This document summarizes a presentation about using technology to evaluate litigation risk. It introduces the presenters: Dr. Donald Vinson, founder of a trial consulting firm; Dr. Katie Vinson, a social psychologist who predicts jury behavior; and Benjamin Kingston, an attorney who manages litigation funding. The presentation emphasizes that early case assessment is crucial for determining litigation strategy and avoiding costly mistakes. However, traditional assessments by attorneys are often inaccurate. The presentation proposes using statistical analysis of real and surrogate juror data combined with case characteristics in a "black box" algorithm to provide more accurate early case evaluations.
1. Technology to Evaluate
Litigation Risk
Presented By:
Dr. Donald E. Vinson
Dr. Katie V. Vinson
Benjamin D. Kingston, Esq.
2. Presenter Backgrounds
Dr. Donald E. Vinson – Chairman and CEO, Vinson Resolution Management
Dr. Donald E. Vinson is widely considered the "founding father" of the trial consulting field, and is internationally
recognized as the world’s leading expert in the field. He has founded three successful companies in the space, two of
which were acquired by NYSE-listed corporations (he currently serves as Chairman of the third). Dr. Vinson has
spent the last 35 years providing valuable insights and strategic recommendations to trial attorneys about juror
behavior, and his record of success is unparalleled. He has consulted on hundreds of civil and criminal trials,
including Pennzoil v. Texaco, the Oklahoma City bombing case, the DuPont Plaza Hotel and MGM Grand Hotel fires,
Dalkon Shield litigation, the O.J. Simpson murder trial, and the World Trade Center insurance case.
Katherine V. Vinson, Ph.D. – Vice President, Litigation Sciences
Dr. Katherine (“Katie”) Vinson is a Social Psychologist with a specialty in Juror Behavior and Decision Making. Her
expertise is based on quantitative measures of juror attitudes, experiences, and behaviors to predict verdicts and
damage awards. This work involves sophisticated mathematical and statistical analysis to develop jury prediction
models which have been successfully employed in major commercial cases.
Benjamin D. Kingston, Esq. – Director of Legal Services
Mr. Benjamin (“Ben”) Kingston is an experienced litigation attorney in both the consumer and commercial law
sectors. As the Director of Legal Services at Vinson Resolution Management (VRM), Ben manages the underwriting
of commercial claims being considered for funding, and monitors funded lawsuits through their resolution. He also
works with VRM’s clients and their handling attorneys to structure funding arrangements that align interests by
rewarding efficiency and efficacy during litigation
3. Early Case Assessment (ECA) and its Importance
Litigation is risky, time consuming and expensive
Although only about 5% of cases are tried, every ECA
should presume trial is strong possibility
Accurate ECA is most crucial variable in decisions
whether to litigate or settle
4. Early Case Assessment (ECA) and its Importance
ECA provides a roadmap calculated to accomplish a
client’s objectives
ECA involves risk assessment coupled with strategic
budgeting
Careful and accurate ECA and budgeting helps avoid
Pyrrhic victory
5. Traditional Early Case Assessment
Sufficient information for ECA is typically available for
Plaintiffs before case is filed
Defendants within 60-90 days after filing/service
6. Traditional Early Case Assessment
Traditional ECA typically includes
Analysis of relevant law
Analysis of supportive and unsupportive facts
Analysis venue and judge
Percentage estimates based on various potential outcomes
Conclusions and recommendations
7. Inaccuracies in Traditional Early Case Assessment
Study: 68% of lawyers’ ECAs are inaccurate
44% were overconfident
24% were under-confident
Attorneys are human – it’s natural to overestimate
abilities on tasks, particularly when advocating
Don’t want clients to equate tempered optimism with
lack of confidence or zeal
8. Inaccuracies in Traditional Early Case Assessment
Attorneys wish and strive for a good outcome, however
While this is a strength for zealous advocacy
It is also a weakness when it skews the attorney’s ability to predict
Inaccurate predictions can be costly
Overconfidence = rejecting reasonable settlements
Under-confidence = accepting low settlements
Most frequently attorneys and clients inaccurately predict
jury trial outcomes
Attorneys often rely on past outcomes of like cases
And make educated guesses on how jurors will weigh the evidence
and apply the law
16. O.J. Unlikely to Murder Because He Excelled at Football
The Jury
Yes
75%
No
25%
17.
18. Rather Jurors CBS Jurors
Dan Rather V. CBS
Real-Time Response System
19. Plaintiffs V. Vivendi
Bronx Jurors
Charles M.
31-35 Male
Single African-American
Some High School
Chef
Julio V.
31-35 Male
Married Hispanic
High School Degree
Auto Installer
Deny M.
36-40 Male
Married Hispanic
High School Degree
Stock Clerk
25. Gestalt Psychology
What is Gestalt Psychology
The gestalt effect is the capability of our brain to
generate whole forms, particularly with respect to
the visual recognition of global figures instead of
just collections of simpler and unrelated elements
(points, lines, curves...).
38. Case Characteristics
Case Facts
Strength of evidence
Case complexity
Element of Litigation
Potential for summary judgment
Potential of defendant waging vigorous defense
Characteristics of Litigants
Physical attractiveness of witness
Industry of litigants
39. Black Box
Case
Characteristics
Importance of
Characteristics
40. Importance of Case Characteristics
Uncontradicted evidence as to an
element of proof at trial
The quantitative value of the
trade secret information