Hirst

INTRODUCTION

Taking the time to effectively interview jurors after a trial is an invaluable tool in trial preparation. That is when you learn where you went right and where you went wrong. This author commits to writing a list of at least five things he could have done better for purposes of self improvement. However, sometimes not seeing the forest for the trees is not so much about knowing about trees as about knowing when you are in a forest. The purpose of this article is to assist attorneys who are trying to demonstrate mild traumatic brain injury to insurance adjusters, defense lawyers, juries, and to other people they do not know.

THAT WAS THEN THIS IS NOW

The job of the lawyer in proving the "unseen" injury of traumatic brain injury is to provide a believable before and after comparison of the injured persons abilities. Those abilities become the planets in a once familiar galaxy which is now misaligned and, at times, on a collision course with other planets. Creativity is key. Following is a list; not an exhaustive list; but a potential list of abilities that a person may have had change as a result of brain injury.

1. Job Skills

2. Job Socialization

3. Job Success or Promotion

4. Recreation

5. Social Skills

6. Partner Skills

Spouse/Significant Other

7. Initiation

8. Civic Responsibility

9. Spiritual Commitments

10. Sporting Activities

These are all potential skills that a person may have affected as a result of traumatic brain injury. It is important to note that a person need not suffer alteration in skills in all of these areas. That is something that a person who would like to believe there is no injury will point out. In other words, if a person can still attend church and go to Sunday school, then the fact that they have been fired from their job due to insubordination, for instance, would make the person unaffected by any potential brain injury. (We will cover this concept in detail below)

HYPOTHETICAL

For purposes of this article we will consider three individuals; the first will be a 52 year old construction worker; the second will be a 26 year old waiter; the third will be a 56 year old comedian. Try to think of what types of, for instance, job skills (from the list previously mentioned) you would expect from a 52 year old construction worker; a 26 year old waiter; and a 56 year old comedian. For the construction worker you might suggest an ability to read blue prints or follow instructions. For the waiter you may suggest the ability to remember multiple orders, the ability to add numbers for purposes of the check, the ability to be personable to diners, etc. For the 56 year old comedian you might suggest an ability to remember jokes, an ability to deliver them with the appropriate timing, the ability to think quick on ones proverbial feet, etc. These would be good suggestions. Of course an in depth conversation with the actual hypothetical client is absolutely necessary. Moreover, a conversation with the hypothetical clients friends, family, significant other, or other person, is necessary. A similar exercise could be conducted for any one of the items listed above in terms of what one would expect from these three individuals. Each of these needs to be explored, dissected, and interpreted for expression to the jury, insurance adjuster, defense lawyer, or any other person.

PROCESSING THE INFORMATION

I have found, and imagine all of us have, that for every opinion there is a counter opinion. This is certainly true in the areas of mild traumatic brain injury litigation. Where one expert says the result of a test is "white," another expert will come in to say it means "black." During the course of litigation it becomes clearer what the "non-believing side" is going to use to support the position that no brain injury exists. Likewise, the "believing side" owes it to their client to present all evidence supportive of the fact that it does exist. This author recently resolved a mild traumatic brain injury case that was set for trial in less than one month via mediation. It had become apparent during the course of that litigation that the defendants were going to use videotapes which had been produced in discovery showing the plaintiff doing his "business" comedy. This actually comes from the third hypothetical we have been using involving a 56 year old comedian. The defendants thought, by showing the jury 144 videotapes of the plaintiff performing his radio talk show that they would convince the jury, since he was able to do that, that he was not brain injured. In fact the videotaped talk show had been produced a year after the injury and indeed showed the Plaintiff hosting two hour radio shows everyday. There were 144 videotapes. It all seemed pretty compelling for the defense. However, as the "believing side", and the plaintiffs attorney, I knew that the truth of the matter was not being told by simply putting those tapes in the VCR. My clients job skills had changed. In fact, when we reviewed those 144 tapes we saw consistent and definite errors conducive with the symptoms of mild traumatic brain injury. Things like: forgetting dates, sponsors, guests, story information, having to keep notes, forgetting the telephone number of the talk show. To show this to the "unbelieving side" we compiled 144 tapes in such a way showing the consistency in the problems the plaintiff had hosting the talk show. Additionally, we interviewed the production manager and the production assistant involved in the producing of the radio talk show. They both were very specific in pointing out that the plaintiff did not behave as "you or I would on tape." The taped interviews, the outtakes of the 144 tapes, along with an interview with a popular comedian who knew the plaintiff, were used to make the mediator and insurance company understand the very real impact of mild traumatic brain injury on my client. This in turn resulted in a significant award. The point is that it is incumbent on the plantiffs attorney to dispel the myths propagated by the "unbelieving side" so that the people making the decisions (insurance companies, a defense attorney) can be properly apprise of the truth.

