Tag Archive for: verdict

How a Mediation Checklist Can Help You Stress Less and Reach A Better Settlement Faster

Atul Gawande’s The Checklist Manifesto was a revolutionary evaluation of how basic checklists and procedures can guarantee error free success time and time again.[1] Many of us may chafe at having to following a basic list of things to do, but his book makes a simple point: no matter how expert we are, a well-designed checklist helps us do the right things, in the right order, every time. In an era when our attention is scattered and the demands on our time are increasing by the minute, it is no wonder that critical errors in many fields are not only on the rise, they are increasingly becoming the norm. The legal profession is no exception and missing critical steps in a case are increasingly common. Unfortunately, these errors lead not only to increased stress for practitioners, but also to an increase in costs in the long run for not only clients, but also the professionals serving them. For this reason, following a checklist prior to mediation- whether it is basic or detailed- may not only save you from costly errors, it may also lead to a better settlement faster. The result isn’t duplicative or wasted effort- it’s fewer mistakes, clearer thinking, and better outcomes.[2]

Why Checklists and Procedures Lead to Repeated Success

Everyone wants to be successful, but why are some people and companies more successful than others? Why can some companies repeat their success over and over, while others are a “one hit wonder” that struggle or can never repeat their initial win? The secret lies not in the “flash in the pan” ideas, but in the daily grind of showing up and doing the right and the hard – and usually boring- thing over and over. There’s hard evidence behind that claim. The WHO’s 19-item surgical safety checklist, studied across eight hospitals worldwide, cut major complications and deaths significantly-proof that a short, disciplined list can change outcomes in complex, time-pressured environments.[3] Is that list boring? Sure it is. Is there temptation to skip some items? Sure there is. But studies show that repeatedly following that simple and boring list guaranteed successful outcomes. This is a concept that is repeated over and over- whether it is McDonald’s incredible success with their “Speedee Service System” or an Olympic athlete who achieves success due to their commitment to relentless practice and exercise no matter what else might be going on.[4]

Over time, many industries, from manufacturing to the military, have realized the necessity of having procedures in place to guarantee repeated success for deliverables. In Getting Things Done, David Allen also extols the many benefits of keeping to-do items on a list to be productive, instead of stressed and distracted. It frees the mind to concentrate on other issues while keeping a place for those “must get done” items.[5] Another seminal work on the value of following procedures and lists to free the mind for deep and concentrated work is Deep Work by Cal Newport. Published in 2016, this was one of the first in-depth discussions on how distraction is leading to increased error rates and the cost of those errors not only on our professional lives, but also in our personal lives.[6] Stolen Focus by Johann Hari, published in 2024, is one of the latest books on this increasingly important topic of how our attention is not only divided, but is also increasingly for sale to the highest bidder in the digital arena.[7] It appears that distraction is here to stay, and it is time to strategize both offensive and defensive plans of attack to continue to provide the best legal service possible.

Legal organizations have reached the same conclusion: “old-school” checklists streamline practice, improve teaming, and make knowledge shareable across a firm.[8] And in negotiation scholarship, robust preparation frameworks from Harvard’s Program on Negotiation show how structured pre-work creates value at the table.[9] Put simply: checklists make good lawyers not only great, but consistently successful. While mediation and arbitration are certainly different from surgery or flying an airplane, they are just as information-dense and decision-heavy. A checklist for case events such as Mediation or Arbitration keeps advocates focused on the moves that will actually move numbers or secure valuable information that can determine case outcomes. It also helps to reduce stress and limit the unknown variables that may affect the ultimate result of the case as litigation continues.

What to Put on a Mediation-Prep Checklist

So it’s clear that a pre-mediation checklist is not only helpful, but probably needed. The question becomes, what to put in that checklist? If it is too basic, you may miss key points and still end up with avoidable mistakes. If it is too detailed, it may be so onerous to follow that it will quickly be abandoned as useless. It’s beneficial to consider your working style and set yourself up for success. Thinking in modules or core concepts can help you tailor the list by case type (PI, employment, construction, commercial, insurance, etc.). Another idea is to consider whether the case could be tried in front of a judge or jury with what you have right now and whether you would win or lose? The answers to those questions can serve as a cornerstone upon which you can strategize what might be needed if the case does not resolve at mediation and whether mediation may in fact be truly your best day for that case.

