Tulsa Lawyer Ashley Leavitt and Her Love/Hate Relationship with Opening Statement Virtual Focus Groups
Learn how to revolutionize your trial strategy with the wisdom of Tulsa attorney Ashley Leavitt. Ashley joins me in this episode to discuss virtual focus groups, which are shaping the way lawyers prepare for trial. Our conversation explores the nuanced ways in which these online platforms are not just convenient but also powerful tools for eliciting unguarded insights from participants.
We talk candidly about the edge virtual groups give – from capturing subtle emotional cues to the ability to analyze reactions and discussions at leisure – ensuring no vital piece of feedback is overlooked. Ashley and I traverse the landscape of legal preparation, sharing personal stories of how virtual focus groups have helped refine courtroom approach. From the challenge of simplifying complex information to the strategic selection of evidence and the artful use of visuals, we dissect the elements that can make or break a case in the eyes of a jury. We delve into the psychology behind certain words and the unexpected power they wield, revealing how even the title “engineer” can sway perceptions.
This episode is an essential listen for those eager to adapt and thrive in the ever-evolving arena of trial law. Join us for a session brimming with strategic insights and heartfelt revelations that promise to enhance not only your legal prowess but also your client relationships.
In this episode, you will hear:
- Comparing virtual and in-person focus groups’ benefits
- Simplifying complex data and strategic evidence selection for juries
- Impact of terminology and visuals on jury perceptions
- Case study: roof damage claims and virtual focus groups
- Managing client expectations using focus group feedback
- Enhancing legal approach and client relations via online jury analysis
Follow and Review:
We’d love for you to follow us if you haven’t yet. Click that purple ‘+’ in the top right corner of your Apple Podcasts app. We’d love it even more if you could drop a review or 5-star rating over on Apple Podcasts. Simply select “Ratings and Reviews” and “Write a Review” then a quick line with your favorite part of the episode. It only takes a second and it helps spread the word about the podcast.
Supporting Resources:
To learn more about Ashley Leavitt please visit: https://www.kollertriallaw.com/
If you need to reach Ashley for help with a first part insurance claim in Oklahoma, please email her directly at: Ashley@kollertriallaw.com
Want to learn more inside tips and tricks for focus groups? Sign up for Elizabeth’s monthly email list by visiting: www.larricklawfirm.com/connect
Episode Credits:
If you like this podcast and are thinking of creating your own, consider talking to my producer, Emerald City Productions. They helped me grow and produce the podcast you are listening to right now. Find out more at https://emeraldcitypro.com Let them know I sent you.
Episode Transcript:
Elizabeth Larrick: Hi there, Elizabeth here. I wanted to pop in very quickly and give you a quick background on our guest, Ashley Leavitt.
She is a lawyer out of Tulsa, Oklahoma. She works with Kohler trial lawyer who they now have offices also in Oklahoma city. You do personal injury [00:01:00] and first party insurance claims. If you want to reach out to Ashley, her information and link will be in the show notes. Hope you enjoy. Hello, and podcast trial lawyer prep.
I’m your host, Elizabeth Laird, and today’s episode, I’ve got a fun guest to come talk about virtual focus groups and opening statements. And we actually, Leavitt and I have done many virtual focus groups together. So she is going to be super helpful to talk to us about her experience. And then we will walk through kind of a case example for a format that we do together.
But Ashley, welcome to the podcast. Thank you so much. I appreciate you having me. Zooming all the way from Tulsa, Oklahoma. That’s right. One of the nice benefits of doing virtual, right? You just pop on and get one done with some Oklahoma folks and then move on with, with your day. Yes.
Ashley Leavitt: And despite the weather, [00:02:00] it might be cold where I’m at or warm depending, but.
Today it’s nice.
Elizabeth Larrick: Yes, and typically what I always tell people when I, you know, checking in with my guests in Montana, wherever they’re from, like, okay, what’s the weather like? But I know springtime, because this is when we’re recording this, is like the most hectic time, I would say, for Oklahoma weather.
Ashley Leavitt: Yes, yes, we are in the midst of truly spring, where it can be all four seasons in one day, and your allergies are going crazy.
