Judges Are People Too

You’ve likely heard us make the point that research is just as meaningful for cases you know will be bench trials as it is in jury trials – because themes that resonate with jurors often apply to judges as well.

A recent defense verdict for a case we worked on drove home this point, as several of the judge’s findings might as well have been lifted verbatim from our focus group report.

The case involved an internationally known shipping company that switched vendors for unloading services. Vendor A sued, accusing the shipper of stealing financial secrets and feeding them to a new potential Vendor. They claimed that Vendor B’s proposal undercut their prices, and that’s why the new vendor snagged the contract.

From the defense perspective, Vendor A wasn’t even in the running for the contract, given its poor productivity and equipment so outdated that one employee described its facility as a “forklift graveyard.”

Research participants heard the details and determined that the defendant acted “unethically but not illegally.” And here’s a direct quote from the judge’s final ruling: “The defendant’s conduct was likely unethical, but not illegal.”

The judge went on to cite several points for both sides that were spot on with what the focus group uncovered.

This is why it’s important to remember that judges and jurors have a lot in common. Aside from technical issues of law, judges are just as attuned as jurors to arguments that resonate based on common sense and prevailing predispositions. Whether your case will be heard by a judge, mediator, or a group of people who couldn’t get out of jury duty, we always advise telling a simple, effective story.