are.
Elizabeth Larrick (40:05)
you know, are we going to talk about, do some jury selection questions? Are you going put an opening? Like, how are you going to kind of plant it here and there? So it’s very personal, I think, but I think most people, think the way that Sari Dilla Want is doing it is helpful. And I think there are other ways that people are doing it that can help you get ready to feel comfortable with that.
Ben Gideon (40:26)
What’s the analysis of the focus group process look like for you? Is there some kind of memo or analytical document that goes through and provides feedback? how are you getting the results to the lawyers who hire you to do the focus groups? What does the format of that look like?
Elizabeth Larrick (40:45)
So typically if we run a focus group, we’re gonna stick around afterwards and we’re gonna do it just a debrief because I want to hear what you heard and I want you to hear what I heard and then typically what I’ll do is I’ll go back through and go back through the transcript if we have you know votes or things like that kind of put that into a report and then just basically Having that debrief together to give them, you know some ideas because sometimes people will think ⁓ This is what I heard but then I can tell them that’s just one person
Just one person kept saying the same thing over and over again, and that’s not necessarily what everybody else was listening to. But then I go back and reread the transcript, and we put together a report that kind of has the main takeaways. And if we had some votes and it’ll break down, here’s the percentage of what was on your client, and here’s what happened after the defense reopening, and here are the things that they wrote in the chat, but here’s what they said. that’s one of the things I always try to do is try to tell people, so we heard from Bob, know, Bob was saying this, but that’s not what Bob was writing down. like, just, you know, take that for a grain of salt. Bob’s probably not telling us 100 % what’s on his mind. There’s a little bit of little bit of there with our Bob over here, you know, or here’s, you know, we’re gonna put Steve on this particular paradigm, but we’re, know, don’t necessarily think that Steve represents everybody who’s gonna be on the jury poll.
Rahul Ravipudi (42:08)
Do you have your focus group folks deliberate at all among each other on the issues or are they talking?
Elizabeth Larrick (42:15)
Sometimes we do, sometimes we do. And you know, what ends up happening is I think what probably we’ve seen, like what most of the deliberations I watch is they either they’re just drawn straws. They’re not putting really a lot of effort into it or one person kind of dominates and you can’t hear anybody else. So when we do a debrief, I always come back or when we do a deliberation, sorry, I come back in and I’m like, okay.
Let me break, y’all need to tell me now. So then I kind of ask them a lot of questions and make them kind of tell me more about their individual thoughts.
Ben Gideon (42:47)
I saw on your website you’re a big runner. Is that still the case?
Elizabeth Larrick (42:51)
Yeah, yeah, I still I enjoy getting out there
Ben Gideon (42:54)
you have any pointers for Rahul and his getting his children in shape? ⁓
Elizabeth Larrick (42:59)
No, not really other than, know, what motivates most of us, which is like, you know, if you do this, you can have that.
Ben Gideon (43:11)
Yeah, the carrot, the stick.
Elizabeth Larrick (43:14)
That’s right, that’s right.
Rahul Ravipudi (43:15)
No, there is a happy ending. Elizabeth, I forced my middle child to go running with me and he was upset the whole time, but I wanted to teach him like mental toughness. And he is a sophomore in high school and on the track team. at that.
Ben Gideon (43:31)
Look at that. So yeah. That’s impressive. What is he? What’s he running?
Rahul Ravipudi (43:37)
I think the 200 and 400.
Elizabeth Larrick (43:39)
my gosh, those are hard races.
Rahul Ravipudi (43:41)
Yeah, he’s a fast kid.
Elizabeth Larrick (43:44)
that’s good, that’s good. I was long and slow. mean, I was cross country, you know, I could get a little bit faster to turtles and things like that. But I I enjoyed running. So that’s why I still do it.
Rahul Ravipudi (43:55)
Fantastic.
Ben Gideon (43:57)
Yeah. tell us about your podcast. know you have a podcast that’s designed to help trial lawyers prepare for trial. What kind of topics do you cover and how do people locate that if they’re interested in listening to more? ⁓
Elizabeth Larrick (44:10)
Absolutely. Trial Lawyer Prep, it’s been out there. I think I’m starting on my fourth year. So I’m a little behind you guys. I thought it was, I’m trying to get the lobster. So typically, a lot of how-to, I I am all about helping other lawyers run their own Zoom focus groups. So there’s a lot of how-to about Zoom focus groups. I really have always been drawn to helping clients get ready for deposition or trial testing. So there’s a lot about
Ben Gideon (44:17)
It’s not a competition.