  1. Core Case File & Facts
    • Pleadings, key orders, dispositive-motion posture, outstanding discovery issues
    • Brief chronology of the case and three strongest facts / three soft spots
    • Exhibits you would actually use at trial and possibly use at mediation (with page cites)
  2. Law & Risk
    • Elements, burdens, and jury instructions that really matter
    • Best case / neutral / worst case outcomes with probability ranges
    • Litigation budget vs. verdict and collection risk
  3. Numbers
    • Damages model or valuation worksheet
    • Verdict form draft
    • Interest, fees exposure, liens/Medicare/Medicaid offsets, insurance limits, coverage defenses
    • Tax or structuring considerations for settlement (annuities, QSFs, allocations)
  4. Parties, People, and Authority
    • Decision-makers who must attend (client, carrier, board designee, etc.) and their real authority
    • Confidential stakeholder concerns (reputational risk, precedent anxiety)
    • Interpreter, accessibility, or tech needs for remote sessions
  5. Offers Strategy
    • Anchors, concessions plan (what/when/why), and walk-away position(s)
    • Cross-offer contingencies (e.g., “If they do X, we can move Y”)
    • Non-monetary terms you will trade (reference letters, transition support, training, confidentiality clauses, etc.)
    • BATNA/WATNA Reality Testing
    • Your credible next steps if no deal (hearing dates, litigation budget and spend, trial posture and date)
    • Their potential next steps and how you’ll explain them in caucus
  6. Ethics & Confidentiality
    • Mediation privilege, confidentiality rules, and local practice requirements
    • Informed-consent talking points with client (process, caucus norms, mediator’s role)
  7. Mediation Summary or Brief
    1. can help mediator unlock value
  8. Logistics
    • Venue/Zoom links, room plan, whiteboard/pads, chargers, print vs. e-signature
    • Food breaks (hungry clients make bad decisions), parking, travel buffers
  9. Settlement, Term Sheet & Closing
    • Pre-drafted term sheet or settlement agreement with blanks- this can be key to avoid blowing up an almost secure settlement
    • Authority to sign; e-signature plan
    • Scope of must have terms for releases such as lien language, no admission clauses, tax language, confidentiality carve-outs, enforcement forum, etc.

Now that we have core concepts in place, how about a detailed step by step checklist that you can use for your case? Again, it depends a lot on your practice style, how your office is structured and your work habits. There are many checklist examples online, and this footnote lists some of them for your reference.[10] But if you want to continue to DIY it for your own use, here are some ideas:

How to Build a Checklist That Works

  1. Keep it short and concrete. 25 to 40 items across the modules above is plenty. Each line should be a do/verify action (i.e. “Confirm lien payoff amount and statutory basis”), not a paragraph. This mirrors why aviation and medical lists succeed: brevity + clarity.[11]
  2. Create “pause points.” Insert natural stops (pre-brief, pre-opening, pre-first offer, pre-closing) where you deliberately run the list and recalibrate.
  3. Assign ownership. Put initials next to each item (partner/associate/assistant/adjuster). Checklists fail when they belong to “everyone” and, therefore, to “no one.”
  4. Make the numbers visible. Build a one-page valuations sheet you can update live as information shifts and keep an eye on midpoints, that can sometimes signal a soft landing for both sides.
  5. Tailor by matter type. Maintain a master list and spin off variants (e.g., bodily-injury, employment, commercial lease, construction, real estate, etc.) so you don’t have to waste time and reinvent the wheel.
  6. Test in low-risk matters first. Pilot or test the checklist in routine conferences; change as needed and iterate after each use.
  7. Train the team. Bring your staff in on using the checklist and get their feedback. Change the tasks as needed.
  8. Design for the room you’ll be in. If you mediate by Zoom, add tech checks; if in person, add print/signer logistics. (Nothing kills momentum like hunting for a charger during the final move or finding out you can’t print the settlement agreement when you need to.)
  9. Close with a written settlement agreement or term sheet- always. Bring your own template and fill it as you go. Know your local rules and case law- an unsigned agreement can kill the whole mediation.
  10. Do a post-mortem. After each mediation, spend five minutes updating the checklist based on what helped or hurt. That’s how it becomes an asset of your practice, not a one-off document.

