Had the honor of sitting on a panel last night with Judges Bacal, Trentacosta and Wohlfeil of the San Diego Superior Court and Robert Francavilla of Casey Gerry for a SDCBA Civil Litigation Section program on the “Process of Trying A Case”. Part of yesterday’s “2018 Civil Lit Conference: Essentials for a Civil Litigator’s Toolbox”. I spoke on direct examination – that part of a trial that I, frankly, find the most difficult. Packed room. Great panel. Lots of fun. And I learned a few new things. Thanks to the SDCBA and the Civ Lit. Section for the opportunity!
Challenging opinions and attacking experts is case-specific and can be quite nuanced. Particular cases can and do provide opportunities to effectively attack the credibility, expertise and even bias of an expert, even a smart, experienced, well-prepared one. But, there will be times when the opposing expert has done a fine job and reached a spot-on, fully-supportable, opinion, but based on incomplete facts and faulty presumptions provided by counsel. In those cases, it is always better to challenge the opinion and not attack the expert. See my new article in San Diego Lawyer. https://issuu.com/sdcba/docs/san_diego_lawyer_mar_apr_2017_issuu/26
I was scheduled to start a bench trial on Tuesday for a plaintiff in a property/easement dispute. Well-prepared, ready to go. Spent probably 8 hours over the weekend, alone in my office, no interruptions, tuning, re-tuning and fine-tuning the perfect cross-examination of the defendant. Going to call him right out of the gate, first witness, as an adverse witness under Evidence Code Section 776. It was going to be brutal, a thing of beauty.
Tuesday morning, in court, fully briefed, all set up, tech working, clients nervous but ready, witnesses lined up, ready to go – case settles! Good settlement, great result for client, fine conclusion to the case.
But, damn, I really wanted to do that cross!
I am resuming my civil litigation and trial practice in downtown San Diego.
I will continue to represent entities and individuals, both plaintiffs and defendants, in complex and general business, commercial, contract, intellectual property, unfair competition, securities, real property, and business tort litigation in state and federal courts.
Please note my new contact information:
James D. Crosby
Attorney at Law
550 West C Street, Suite 790
San Diego, California 92101
Office: (619) 450-4149
Cell: (858) 705-0083
I am excited about this move, happy to be back downtown, and ready to go.
As always, I am seeking new clients to represent, complex matters to litigate, and tough cases to try. I will handle cases at hourly rates, on contingency, and with hourly/contingency blends. Please consider my practice for new matters and referrals. I will do a good job for you, your friends, clients and referrals.
Change is good! I am returning to downtown San Diego later this month to resume my own civil litigation and trial practice. I am excited about this move, happy to be heading back downtown, and ready to go. Details to follow!
Some days being a lawyer is extra engaging and challenging. In a good way!
Monday, it involved the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal where I argued a copyright case. Of course, it’s on YouTube! What a world.
Anyone interested in seeing my five minutes or so of short-lived fame can go to 1:20:48 on the video. https://lnkd.in/b-F-Vhy
Hoping for a good result and another chance for my client in the District Court.
We will see.
This is a Trial Call guest post – an interesting piece on evidentiary burdens in copyright litigation from my partner, Doug Lytle. Doug discusses a recent Seventh Circuit copyright infringement case about making and distributing copies of a painting. The piece and the opinion identify some important pitfalls for copyright litigators, and offers some preventative guidance for those who make copies of or distribute the creative works of others. Thanks, Doug! Jim