Elizabeth Larrick: And possibly a tornado, maybe, maybe not. I remember my time of living there just thinking like, Oh, it’s always such a treacherous time, but it is nice when it warms up. So, and it’s even busier for you right now because you guys are doing a lot of property claims,
Ashley Leavitt: right? Yes. And with the way that insurance companies like to set up their statute of limitations, we have about a year before we get an influx of claims.
I can write down, Oh, there was hail today. And a year from now, I’m going to be busily drafting petitions.
Elizabeth Larrick: Yes. So anyone [00:03:00] listening in Oklahoma, you have family in Oklahoma and go through a storm. Remember Ashley or contacts me in the show notes and that one year statute, because that is, I know it’s different all over the place.
So good already piece of good nugget to tell us. So let’s talk about what you’re here to talk about, which is virtual focus groups. So just from off the bat, like You’ve done in person before, doing virtual. What do you like? What are the pros and cons for
Ashley Leavitt: you? I definitely, the first thing off the bat from going from in person focus groups to virtual is the need for less icebreakers.
People come in to a in person focus group and they all don’t really want to talk. They’re not really sure about it. It’s, you know, in a lawyer’s office or somewhere else that they feel might be kind of fancy. And so it just takes a little while to get people talking. And the first case that is up or discussion that starts, I don’t feel like you get quite the same amount as the last one of the day.
But virtual people are appearing [00:04:00] from the comfort of their own home and they’re not face to face with someone. And I just don’t even notice the need for an icebreaker. They just kind of pop in and they’re ready to talk. That’s what they’re there for.
Elizabeth Larrick: Yep, absolutely. And they don’t have to go anywhere, which always like lately, that’s what I’ve hearing from my participants.
It’s like, please don’t make me get in a car and drive somewhere. And, you know, we were talking a little bit before we started. One of the things too, that. You pointed out that I love to also point out to people is like you get such great facial recordings of every single person.
Ashley Leavitt: Yes, every person is sitting in front, square in front of a camera.
So there’s a camera directly on their face and you can have in your in person focus groups, you could have multiple angles of cameras. You’ll be hard pressed to put a camera in front of every single person’s face. They’re sitting in the same room as the other participants. And so they’re less likely to use body language.
You know, when we have the virtual focus group and one person is talking, you’ll [00:05:00] actively see other people shaking their heads or nodding along in agreement. I don’t feel like that really happens in the same room very often.
Elizabeth Larrick: From a, from a, like a moderator perspective or like just observing the focus group perspective, you can’t even catch that with your eye.
But when everyone’s in a Brady Bunch box, like it’s so much easier for eye to catch, like, shoot, they’re agreeing with that. Let me go over there then and ask like, yeah, I saw you nodding along. It’s much easier to see some of those little. Even just the slightest amount of body language.
Ashley Leavitt: Exactly. And I found that when I was trying to take notes about what certain people were making reactions to, I’d scribble down, you know, Elizabeth rolled her eyes.
Well, at what? I don’t remember anymore. And I am less focused on trying to take notes when I know that this is all being recorded and I can see it again, I’m going to be able to rewind it and notice that. And. I’m able to really fully just be a observer during the virtual focus group [00:06:00] knowing that I’m, I’m going to have an opportunity to see it again if I want to, but I get to watch it unfold as opposed to trying to take notes.
Elizabeth Larrick: That’s such a huge point. I mean, I just like, it’s such a huge point. Tell me a little bit like what you get out of just being able to sit and observe it unfold.
Ashley Leavitt: Well, so again, it’s not so much that you’re trying to note, okay, this person shook their head or this person. Exhaled when I said this or, or whatever, you know, I really got to focus on my delivery of my opening statement, as opposed to, you know, checking in, how am I doing?
Do I need to adjust? I’m really just delivering it the way that I want to knowing that I’m going to get to watch the reactions back and not worried about that. Not trying to make a note, not trying to make. necessarily adjustments in that moment, because I’ll be able to see how they react to me later.
Elizabeth Larrick: You know, it goes down to the basic things, you know, our brains really can only do one thing at a time. And if you are so honed in on taking a note about something, you are going to miss what you just said, the unfolding. Because [00:07:00] being able to watch Everybody, especially with virtual, their faces and just be able to just take it all in and process it and then listen to everybody really intently is such a, like, it’s a great thing to do on the first go round, because what I find is then when I go to the second go around, or when I just read the transcript, like, Oh, like it comes so much full circle in your mind and you get so much out of it because you’re going to get You know, ideas are going to be flowing when people are like, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa.