Free for Your Use:  Mediation Prep Mini-Checklist

  1. Book Mediator and confirm virtual or in-person.
  2. Confirm attendance & authority (client/insurer/board memebrs, etc.).
  3. Update case chronology + top 3 facts/risks.
  4. Consider jury instrauctions and/or draft verdict form.
  5. Valuation sheet (best/neutral/worst; fees to verdict).
  6. Liens/offsets/coverage confirmed.
  7. Confidential client brief on process & roles.
  8. Confidential phone conference with mediator if beneficial.
  9. Mediation statement sent & exhibits pared to essentials.
  10. Agenda & process agreed with mediator.
  11. First-offer anchor and concessions plan set.
  12. BATNA/WATNA scripts/plans for each caucus.
  13. Non-monetary trades pre-approved.
  14. Logistics: room/Zoom, tech, food, printers.
  15. Draft settlement or term sheet loaded with blanks.
  16. E-signature and payment mechanics ready.
  17. Press-line or confidentiality language sorted.
  18. Post-mediation debrief scheduled.

Used consistently, a checklist like this reduces preventable mistakes, sharpens strategy, and consistently provides more predictable outcomes. For a quick downloadable version, check out our Resources page above. Especially in Florida, where Case Management Orders are bringing cases to trial within 18 months, a checklist like this helps to ensure that mediation will be the best day for the case. That’s the quiet power of a good checklist.

______

[1] Atul Gawande, The Checklist Manifesto, 2009; https://atulgawande.com/book/the-checklist-manifesto

[2] Atul Gawande, The Checklist Manifesto, 2009; https://atulgawande.com/book/the-checklist-manifesto

[3] Atul Gawande, The Checklist Manifesto, 2009; https://atulgawande.com/book/the-checklist-manifesto

WHO Surgical Safety Checklist, 2009; https://www.who.int/docs/default-source/patient-safety/9789241598590-eng-checklist.pdf; A Surgical Safety Checklist to Reduce Morbidity and Mortality in a Global Population, Alex B. Haynes, M.D., M.P.H., Thomas G. Weiser, M.D., M.P.H., William R. Berry, M.D., M.P.H., Stuart R. Lipsitz, Sc.D., Abdel-Hadi S. Breizat, M.D., Ph.D., E. Patchen Dellinger, M.D., Teodoro Herbosa, M.D., for the Safe Surgery Saves Lives Study Group; New England Journal of Medicine January 2009; https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMsa0810119

[4]Christopher Klein, How McDonald’s Beat Its Early Competition and Became an Icon of Fast Food, (May 15, 2015), HISTORY; https://www.history.com/articles/how-mcdonalds-became-fast-food-giant

[5] David Allen, Getting Things Done, 2001 and 2015,; https://gettingthingsdone.com/

[6] Cal Newport, Deep Work: Rules for Focused Success in a Distracted World, 2016,; https://calnewport.com/deep-work-rules-for-focused-success-in-a-distracted-world/

[7] Johann Hari, Stolen Focus: Why You Can’t Pay Attention, 2024; https://stolenfocusbook.com/

[8] Daniel Siegel and Pamela Myers, How old-school checklists can help you better serve clients, ABA Webinar;

https://www.americanbar.org/news/abanews/publications/youraba/2017/october-2017/use-the-old-school-way-to-streamline-your-practice–make-checkli/

[9] Katie Shonk, A Negotiation Preparation Checklist, Harvard Program on Negotiation, August 20th, 2025; https://www.pon.harvard.edu/daily/negotiation-skills-daily/negotiation-preparation-checklist/

[10] John Lande, Real Practice Systems Project Menu of Checklists for Attorneys in Mediation, Center for the Study of Dispute Resolution University of Missouri School of Law, September 24, 2024; https://scholarship.law.missouri.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2246&context=facpubs;  The Advocate’s Mediation Checklist, https://www2.mediate.com/ICM/docs/Advocates%20Checklist%20for%20Mediation.pdf