Elizabeth Larrick (44:40)
preparation for that. And then a lot of it is just different things about strategy, getting people to even just start thinking about it. What does it even mean? Breaking down communication and persuasion. A lot of things that come from working. Oh, hey, here’s one of the things we stumbled across. Like, let me just tell you what we learned. So just different things about helping people kind of get started in it, thinking about it. And then I always try to have some of my folks come on and tell people their, just their experience. Like we had Michelle Gessner, she had an amazing verdict against Wells Fargo recently. And so she came in and did two episodes to kind of talk about how she used focus groups from a very, what I would say, low to the ground, know, didn’t have a lot of money to invest, right? So how’d she get $21 million?
What’d she do and her formula was just basically to do the opening statement over and over again until she was just felt so comfortable and knowing exactly what they needed to hear. Cause she had 15 minutes in her ear. So she was like, okay, that’s easy. I know only in 15 minutes I’ve got two questions here, but what’s really gonna be weighing on them is that opening statement. So I think it’s fun to have people come in and really dive deep on some of that stuff because then it overcomes people’s…of like, I’m not gonna know what I’m gonna get or I don’t know how to use them. Cause again, I feel like everybody’s gonna be trying cases should be doing at least a zoom focus group to get those issue spots, those blind spots we may not be able to see.
Ben Gideon (46:13)
Yeah, and part of it, I think, is whether you gain anything valuable from the focus group itself or not, but you inevitably will, just the discipline of having to prepare your case, to think about it critically, and to go through that process has value in and of itself, I think. I mean, just like anything else, you need to practice, you need to think, you need to prepare, you know? The idea that you just go into court now and wing it is, I don’t think that works very well for most people.
Elizabeth Larrick (46:43)
Yeah, it doesn’t. like, you know, people will, and I’m sure you guys have probably talked about this, like kind of Frankenstein style, take a little bit from this and do a little bit from that and maybe a little rules of the road and a little bit of this. And like, you don’t really have a good cohesive, like thought process. And so it’s like, ⁓ well, you’re going to do that thing. I’m going to do this thing. And critical thinking about the whole picture, I think, is sometimes what gets lost when you’re trying to kind of piecemeal things and try it out. And I know having listened to your podcasts, you know,
People who try cases, they go and listen and they’re like, okay, I’m gonna try this little piece. We’re gonna keep with our strategy here. So, I mean, I think you nailed it and that’s a big piece that people miss is when you take that step to do a focus group, even if it’s just a simple one hour focus group, you’re gonna sit down and have to prepare and think through all the information and get ready. And that’s just something you wouldn’t do unless you’re doing a focus group or a mock jury. And I think it significantly helps you start your mind thinking about it for trial.
Ben Gideon (47:44)
You stay in touch with Keenan at all? Mm-hmm. I saw him in California last year briefly. It was great to see him. I hadn’t seen him in a couple of years before that. And he seems like he’s doing well now, which is nice. Yeah.
Elizabeth Larrick (48:00)
I think he is doing better. They just had a Med Mal seminar in person down in Florida.
Ben Gideon (48:05)
Okay. Yeah. Well, Elizabeth, if folks want to reach out and find you and get your help doing focus groups, how do they do so?
Elizabeth Larrick (48:12)
The easiest way is just to go probably to my website and that’s just my name, elizabethlarrick.com and then, you know, take from there. The podcast is also located on there as well.
Ben Gideon (48:22)
Awesome. Well, you’re in the running now for the lobsters.
Elizabeth Larrick (48:26)
I hope so, I hope so. No, I enjoyed coming on and like I said, really my focus, my target is to get people to kind of start doing this in their own office. And then if you need extra help, like there are lots of lovely people out there to help people and to do big data, absolutely. just think, let’s our toe in the water.
Let’s do a little Zoom focus group and really kind of open our eyes. And I always think too, helping it prepare makes you think critically, but also talking out loud your case really helps your communication skills.
Ben Gideon (49:01)
Yeah, agree. And I think a barrier for a lot of people, like you said, is they’re just busy and sometimes it might seem cost prohibitive. So being able to reach out to someone like you who knows how to do it, can talk them through it, or can just do it for them, at least the first time, or it just makes it turnkey and easy. And for some people, that’s what they need. They just need to be able to push the button and make it happen. I think that’s a great service you’re offering. So thank you for doing that. And thanks for coming on today. We appreciate it.
Elizabeth Larrick (49:33)
No, thanks for having me. I enjoyed it.