And sometimes it’s just better to write down the idea than it is to be like, you know, Fred said yes to, you know, question one, like it’s going to be, Oh wow. What about that idea? And then that idea, cause that’s really where, cause that may never come back. That’s true. The
Ashley Leavitt: idea may never come back. And the point you just made with the transcript, you don’t, nobody’s typing up a transcript when you do it live.
And so the transcript comes through, which is fantastic. And it eliminates so much need for, for you to try and take [00:08:00] notes that you can really just sit there and watch. And, and I, I mean, I will sit here with a paralegal and we’ll be like this one, this one gets it. She gets it. She’s with us. Just wait. When she starts talking, she’s going to be with us and then, you know, see what she says.
So it just makes it a lot more fun as opposed to, you know, just scrambling to try and get the most out of it that you can. I mean, a lot out of it because you can always refer back to it.
Elizabeth Larrick: Yeah. Yeah. And I will say also, I mean, the way that y’all do them, Ashley’s partner is Lori Kohler. When we do them in these smaller time fragments, either an hour, an hour and a half, or sometimes two hours, like that’s so manageable for you to go back and watch it, even if you speed it up.
Yes. You know, it’s so much manageable for you to be able to go back and rewatch it. Right.
Ashley Leavitt: Yeah. Yeah. Even if you fast forward through some people that you’re like. I wasn’t a big fan of this one, so we’ll just skip forward about a minute, you know, let her not talk anymore.
Elizabeth Larrick: Yes. [00:09:00] Yes. Well, and that’s, I will tell you, truthfully, that’s one of the reasons why I like whenever we do a focus group together, I always ask for feedback.
And, you know, we have these forms that people give feedback on. And Ashley’s feedback on one of the forms was that she didn’t like the focus group. So I was like, oh, okay, well, we got to go back in and talk about this. So, and it was an opening statement focus group. So tell us, you know, in a very general, what were a little bit of the facts about the case and then how come you guys were ready to do an opening focus group?
Ashley Leavitt: Uh, so the facts of this case, pretty standard for us. Half of our practice is suing insurance companies directly for breach of contract and the breach of the duty of good faith and fair dealing after they’ve refused to replace a roof and other damaged property after hail and wind storms. That’s just pretty general.
Everyone has different facts, but in general, they’re all the same in that sense. So this particular case, I was so excited about, and I had been working on it for about a year. [00:10:00] and really developing that there was all these really bad faith facts there. Most of the time I want to make arguments for bad faith and courts shut me down consistently, but this one I just knew.
We were in state court so our standard was better off and I had all of these just bizarre facts, but I just, I loved this case and I loved telling people about it. So we were coming up on a trial date. I was supposed to try that case in January of 2024. And this was, I think we did our first opening statement in November of 2023 on this case.
So it was coming up about two months away. I was really excited about it. I made a, a PowerPoint that I was going to potentially use at trial because I knew it was fact heavy and I wanted to give a visual so that they could follow along. Well, I told this focus group every single bad faith fact that I had, [00:11:00] I told it in order, this is what happened.
And then this was what happened. And then can you believe that they determined through their engineer that birds ate the roof. And, you know, I just kept building on all of these crazy facts, and I end, I sit back, and I’m watching, and they had no idea what I said. The only thing that they remembered was the very first inspector didn’t get on the roof.
He just leaned the ladder up against the house, and climbed to the top of the ladder, and pointed his camera up over the roof. The eaves and took pictures that way. He didn’t get on the roof. And I was like, but you didn’t, you didn’t remember that the birds ate the roof. You didn’t remember, you know, all of these other crazy, interesting, like slap yourself in the forehead facts that I thought, you know, I, for sure, I’m going to get this huge verdict.
So basically they were like, no, you’re a dork. We don’t understand why you’re so excited about this. And I don’t [00:12:00] follow it. So frustrating. Hence the review.
