Colorado Trial Lawyer Connection

Paula Slaughter gathered a polished, prepared team – starting with co-counsel Sandra Hagen – to represent a 74-year-old man who suffered a stroke seven months after his vehicle was rear-ended. Unpacking the case with host Keith Fuicelli, the team reveal their surgical approach to trial teamwork, including Paula's voir dire method that doesn’t involve questionnaires and Sandra’s meticulous research into the defense expert’s past. After they exposed an unprepared defense and a “Parade of Horribles,” the jury responded with a verdict of $3.2 million.Learn More and Connect with Colorado Trial Lawyers☑️ Paula Slaughter☑️ Sandra Hagen | LinkedIn☑️ The Wilhite Law Firm on LinkedIn | Instagram | Facebook | X | YouTube☑️ Keith Fuicelli | LinkedIn☑️ Fuicelli & Lee Injury Lawyers Website☑️ Fuicelli & Lee Injury Lawyers on X, Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, and LinkedIn☑️ Subscribe Apple Podcasts | Spotify | YouTubeEpisode SnapshotThe team’s client suffered a triple cardioembolic stroke seven months after his vehicle was rear-ended. The crux of the case became whether the crash caused the stroke.Sandra showed that the defense neurologist's opinions were "historically absurd" by walking the jury through his prior cases — including one where he found no concussion after a warehouse dock door fell on a man's head.Sandra and Paula revealed that every single ER systems check — including elder abuse and fall risk — was completed in four minutes.Paula used Expert Radar to pull prior reports, depositions, pharmaceutical payouts, and a letter in which the defense neurologist himself complained about the bias of defense doctors.Barred from asking a specific non-economic dollar amount by a motion in limine, Paula closed with: "This is his final chapter. This is his only chance. This has to be enough" — and the jury came back saying she hadn't asked for enough.The information contained in this podcast is not intended to be taken as legal advice. The information provided by Fuicelli & Lee is intended to provide general information regarding comprehensive injury and accident attorney services for clients in the state of Colorado.

What turns an ordinary premises case into a $2.7 million verdict? Strategy.When a 68-year-old woman tripped over a fallen curbside sign outside Target, Vern Ready didn’t just argue negligence — he built a case around corporate decision-making. Discovery revealed no wind-resistance policy, no inspection protocol, and no meaningful response to employee reports about falling signs. That allowed him to frame the case as “corporation versus customer” — and when employees testified, “corporation versus employee.”In this episode of Colorado Trial Lawyer Connection with host Keith Fuicelli, Vern breaks down the tactical decisions behind the verdict: saving his cross of the defense doctor for trial, telling the medical story through the client’s lived experience instead of clinical jargon, using a simple ELMO instead of flashy demonstratives, and positioning damages after a $500,000 pre-suit offer.The jury asked for a calculator — and returned $2.7 million.A masterclass in framing, restraint, and trusting the jury to connect the dots.Learn More and Connect with Colorado Trial Lawyers☑️ Vern Ready | LinkedIn☑️ Ready Law on Instagram | Facebook | X | YouTube☑️ Keith Fuicelli | LinkedIn☑️ Fuicelli & Lee Injury Lawyers Website☑️ Fuicelli & Lee Injury Lawyers on X, Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, and LinkedIn☑️ Subscribe Apple Podcasts | Spotify | YouTubeEpisode SnapshotVern's client, a 68-year-old woman, tripped over a fallen portable curbside sign outside a Target, finished her shopping trip, and ultimately required two surgeries for ulnar nerve damage in her right hand.Vern framed the case as "corporation versus customer" and “corporation versus employee” when Target's own employees testified that the company provided no guidance about wind resistance, sign maintenance, or safety procedures.Discovery revealed that nobody at Target had checked the manufacturer's wind resistance specifications for the signs, no policy existed for bringing them in during wind, and nobody responded to internal reports about falling signs.Rather than deposing the defense doctor, Vern saved his ammunition for trial, where he caught the doctor mid-testimony reading only half a sentence from a second-opinion record that actually supported his client's future surgical needs.In opening, Vern told the medical story from the patient's perspective — not through clinical terminology — by asking, "What makes a person agree to have surgery to try to fix something?"Instead of flip charts, Vern used an ELMO when writing – “just like an overhead projector.” The technique landed well with jurors, he says.The jury asked for a calculator during deliberations and ultimately awarded $2.7 million — more than five times the $500,000 pre-suit offer that Target had made.The information contained in this podcast is not intended to be taken as legal advice. The information provided by Fuicelli & Lee is intended to provide general information regarding comprehensive injury and accident attorney services for clients in the state of Colorado.

Gabriel Stoops secured a $1.2 million verdict in his first lead civil jury trial, a medical malpractice case that other firms had turned down due to weak economic damages and high risk. His client underwent routine PRK eye surgery to improve her vision, but when she developed pain and progressive vision loss three days later, her surgeon's office ignored her pleas for help. With the defense declining settlement offers, Gabriel – who started his firm in his mom's basement – invested everything into the case. “This could be a movie,” says host Keith Fuicelli as he unpacks the high stakes, incredible odds, and ultimate victory.Learn More and Connect with Colorado Trial Lawyers☑️ Gabriel Stoops | LinkedIn☑️ Stoops Law Group☑️ Keith Fuicelli | LinkedIn☑️ Fuicelli & Lee Injury Lawyers Website☑️ Fuicelli & Lee Injury Lawyers on X, Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, and LinkedIn☑️ Subscribe Apple Podcasts | Spotify | YouTubeEpisode SnapshotGabriel was inspired to pursue law by hearing his father's medical malpractice stories at the dinner table as a youth.When a summer associate role at a big Houston firm didn’t turn into a permanent job, Gabriel did contract work and eventually started his own firm in his mom's basement.Gabriel's client underwent routine PRK eye surgery, but three days later developed excruciating pain and vision loss in both eyes. The surgeon's office ignored her desperate calls for help and didn't see her until a full week after surgery.The surgeon didn’t start antibiotics to treat the client’s eye infection soon enough, which led Gabriel to his case theme that “when you only have 24 hours, it can’t wait a week.”The defense offered only not to pursue the client's costs if Gabriel dismissed the case before trial.Gabriel had two experts: an economist who developed a vocational economic assessment and a life care planner who accounted for what his client would need going forward.Most of the $1.2 million verdict were economic damages for the client’s life care plan and reduced earning capacity.The information contained in this podcast is not intended to be taken as legal advice. The information provided by Fuicelli & Lee is intended to provide general information regarding comprehensive injury and accident attorney services for clients in the state of Colorado.

In Part 2 of his look at a high-profile civil rights case, host Keith Fuicelli interviews the young trial team that secured $20 million. These “main brains” behind the verdict – Ciara Anderson, Omeed Azmoudeh, and Crist Whitney – reveal how they divided duties to represent six bystanders who were injured when a former Denver police officer shot into a crowd. Tune in for their insights about voir dire (“we went in with the strategy of finding liberal gun owners”), themes in opening (“you do not shoot into a crowd”) and witness preparation (“for our client, I wanted to get his emotional story out to the jury.”). Learn more about the case in Part 1.Learn More and Connect with Colorado Trial Lawyers☑️ Ciara Anderson | LinkedIn☑️ Omeed Azmoudeh | LinkedIn☑️ Crist Whitney | LinkedIn☑️ Rathod Mohamedbhai on LinkedIn | Instagram | X | YouTube☑️ Keith Fuicelli | LinkedIn☑️ Fuicelli & Lee Injury Lawyers Website☑️ Fuicelli & Lee Injury Lawyers on X, Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, and LinkedIn☑️ Subscribe Apple Podcasts | Spotify | YouTubeEpisode SnapshotCiara's opening focused on establishing credibility while withholding powerful evidence like the defendant’s criminal conviction.In voir dire, Crist’s strategy was to find “liberal gun owners” who understood gun safety principles and would recognize the recklessness of firing into a crowd.The team distilled their case theme to a simple rule: "You do not shoot into a crowd.”Officer Ramos suggested that a worse backdrop than shooting into a crowd of people would be "senators, presidents, and very important people." In his closing, Omeed noted that their clients are “very important people.”Omeed organized his cross-examination of Officer Ramos into chapters, each making one narrow point, with questions becoming increasingly focused during preparation: A "know your target" chapter split into separate chapters on "know your target" and "know what's beyond.”The team's collaborative preparation involved often working until 3:00 a.m. and extensive role-playing where Ciara portrayed Officer Ramos for Omeed's cross-examination practice.For punitive damages, the team dismantled the defense attempt to minimize Officer Ramos’ criminal conviction. He had pleaded guilty in a “sweetheart” deal that avoided jail time. Omeed told the jury: “Look, folks, if you're as enraged as we are, here's what you should note. This guy has never been punished for this conduct.”The information contained in this podcast is not intended to be taken as legal advice. The information provided by Fuicelli & Lee is intended to provide general information regarding comprehensive injury and accident attorney services for clients in the state of Colorado.

