Kenneth Behrend - TLC '08 Grad. June 11, 2012.
This was my FIRST jury trial since graduating from the
college in 2008. Wow, what a difference there is in the experience of trying a
case after TLC!!!
Background
In preparing for this case, I listened to the CD's of
Gerry's "Win Your Case. During the trial, every morning driving to court
and every night driving home, I listened to the section of the book that
addressed the part of the case that was actually happening. It felt as if Gerry
was standing beside me in the courtroom and was very comforting to here is
melodious voice. Interestingly, as I listened to certain sections over and over,
my mind would wander into my own examinations, arguments, etc., and helped to
crystallize them.
This case involved claims for conversion and breach of
contract against Walgreens. My client was a small vendor, whom Walgreens owed
money to. Most significantly, my client is owned by my sister Becky, which came
with a boatload of additional pressure and family relationship issues, since I
am her younger brother. Needless to say, I would never hear the end of it, if I
lost the trial.
My sister's small company, MXM Essential Formulas, Inc.,
produces vitamins and sells them to middleman/marketing companies who resell to
drug store chains like Walgreens, CVS, Rite-Aid. In the early 2000's, she sold
to a middleman company called Triad ML Marketing, Inc. In November of 2002,
they start selling the vitamins through Walgreens on consignment via Walgreen's
Pay on Scan system. (No payment is made until the vitamins are
"scanned" at the cash register and paid for by a customer). The
consignment issue is important since it relates to the conversion claim, which
includes a claim for punitive damages, if the defendant's conduct is
outrageous.
In mid-2003 Triad decides to squeeze more money out of my
sister by slowing down payments and suing her in federal court. She counterclaims
for copyright infringement (she designed the labels and was never paid). There
is a settlement where Triad agrees to pay her by assigning all of the existing
inventory with Walgreens (56,552 bottles @ $7.42 per bottle) and around
$200,000 in the account's payable from Walgreens. The transfer occurs in
October of 2004.
Walgreens then enters into a contract to sell the vitamins
with my sister's company on consignment, since the vitamins make money for
Walgreens. Walgreens then refuses to pay
her for over a year and a half and in 2006 she comes to our dad for help (he
was also an attorney). Ultimately, it turns out Walgreens has failed to
disclose the amount of money that was in
the Triad accounts payable and destroys about half of the bottles in inventory
without authorization from my sister.
At trial, the judge refuses to make a ruling as a matter of
law that there was a consignment. Instead, he makes it a jury question and in
the closing charge reads the defense's very confusing jury instructions on
consignment and conversion, so the jury determines that no consignment and no
conversion, only a breach of contract.
Defense counsel is from White and Williams in Philadelphia
and is a Pennsylvania SuperLawyer.
Walgreens offered $57,000 to settle. Jury verdict, with
interest is just over $600,000.
Voir dire
In Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania the court does individual voir
dire, so it is more difficult to build a tribe, but TLC/Gerry's methods of how
to connect with jurors is powerful even on an individual basis! By using these
methods, I never felt so connected to a group of strangers. Best effort was
with one woman who came in spouting about frivolous lawsuits, McDonalds case,
etc. I thanked her for having the courage, and being honest about her feelings,
in order to be able walk into a room of lawyers in a courthouse and tell them
that there are too many lawsuits and most of them are fake claims. I also told
her that I respected her opinion, it was hers and she was entitled to have it.
Next, I respectfully asked her Q. Had she ever talked to a juror who served in
one of "those types of cases" A. No. Q. Have you ever looked into or
investigated on your own why a large verdict occurred like the McDonalds case?
A. No - I read it in the newspapers. Q. Do you believe everything you read in
the newspapers? No. Q. You have a small business with your husband, have you
ever had a legal problem? A. Now that you mention it, yes, we once had a sale
of a business property fall through. Q. tell me more about that? A. We were
forced to hire and attorney, because we were cheated. Q. How did that make you
feel? A. a long pause then..... Oh ... I see your point. Q. Would it be alright
with you if my client was forced into having to hire an attorney? A. Yes. (Her
entire physiology changed it was amazing to see her open up to me and
acknowledged that yes, it might be ok to file a lawsuit).
It was amazing, by showing respect and using the listening
skills, every juror opened up after starting out either neutral or somewhat
hostile. As a result, a bond was started with every juror.
Opening statement
The focus was on creating simple rules for the jury to make
sense out of the intricate complex issues in the case. To help in understanding
the flow of the story, a timeline/flow chart was designed with the help of my
wife and 11 year old son that showed the key events and the damages that were
caused by them. After looking each juror in the eyes and telling them how I was
feeling - that I was tired from all the work it took to prepare in the last
couple of days, then, I explained to the jury that this case is like a jigsaw
with 1,000 pieces and Walgreens had around 900 of the pieces in its possession,
and had refused to share them with us until the court forced them to share some
in the fall of 2011 and the court forced them to share the rest in March of 2012.
That putting the puzzle together was difficult and time consuming, but here it
was - and showed them the timeline/flow chart. They looked relieved that they
had a roadmap to reference and to use as a guide through the trial.
To help establish the rules of the case ala David Ball, I
read to the jury from a children's book called: "How to Behave and
Why." I explained that it is a book that my wife and I read to our
children. The 3 rules of the case were: 1) If I owe money I pay it; 2) If I make
a mistake I admit it - I don't' cover it up; and 3) If I have someone's
property I return it in good condition, I don't damage it. Then I went on to
explain a consignment and how an auctioneer sells on consignment. After which I
matter of factly went through the chart and the key points of the case. It took
one hour and 15 minutes, but the jury was attentive the whole way through.