I tried, you know, I tried very hard not to, that was not a google review where it was public. I
Elizabeth Larrick: know. Well, no, no, no, of course not. It’s internal. But I was just like, oh, okay, well, but then I realized like when we, so, you know, naturally we run the focus, you know,
And it’s all these other facts, but there’s, you know, there’s a good level of confusion and it really came down to, okay, you had some visuals, but we need some other visuals to kind of give them more, like more perspective and, and ideas. And we got some really good things, but from that focus group, but I think also it was just a little bit like, You
Ashley Leavitt: really interpreted it well for me because I was just so defeated about it and got my feelings hurt, really, if I’m being honest, that they weren’t on the same page as me and they didn’t see it like I saw it.
And so I [00:13:00] had a hard time coming up with, well, I, I just, you know, Don’t know what I could do better. And you were like, well, here, let’s try this. And so you started me on this path and you pointed out different things that different people said that led to that. And so I was able to make a lot of changes and I really just tried to simplify it, even though there was a whole bunch of juicy facts that were going to come out later during the trial.
We just decided it wasn’t best in an opening statement because it just left them so confused.
Elizabeth Larrick: Right. And one of the things I think that really kind of stood out that a lot of lawyers come to find out about is how powerful is the other expert. And we found out like just by dropping the word engineer, ooh, okay, there’s a lot of power behind that, you know, and you just made a really good point too, which is, selecting the facts for opening versus waiting for, you know, later development when you have more time and more like cross exam, like that kind of stuff, which again, I still though, feel like we came back and tested him again.
Like, okay, [00:14:00] let’s put them back in there because he’s the big, you know, one of the biggest things they rely on. And so you, you did, you refashion it and came back, but we, like I said, we did hear some really good things, but we also disappointed, but. And I think what also to give kind of, you know, people listening a perspective of this whole, one of the biggest facts that we heard from nearly every participant was about like how crazy it was that the very first person who showed up to look at the house never got on it.
Well, this was a 4, 000 square foot roof y’all. We’re not talking about like, you know, small residential home. This was a big home and they had that house and they had two other outbuildings, large outbuildings again. And so to them, they just were like, wait a second, what? So helpful to know, like, okay, this is a juicy fact.
Like you didn’t think it’s so juicy. Let’s give it back to them. So that was a big one. And then also again, kind of the visual concept of, and then the learning piece. Because that’s the other thing, too, is, you know, when people are so confused, you’re like, okay, [00:15:00] do I need to simplify or are they just lost because they don’t know how a shingle roof works?
It was a little both.
Ashley Leavitt: Right. That’s exactly it. And I think, well, I’m not a roofer, but I have been working these types of cases for about three years. And so I tell everyone at this point, I could be a supervisor at least. Oh yeah. Joke because I can’t get on the roof. I’m too scared of heights. But you know, it was just interesting to really focus on the one thing that they kept going back to, which was the first bad faith fact I gave them.
He didn’t even get on the roof. I see that all the time in a lot of claims. And I just have been numbed to that fact, but it stood out to them. And so I leaned on that in the second round.
Elizabeth Larrick: And I think we also had people like we were kind of missing like you had the facts like you had this kind of juicy story where it’s like they were disbelieving the client but the client had literally visual video and [00:16:00] footage documented like Can’t dispute, like we couldn’t make this up kind of stuff.
And that was such a like, Ooh, okay. We know we have this thing and they kind of hit on it, but it was like, okay, we’re still not aligning this in a way where it’s just like, wow, like how could they say, and we just had bombarded them with so much stuff. So it was like, okay, let’s come back and try it again.
And so you came back for the second one. And what’d you do to prepare for, for the second virtual focus group?
Ashley Leavitt: I cut a lot. I cut just a lot of facts out and I remember there was something to do with, you know, to me, these big holes on the shingle roof. It’s clearly hail damage, clearly, based on the video that we have showing the hail pelting down at this residence on the day in question.
And That first focus group was like, but is that it? I don’t know what hail damage looks like. I’m like, really? Like you don’t just assume that that’s hail damage. What do you think it would be? And so we did some more explanation [00:17:00] of roofing procedures and how many hail hits per test square it takes to total a roof.
And we put a visual up there for them to understand. And it didn’t even seem like an issue at all in for the second group.
Elizabeth Larrick: One of the things too that I think we forgot to talk about that you made sure to mention was people were had this impression that like if it is damaged, therefore it leaks like that was what they were looking for.
