As a personal injury lawyer, I am frequently confronted with the question about how to value a personal injury case. My stock answer is that there are multiple factors which determine the value of a case: the clarity of liability, the egregiousness of the defendant’s negligence, whether the plaintiff was also negligent and to what extent, the severity of the injuries, the amount of medical bills, lost wages, and other economic damages, the age of the plaintiff, the venue (location where the suit will be filed), the plaintiff’s work history, the defendant’s character and mannerisms, the type of medical treatment the plaintiff receives, the plaintiff’s pre-existing conditions, the plaintiff’s criminal history, the defendant’s criminal history, the plaintiff’s claims history, the credibility of the parties, and a multitude of other factors. If I had to choose which of these factors is the most important in determining the value of a personal injury case, I would choose credibility. Credibility is the most important because all of the other factors depend upon it.

A jury trial is essentially a battle between stories. The plaintiff’s attorney tells his client’s story in the opening argument, then supports that story with evidence in the form of witness testimony, medical testimony, photographs, videos, films, and other physical evidence. Then, the defense attorney tells his side of the story in the same way. At the end of the trial, the jury is going to find in favor of the side with the most credible story. Jurors are smart, and they look for holes in the story. They look for lies and omissions. They like to reward honest people and punish liars.

The most effective way to lose a jury trial is to get caught in a lie. A case with egregious negligence, severe damages, and clear causation can be defeated if the jury thinks that the plaintiff lied. Defense attorneys will go through the plaintiff’s medical records carefully and ask hundreds of questions during the plaintiff’s deposition about details in the plaintiff’s medical records, hoping to catch the plaintiff making some inconsistent statements. A good defense attorney will do a thorough background check on the plaintiff, talk to her friends and neighbors, and go to the deposition armed with inside information. The defense attorney will then ask questions to which he already knows the answer, hoping he will catch the plaintiff in a lie. Often, the defense attorney places the plaintiff under surveillance doing certain tasks, and asks the plaintiff in deposition if she is able to do such a task. If the plaintiff tries to exaggerate her injuries and lies, the case value takes a nosedive.

The most effective way to win a jury trial is to expose the defendant as a liar while at the same time keeping the plaintiff’s credibility in tact. Of course, if the defendant is telling the truth, this is impossible to do. Unfortunately, most defendants will lie to protect themselves. Even in a case of clear liability, it’s important for the plaintiff’s attorney to do her homework on the defendant before the defendant’s deposition. I like to put the defendant under surveillance when the situation is appropriate. It is important to do a thorough background check of the defendant before the deposition, including a criminal history check, and interviews with his neighbors and associates. One particularly vulnerable area I like to attack is the defendant’s knowledge base. Defendant’s will often lie about whether they knew a particular action was dangerous. A thorough investigation may reveal situations in the defendant’s life where the defendant should have learned that such an action was dangerous. For instance, in a medical malpractice case, it’s sometimes easy to find out where the defendant doctor went to med school, and which professor taught him the course that is relevant to the medical malpractice case. If the defendant doctor’s opinion conflicts with his professor’s opinion, I bring that out in the deposition. This shows that either the doctor knew he was wrong and is lying about it, or that he didn’t pay attention during that course in medical school. Either way, his credibility is affected.

For more information regarding the importance of credibility in a personal injury case, click here.