A former Denver police officer was never held accountable for shooting into a crowd, injuring six bystanders. That is, not until a civil rights suit brought by Siddhartha Rathod, name partner at Rathod Mohamedbhai, the largest civil rights firm in the state, and John Lee, name partner at Fuicelli & Lee Injury Lawyers. In its $20 million verdict, the jurors sent a message that “you need to take responsibility,” Siddhartha explains. In Part I of this case breakdown, host Keith Fuicelli (John’s partner) moderates the discussion to explore how the trial team delivered their message. Come back in January for Part 2, when the three young attorneys who handled much of this case will join Keith to reveal how they prepared and won the “monster” verdict.Learn More and Connect with Colorado Trial Lawyers☑️ Siddhartha Rathod | LinkedIn☑️ Rathod Mohamedbhai on LinkedIn | Instagram | X | YouTube☑️ John Lee | LinkedIn☑️ Keith Fuicelli | LinkedIn☑️ Fuicelli & Lee Injury Lawyers on X, Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, and LinkedIn☑️ Subscribe Apple Podcasts | Spotify | YouTubeEpisode SnapshotSiddhartha and John outline the procedural landmines in civil rights cases: Bringing a federal 1983 claim can result in removal to federal court, while bringing a tort claim can expose clients to a Trinity hearing and potential fee/cost liability at the beginning of the case.The July 2022 incident occurred in downtown Denver when police pursued a man who was wearing a hoodie with a bulge in the pocket. As that man kept reaching into his pocket, the officers became concerned that he wielded a weapon.The officers’ suspect darted behind a car and, when cornered, tossed away his weapon. Down the block, Officer Ramos fired at the suspect and injured six bystanders, who became the team’s clients.Despite having a half dozen different body cams and a halo cam, details of the event remained in dispute because the cameras capture different frames per second.The trial team did use video showing that the defendant didn’t act reasonably, including how he had his flashlight pointed in the wrong direction.Siddhartha and John made the strategic decision to have younger attorneys—many in their first five years of practice—handle 75% of the trial. As Siddhartha explains, senior attorneys wouldn't have done as good a job as the younger team members because this was their first trial, and they were extraordinarily well prepared.“They weren't outliers. They weren't radicals,” Siddhartha says of the jurors. “They were enraged that Denver never held the officer accountable.” Result: $20 million verdict.The information contained in this podcast is not intended to be taken as legal advice. The information provided by Fuicelli & Lee is intended to provide general information regarding comprehensive injury and accident attorney services for clients in the state of Colorado.

Their client was just 16 when a driver T-boned her vehicle, leading to years of debilitating headaches that require cutting-edge treatments every 12 weeks. In this case breakdown with host Keith Fuicelli, Melissa Hailey and Liz Hart reveal how they approached the case with meticulous pre-litigation case development, strategic big data jury research, and expert medical testimony. Jurors awarded $7.1 million in future medical costs and $500,000 in non-economic damages. Tune in for the team’s insights about limiting economic demands to maintain credibility – and about joining forces to develop a successful law practice.Learn More and Connect with Colorado Trial Lawyers☑️ Melissa Hailey | LinkedIn☑️ Liz Hart | LinkedIn☑️ Hailey | Hart on LinkedIn | Facebook  ☑️ Keith Fuicelli | LinkedIn☑️ Fuicelli & Lee Injury Lawyers Website☑️ Fuicelli & Lee Injury Lawyers on X, Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, and LinkedIn☑️ Subscribe Apple Podcasts | Spotify | YouTubeEpisode SnapshotElizabeth's journey from wanting to be a criminal defense attorney to becoming a plaintiff's lawyer after five years in insurance defense.Melissa's unconventional path from conservation biology to environmental law to personal injury practice.The lawyers envisioned a women-owned plaintiff's firm during Covid and opened Hailey | Hart in 2021.Their collaborative trial approach: splitting responsibilities, with Liz handling jury selection and closing and Melissa doing opening and rebuttal.In this case breakdown, they describe representing a 16-year-old client who suffered chronic migraines after a T-bone collision.The client contacted lawyers three years after the crash when USAA refused to pay policy limits despite expensive ongoing neurological treatment.A cutting-edge infusion medication given every 12 weeks called VYEPTI became the cornerstone of the client's successful treatment planThe team used big data research to identify jury resistance points and craft strategy around potential damages objectionsThey decided to limit their economic ask to $7.1 million for only two types of treatments (VYEPTI and trigger point injections) rather than including all medications.The jury awarded exactly $7.1 million in economics and zero in permanent impairment, validating their approach.The information contained in this podcast is not intended to be taken as legal advice. The information provided by Fuicelli & Lee is intended to provide general information regarding comprehensive injury and accident attorney services for clients in the state of Colorado.

A broken sidewalk left like a "jigsaw puzzle" became the foundation of an $8.2 million verdict for Tim Garvey and Greg Bentley. Representing a 60-year-old man who suffered a moderate traumatic brain injury after falling on the sidewalk, Tim and Greg sued the telecommunications company and general contractor that had torn it up to install fiber optic infrastructure. In this case breakdown moderated by host Keith Fuicelli, the trial team reveals their strategies, including confronting deponents with their statements on a PowerPoint and using red masking tape on a model skeleton to show injuries. For a unique approach to damages, Keith encourages listeners to check out Sari de la Motte’s podcast episode where guest Christy Crowe Childers describes her “Damages House” strategy.Learn More and Connect with Colorado Trial Lawyers☑️ Tim Garvey | LinkedIn☑️ Greg Bentley | LinkedIn☑️ Dormer Harpring Personal Injury Lawyers on LinkedIn | Instagram | Facebook | YouTube☑️ Keith Fuicelli | LinkedIn☑️ Fuicelli & Lee Injury Lawyers Website☑️ Fuicelli & Lee Injury Lawyers on X, Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, and LinkedIn☑️ Subscribe Apple Podcasts | Spotify | YouTubeEpisode SnapshotIn this case, a man riding his personal e-scooter was thrown face-first when he hit a sidewalk that had been left uneven and broken after a fiber optic project.One takeaway from suing under the Colorado Premises Liability Act, Tim suggests, is that plaintiffs’ lawyers try to keep negligence claims “until they either prove to you that it can't be a negligence claim or the court tells you it can't be a negligence claim.”Tim and Greg's multimedia trial presentation approach incorporated video depositions, PowerPoint, king boards, and a model skeleton they named “Skeletor.”To head off the suggestion that their client “did something wrong,” the team worked with trial consultant Jesse Wilson to prepare him for testifying.Using Jessica Brylo for focus groups and big data studies helped the team refine damage asks, prioritize voir dire questions, and predict jury apportionment.The $8.2 million verdict breakdown: $4.2 million in economic damages (fully awarded), $2 million in non-economic damages, and $2 million in impairment damages.The jury apportioned 35% of responsibility each to the general contractor and subcontractor, 15% to the city of Denver, and 15% to plaintiff.Other takeaways: making trials multimedia experiences, guarding against jurors "backing into" damage numbers rather than evaluating each category separately, and achieving exceptional results with teamwork.The information contained in this podcast is not intended to be taken as legal advice. The information provided by Fuicelli & Lee is intended to provide general information regarding comprehensive injury and accident attorney services for clients in the state of Colorado.

What’s it like to try three jury trials in five weeks? Returning guest Tim Galluzzi of Cheney Galluzzi & Howard breaks down his whirlwind trial stretch—including wins, missteps, and a humbling loss. In this conversation with host Keith Fuicelli, Tim shares how he and his litigation team managed a total of five trials in five weeks, the systems they relied on (and improved), and how getting your “ass kicked” in the courtroom isn’t a setback—it’s part of the process. Tune in for a real-world look at sustainable trial practice, case selection strategy, and the power of showing up, even when it’s hard.Learn More and Connect with Colorado Trial Lawyers☑️ Tim Galluzzi | LinkedIn☑️ Cheney Galluzzi & Howard on LinkedIn | Instagram | Facebook | X | YouTube☑️ Keith Fuicelli | LinkedIn☑️ Fuicelli & Lee Injury Lawyers☑️ Fuicelli & Lee Injury Lawyers on X, Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, and LinkedIn☑️ Subscribe Apple Podcasts | Spotify | YouTubeEpisode SnapshotIn trying three cases in five weeks, Tim highlights the importance of using robust case management systems like Filevine.The team leveraged Filevine's 120-day trial button to automate tasks including expert subpoenas, witness confirmation, and certificates of authentication for medical records.Tim’s firm ranks trial cases on a 1-5 system; cases with over a million dollars in damages with clear liability and coverage get a 5.Tim's client preparation involves three pretrial meetings: initial question review, full direct examination dry run, and aggressive cross-examination practice with his trial partner.Getting certificates of authentication for medical records at 120 days prevents last-minute scrambling to find custodians when defense won't stipulate, Tim suggests.Tim describes the impact of his firm’s reputation for going to trial: opposing counsel calling more often with settlement offers. The firm achieves policy limits in 79% of their cases, which Tim attributes to their willingness to try cases.Tim explains how a loss in Summit County demonstrated the importance of understanding local jury pools and personal accountability attitudes.The firm emphasizes that losses and "getting your ass kicked" is essential for maintaining perspective and continued growth as trial lawyers.The information contained in this podcast is not intended to be taken as legal advice. The information provided by Fuicelli & Lee is intended to provide general information regarding comprehensive injury and accident attorney services for clients in the state of Colorado.