So if they hadn’t replaced it had been so long, is it leaking? And so it was like, okay, put that in your opening. And I remember you made sure to talk about how they would not have net that. Do you put that in there? Like they couldn’t have known it was leaking because the way the roof was made with some seal stuff or something.
Ashley Leavitt: Right. And that’s part of the insurance company’s denial was this cosmetic damage exclusion saying that if it were to be damaged in order for it to be covered, there would have to be leaks. But this particular house had 12 inch spray foam insulation underneath [00:18:00] the roof. So for my clients to know that they had a leak, that water would have to penetrate through 12 inches of insulation.
It was, and I will tell you since then, the case has resolved. The clients have a new roof and they had to redo all of that insulation as well because it’s moldy, just like we expected. But, you know, without getting in there and destroying things, we couldn’t prove that. And you’re asking our clients now to cut a hole in their roof to prove that they need a new roof.
That’s just crazy. But having that, I don’t even think I had to put a picture of the spray foam insulation into the side, just telling them how it was made just made the difference for them. I just don’t feel like it was a, an issue at all. I don’t remember it being an issue at all for the second group.
Elizabeth Larrick: It wasn’t. Yeah. And I think because we had one of things, of course, was like, you know, how would you know? And what questions do you have? And like, we made sure and kind of, okay, this is a big one. Multiple people are asking this. So that was definitely something that you put in there. So refashioned it, put some more emphasis on the, on the roofs of things, answer some [00:19:00] questions.
How did you feel like the second virtual focus group went?
Ashley Leavitt: The second one was good for my ego. It gave me that little confidence that I needed when the mediator came calling and said, Hey, they’re wanting to talk more settlement again. And so it was a nice confidence booster before trial. I mean, we were, I think, a week and a half from trial by the time we settled.
Maybe even less. So I thought I was going and when the case settled, I was heartbroken, but it needed to happen.
Elizabeth Larrick: Yeah. Well, and I think even after your second one, you know, you got good feedback again, and then I think we still said, okay, this is still a thing with the engineer. Like this is still a thing that’s just not really coming through all the way.
It needs more development. Let’s, you know, make sure and put that. In cross exam, but you know, put it in there as some, you know, some kind of excuse fashion,
Ashley Leavitt: right? Yeah, I did learn that [00:20:00] I did not have an engineer on this case and they did and I didn’t feel at the beginning of the case that I needed one because the engineers conclusion was because there was bird poop on the roof.
within two inches of a hole in the roof that therefore birds were eating the roof because they burrow from the ridge of a roof down, which is ridiculous. And I just thought everyone would understand that and that this engineer meant nothing. But I found out that Just because he’s an engineer. He holds some weight.
So that was interesting and disheartening, but I’m definitely moving forward with that information on every other case that I have to engineer something ridiculous. Yeah, that it’s going to repeat itself. Right, exactly. And that’s what’s really nice about these, these focus groups too, is even though that was specific to that one case, like I said at the beginning, all of our cases are pretty similar.
They’re all [00:21:00] denied roof replacements from insurance companies because of weather related events.
Elizabeth Larrick: Right. And I think the other thing too, that you guys were testing in both of them were kind of the fraud aspect, because, you know, that’s, that’s always an underlying theme for, for the, for the insurance company.
And it’s, you know, as we saw in both groups, there were people who were just like, well, there’s a lot of people out there who, you know, just want a new roof. So it’s, it’s fraud. And it was just like, okay, well, you know, here’s all the things that, and I think by the time you got to the second one, like, here’s all the things they did to.
You know, follow the rules to show the damage and still were, you know,
Ashley Leavitt: I completely forgot about that. So the first focus group on this particular case, they had a prior claim within a year before this incident. And they had gotten a new roof the day of the storm. The day that this, or actually it was the day, yeah, day before the storm happened.
They had a new roof on one of the three buildings. And then [00:22:00] the storm happens and they deny the claim again. So their first claim with this insurance company was denied. Eventually they paid it, but it was, it turned it into this dramatic thing where they ended up having to do a lot more repairs because of the spray foam insulation issue.
And so. When they made the second claim, they were really not expecting their insurance company to do the right thing because they’d already had this previous experience. And I, as an attorney, am going, that’s pattern in Practice . That’s bad faith. And, and the first focus group hated it because they decided that my clients were litigious and just constantly making claims and wanting new roofs and that wasn’t it at all.
