Florida plaintiff lawyer loses $2.2 million verdict due to stupid shoe motion
Above the Law has the story on the Florida case where the plaintiff lawyer filed a motion to compel defense counsel to not wear shoes with a hole in the bottom. Apparently, the plaintiff lawyer (wrongly) thought that the simple man persona of the hole-in-the-shoe lawyer was unbeatable. The motion made it into the press about the time the jury returned a $2.2 million verdict for the plaintiff. The trial court set the verdict aside due to the press coverage of the shoe motion. Here is ATL's earlier post, which displays the motion.
Wow! As Will Ferrell said in this scene from Wedding Crashers, "what an idiot." Of course, if I'm the lawyer my response is: I got a $2.2 million verdict, so how big of an idiot can I be?
I encourage all of my future trial adversaries to wear shoes with holes in the bottom. I promise that if they do, I will not file a motion to compel nice footwear. It has been my experience in watching many focus group deliberations that jurors do not like poorly attired lawyers. This has been without exception.
Here are a few examples. I once got rid of my favorite suit because a mock juror at NITA said my pants were "high-waters." I presented at a focus group with Mark Lanier, one of the best trial lawyers in the nation. Lanier did a great job presenting the defense case, but dressed down to look like a simple man. Alas, the focus group talked about how they didn't like what he was wearing because it was not formal enough. The same focus group discussed my tie in detail before giving it a thumbs up. Finally, after a trial about a year ago word got out that the jury deliberated on the verdict for 15 minutes and then spent an hour discussing Who's Who awards for the trial's lawyers. Best dressed was one of the awards and it went to one of the lawyers on the winning side.
Don't get me wrong, I never thought any of those focus groups or juries decided the case based on lawyer attire. But lawyers like to be liked by jurors--to the point that many lawyers are more concerned post-trial with whether the jury liked them than whether the jury liked the case he/she tried. Jurors expect lawyers to dress professionally during trial and are critical of poorly dressed lawyers. And while David Boies can wear the same cheap blue suit to trial every day, you better know something like that works before you try it. Attempts to dress down for jury appeal are prone to back-fire. Just ask the guy in Florida with the holes in his shoes.
How about "cowboy lawyers?" This is the guy that wears string ties, turquoise belt buckles on a hand tooled leather belt and, of course, cowboy boots. Buckskin fringe jackets optional for lawyers on tv talk shows who feel that not enough of their other cowboy bling is visible. Speaking only for myself, I would not feel comfortable in the courtroom being represented by someone who looked like they had wandered off the Chisolm trail.