A defense neuropsychologist claimed their client was faking a rare psychological condition for money. The jury's response? Nearly $7 million for the plaintiff. Jared Mazzei and Jessica McBryant secured this verdict on behalf of their client, who was injured after falling at a Kohl’s store. The case featured compelling surveillance video, late admission of liability from the defense, and a strategic division of physical and psychological injuries. Host Keith Fuicelli explores how the team from Ramos Law countered defense claims of malingering with powerful rebuttal testimony and compelling video evidence.Learn More and Connect with Colorado Trial Lawyers☑️ Jared Mazzei☑️ Jessica McBryant | LinkedIn☑️ Ramos Law | LinkedIn | Instagram | Facebook | X | YouTube☑️ Keith Fuicelli | LinkedIn☑️ Fuicelli & Lee Injury Lawyers Website☑️ Fuicelli & Lee Injury Lawyers on X, Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, and LinkedIn☑️ Subscribe Apple Podcasts | Spotify | YouTubeEpisode SnapshotThe slip-and-fall occurred when a Kohl's employee removed COVID decals using Goo Gone-type products but failed to properly clean the area or post caution signs.Compelling surveillance video captured the entire incident, showing the client's feet going out from under her and her head hitting both an end table and the tile floor.The client developed functional neurological symptom disorder, a rare psychological condition that caused involuntary movements, speech difficulties, and walking impairments.Strategic division of the case between physical injuries (handled by Jessica) and psychological injuries (handled by Jared) helped the jury conceptualize the complex medical conditions.The defense neuropsychologist accused the client of malingering, claiming she was faking her symptoms for financial gain.Jared's cross-examination strategy included purchasing the MMPI-3 manual and creating a PowerPoint showing how the neuropsychologist’s interpretations contradicted the official test manual.Powerful rebuttal testimony effectively dismantled the defense expert's malingering claims using the actual test manual standards.Videos of the client's symptoms in the hospital, including her relearning to walk and involuntary movements, proved devastating to the defense's malingering theory.The jury awarded $6,945,040 total: $1,000,040 in non-economic damages, $650,000 in economics, and $4,875,000 in physical impairment.The information contained in this podcast is not intended to be taken as legal advice. The information provided by Fuicelli & Lee is intended to provide general information regarding comprehensive injury and accident attorney services for clients in the state of Colorado.

Born with profound hearing loss, Spencer Kontnik spent a long time distancing himself from any fields of law related to disability. Then, the “light bulb” went off, and today he advocates for people with disabilities – like the client whose job offer from Denver Health was rescinded after she requested disability accommodations. In this case breakdown with host Keith Fuicelli, Spencer discusses how his team approached the issue of proving discrimination. “It's very difficult to prove that individual, that person, is a discriminatory person,” he explains. So the team focused on cultivating evidence and cross-examinations that showed that the defendant’s actions toward his client were discriminatory. Spencer secured a jury award, pre-judgment interest, back pay, and front pay totalling $500,000. Learn More and Connect with Colorado Trial Lawyers☑️ Spencer Kontnik | LinkedIn☑️ Kontnik | Cohen on Instagram | LinkedIn | Facebook | X☑️ Keith Fuicelli | LinkedIn☑️ Fuicelli & Lee Injury Lawyers Website☑️ Fuicelli & Lee Injury Lawyers on X, Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, and LinkedIn☑️ Subscribe Apple Podcasts | Spotify | YouTubeEpisode SnapshotSpencer's transformation from defense attorney to disability rights advocate after defending a case involving a deaf job applicant.Employment law requires employers to provide reasonable accommodations for disabilities that limit major life functions, with the burden shifting to employers to prove fundamental alteration or undue burden.The Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act (CADA) offers similar remedies to the ADA but allows cases to proceed faster in state court versus federal court.Spencer's client, a biostatistician with 130-plus peer-reviewed publications, was denied a job at Denver Health after requesting a one-hour later start time due to seizure disorder, short bowel syndrome, and depression/anxiety.Denver Health rescinded the job offer after the accommodation request, leading to a retaliation claim.The jury awarded $150,000 in compensatory damages, with $16,000 in pre-judgment interest, and the court awarded $130,000 in back pay plus $205,000 in front pay.Spencer's hearing loss requires CART interpreters in the courtroom, a vulnerability that he says isn’t a hindrance; it builds trust with juries.The information contained in this podcast is not intended to be taken as legal advice. The information provided by Fuicelli & Lee is intended to provide general information regarding comprehensive injury and accident attorney services for clients in the state of Colorado.

Text messages and surveillance footage revealed the horrific truth: A jail inmate told staff, "I'm trying to kill myself right now," yet they did nothing. Eight hours later, he was found dead. Sean Dormer returns for his third podcast appearance alongside civil rights attorney Spencer Bryan to discuss their groundbreaking $4 million verdict on behalf of the inmate’s family. Host Keith Fuicelli explores how they overcame the deliberately indifferent standard, defeated qualified immunity at the 10th Circuit, and secured what appears to be Colorado's largest jail suicide verdict. Their victory came despite defense counsel telling jurors that the inmate "valued his life at nothing because he killed himself."Learn More and Connect with Colorado Trial Lawyers☑️ Spencer Bryan | LinkedIn☑️ Bryan & Terrill Law on Facebook | YouTube☑️ Sean Dormer | LinkedIn☑️ Dormer Harpring Personal Injury Lawyers on LinkedIn | Facebook | Instagram | YouTube☑️ Keith Fuicelli | LinkedIn☑️ Fuicelli & Lee Injury Lawyers Website☑️ Fuicelli & Lee Injury Lawyers on X, Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, and LinkedIn☑️ Subscribe Apple Podcasts | Spotify | YouTubeEpisode SnapshotAn inmate named Jackson told jail staff "I'm trying to kill myself right now" while banging his head against the cell wallThe jail captain repeated Jackson's words, acknowledging he heard the suicidal statement, yet no suicide watch was implemented.One jailer was criminally charged for falsifying cell check logs, claiming he checked on Jackson when he never did.Jackson's body wasn't discovered for eight hours despite industry standards requiring hourly checks for non-suicidal inmates.The trial team overcame qualified immunity challenges and prevailed at the 10th Circuit Court of AppealsColorado Open Records Act requests revealed inconsistent police reports and preserved crucial surveillance footageDefense strategy backfired when counsel told jurors that Jackson "valued his life at nothing because he killed himself."The $4 million verdict appears to be Colorado's largest jail suicide award and among the top 10 nationally.In an emotional courtroom moment, Jackson’s mother forgave the young deputy who falsified logs.The information contained in this podcast is not intended to be taken as legal advice. The information provided by Fuicelli & Lee is intended to provide general information regarding comprehensive injury and accident attorney services for clients in the state of Colorado.

Two routine medical flights turned catastrophic when the cabin rapidly depressurized, leaving a flight paramedic with permanent tinnitus and hearing loss. In this case break-down with host Keith Fuicelli, Nicole Quintana and Kylie Schmidt of Ogborn Mihm discuss how they navigated complex aviation maintenance records, fought an admission of liability that wasn't truly an admission, and overcame defense arguments about their client's recreational shooting and explosives training to secure verdicts totalling nearly $400,000 for both incidents.Learn More and Connect with Colorado Trial Lawyers☑️ Kylie Schmidt | LinkedIn☑️ Nicole Quintana | LinkedIn☑️ Ogborn Mihm on LinkedIn | Facebook | YouTube☑️ Keith Fuicelli | LinkedIn☑️ Fuicelli & Lee Injury Lawyers☑️ Fuicelli & Lee Injury Lawyers on X, Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, and LinkedIn☑️ Subscribe Apple Podcasts | Spotify | YouTubeEpisode SnapshotThe case involved a flight paramedic who suffered permanent tinnitus (ringing in the ears) and hearing loss after cabin depressurization incidents in an air ambulance.The trial team identified maintenance failures that caused the rapid loss of cabin pressure that damaged their client's ears.Focus groups encouraged the team to disclose their client's recreational activities –  shooting and explosives training – upfront rather than let the defense use them as a "gotcha" moment.The client's annual hearing tests for his job proved invaluable in showing that he had no tinnitus symptoms before the first incident.Despite a workers' compensation doctor giving a 0% impairment rating, the attorneys successfully argued that their client suffered permanent physical impairment.The defense claimed negligence but refused to admit specific failures, forcing extensive motions practice about what evidence could be presented at trial.The second, similar depressurization incident occurred during litigation, which caused the client to abandon his flight paramedic career.The jury awarded $378,000 for the first incident and $17,000 for the second.The information contained in this podcast is not intended to be taken as legal advice. The information provided by Fuicelli & Lee is intended to provide general information regarding comprehensive injury and accident attorney services for clients in the state of Colorado.