And so even though I felt like it was a huge. You know, point that I could make in my bad faith claim, we decided to completely forego it and we did not talk about the prior claim at all. And that was my intention going into trial. We were not going to bring up the prior claim at all, even though the same adjuster that adjusted the second one had [00:23:00] adjusted the first claim.
We just decided to scrap it all together. That was a huge part of what I thought my claims were going to be. But it really made the difference. It really did.
Elizabeth Larrick: Yeah, there weren’t as many people. I think y’all know there’s always going to be somebody in the crowd who says, oh, there’s a, you know, but that particular fact was like, oh, they’ve already had a clean before.
Like, oh, you know, and also I think one of the things too, from the first to the second one was we had a lot of people in the first one say, well, I mean, how old was the roof? Because if it’s an older roof, they should just go ahead and replace it. But if it’s brand new, well, they used me trying to get a new roof.
So in the second one, you made sure and said, okay, here’s a picture of the, you know, beautiful home with the roof and it was built in this year. And like, but yeah, completely left out the other flame altogether.
Ashley Leavitt: That’s probably the biggest thing I learned from that focus group. And here I am a couple months out and I’d already forgotten.
Elizabeth Larrick: No, you’re fine. And that’s kind of how you like, you know, kind of comes back to you as well. Cause [00:24:00] there were other facts that were in the first one where it was like, because we wanted to see like, what is it that they need to kind of. Not bolster them, but what’s something they can lean on is like, we’re doing our job, we’re telling insurance everything, and they had hired their own private adjuster.
And I want to say, I don’t know if we talked, like, I think we dropped it in there, but that concept alone was just like, what? Like, mind blown. We don’t know what this is.
Ashley Leavitt: Right. That no one from the insurance company, no one who was directly employed from the insurance company ever went to the property to inspect.
There were. Three different inspections in that one. And it was a third party adjuster. Then it was a, just somebody hired to take photos and then it was an engineer and none of them were employed by the insurance company. And again, that is common. So for me, I’m working these cases for three years and being around dozens and dozens, if not hundreds, that’s so common, but [00:25:00] people did not like that.
Elizabeth Larrick: Yeah. And they just didn’t know. I mean, that’s. You know, I think people who had a lot of experience. Kind of new, but I mean, it’s just one of those things that we take for face value of like someone shows up at your house with, you know, ex insurance company, you’re like, okay, here, like, you know, we just assume that you’re, you know, employed by them, but they’re just not at all.
So, I mean, it was definitely lots of really good feedback. And then again, being able to do them back to back. And we didn’t like you put in, you know, here’s what the defense is going to say. And then, you know, we try to do some questions about it, but we, you know, we didn’t put a defense opening in there because didn’t really need one for the purposes of what you guys were doing, because it was like, okay, keep testing, keep testing.
Cause even after that second one, you know, we talked about, okay, how could you then tweak and change and refashion it to get it ready. So even though I know you settled, did you feel like the opening statement was pretty well set?
Ashley Leavitt: Yes, absolutely. I felt like after the second [00:26:00] one, I sat there and I watched them all talk about how great my case was and how I was probably going to get such a high verdict.
And I just I was nodding along and they’re telling me what they found most egregious. And it was just kind of a check, check, check, check. Now I feel really good about where we’re at. And then once you have your opening, it’s everything else just falls in, in line. So I did, I felt very prepared to go to trial after that.
Elizabeth Larrick: How did you feel about the numbers? Cause I know the numbers were a little bit like different than what people would normally expect for, for Ruth claims.
Ashley Leavitt: So they did have a little bit of an issue with my contractor numbers. Because I had a public adjuster and I had a contractor and the numbers are different, but I didn’t even put it in.
I don’t think I put in the public adjuster number on the second and they were picking apart my contractor number because it was an extremely high amount. Like [00:27:00] you said before, it’s a 4, 000 square foot home plus two. And that was an asphalt shingle. And that was two. Outbuildings that were metal roofed.
And so the total that I had, which was actually an old estimate that I showed them was like 123, 000. And that’s the actual damages. And so we’re asking for more than that. And these people just couldn’t fathom that that’s how much a roof cost. And I, I mean, that was a real estimate. That’s the real quote of what it would have cost at the time it was written.
