Wednesday, January 25, 2012

In a high-profile wrongful death trial, attorneys win $37.5 million verdict using an iPad & TrialPad

One week before starting a trial that would become the largest verdict of our careers, my law partner Matt Minner and I were still debating on how best to present our evidence. We had discussed it before, of course, but couldn't quite come to agreement on the best approach to try a politically sensitive wrongful death case involving the tragic death of a young Alabama police officer, Daniel Golden. Our Birmingham-based firm,Hare, Wynn, Newell & Newton represented Golden's family and his estate in a civil wrongful death suit that followed the criminal adjudication of the case.

On a slightly rainy, warm afternoon on Aug. 29, along the outskirts of the city, Golden responded to what he perceived to be a routine domestic disturbance at the Taqueria Jalisco Mexican Restaurant. The 911 call was placed by Laura Castrajon, the wife of the assailant, Benito Albarran. Tapes revealed a frantic young woman worried about her own safety as well as the safety of others. Her husband was drunk and "fighting," she told the 911 operator.

Golden arrived alone and stepped out of his patrol car. From the eyewitness accounts, he hadn't quite taken four steps toward the front door of the restaurant when Albarran, who was hiding along the front of the building, suddenly opened fire. Although struck by Albarran's gunfire, Golden managed to free his Beretta service pistol and fired several shots before it jammed. Albarran, the restaurant's cook and manager, approached the wounded officer, who was seated on the ground and struggling to unjam his weapon, and fired, at point blank range, two fatal bullets into Golden's head.

On June 19, 2008, Albarran was convicted of capital murder, and subsequently sentenced to death. After that verdict, our firm began to investigate a separate civil case against the Jalisco Restaurant. Initially, it was clear that the restaurant could not be held vicariously liable for the acts of Albarran due to his intervening criminal act. In other words, the crime was obviously outside of the line and scope of his duties and thus Jalisco could not be held accountable for the employee's criminal actions.

However, further investigation revealed that Albarran was probably intoxicated during the event. Later, we were able to trace back his intoxication to beer provided by the Jalisco restaurant in violation of several Alcohol Beverage Control regulations. Furthermore, we were able to link Alabama's 100-year-old Dram Shop Act (which generally prohibits serving intoxicated individuals) with the restaurant's ABC violations in allowing an employee to consume alcohol. Under these two laws, it would be illegal to allow Albarran, an employee, to drink Jalisco's beer during working hours. Thus, if we could ultimately prove what we believe occurred, Jalisco could be held civilly liable for Officer Golden's death under both the 1909 Dram Shop law and the ABC regulations.

In all, we had more than 45 key trial exhibits, which we felt would be easily manageable in most any presentation system. In view of our focus, and the challenges the case presented, we decided to take an entirely different approach — and turn to an Apple iPad for our trial evidence presentation. We would still use a couple of documents blown-up on foam boards, for effect — but we didn't use TrialDirector or bring in an independent IT professional. Everything was managed directly from counsel table with minimal hardware and technology.

Just before trial I chose TrialPad (http://www.trialpad.com). Cost: $89.99.

I kept all trial documents loaded on the other two apps as a backup. To be sure, there were some minor glitches. For example, in testing we discovered that not every app supported each document format needed. Some could not play audio (our 911 tape), or display video (our trial video deposition). But we worked around these idiosyncrasies and display all trial content on the iPad.

To do so, we used the native iPad video app to play the trial video deposition with synced transcript and the native iPod app to play the 911 tape, which was converted into an MP3 file. Switching between applications, while perhaps not ideal, was quick and flawless with a double-tap of the iPad's home button.

Highlighting words, phrases, or key portions of documents was easily handled on the iPad's touchscreen by simply moving a finger to select the portions of the document that needed emphasis. As with TrialDirector, this can be accomplished in real time as the lawyer or witness is reading the document aloud.

From opening statement to closing argument, we were never more than a few steps away from quickly accessing any document in the case, enlarging it for the jury through the projector with a pinch of the iPad's touchscreen, and annotating the document with colored circles, lines or just highlighting portions of text in a long police report.

With a long VGA cord and adapter connected to the projector, we could walk with the iPad with us as we moved about the courtroom, or rest the device on a gallery rail while examining a witness. For the times when audio or video was played, an additional small audio cord ran from the iPad's audio output to the speaker.

The iPad's 10-hour battery life meant we never had to worry about crashing — but we were very careful to start each day with a full charge, as the iPad will not support charging while in display mode, due to its single dock connector port.

TrialPad could mark "hot docs" as well as help us organize documents into separate folders — so we could create folders for opening, closing, and each witness. As new documents and demonstrative aids were needed, we used Dropbox, a web-based document storage and transfer system. With it, our colleagues at the office could transfer documents directly to our iPad trial app, ready for use.

On April 19, 2011, the jury returned a verdict in favor of Golden's family in the amount of $37.5 million, assessing damages of $25 million against Albarran as well as $12.5 million against the Jalisco restaurant. No appeal was filed and the time for appeal has expired.

By Guest Blogger: Lit Software - Developer of TrialPad and TranscriptPad