When a 68-year-old woman shattered her kneecap after slipping in Walmart, defense attorneys expected an easy win—ignoring that surveillance footage revealed employees had walked past the water spill without action for 30 minutes. Allison Pritchard and Phil Meinkoth of Olson Personal Injury Lawyers reveal to host Keith Fuicelli how they meticulously built their case, leveraging surveillance footage, strategic witness cross-examinations, and a perfectly calculated damage ask that delivered a $240,000 verdict—exceeding their pre-trial demand by nearly $70,000.Learn More and Connect with Colorado Trial Lawyers☑️ Allison Pritchard | LinkedIn☑️ Phil Meinkoth | LinkedIn☑️ Olson Personal Injury Lawyers on LinkedIn | Instagram | Facebook | YouTube☑️ Keith Fuicelli | LinkedIn☑️ Fuicelli & Lee Injury Lawyers Website☑️ Fuicelli & Lee Injury Lawyers on X, Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, and LinkedIn☑️ Subscribe Apple Podcasts | Spotify | YouTubeEpisode SnapshotThe client slipped in a pool of water that had been present for 30 minutes after ice delivery, breaking her kneecap so severely that she permanently lost the lower half of her patella.Surveillance footage revealed four Walmart employees walking directly through the area without addressing the hazard.The team fought to obtain complete surveillance footage, initially receiving only 5 minutes before securing the full 2 hours that showed the origin of the spill.Walmart claimed everyone is responsible for safety but had no enforcement mechanisms, safety sweep logs, or accountability systems.The defense's attempt to designate the ice delivery company as a non-party at fault was struck due to the nondelegation doctrine for premises liability.The attorneys made a strategic game-time decision to ask for half of their initially calculated damages, increasing their credibility with the jury.The jury awarded exactly what was asked for ($240,000 with 25% comparative fault), which exceeded Walmart's final offer of $150,000.Effective witness cross-examination turned a likable female Walmart manager into a "victim of the corporation" by highlighting how she lacked tools to enforce safety protocols.The information contained in this podcast is not intended to be taken as legal advice. The information provided by Fuicelli & Lee is intended to provide general information regarding comprehensive injury and accident attorney services for clients in the state of Colorado.

Lawyers have a stressful job and, as host Keith Fuicelli explains, “keeping our bodies in peak optimal performance is critical to success.” That’s why he invites his personal trainer, Courtney Samuel, to the show to encourage lawyers to take up a physical fitness regimen. Courtney lays out why maintaining muscle mass becomes increasingly crucial as we age and offers practical fitness guidance for busy professionals. Tune in for Courtney’s insights about the importance of treating your body as professionally as your legal practice.Learn More and Connect with Colorado Trial Lawyers☑️ Courtney Samuel | LinkedIn☑️ Bodies By Perseverance on LinkedIn | Instagram | Facebook | X☑️ Keith Fuicelli | LinkedIn☑️ Fuicelli & Lee Injury Lawyers Website☑️ Fuicelli & Lee Injury Lawyers on X, Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, and LinkedIn☑️ Subscribe Apple Podcasts | Spotify | YouTubeEpisode SnapshotCourtney's path from NFL prospect with a computer science degree to fitness entrepreneur.Why beginners should look to personal trainers as they embark on their fitness journey. How maintaining muscle mass becomes increasingly crucial as we age, particularly to prevent conditions like osteoporosisWhy boxing is an excellent low-impact, high-intensity cardio option.Courtney recommends starting with two weekly strength training sessions (45-60 minutes) that focus on upper and lower body.Simple body-weight exercises anyone can do in limited time: push-ups, sit-ups, dips, squats, and jumping jacks.The mindset necessary to overcome the "inner voice" that wants to skip workouts.Bodies By Perseverance has two Denver locations: the main 10,000-square-foot facility (30th and Downing) and a personal training studio in Cherry Creek North.The information contained in this podcast is not intended to be taken as legal advice. The information provided by Fuicelli & Lee is intended to provide general information regarding comprehensive injury and accident attorney services for clients in the state of Colorado.

A seemingly routine case turned extraordinary when Alana Anzalone and Melanie Stuckey secured a $2.2 million verdict in Adams County for a 22-year-old client with herniated discs. Their victory is even more remarkable considering this was Melanie's first trial after transitioning from paralegal to attorney, and they faced a defendant who shockingly denied even hitting their client's car despite totaling it. Host Keith Fuicelli explores how their teamwork, strategic witness preparation, and powerful rebuttal of the defense's degenerative disc claims led to a jury award exceeding their request.Learn More and Connect with Colorado Trial Lawyers☑️ Alana Anzalone | LinkedIn ☑️ Anzalone & Doyle Trial Lawyers on LinkedIn | Instagram | Facebook☑️ Melanie Stuckey | LinkedIn☑️ Donaldson Law on LinkedIn | Instagram | Facebook☑️ Keith Fuicelli | LinkedIn☑️ Fuicelli & Lee Injury Lawyers Website☑️ Fuicelli & Lee Injury Lawyers on X, Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, and LinkedIn☑️ Subscribe Apple Podcasts | Spotify | YouTubeEpisode SnapshotMelanie's inspiring journey from 25-year paralegal career to law school graduate and trial lawyer in 2020.The case involved a 22-year-old client with multiple herniated discs after being rear-ended on I-25 by a 78-year-old distracted driver.State Farm initially offered only $28,000 on $66,000 in medical bills, then later made a $95,000 statutory offer that the client rejected.The defendant shocked everyone at trial by denying he even hit the client's car, despite causing so much damage that it was totaled.The defense expert tried to attribute the young client's injuries to degenerative disc disease, claiming all symptoms were pre-existing.The chiropractor played a critical role by establishing the plaintiff’s permanent impairment through his testimony about ligament laxity.The case benefitted from the co-counsels’ complementary styles: Melanie's calm demeanor and Alana's fiery approach.The jury awarded $2,232,500, exceeding what was requested, including $40 per day for physical impairment based on the client's barber fee.The information contained in this podcast is not intended to be taken as legal advice. The information provided by Fuicelli & Lee is intended to provide general information regarding comprehensive injury and accident attorney services for clients in the state of Colorado.\

At a glance, the two large vehicles involved in a rear-end collision – a Toyota 4Runner and a Nissan Xterra – didn’t appear visibly damaged. And Melanie Sulkin’s client didn’t appear injured. But Melanie pursued the case beyond surface images. She recounts her methods with host Keith Fuicelli. From proving the significant frame damage to her client’s car and the permanent injury to her client’s rotator cuff, Melanie describes an approach that yielded a jury verdict of nearly $583,000.Learn More and Connect with Colorado Trial Lawyers☑️ Melanie Sulkin | LinkedIn☑️ Krivit Law | LinkedIn | Instagram | Facebook☑️ Keith Fuicelli | LinkedIn☑️ Fuicelli & Lee Injury Lawyers☑️ Fuicelli & Lee Injury Lawyers on X, Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, and LinkedIn☑️ Subscribe Apple Podcasts | Spotify | YouTubeEpisode SnapshotMelanie found her calling as an undergraduate when she founded Northern Illinois University’s mock trial team.Early in her career, Melanie was on the team that tried the first M2a Magnum Biomet case in the country.In a recent case, Melanie represented a client who was rear-ended, but both her client’s car and the defendant’s car showed little to no visible property damage.Even though the defendant originally admitted fault, his stories changed during trial in an attempt to place some blame on Melanie’s client.In arguing that the crash caused her client’s rotator cuff tear, Melanie showed photos of the car, and her client testified that she had the entire frame repaired.  Melanie struck many jurors who said during voir dire that her client “looks fine.” When the “mechanism of injury” became a question at trial, Melanie elicited an answer from the defense surgeon.The defendant’s insurance carrier initially agreed to a demand of $300,000, but then backed off. For Melanie’s client, the decision to go to trial was easy. “They told us to make a demand, we did it, and they didn't make good on it,” Melanie says.The information contained in this podcast is not intended to be taken as legal advice. The information provided by Fuicelli & Lee is intended to provide general information regarding comprehensive injury and accident attorney services for clients in the state of Colorado.

Text messages, complete with poop emojis, revealed that a charter school’s board members targeted the executive director because they just didn’t like her. “It was like ‘Mean Girls,’” recalls Jason Wesoky, who, with colleague Clay Wire, represented the director.Tune into this case breakdown with host Keith Fuicelli as Jason and Clay describe how they framed the contract dispute as a set-up by board members hoping to boot their client off the job. In the end, she won a jury verdict of about $950,000.Learn More and Connect with Colorado Trial Lawyers☑️ Clay Wire | LinkedIn☑️ Jason Wesoky | LinkedIn☑️ Ogborn Mihm on LinkedIn | Facebook☑️ Keith Fuicelli | LinkedIn☑️ Fuicelli & Lee Injury Lawyers Website☑️ Fuicelli & Lee Injury Lawyers on Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, and LinkedIn☑️ Subscribe Apple Podcasts | Spotify | YouTubeEpisode SnapshotWhen he realized that he was making more as a bartender than he would as a political scientist or journalist, Clay turned to law school.Jason grew up in the legal world and went to college knowing he wanted to be a lawyer.Clay and Jason represented the executive director of a Colorado charter school when a new board refused to honor her contract.Because the team couldn’t bring tort claims against a governmental entity, they focused on a contract claim for economic damages through the Colorado Governmental Immunity Act.Their client used the state’s social security replacement for public employees to draw on her retirement and then return to work under the contract. The defense argued that their client had, in fact, retired and that she wasn’t honoring her contract.Text messages provided through the Colorado Open Records Act revealed the real story: that board leaders targeted their client because they didn’t like her.Clay and Jason were also helped by a former board member who had written a long email to the rest of the board, detailing problems he saw with how they treated their client. At trial, the board president testified that she had only “skimmed” the email.At closing, the team focused on showing how the board’s bad decisions were due to bad advice from their lawyer. Clay’s final line of questioning to the board attorney elicited the attorney’s personal interest in a good outcome – for him. The information contained in this podcast is not intended to be taken as legal advice. The information provided by Fuicelli & Lee is intended to provide general information regarding comprehensive injury and accident attorney services for clients in the state of Colorado.