[11] Atul Gawande, The Checklist Manifesto, 2009; https://atulgawande.com/book/the-checklist-manifesto

 

** External Links Disclaimer**

The appearance of external hyperlinks on this website does not constitute endorsement by Endeavor Mediation LLC of the linked websites or the information, products, or services contained therein. While all links provided are consistent with the mission of this website and every effort is made to present reputable resources, Endeavor Mediation LLC assumes no responsibility for the content or consequences of using these resources. The validity of linked content cannot be guaranteed, and use is strictly voluntary.

/by

The Art and Science of Persuasion: How Trial Lawyers Win the Jury’s Mind and Heart – Part 1

I recently had the good fortune to attend the Hillsborough County Bar Association’s Annual Bench and Bar Conference in early October. Among the many excellent seminars, one stood out to me in particular: a panel of jurors who had served on various civil trials in Hillsborough County. They had returned for the conference to discuss what they had considered important in the trials they had participated in and why they had come to the conclusions they did. As they discussed the observations, evidence and arguments they found most persuasive in reaching their verdicts, I was reminded that success in litigation and trial is as much an art as it is a calculated presentation of the evidence available to counsel and their client. In this two-part blog post, we will explore how nonverbal communication from the attorneys and the parties can influence litigation from the opening stages of a case through to the verdict and the types of evidence juries find most compelling.

Part 1: The Art and Science of Nonverbal Communication

Quick Thinking, Nonverbal Command, and the Advocate’s Presence

When most lawyers think about persuasion in litigation or trial, they focus on arguments, evidence, and the precise words spoken to the Court. But persuasion operates on more than just the conscious, rational level. Body language and subconscious cues influence parties, jurors, and even judges, sometimes more powerfully than a closing argument. Albert Mehrabian’s foundational research in communication theory is often cited for the idea that the majority of meaning in face-to-face communication comes not from words, but from tone and body language.[1]  Additional studies have confirmed that nonverbal cues shape how listeners perceive credibility, confidence, and trustworthiness.[2] Becoming aware of how you are communicating with others nonverbally can make a difference in how you (and your arguments) are perceived.

Malcolm Gladwell’s Blink expands on this phenomenon, describing how people form intuitive judgments in seconds—a process he calls “thin-slicing.”[3] In the courtroom, jurors are continually “thin-slicing” advocates, witnesses, and parties based on fleeting cues: a pause before answering, a crossed arm, a flicker of irritation. These are the “tells” that their subconscious minds are looking for to confirm or discredit their opinions and/or pre-conceived notions. Once formed, these impressions are remarkably resilient. Trial lawyers who understand this can use deliberate posture, pacing, and tone to project credibility and calm even when under stress.

In Outliers, Gladwell adds that elite performance often arises not from innate genius but from deliberate, repeated quality practice.[4] Quick thinking in trial, the ability to object smoothly, pivot on cross, or adapt to a judge’s question, depends on hours of structured rehearsal. The advocate who practices under pressure gains the intuitive mastery to make rapid decisions that feel instinctive to the jury.

Philip Meyer’s Storytelling for Lawyers offers a complementary insight: jurors interpret evidence through the story that feels most coherent.[5] Cognitive biases push people toward narratives that “fit.” When facts are organized into a clear, emotionally and visually consistent story, jurors experience less cognitive dissonance and are more likely to find the storyteller credible. Lawyers should therefore align their nonverbal communication with the story they are telling: calm tone for reason, measured movement for logic, warmth for empathy. Similarly, Brian Johnson and Marsha Hunter’s The Articulate Advocate reminds us that nonverbal delivery is the final layer of persuasion.[6] Vocal cadence, breathing, and stance all signal composure. Jurors (and other decision makers) equate these physical cues with sincerity and preparation, which in turn reinforce their subconscious judgment that the advocate is trustworthy. A trial lawyer’s ability to control their own body language, and read others’, can create subtle but real advantages:

  • Confidence and credibility. Research in legal psychology finds that refined appearance, upright posture, steady eye contact, and measured speech increase perceptions of trustworthiness.[7]
  • Storytelling through gesture. Gestures that mirror or emphasize verbal arguments help jurors retain key points.[8]
  • Detecting deception. While no signal guarantees truth or falsehood, inconsistencies between verbal statements and body language often alert jurors and judges to credibility issues.[9]

Persuasion begins long before closing argument. It begins in milliseconds- with a glance, a gesture, or the quiet confidence that jurors interpret as truth.