Examination of Witnesses
During the trial there were four witness from Walgreens.
Three became involved after the problems arose, and Walgreens failed to produce
the employees who actually caused the problems and worked on the numbers. 1 -
the buyer who authorized selling the vitamins in Walgreens. He did not remember
much, and said he had no memory of a documents $248,000 deduction that improperly
occurred. He said that $248,000 was an insignificant amount of money and that's
why he could not remember it. And, he
forgot that he never attempted to have the money repaid. Instead, he said it
was a small amount of money - that it was an insignificant amount, not enough
to remember. - this admission astonished me and it played well in the
closing. 2 - the head of accounts
payable - didn't come into the job until 2005 and did not really know anything
about the transactions at issue all of which occurred prior to his tenure. 3 -
the buyer who took over for the first buyer, said he knew nothing of the behind
the scenes number crunching. 4. the in house counsel - she was evasive,
controlling and argumentative. I used a controlled cross on her in a very
polite and deferential manner - she appeared to hate how she was being
questioned and she openly appeared to dislike me. When pressed, she admitted
that she was acting as a "zealous advocate" for Walgreens in
attempting to reduce the amount of damages!
During the cross of my sister, Walgreen's counsel attempted
to control and push my sister, but she proudly and politely stood her ground.
We worked with her in trial preparation including two psychodrama groups.
(Thanks to Simina Vourlis and Chris Youngs!). Also, defense counsel slandered
my father saying he "gamed Walgreens" into overpaying my sister. So,
we had to defend our dead father's honor - but calmly and politely. My sister,
was wonderful on redirect sharing with the jury about who our father was - a
church elder, a president of the local YMCA, involved in the Boy Scouts, a
loving father and husband. Then, she shared about his funeral and about her and
my mother's fear that no one would hardly show-up since he was 85 years old
when he died and most of his friends predeceased him. Several thousand people
showed up to his funeral, a judge gave his eulogy, and she looked at the jury
and said that defense counsel could ask any one of them what type of man he
was. She was magnificent and remained strong, I broke down into tears at the
thought of how I missed my father. His love and caring was shown throughout the
letters he wrote on my sister's behalf in this case. The judge saw me and
kindly called a recess.
During the trial I objected twice - Defense objected
repeatedly. My first objection was because defense counsel kept suggesting
answers to questions for his clients, I said out loud in the court room that I
do not object to what he is asking, just that he is suggesting the answers to
his clients. The second was because defense counsel stated in a question how we
had been here for two weeks. I objected stating that it may have felt like two
weeks, but in fact it was only 5 days. The jury and the judge chuckled and the
judge sustained my objection.
Closing
During Defense counsel's closing argument, Defense counsel
paced up and down and spoke most of the time to the ground. He appeared nervous
- eloquent, but nervous. His words did not resonate or "ring true."
He focused on certain documents, but one was the heart and soul of his whole
argument. He even had the key document "blown-up" on a large poster
board. Throughout most of his closing I closed my eyes, as Gerry says to do,
and listened to the cadence and sound of his voice, to see if I could hear and
feel his weaknesses. This exercise in listening helped calm me and to recognize
that I was prepared and ready to handle his arguments in my closing.
In my closing, I started by looking every juror in the eyes
and then acknowledged how much they had sacrificed in this week long trial, as
well as how much they paid attention. Then, I picked up his large poster board
and told the jury its a useless document since nothing on it can help you
decide the case, and then dropped it onto the floor, as if it was a piece of
garbage. (One of the jurors told me that he repeated that same words and
actions in the jury room when the foreperson put it up on an easel).
Importantly, in organizing my closing, I borrowed some from
Gerry's case where he represented a small vendor against McDonalds and from his
Kerr-MgHee (Silkwood) closing. (If you have the opportunity, they are wonderful
to read and to become familiar with).
Next, I empowered the jury by pointing out that they are the
voice of the community and said they had more power than the judge. Next, I
reviewed the concept of "actions speak louder than words." Showing
how Walgreens actions failed to compare to that of an honest person. For
example, if they were acting honestly they would have contacted Becky the moment
the inventory and accounts payable became hers and worked with her. Instead,
they withheld information from her and refused to pay her anything for over a
year.
Next, I pointed out the holes in their defense. Then, I read
some "life rules" from another children's book "Be Honest and
Tell the Truth" and told the jury the story about preparing for the case,
how I practiced my opening on my eleven year old son and my wife. After I was
done telling the story to my son, he said, "Dad, I know what your case is
about" and went out of the room and returned with the book my wife had
been reading with him: "How to Behave and Why."
In conclusion, I repeated the three rules and closed with a
different section from "How to Behave and Why" - "Good people
should not allow bad people to take your property by stealth or otherwise. This
is because the world would be a miserable place to live. And no one's property
would be safe." Then, I asked them for a happy ending, and thanked them
for listening, since Walgreens and Walgreen's lawyer never listened, but you
have. And just as important is that you now have the power to make Walgreens
listen.
Afterwards, the court reporter took me aside and said she
was moved to tears by my closing - one of the best she ever heard. What she did
not know, was that she was hearing from a Warrior - who is part of the great
tribe of F-Warriors!
Thank you all for your support, guidance and friendship!
This verdict would not have happened without TLC in my blood and heart.
Ken TLC '08
p.s. I wore my medicine bag each day, so you were all there
fighting with me in the courtroom!
No comments:
Post a Comment