The jury in Dan Lipman’s civil case on behalf of a young sexual assault survivor awarded $2,020,000 in three categories of damages: economic, non-economic, and physical impairment. The last category was notable because few, if any, Colorado juries have awarded damages for physical impairment based on emotional trauma.Now, one has.“We can’t find another verdict where, in a civil case, a sexual assault victim proved physical impairment not from physical injury, like being beaten, but from the emotional aspect of it. And we think that this is a notable case that will help open the door to other survivors of sexual assault,” he explains to host Keith Fuicelli.Tune in to hear Dan break down this strategy and other approaches in the Jefferson County case. For lawyers, Dan provides questions they should answer in screening sexual assault cases and, once they’re working with a client, tips for prioritizing empathy.Learn More and Connect with Colorado Trial Lawyers☑️ Dan Lipman | LinkedIn☑️ Parker Lipman | LinkedIn☑️ Keith Fuicelli | LinkedIn☑️ Fuicelli & Lee Injury Lawyers Website☑️ Fuicelli & Lee Injury Lawyers on Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, and LinkedIn☑️ Subscribe Apple Podcasts | Spotify | YouTubeEpisode SnapshotDan’s focus on sexual assault cases began with the case of a male swimming coach who was having sexual contact with a 16-year-old swimmer.The two questions Dan answers when he screens these types of cases.The complicated landscape of the statute of limitations for sex assault claims.Background of the Jefferson County case where Dan represented a girl who was sexually assaulted by her mother’s fiance.In asking for damages, Dan categorized his client’s emotional trauma as physical impairment, a technique that yielded a notable verdict.How Dan “ferociously” fought the defense argument that his client’s PTSD diagnosis was created by lawyers.If PTSD physically impairs the brain, why not get an MRI? “You want to be really careful to say that imaging can show these impacts. Imaging can show these impacts in some people, and it’s not known which people show these things or not,” Dan explains.Dan’s pointers for lawyers taking on sexual assault cases: First, make sure the client wants to go to trial.The information contained in this podcast is not intended to be taken as legal advice. The information provided by Fuicelli & Lee is intended to provide general information regarding comprehensive injury and accident attorney services for clients in the state of Colorado.

Jurors listened, wide-eyed, as Ross Ziev presented his case against King Sooper Grocery Store. His client was injured in a slip-and-fall, but they may as well have been watching a murder mystery as a poor-quality video revealed “who-dun-it.”“You could see in the jury’s eyes – they were trying to figure out what caused this as well,” Ross recalls in this case break-down with host Keith Fuicelli. They ultimately awarded $350,000 to his client for pain and suffering and physical impairment.The store’s video proved to be pivotal evidence, and Ross details his strategy for when and how he presented it. He also walks through important steps that PI plaintiffs’ lawyers should take in such cases, starting with claims notes, incident reports, and video. And he offers advice for how to compel an obstructionist defense to disclose vital information. As for who caused his client’s fall… tune in to find out!Learn More and Connect with Colorado Trial Lawyers☑️ Ross Ziev I LinkedIn☑️ Legal Help in Colorado I LinkedIn I Instagram I Facebook☑️ Keith Fuicelli | LinkedIn☑️ Fuicelli & Lee Injury Lawyers☑️ Fuicelli & Lee Injury Lawyers on Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, and LinkedIn☑️ Subscribe Apple Podcasts | Spotify | YouTubeEpisode SnapshotRoss’ path from his native Dallas to law school at the University of Denver to launching his own firm in 2019.Background of Ross’ case on behalf of a woman who slipped and fell in the aisle of a King Soopers Grocery Store.Ross filed a formal settlement demand, but his experience has taught him that adjusters try to low-ball the plaintiff’s lawyer.Ross’ questioning of the assistant manager revealed that the store cleaned up the spill before any photos of it were taken.The defense went to trial assuming that a random customer caused the spill. Ross’ team reviewed store video that showed the real source.Ross’ theory at voir dire: damages and physical impairment and whether jurors would award those types of damages.How Ross overcame defense objections to some testimony about the store’s failure to investigate the spill.Why Ross advises plaintiffs’ lawyers to review disclosure and discovery with “an eye for deficiencies.” The information contained in this podcast is not intended to be taken as legal advice. The information provided by Fuicelli & Lee is intended to provide general information regarding comprehensive injury and accident attorney services for clients in the state of Colorado.

Colorado PI attorney Jason Jordan, founder of Jordan Law, has a vast amount of product liability experience, but he recently settled a “felonious killing” case that had reminders of the killing of George Floyd. In that case, Jason represented the widow of a man who was killed when guards at a hospital leaned on his back and neck until he lost consciousness. In this conversation with Keith Fuicelli, Jason recounts the details of that case as well as how his team investigates to determine if a case has product liability issues. He also describes his process for getting to know clients in order to humanize them for a jury and to prepare them for testimony in court. Finally, Jason stresses the importance of partnering with other attorneys both for their experience and for expertise in specialized areas of the law.Learn More and Connect with Colorado Trial Lawyers☑️ Jason Jordan | LinkedIn | Instagram | X | Facebook☑️ Keith Fuicelli | LinkedIn☑️ Fuicelli & Lee Injury Lawyers on Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, YouTube & LinkedIn☑️ Subscribe Apple Podcasts | Spotify | YouTubeEpisode SnapshotHow Jason opened his own practice out of law schoolWhy Jason encourages young lawyers to ask for help, seek partners on casesA car accident may include product liability issues, so lawyers should be prepared to investigate car parts involved in the crashHow Jason exposed the training of hospital guards who killed a patient by leaning on his neck.How to get to know your clients well so you can humanize them in courtHow a video tape of a hospital patient showed he wasn’t violent until a guard touched himWhy it matters which state a trial is held in and the importance of investigating state lawsHow focus groups can help trial lawyers decide how to present a caseIf a victim or a client has a dark side, lawyers must offer testimony about their strengthsHow press conferences can be a tool to help stop witness intimidationThe information contained in this podcast is not intended to be taken as legal advice. The information provided by Fuicelli & Lee is intended to provide general information regarding comprehensive injury and accident attorney services for clients in the state of Colorado.

Two cars collided head-on – but their client wasn’t wearing his seatbelt. The client suffered a brain injury – but didn’t require significant medical treatment.Yet Michael Born and Peter McCaffrey of Born & McCaffrey Injury Law secured $380,000 from a jury. With host Keith Fuicelli, Michael and Peter reveal the plot twists in this unique case, starting at the hospital, when police initially considered that their client was at fault. The story changed when crash data revealed the defendant’s excessive speed. Michael and Peter discuss how they balanced the role that speed played against their client’s lack of a seatbelt. They also share how they delicately cross-examined the defendant so that the jury would not feel sympathy for him.Learn More and Connect with Colorado Trial Lawyers☑️ Peter McCaffrey | LinkedIn☑️ Michael Born | LinkedIn☑️ Born & McCaffrey Injury Law on Facebook | Instagram | YouTube | TikTok☑️ Keith Fuicelli | LinkedIn☑️ Fuicelli & Lee Injury Lawyers Website☑️ Fuicelli & Lee Injury Lawyers on Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, YouTube & LinkedIn☑️ Subscribe Apple Podcasts | Spotify | YouTubeEpisode SnapshotAdvice from Peter and Michael to young trial lawyers working for big verdictsThe advantages of practicing with a partner versus going aloneA story with plot twists begins with the client appearing at faultHow the crash data prompted police to reassess their clientWhat the investigator testified to help them win the caseWhy the defense didn’t call their expertThe information contained in this podcast is not intended to be taken as legal advice. The information provided by Fuicelli & Lee is intended to provide general information regarding comprehensive injury and accident attorney services for clients in the state of Colorado.