BEFORE AND AFTER WITNESSES

What attorneys call "before and after witnesses" are those witnesses who can attest to the behavior and personality of a person before an injury and after an injury. Of course locating these individuals is not an easy thing to accomplish. For instance, there may be someone who knew the injured party in high school but has not seen them for sometime after the injury. On the other hand, there maybe someone who the injured party met after the injury but did not really know them before the injury. In any case, these witnesses are crucial to proving how the injured party was before the injury and how the injured party was after the injury. Where you can find people, for instance siblings, spouses, or others, that knew the person both before and after the injury makes for a more complete presentation.

WHEN LESS IS MORE AND WHEN MORE IS MORE

Less is more when you are putting the witness on the stand. Be concise and precise. Know in advance what particular areas the witness will be able to assist you with in helping the jury to understand how your client has been impacted by mild traumatic brain injury. Do not try to get more out of the witness than can be had. These witnesses typically last between five and fifteen minutes. They typically do not involve long cross examination since this is where the defense can only look bad trying to beat up on an otherwise honest witness. More is more regarding the number of before and after witnesses you have. Sometimes, I list as many as twenty-six before and after witnesses in pre-trial so the defense can learn as much as there is to learn about my clients changed condition before trial. I advise my clients at the initial interviews that I absolutely need the names of between five and ten people who knew or know the client and the changes that have resulted since the injury. This is crucial. I explain that this is not an option. In other words, without these people, I cannot represent them in a mild traumatic brain injury case. Over the course of the first few weeks of my representation I obtain the names of people, contact information, and have them interviewed. This is where I began to learn a lot about my clients from other people. I frequently, get a defense motion to exclude multiple witnesses (before and after witnesses) based on redundant testimony. I have never had this type of motion succeed since I am always able to tell the trial Judge that the testimony anticipated will be unique from the witnesses perspective of how and where the plaintiff exhibits a change in personality, job skills, etc. In other words each witness will have unique testimony of observations supporting brain injury.

CONCLUSION

In order to make another person understand mild traumatic injury, a lawyer needs to consider factors other then medical opinions, neuropsychological opinions, psychiatric opinions, and the defense experts opinions. The trial lawyer needs to go deeper into the life and times of the client. The lawyer needs to examine, analyze, find out, and use the testimony and evidence provided by people who can share changes they have observed with the injured party. In my humble opinion, this is understanding mild traumatic brain injury.

Timothy R. Titolo is a trial attorney in Las Vegas, Nevada. His practice concentrates on representing people and their families, who have suffered traumatic brain injury. He can be contacted at the following address: Titolo Law Office 10100 West Charleston Blvd. Suite 100 Las Vegas, Nevada 89134 Tel : 702.869.5100 Fax: 702.869.5111 E-mail: tim@titololawoffice.com Website: www titololawoffice.com

Timothy R. Titolo is Las Vegas and Nevadas experienced trial attorney. Mr. Titolo handles all types of personal injury cases, including catastrophic and serious injuries and wrongful death. He has particular expertise in traumatic brain injury (TBI), spinal cord injury and nerve damage cases.

Titolo Law Office has earned a reputation for achieving significant results. Through his successes, as well as by writing articles and giving presentations to attorneys and medical professionals around the country, Mr. Titolo has garnered the respect of colleagues.