Subconscious Thinking and Cognitive Biases

Body language operates alongside subconscious mental shortcuts, or cognitive biases, that affect decision-making. Research by Daniel Kahneman in Thinking, Fast and Slow, and behavioral economists highlights how people rely on heuristics, availability, anchoring, confirmation bias, when making judgments.[10]

  • Authority bias: Jurors may unconsciously attribute more weight to testimony from a confident expert who appears composed and authoritative.
  • Halo effect: A likable party or witness (through warmth in demeanor or open posture) can influence jurors to see their testimony as more credible.
  • Anchoring: Discussion of case value in jury selection can subconsciously “anchor” the jury’s sense of reasonable outcomes, regardless of counterarguments.

Anchoring in Depositions and Testimony

Anchoring doesn’t just occur at the trial stage; it plays a powerful role during depositions and live testimony. Anchoring occurs when the first figure, fact, or framework presented exerts an outsized influence on subsequent perceptions, even if it is arbitrary.[11]

  • Depositions. When an attorney introduces an early numerical estimate (e.g., damages, timelines, percentages of fault), it can subtly set the reference point for the witness, opposing counsel, and even the judge reviewing the transcript later. Research in negotiation shows that first offers, even aggressive ones, tend to pull final outcomes closer to the anchor.[12]
  • Witness testimony. A plaintiff testifying that their medical bills were “over $100,000” anchors jurors, even if the defense later emphasizes a smaller reimbursable portion. Similarly, an expert who explains an injury will reduce life expectancy “by at least 15 years” has set a mental baseline that jurors carry into deliberation.
  • Cross-examination. Defense lawyers may use anchoring by posing questions with embedded figures: “Would you agree that many back injuries resolve within six months?” Even if the witness disputes the timeframe, the six-month figure becomes a subconscious benchmark.

Effective trial lawyers focus on tactics such as:

  • Set the anchor first whenever possible, framing damages or timelines in ways favorable to their client.
  • Challenge anchors overtly. Jurors are less likely to be unconsciously influenced if opposing counsel explicitly calls out an anchor as misleading or speculative.
  • Train witnesses. Prepare clients to avoid unintentionally reinforcing harmful anchors during deposition.

Anchoring operates quietly, but once established, it is notoriously difficult to dislodge, making it one of the most potent psychological tools in the trial lawyer’s arsenal.

Florida Courts and Subconscious Persuasion

Florida case law shows that courts are alert to the power of both nonverbal behavior and anchoring, even if they rarely use psychological terms.

  • In State v. DiGuilio, 491 So. 2d 1129 (Fla. 1986), the Florida Supreme Court noted that subtle cues, such as prosecutorial comments or gestures, can create unfair prejudice, underscoring how easily subconscious impressions can affect juror perceptions.
  • Florida appellate courts have also cautioned against “golden rule” arguments, which are essentially emotional anchors inviting jurors to put themselves in the plaintiff’s position (See Metropolitan Dade County v. Zapata, 601 So. 2d 239 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992)).
  • Federal courts sitting in Florida recognize similar concerns: in U.S. v. Schlei, 122 F.3d 944 (11th Cir. 1997), the court highlighted how prejudicial framing can sway juries beyond the evidence presented.

Beyond published opinions, Florida’s trial practice CLEs frequently emphasize the importance of demeanor, credibility, and the way questions are framed, echoing research on subconscious persuasion. For litigators practicing in Florida, this means being attuned not only to statutes and case law, but also to the subtle cues picked up by Florida jurors, who often come from diverse cultural and linguistic backgrounds. Body language and anchoring techniques that resonate in one county may land quite differently in another part of the state.