Their client, a drywall installer, was injured in a five-car pile up outside Denver. Sean Dormer and Tim Garvey helped him secure a $2.51 million verdict against the driver who caused the injuries.Tune in as Sean Dormer and Tim Garvey of Dormer Harpring, LLC join host Keith Fuicelli to discuss this recent trial victory in Denver. Sean and Tim recount the facts of the case, how their quick-thinking changed the course of trial, and how they portrayed their client as a victor and not a victim. Sean and Tim also share how they got a shocking admission from defense experts and their philosophies for voir dire, witness sequencing, and closing arguments.Learn More and Connect with Colorado Trial Lawyers☑️ Tim Garvey | LinkedIn☑️ Sean Dormer | LinkedIn☑️ Dormer Harpring, LLC on LinkedIn, Facebook, & Instagram☑️ Keith Fuicelli | LinkedIn☑️ Fuicelli & Lee Injury Lawyers Website☑️ Fuicelli & Lee Injury Lawyers on X, Facebook, Instagram, YouTube & LinkedIn☑️ Subscribe Apple Podcasts | Spotify | YouTubeEpisode SnapshotFacts of Dormer Harpring’s recent $2.51M verdict in DenverObtaining crucial admissions from defense expert witnesses on cross-examinationHow Tim and Sean capitalized on defense’s undisclosed photosHow to frame your client as a victor, not a victimWhy you need to trust your gut at trialCreative closing argumentsThe information contained in this podcast is not intended to be taken as legal advice. The information provided by Fuicelli & Lee is intended to provide general information regarding comprehensive injury and accident attorney services for clients in the state of Colorado.

A developmentally disabled man was injured when the car he was in was rear-ended by a delivery service partner company. He needed justice, and he got it. In this episode of Colorado Trial Lawyer Connection, Jessica Schlatter, Paige Singleton, and Randy Manning of Ramos Law join host Keith Fuicelli to discuss a $19M verdict they recently obtained for their client in Denver District Court. Listen as Jessica, Paige, and Randy discuss how their client was diagnosed with a brain bleed within three hours of being involved in a rear-end collision, how they established medical causation at trial, and how a creative closing argument helped put the defense on the ropes and secure a huge win for their plaintiff. Jessica, Paige, and Randy also go in depth into the medical side of their client’s injuries.Learn More and Connect with Colorado Trial Lawyers☑️ Jessica Schlatter | LinkedIn☑️ Paige Singleton | LinkedIn☑️ Randy Manning☑️ Ramos Law on LinkedIn, Facebook, Twitter/X, Instagram, & YouTube☑️ Keith Fuicelli | LinkedIn☑️ Fuicelli & Lee Injury Lawyers Website☑️ Fuicelli & Lee Injury Lawyers on Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, YouTube & LinkedIn☑️ Subscribe Apple Podcasts | Spotify | YouTubeEpisode SnapshotFacts of the $19M verdict caseInjuries sustained by the plaintiffArguments made by the defenseUse of experts for liability and damagesGathering information through 20 depositionsUse of focus groups in crafting liability argumentsBreakdown of the $19M verdictUsing police officer testimony to bring in evidence otherwise not admittedThe information contained in this podcast is not intended to be taken as legal advice. The information provided by Fuicelli & Lee is intended to provide general information regarding comprehensive injury and accident attorney services for clients in the state of Colorado.

Trial is adversarial. “Do what you want until you’re not allowed to do it.”In part two of this special episode of Colorado Trial Lawyer Connection, host Keith Fuicelli is joined by guest host Tim Galluzzi, founding partner of Cheney Galluzzi & Howard, LLC to interview Kurt Zaner, founding partner of Zaner Harden Law LLP and owner of the largest premises liability verdict in Colorado history. Kurt, Tim, and Keith discuss the trial on Kurt’s fracking explosion case in federal court in Colorado that resulted in a $30M verdict.   Tune in as the trio discuss Kurt’s approach to doing voir dire in 30 minutes or less, the ‘Do Your Job’ theme Kurt used in his opening statement, his ‘butcher paper’ approach to creating persuasive courtroom visuals when you can’t create the perfect slide ahead of time, and more. Learn More and Connect with Colorado Trial Lawyers☑️ Kurt Zaner | LinkedIn☑️ Zaner Harden Law LLP on LinkedIn, Instagram, Facebook, & YouTube☑️ Tim Galluzzi | LinkedIn☑️ Cheney Galluzzi & Howard, LLC on LinkedIn, Instagram, Facebook, TikTok & Twitter/X☑️ Keith Fuicelli | LinkedIn☑️ Fuicelli & Lee Injury Lawyers Website☑️ Fuicelli & Lee Injury Lawyers on Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, YouTube & LinkedIn☑️ Subscribe Apple Podcasts | Spotify | YouTubeEpisode SnapshotKurt’s use of visuals at trialTrial prep two weeks leading up to trialKurt’s voir dire strategyResource mentioned:  Moonwalking with Einstein: The Art and Science of Remembering EverythingOpening statementResource mentioned: Twelve Heroes, Once Voice: Guiding Jurors to Courageous VerdictsHow Kurt creates persuasive visuals on the flyHow Kurt sequences evidenceClosing argumentTo see demonstratives Kurt used for opening and closing email KurtThe information contained in this podcast is not intended to be taken as legal advice. The information provided by Fuicelli & Lee is intended to provide general information regarding comprehensive injury and accident attorney services for clients in the state of Colorado.

“I do everything I can to be friends with defense lawyers. It makes the case so much more enjoyable. And when it comes to non-parties, just be nice to these people and you’ll be amazed at what you can catch.”In this special episode of Colorado Trial Lawyer Connection, host Keith Fuicelli is joined by guest host Tim Galluzzi, founding partner of Cheney Galluzzi & Howard, LLC to interview Kurt Zaner, founding partner of Zaner Harden Law LLP and owner of the largest premises liability verdict in Colorado history. Kurt, Tim, and Keith discuss Kurt’s fracking explosion case in federal court in Colorado that resulted in a $30M verdict. Tune in as Kurt, Tim, and Keith discuss Kurt’s closing method to make your client’s pain real to the jury, why he filed the case in federal court, experts used in the case, and how being nice to everyone paid dividends at trial. Stay tuned for Part 2 coming out next week! Learn More and Connect with Colorado Trial Lawyers☑️ Kurt Zaner | LinkedIn☑️ Zaner Harden Law LLP on LinkedIn, Instagram, Facebook, & YouTube☑️ Tim Galluzzi | LinkedIn☑️ Cheney Galluzzi & Howard, LLC on LinkedIn, Instagram, Facebook, TikTok & Twitter/X☑️ Keith Fuicelli | LinkedIn☑️ Fuicelli & Lee Injury Lawyers Website☑️ Fuicelli & Lee Injury Lawyers on Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, YouTube & LinkedIn☑️ Subscribe Apple Podcasts | Spotify | YouTubeEpisode SnapshotGetting to know Kurt ZanerWhy you want the jury to see you as a person, not as a lawyerHow Kurt makes his client’s pain real to the jury at closingCaps in ColoradoBackground of the caseFinding the right expertsHow Kurt simplified things for the juryConflict that arose in the case which led to co-counseling with TimWhy you need to make time for later deposHow being kind benefitted the caseThe information contained in this podcast is not intended to be taken as legal advice. The information provided by Fuicelli & Lee is intended to provide general information regarding comprehensive injury and accident attorney services for clients in the state of Colorado.

Products cases can be intimidating. There’s a monster defense with an unlimited budget, it’s going to be a cage match until the end, and there are no guarantees of success. So you have to be willing to go the distance. In this episode of Colorado Trial Lawyer Connection, host Keith Fuicelli is joined by experienced products liability attorneys Brad Holmes of Bradly J. Holmes, PC and Mike Blanton of Gerash Steiner Blanton, P.C.. Brad and Mike recently obtained a verdict of over $56 million ($45M of which in punitive damages) on a product defect case against Ford Motor Company in federal court in Colorado Springs.Tune in as Brad and Mike discuss making product defect claims against automakers, how to rebut defensive theories, and Ford’s ongoing bad behavior that led to the punitive damages award.Learn More and Connect with Colorado Trial Lawyers☑️ Brad Holmes | LinkedIn | Email☑️ Mike Blanton | LinkedIn | Email | $56M Verdict Against Ford☑️ Gerash Steiner Blanton, P.C. on Facebook & Twitter☑️ Keith Fuicelli | LinkedIn☑️ Fuicelli & Lee Injury Lawyers Website☑️ Fuicelli & Lee Injury Lawyers on Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, YouTube & LinkedIn☑️ Subscribe Apple Podcasts | Spotify | YouTubeEpisode SnapshotGetting to know Brad Holmes and Mike BlantonBackground facts of Brad & Mike’s $56 million products liability verdictPunitive damages in products liability casesDefendant’s ongoing bad behavior leads to large noneconomic and punitive damagesOvercoming defense theories in products liability casesMotion practice and jury instructions in products liability casesThe information contained in this podcast is not intended to be taken as legal advice. The information provided by Fuicelli & Lee is intended to provide general information regarding comprehensive injury and accident attorney services for clients in the state of Colorado.