I love cycling. In fact, if it wasn't for Lance Armstrong himself, I may have never gotten into this wonderful sport. So now every weekend, I go cycling with my friends down the sloping streets of Washington State, and boy do I have fun! But I need to be honest with you: I am terrible at it. I'm slow, I fall a lot, I bump other riders (unintentionally). That is why I love to watch the Tour de France. I love to watch the professionals do it and do it right. There is a lot that I have learned from past tours and I am sure that there is much more for me to learn. Unfortunately, this year they only show the Tour de France on a cable station that I am not subscribed to and even if I did want to pay the outrageous fees, it would take them weeks to come out and install it. That led me to wonder if I could watch Tour de France online and in real time.

After a few hours of searching, I was able to find a program online that allows you to watch Tour de France on your computer or laptop: Satellite TV For PC. All I had to do was put down a small one time payment and I had an all access pass to watch the Tour de France online. I am able to watch every single leg of the race in real time, from London to Paris. I don't have to stop myself from going to the official website of the race before its over to see results, because I can spend all my time watching the cyclists doing their thing for all 3553.9 kilometers of the grueling competition.

In case you were wondering, the race started on July 7, 2007 and will run until the grand finale on July 29, 2007. With over three weeks of unlimited coverage you'll be able to watch Tour de France on your computer at home, at work or even, if you want, at a coffee shop. As long as you have an internet connection you will be able to see the Discovery Channel Pro Cycling Team try and regain its old days of glory....or see an up and coming team come up from out of nowhere and take the yellow jersey in an upset. I mean, who doesn't love an upset? Well, not counting the French.

If you would like to know more about where you can find a place to watch Tour de France, you can find more information that might be helpful here. http://hubpages.com/hub/Watch_Tour_de_France_LIVE_on_your_Computer_

Viagra is by far the most recognizable brand name and for the drug sildenafil citrate. It is produced and marketed by the pharmaceutical giant Pfizer, and is also sold under the name Ravatio and Caverta in certain locations throughout the world. Viagra is produced for one reason and one reason only, to treat erectile dysfunction, or as it's more commonly known, ED. It comes in the form of a blue pill in 25mg, 50mg, and 100mg dosages. Although it is available only by way of a doctors prescription, you can actually buy Viagra on the Internet if you so choose.

The drug Viagra wasn't even intended to treat what is so widely known for now, in the beginning. It Was designed in the 1990s with the for the purpose of treating a form of heart disease known as angina pectoris. It didn't work for the purpose it was intended, however, researchers of the drug noticed an interesting side effect of the drug at those who are testing it. It consistently induced erections.

They had a gold mine on their hands and they knew it. It was then patented in 1996 with the intention of development as a treatment for ED. By 1998 it had passed the necessary tests for FDA approval, and was released to the public where it was received with open arms and open legs.

Erectile dysfunction is a very common disorder in men, and is brought about by any number of factors. Some of the most common causes behind ED are psychological in origin, and some are equally based on physical abnormalities. The vast majority of men will find that they will have some difficulty getting or maintaining an erection at at one time or another, even though they may be perfectly healthy.

These are the instances where Viagra has proven to be very effective indeed. Some cases of ED can be caused by damage to the nervous system, diabetes, or hypogonadism, and in these cases Viagra may not be effective. If a doctor you to effectively screen new officers of questions to see if it can help you pay

Viagra is classified as a PDE5 inhibitor. Pretty fancy name isn't it? PDE5 causes a compound called cyclic GMP or cGMP to degrade. Since cGMP causes the arterial smooth muscles in the penis to relax, which will then allow the penis to become engorged blood which is how an erection is created. Stopping or restricting the action of PDE5 will result in penile erections if the individual has an otherwise clean bill of health. Some other PDE5 inhibitors available today include Levitra, and Cialis. You have probably heard of all of them because they advertise very aggressively for this lucrative market.

Viagra is not without side effects and some of them include headaches, stomach upset, flushing, and sweating. Viagra has been reported to also cause blurred vision in some cases, and in some rare cases have actually been reports of temporary blindness. Viagra should not be taken in conjunction with drugs designed for angina pectoris, combination can cause a serious drop in blood pressure that may be very dangerous. Even though it is available on the internet, it is always wise to consult a qualified physician before taking any drug, including Viagra.

Morgan Hamilton offers his findings and insights regarding men's health. You can get interesting and informative information here at A Review of Viagra