Influence on Judges and Opposing Parties

Even in bench trials, nonverbal cues matter. Judges, like all decision makers, are also subject to subconscious influences. Research shows judges, despite legal training, are not immune to cognitive biases like anchoring or framing effects.[13] In mediation or settlement negotiations, attorneys who display calm, open body language can reduce conflict intensity and promote trust. Subtle mirroring and adopting a posture similar to the opposing party has been shown to increase rapport and willingness to compromise.[14]

Practical Tips for Lawyers

  1. Control your posture and eye contact. Stand confidently, avoid crossing arms, and engage jurors or the judge with steady but not aggressive eye contact.
  2. Be aware of the influence of clothing and organization of materials for trials or hearings. Decision makers are looking at every single aspect they can, whether they realize it or not. This will include your clothing, physical appearance and even how organized your table might be in the courtoom. Refined and neat appearances often subtly suggest confidence and trustworthiness.
  3. Use intentional gestures. Don’t fidget—use your hands to underscore important points in your argument.
  4. Be mindful of micro-expressions. Jurors often sense disdain, irritation, or nervousness in a split second.
  5. Prepare your client and witnesses. Jurors notice when witnesses look evasive, avoid eye contact, or fidget. Roleplay in advance to help them feel composed.
  6. Be aware of subconscious framing. The order in which you present evidence, the first number you introduce, and the way you label parties (“plaintiff” vs. “injured mother”) can anchor perceptions powerfully.
  7. Use anchoring strategically in deposition. Be deliberate with the numbers you put on the record, knowing they’ll stick with both jurors and judges later.

Litigation is a battle that is composed not only of stories, facts, and law- but also of subtle signals and subconscious impressions. By integrating lessons from psychology, communication science, and behavioral economics, lawyers can sharpen their persuasive edge in ways that go beyond the transcript. As Daniel Kahneman, Malcolm Gladwell, and many other scholars remind us, much of human judgment is fast, intuitive, and subconscious. In litigation and trial, that means the decision makers, whether it is a judge, jury or opposing counsel and their client, may have made their decision long before you even imagined it was possible. These decisions were not made after the closing argument, but instead are based on the signals they pick up from every nod, glance, and gesture you provide through the litigation process and in the courtroom. Stay tuned for more as we dive into our second part to this blog post: where we will consider what evidence is most persuasive in litigation and trial and why how it is presented is often the most important aspect.

 _________________________________

REFERENCES & BIBLIOGRAPHY

[1] Silent Messages, Albert Mehrabian, 1971

[2]Burgoon, Guerrero & Floyd, Nonverbal Communication, 2016

[3] Blink: The Power of Thinking Without Thinking, Malcolm Gladwell, 2005

[4] Outliers, Malcolm Gladwell, 2008

[5] Storytelling for Lawyers, Philip N. Meyer, 2014

[6] The Articulate Advocate, Marsha Hunter, Brian Johnson, 2016

[7] Detecting Lies and Deceit, A. Vrij,  2008; What Every Body is Saying, Joe Navarro and Marvin Karlins, 2008; Cues: Master the Secret Language of Charismatic Communication, Vanessa Edwards, 2022

[8]  “How Gesture Promotes Learning and Thinking,” Goldin-Meadow, Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 2003

[9] Detecting Lies and Deceit, A. Vrij,  2008; What Every Body is Saying, Joe Navarro and Marvin Karlins, 2008; Cues: Master the Secret Language of Charismatic Communication, Vanessa Edwards, 2022

[10] Thinking, Fast and Slow, Daniel Kahneman, 2011

[11] “Judgment Under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases”, Tversky & Kahneman,  Science, 1974; Anchoring Effect in Real Litigation: An Empirical Study, Yun-chien Chang, Kong-Pin Chen, Chang-Ching Lin, Chicago Unbound, University of Chicago Law School, 2016

[12] “First Offers as Anchors,” Adam D. Galinsky and Thomas Mussweiler, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2001

[13] “Inside the Judicial Mind,” Chris Guthrie, Jeffrey Rachlinski and Andrew Wistrich, Cornell Law Review, 2001

[14] “The Chameleon Effect,” T.L. Chartrand , J.A. Bargh, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1999

/by