Few trial attorneys begin trial thinking about appeals. But how can conducting a trial with an eye on appeal be helpful?In this episode of Colorado Trial Lawyer Connection, host Keith Fuicelli is joined by experienced appellate attorney Nelson Boyle of The Paul Wilkinson Law Firm, LLC. Nelson has represented clients in both state and federal appeals for over fifteen years.Tune in as Keith and Nelson discuss how trial lawyers can preserve errors for appeal, how to properly use trial briefs and motions in limine, and the benefits of using a live court reporter at trial instead of recording software.Learn More and Connect with Colorado Trial Lawyers☑️ Nelson Boyle | LinkedIn☑️ The Paul Wilkinson Law Firm, LLC | LinkedIn | Facebook☑️ Keith Fuicelli | LinkedIn☑️ Fuicelli & Lee Injury Lawyers Website☑️ Fuicelli & Lee Injury Lawyers on Twitter/X, Facebook, Instagram, YouTube & LinkedIn☑️ Subscribe Apple Podcasts | Spotify | YouTubeEpisode SnapshotBiggest mistakes trial lawyers makeMaking a record of evidence or testimony not allowed into evidencePreserving issues for appeal during trialBenefits of trial briefs and pocket briefsUsing motions for summary judgment as a plaintiff’s lawyerPresenting motions in liminePreserving error of pre-trial issuesDigital recording software versus live court reportersThe information contained in this podcast is not intended to be taken as legal advice. The information provided by Fuicelli & Lee is intended to provide general information regarding comprehensive injury and accident attorney services for clients in the state of Colorado.

They say hindsight is 20/20. Looking back on and evaluating your past trials can serve as a useful tool for improving trial preparation and strategy going forward. In this episode of Colorado Trial Lawyer Connection, the tables are turned as podcast host, Keith Fuicelli, and his partner John Lee, who co-founded Fuicelli & Lee with Keith in 2008, are interviewed by Jerry Bowman. Like Keith and John, Jerry is a Denver-based personal injury attorney and the founder of Bowman Law, LLC. Tune in to hear Keith and John talk about an MTBI concussion case they tried in November of 2023 in Jefferson County, and reflect on some of the mistakes they made in that case and what they would have done differently. Learn More and Connect with Colorado Trial Lawyers☑️ Jerry Bowman | LinkedIn | Email☑️ Bowman Law, LLC☑️ Bowman Law, LLC on Twitter/X, Facebook, LinkedIn & Yelp☑️ John Lee | LinkedIn | Email☑️ Keith Fuicelli | LinkedIn☑️ Fuicelli & Lee Injury Lawyers Website☑️ Fuicelli & Lee Injury Lawyers on Twitter/X, Facebook, Instagram, YouTube & LinkedIn☑️ Subscribe Apple Podcasts | Spotify | YouTubeEpisode SnapshotKeith and John’s early careers as prosecutorsCreating constructive charts to represent client’s medical issues Accident reconstruction and reliability of black box dataKeith and John used Elite Trial Consultants to help with their courtroom presentationPreparing your plaintiff for trialThe information contained in this podcast is not intended to be taken as legal advice. The information provided by Fuicelli & Lee is intended to provide general information regarding comprehensive injury and accident attorney services for clients in the state of Colorado.

It’s easy to get busy on a case and wonder if it’s worth fighting the fight to get the defense expert’s financials and prior reports. But this episode shows the fight can be worth the effort. In this episode of Colorado Trial Lawyer Connection, Keith Fuicelli is joined by Colorado trial lawyers, Glenn Fair and Emily Jamieson from the Oakmont Law Group, to talk about how they got a $2.2M verdict on an otherwise commonplace hit-and-run car crash case. Tune in to hear Glenn and Emily discuss their approach and strategy, including how they got in critical information with a modified failure to mitigate jury instruction, why they used 16 hours a day and not 24 when calculating non-economic damages, and the strategies they used at deposition and at trial to make the defense expert, an orthopedic surgeon, look foolish in front of the jury. Learn More and Connect with Colorado Trial Lawyers☑️ Glenn Fair | LinkedIn | Email: [email protected] ☑️ Emily Jamieson | Email: [email protected] ☑️ Oakmont Law Group, P.C. | Phone☑️ Oakmont Law Group, P.C. on Facebook | Twitter/X☑️ Keith Fuicelli | LinkedIn☑️ Fuicelli & Lee Injury Lawyers Website☑️ Fuicelli & Lee Injury Lawyers on Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, YouTube & LinkedIn☑️ Subscribe Apple Podcasts | Spotify | YouTubeEpisode SnapshotHow Glen and Emily became lawyers and the founding of Oakmont Law GroupBackground of their hit-and-run car crash case, what was pled, and the venueBreaking down the $2.2M verdictThe impact of motions practice on the outcome of the caseStrategy for locking-in the defense expert’s storyHitting the “professional witness” hard in openingDealing with the fact that the client didn’t get injectionsGlenn’s Facebook group that talks about “Running With the Bulls” concepts: PI Lawyers Discussing RWTBThe information contained in this podcast is not intended to be taken as legal advice. The information provided by Fuicelli & Lee is intended to provide general information regarding comprehensive injury and accident attorney services for clients in the state of Colorado.

You can get great results at trial even if you don’t have a perfect case. As long as you’re connecting with the client, the purpose, and the cause, the jury will see that.In this episode of Colorado Trial Lawyer Connection, Keith Fuicelli is joined by Boulder, Colorado personal injury lawyer, John Duguay. Keith and John talk about a tough car accident case John recently tried where his client had a prior injury, among other difficult circumstances that complicated his case. Tune in to hear John’s strategy going into the case, including what worked for him and what didn’t. Keith and John also discuss the importance of understanding the impact of your client’s injury beyond the physical aspect, using defense experts to shore up your case, the value of another set of eyes, voir dire tips, and John’s successful verdict despite the odds.        Learn More and Connect with Colorado Trial Lawyers☑️ John Duguay | LinkedIn☑️ Sloat, Nicholson & Hoover, P.C.☑️ Sloat, Nicholson & Hoover, P.C. on LinkedIn ☑️ Keith Fuicelli | LinkedIn☑️ Fuicelli & Lee Injury Lawyers Website☑️ Fuicelli & Lee Injury Lawyers on Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, YouTube & LinkedIn☑️ Subscribe Apple Podcasts | Spotify | Google Podcasts | YouTubeEpisode SnapshotJohn Duguay’s origin story and how he became a trial lawyerBackground on John’s difficult automobile collision case Understanding what was taken from your client, beyond the physical injuriesThe “burning house in Aspen” analogy of impairmentJohn’s voir dire strategy Closing arguments won’t always be pretty The information contained in this podcast is not intended to be taken as legal advice. The information provided by Fuicelli & Lee is intended to provide general information regarding comprehensive injury and accident attorney services for clients in the state of Colorado.

When taking a case to trial, you always want to have the facts in your client’s favor. But how do you handle a personal injury case where the facts are different than they initially seemed or aren’t advantageous to your client?In this episode of Colorado Trial Lawyer Connection, Keith Fuicelli is joined by attorneys Erin Hogan and Ben Flicker to talk about a trial they recently won in Denver involving a pedestrian who was hit by a van, while running against traffic, at night, in dark clothes, after drinking. Tune in to hear Erin and Ben discuss their trial strategy, from voir dire to closing arguments, ultimately resulting in a hugely successful impairment award. Learn More and Connect with Colorado Trial Lawyers☑️ Erin Hogan | LinkedIn ☑️ Ramos Law Website☑️ Ramos Law on LinkedIn | Facebook | Twitter/X | Instagram | YouTube☑️ Ben Flicker | LinkedIn ☑️ The Wilhite Law Firm Website☑️ The Wilhite Law Firm on LinkedIn | Facebook | Twitter/X | Instagram | YouTube☑️ Keith Fuicelli | LinkedIn☑️ Fuicelli & Lee Injury Lawyers Website☑️ Fuicelli & Lee Injury Lawyers on Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, YouTube & LinkedIn☑️ Subscribe Apple Podcasts | Spotify | Google Podcasts | YouTubeEpisode SnapshotGetting to know Erin Hogan and Ben FlickerThe role of comparative negligence in personal injury Trial strategy involving impairment compensation, including impairment rating and impairment instructionAnalyzing the jury poolThe benefits of using a trial tech consultantThe information contained in this podcast is not intended to be taken as legal advice. The information provided by Fuicelli & Lee is intended to provide general information regarding comprehensive injury and accident attorney services for clients in the state of Colorado.

Every case has facts that weaken a client’s position. But by showing their hand to the jury early on, a lawyer can build trust and credibility as part of a winning strategy. In this episode of Colorado Trial Lawyer Connection, Ed Lomena joins Keith Fuicelli to discuss a recent verdict on a rear-end collision case involving a likable client whose case had significant problems related to treatment and property damage. Ed explains how he was able to work around these issues and turn a $5,000 insurance offer into a $980,000 verdict in the conservative venue of Colorado Springs. Learn More and Connect with Colorado Trial Lawyers☑️ Ed Lomena | LinkedIn☑️ McDivitt Law Firm ☑️ McDivitt Law Firm on Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, & LinkedIn☑️ Keith Fuicelli | LinkedIn☑️ Fuicelli & Lee Injury Lawyers Website☑️ Fuicelli & Lee Injury Lawyers on Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, YouTube & LinkedIn☑️ Subscribe Apple Podcasts | Spotify | Google Podcasts | YouTubeEpisode SnapshotWhy preparing a client for the courtroom pays dividends at trialTrying–and winning–a case with almost no property damage and treatment gapsThe simple approach that helped turn a $5,000 insurance offer into a $980,000 verdictGetting to know a client and the “trial by human” approachIcebreakers and the Socratic method in jury selectionOvercoming bad facts with good strategyWays to poke holes in an expert’s calculations for a low speed collisionHow a single witness can change the tone of a caseThe information contained in this podcast is not intended to be taken as legal advice. The information provided by Fuicelli & Lee is intended to provide general information regarding comprehensive injury and accident attorney services for clients in the state of Colorado.

