Transcript:
Adam Bloomberg: Hello everyone, welcome to our LinkedIn Live. I'm Adam Bloomberg, Senior Client Success Advisor here at IMS. Today we're joined by William Toles, an experienced civil trial lawyer with Munch Hardt in Dallas, TX. The discussion will be led by our very own Chris Dominic, Senior Strategy and Jury Consulting Advisor here at IMS. They're going to cover William's approach to trial preparation, his methods for building narratives, using mock trials to refine those narratives, and how he establishes trust with the jury early on. Chris, you ready? Over to you.
Chris Dominic: Hey, thanks, Adam. William, so good to see you today.
William Toles: Good to see you as well.
Chris Dominic: Oh man, I've been looking forward to talking to you.
William Toles: Likewise, this last case that we had together was really fun. One of the things I noticed while we were working together was that you're really spread out there. You've got all sorts of causes you're working with. You seem to be pretty dedicated to a broad array of things, and yet you're in trial winning all the time. So what's going on? How does that make sense to regular folks?
I don't know that I'm winning all the time. But for me, it's really important to be involved in your community. I grew up in Dallas, born and raised here, went away to school, came back, blessed to come back and be here. There are so many wonderful things going on in Dallas. To be a part of the community is something special. I feel like that also allows me to be a better person, a better lawyer, and do the best I can representing my clients.
Chris Dominic: It's fun to watch. Before we conducted the mock trial in our last case, we were working for the Goliath in our David versus Goliath. We got together to make sure that we had both sides of the arguments figured out and were adopting all the best themes we could. One thing I noticed in that strategy session was that I didn't have to have the same conversation with you that I do with some people, which is we need to skip the corporate commercial because it hurts the credibility of our side a lot of times. Can you tell me how you were already at that place? I really want to know.
William Toles: I got my start trying cases as assistant city attorney in Dallas for a little over a year, then moved on to personal injury, primarily on the defense side—car wrecks, product liability, that sort of thing. With that background, you look at cases a little differently. There's a humanistic approach you don't always see in commercial cases. Sometimes, in my experience, it allows you to connect with the jury a little more and present your case differently.
Chris Dominic: That explains a lot. When we get to the mock trial, utilizing what we think we already know about these cases, you go and play the other side and basically let us have it the entire time with this big company profits-over-people theme. I think it got us a good test in the process. We got feedback on some of our witnesses. That was pretty interesting. Some people did not do as well as we'd hoped, but when we dug into their credibility and some of the tools we use, we found they had just one or two areas to develop in witness preparation before trial. One in particular was considered trustworthy but not likable. Can you talk about what you saw in that experience and what we did about it?
William Toles: When I get a case, my thought is always: what's it going to look like if you try this case? It's not just going through the motions. It's important to visualize what it's going to look like to try the case—the pros and cons. Credibility is very important. If a jury doesn't find you credible, that's a problem. If a jury doesn't like a witness, or the witness angers them, that's obviously not good. So, going back to the mock trial, it's about figuring out the deficiencies with a particular witness. Now you know what those deficiencies are, especially for witnesses on your side. What can I do to counterbalance the perceived negatives that were obvious in the mock trial? That was one of the big things that helped us. Instead of being someone who's been involved in the case for years, you get a group of people who know nothing about the case or the individual. They have an opportunity to lay eyes on them—do they get a good vibe or a bad vibe? It's very helpful. It's also advantageous because now you know the problems and challenges. So, perhaps I need to do things differently with other witnesses, or adjust the narrative for my case, or work on these deficiencies in advance of trial.
Chris Dominic: During the trial prep we worked on, I noticed your collaboration with in-house counsel was really functional. Not that it isn't always, but you can see different layers of function depending on the case and the cultures of the outside law firm and inside counsel. Can you talk about your approach there?
William Toles: This was a unique situation because we were hired by the client to try this case. Some of my other clients have had long-standing relationships, so I know about their brand and what they're about. In this matter, we were brought in to try the case. We knew the facts, the allegations, and a little about the client and brand. Having that dialogue with in-house counsel was incredibly beneficial—this is what we're about, this is our story, this is our brand, this is what we want people to know about us. Even further, it's about having hands-on, one-on-one experiences with employees, talking to them about why they work there, what makes them happy. Go and look at the client's business, see what makes them successful. When you see those things firsthand, have that interaction and dialogue, it allows you to create a narrative so the jury isn't just thinking, "Oh, there's this big corporation and they're bad." It's "this is what we're about and what's important to us." You're only able to really sell and tell that story when you roll up your sleeves and get involved and understand what the company is truly about.
Chris Dominic: That's a great way to address the problem of, "If I can't just say it to people because they won't believe it, how do I achieve that?" OK, last thing. I've been dying to ask a style question because there's a big difference between style and performance, but they can contribute to each other. When I saw you on your feet doing your thing, I noticed you were really calm but direct. Your style is kind of two sides of different approaches meshed into one. Can you talk about the evolution of that?
William Toles: It's really just being humanistic and trying to relate to the people on the jury. Going back to law school, it's important to connect with the jury. Sometimes my voice might change to emphasize a point. Sometimes I might repeat things. I've heard people talk about going to church and picking up on things there. I go to church, and sometimes the minister says or does something, and I write that down. The little things matter, but also realizing you can only be who you are. When I was a younger lawyer, before COVID, lawyers I worked with would say, "When you go to the courthouse for a hearing, pop in this courtroom and see who's in there. Pop in that courtroom, see who's in there." You learn about good trial lawyers and try to observe them. You pull little pieces from different people—plaintiff lawyers, defense lawyers—what you feel you can emulate, what works and doesn't work. It's a work in progress. I've been practicing a long time, and if I hear a really good lawyer is in trial, I try to make it to the courthouse to watch them because you can always learn. It's about picking little things from different lawyers, reading your jury, getting eye contact, trying to connect.
Chris Dominic: You're doing a great job of highlighting that regardless of where you are in your career, you can always learn something. Continuous improvement is so important, and yet it's a challenge at certain stages of your career, right?
William Toles: Yeah. I feel like jurors are usually pretty good judges of character. Sometimes people put it on too thick and overcompensate, and it's apparent. There have been instances where you talk to a juror afterwards and they're like, "Yeah, I didn't believe that person. I could tell that person wasn't sincere." There were things that person did in court where you could tell they were "on," but then didn't do that again. That's not the genuine person. So, just being yourself is big because jurors don't miss anything. They're very observant. They pick up on everything. You have to remember that.
Chris Dominic: Great stuff. William, thanks so much for being here. We really appreciate it.
William Toles: Thank you. Good seeing you.
Chris Dominic: Likewise.
Adam Bloomberg: IMS has served trusted law firms and corporations worldwide for more than 30 years and over 65,000 cases. As a strategic partner for the full case life cycle, our integrated teams provide specialized advisory support, expert witness services, litigation consulting, visual advocacy, and presentation technology to elevate strategies and protect hard-earned reputations. Learn more at imslegal.com.
