Reviews

I recently served as a juror on a (now closed) case for a personal injury lawsuit where Jim was the plaintiff's legal counsel. I found Jim made a compelling argument and presented facts in an easy to understand manner. Jim did an exceptional job of anticipating the defense attorney's arguments before they were made. He played devil's advocate to the defendant's perspective. This allowed him to be in control in a reserved manner even when the defense lawyer was trying to present his case. His closing argument reflected much of my internal monologue throughout the two day trial and it was an important aspect of what helped me convey my perspective to the other jurors during the deliberation period. He is very good at showing the humanity of his clients. He is also good at picking apart testimony during cross examinations in real time. On top of that he was also much more organized than the other side. While everybody in the jury agreed his client's request for compensation was too ambitious based on the nature of the case, I think Jim's lack of overly aggressive tendencies serves him well and allows him to stand in contrast to other lawyers who adopt more stereotypical approaches.