When you practice personal injury law, you have clients on pain medication all the time. But how often as lawyers do we ask: Is my client addicted? Do we have a problem? In this episode of Colorado Trial Lawyer Connection, Keith Fuicelli is joined by attorneys Alana Anzalone and Jerry Bowman. Alana and Jerry share their success story in a challenging motorcycle versus car collision case involving their client, Harrison Rick. They discuss how they tackled adverse facts, identified bias during voir dire, and bolstered their credibility through their opening statement. The episode highlights the importance of connecting with clients and addressing addiction issues in personal injury cases.Learn More and Connect with Colorado Trial Lawyers☑️ Alana Anzalone | LinkedIn☑️ Anzalone Law Offices, LLC☑️ Anzalone Law Offices, LLC  on Facebook | Instagram☑️ Jerry Bowman | LinkedIn☑️ Bowman Law, LLC☑️ Bowman Law, LLC on Facebook | LinkedIn ☑️ Keith Fuicelli | LinkedIn☑️ Fuicelli & Lee Injury Lawyers Website☑️ Fuicelli & Lee Injury Lawyers on Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, YouTube & LinkedIn☑️ Subscribe Apple Podcasts | Spotify | Google Podcasts | YouTubeEpisode SnapshotAddressing bad facts in voir direHow the client’s subsequent crashes and addiction to Oxy impacted the caseAn addiction specialist provides testimony to mitigate problematic factsUncovering bias in voir direHow to enhance your credibility through your opening statementWhy attorneys need to get to know the client they are fighting forThe information contained in this podcast is not intended to be taken as legal advice. The information provided by Fuicelli & Lee is intended to provide general information regarding comprehensive injury and accident attorney services for clients in the state of Colorado.

Pedestrian versus car at an intersection—It’s he said, she said, unless you have the video footage. However, you may not get the tape that easily. Be prepared to put in the work to investigate.In this episode of Colorado Trial Lawyer Connection, Keith Fuicelli is joined by attorneys Dan D’Angelo and Tyrone Glover who recently won an almost $3 million verdict in Denver District Court for their client who was hit in a crosswalk by a car and suffered a mild traumatic brain injury. Tune in as Dan and Tyrone talk about how they approached investigating the case, the importance of the vestibular component of a TBI case, and how to conduct voir dire to make sure you have the most receptive jury to hear your case.Learn More and Connect with Colorado Trial Lawyers☑️ Dan D’Angelo | LinkedIn ☑️ D’Angelo Law Office, P.C. Website☑️ D’Angelo Law Office, P.C. on Facebook☑️ Tyrone Glover | LinkedIn ☑️ Tyrone Glover Law, LLC Website☑️ Keith Fuicelli | LinkedIn☑️ Fuicelli & Lee Injury Lawyers Website☑️ Fuicelli & Lee Injury Lawyers on Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, YouTube & LinkedIn☑️ Subscribe Apple Podcasts | Spotify | Google Podcasts | YouTubeEpisode SnapshotGetting to know Dan D’Angelo and Tyrone GloverInvestigate early in the case or risk losing evidenceThings that can be missed by doctors in a TBI caseUsing bad facts to your advantage in jury selectionThe information contained in this podcast is not intended to be taken as legal advice. The information provided by Fuicelli & Lee is intended to provide general information regarding comprehensive injury and accident attorney services for clients in the state of Colorado.

Connecting with the jury is one of the most important parts of being a trial lawyer. Personal injury lawyers Kevin Cheney and Tim Galluzzi would know, as they’ve done 10 jury trials in the past 2 years. Tune in to Colorado Trial Lawyer Connection as Keith Fuicelli welcomes Kevin and Tim to the show. From starting their own practice shortly after law school, to leveraging the concept of “anchoring” in voir dire, both guests share strategies and tactics for connecting with the jury that you won’t want to miss.Learn More and Connect with Colorado Trial Lawyers☑️ Kevin Cheney | LinkedIn☑️ Tim Galluzzi | LinkedIn☑️ Cheney, Galluzzi, & Howard☑️ Keith Fuicelli | LinkedIn☑️ Fuicelli & Lee Injury Lawyers Website☑️ Fuicelli & Lee Injury Lawyers on Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, YouTube & LinkedIn☑️ Subscribe Apple Podcasts | Spotify | Google Podcasts | YouTubeEpisode SnapshotGetting to know Kevin Cheney and Tim GalluzziWhy you need to treat your law firm like a businessLeveraging the concept of “anchoring” in voir direWhy it is critical to remind the jurors of the permanency of the injury in closingThe information contained in this podcast is not intended to be taken as legal advice. The information provided by Fuicelli & Lee is intended to provide general information regarding comprehensive injury and accident attorney services for clients in the state of Colorado.

Two Question Verdict Form. $2.4 Million Verdict. Federal Court.Tune in to Colorado Trial Lawyer Connection as Keith Fuicelli welcomes Denver Personal Injury Attorneys Laura Browne and Sean Dormer to the show. Laura and Sean discuss how they won $2.4 million for their client against State Farm after submitting a two question verdict form with zero elements stated about their claims.  Learn More and Connect with Colorado Trial Lawyers☑️ Laura Browne | LinkedIn☑️ Sean Dormer | LinkedIn☑️ Dormer Harpring, LLC Website☑️ Keith Fuicelli | LinkedIn☑️ Fuicelli & Lee Injury Lawyers Website☑️ Fuicelli & Lee Injury Lawyers on Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, YouTube & LinkedIn☑️ Subscribe Apple Podcasts | Spotify | Google Podcasts | YouTubeEpisode SnapshotWho are Laura Browne and Sean Dormer?Procedural posture of their $2.4 million case against State Farm Sean’s tactics during voir dire in this caseLaura’s opening statement for the case Sean’s closing statement for the case The reasons for using an IME doctorHaving the client’s family as witnesses How they would argue impairment differently versus how they did in this case. The information contained in this podcast is not intended to be taken as legal advice. The information provided by Fuicelli & Lee is intended to provide general information regarding comprehensive injury and accident attorney services for clients in the state of Colorado.

Amidst the chaos of a jury trial, mindfulness and calmness are the pivotal keys to communication and success in the courtroom.On this inaugural episode of Colorado Trial Lawyer Connection, Keith Fuicelli welcomes acclaimed Colorado truck accident attorney, Peter Anderson, to the show. Keith and Peter discuss how Peter’s spirituality plays into his courtroom success, the strategies he uses in voir dire, and how to get stories that resonate from harm witnesses.Learn More and Connect with Colorado Trial Lawyers☑️ Peter Anderson | Law Offices of Peter M. Anderson | LinkedIn☑️ Keith Fuicelli | LinkedIn☑️ Fuicelli & Lee Injury Lawyers Website☑️ Fuicelli & Lee Injury Lawyers on Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, YouTube & LinkedIn☑️ Subscribe Apple Podcasts | Spotify | Google Podcasts | YouTubeEpisode SnapshotWho is Peter Anderson?How Peter’s spirituality plays into what he does in the courtroom.Tactics Peter uses in voir dire.Why Peter uses a personality test at the end of voir dire.Discussion of trucking case #1: Manny v. Swift where Peter won a $5 Million verdict on a connective tissue injury.How to get harm witnesses to tell stories that give goosebumps.How to use props in trial.Discussion of trucking case #2: Sanchez v. DirectTV.The information contained in this podcast is not intended to be taken as legal advice. The information provided by Fuicelli & Lee is intended to provide general information regarding comprehensive injury and accident attorney services for clients in the state of Colorado.

The pursuit of justice starts here.Join host Keith Fuicelli as we uncover the stories, strategies, and lessons from Colorado trial lawyers to help you and your clients achieve justice in the courtroom.Our goal is to bridge the gap between theory and practice, connecting you to the proven strategies that work, from the state’s most accomplished litigators to sharpen your own skills in the pursuit of justice.If this podcast is bringing value to your practice, be sure to subscribe and join us on every episode as we dissect real cases, learn from Colorado's top trial lawyers, and empower our legal community to reach greater heights of success. Keep your connection to Colorado’s best trial lawyers alive at www.TheCTLC.comReady to refer or collaborate on a case? The personal injury attorneys at Fuicelli & Lee can help. Visit our attorney referral page at TheCTLC.com/Refer or call our Denver office at (303) 355-7202.Fuicelli & Lee is a personal injury law firm dedicated to representing clients across Colorado who have suffered catastrophic injuries due to someone’s reckless or careless actions. Our top areas of focus include: car accidents, brain injury/TBI, truck accidents, motorcycle accidents, wrongful death claims, pedestrian accidents, bicycle accidents, drunk driving accidents, dog bites, construction accidents, slip & fall/premises liability, and product liability.The information contained in this podcast is not intended to be taken as legal advice. The information provided by Fuicelli & Lee is intended to provide general information regarding comprehensive injury and accident attorney services for clients in the state of Colorado.