That was a little bit scary to get past, but then in the end, I think all of them. You know, said more than what the, the estimate was.
Elizabeth Larrick: We’re frantically talking, you know, texting to each other. Cause I was like, what, it was all this included. And so I think once they understood like, okay, it’s roost, but it’s also the trim pieces and drains and guttering and garage doors and all these, all the, they’re like, oh, okay, well that, that made them feel a little better.
Yes. [00:28:00]
Ashley Leavitt: The hot tub cover. Oh my goodness. The video was of the hail pelting the hot tub cover and the insurance company waited until two years after the claim to pay for that. So yeah, it was,
Elizabeth Larrick: I mean, and we talked about, okay, like how can we, of course, you know, a jury in Oklahoma is going to understand this so much more because they’re all going to have experienced.
having gone through a hailstorm, but then at least their cars or, you know, some kind of damage, but the size difference between what he had in it, in his hand, in that picture versus what, you know, the engineer said hit their house. Like it was such a drastic difference, but you couldn’t convey that verbally.
Like you, I was like, okay, you’re going to have to get something. Hobby lobby or something to show them like, this is what we’re, you know, so lots of good ideas, but overall, like, what was your kind of big takeaways from kind of doing both of the virtual focus groups for this case?
Ashley Leavitt: My big takeaway on this was that focus groups are [00:29:00] so necessary because I thought that I had.
this case in the bag. I thought I understand these facts forwards and backwards and I’ve been living and breathing this case and been so excited about it and I don’t need to refer to my notes at all. I can talk about this case ad nauseum and that is not what’s going to get a jury to understand the claim.
And so if I hadn’t had that experience, I would have Well, I certainly would have gone to a jury and given an opening statement in a different way that a jury probably was not going to follow. So even though I had thought it was really simplified and that a jury was going to just follow along with me, that I was going to be leading them down the path, they just were not as excited as I was and they didn’t get on board.
So I had to make it a whole lot easier in order to get them on board. And part of that was cutting out things that I thought were really important, that my clients thought were really important and having that conversation with [00:30:00] them in preparation for trial, like this is what we have to do. So really as cliche it is to say it, focus groups are so necessary because we just live and breathe this.
All day long and think that everybody’s going to be with us, but we have to remind ourselves that of where we were or where the average person is not knowing anything about these types of claims or the legal implications or conclusions or anything else that goes along with the claim, like we’ve got to take it back to a baseline knowledge and give them breadcrumbs so that they can follow along.
Elizabeth Larrick: Yeah, exactly. I’m curious, did you, like, did you talk to your clients about the feedback? I did.
Ashley Leavitt: I did. My clients are, those particular clients were more involved than the average client, I would say. They’re self described gamblers. And most of my clients do not want to go to trial. Like, that is the ultimate, like, nope, I would rather settle for less than what this claim is worth than go to trial.
Not these clients [00:31:00] at all. They actually had experienced a jury trial before, years before for a different issue, not because they’re litigious, but they’re just willing to fight the good fight for what is right in their mind. And so they were very much wanting to be involved. They were very much wanting that first claim to be introduced as evidence.
And so I did have to talk to them about the focus group. I told them that I was going to do the focus group before I did it. And then afterwards I talked to them about what I learned and what we were now going to pivot towards for trial. So they were on board with it. Because they, they trusted me and I was able to explain why, but that’s not what they wanted to originally do.
They wanted to talk about the first claim. Yeah,
Elizabeth Larrick: you just nailed it. Like, if you are a lawyer and you’re going to explain the implications of a focus group. Cause I, I’ve got a pretty strong opinion about like not having people watch them live, like never have your, especially like personal [00:32:00] injury clients or even really any client because they can’t really fathom what’s happening other than it feels like a constant personal attack.
Right. They’re really close to the case. When you think we’re close, like, you know, they’re, they’re super close. So like, I love the way you, obviously you always got like, Hey, this is what we’re doing. We, we want to test it with a group of people who. No, nothing about it. Right. These could be potential jurors.
And then going back and saying, okay, here’s what we heard. But here’s what that means for the case. And really, why are they saying it? Right. So being able to really give the full picture because a lot of times people say, well, hey, we folks script your case. They hated it. You know, sorry. We’re going to settle it or you know what I mean?
Like, cause they’re like, well, why? I don’t understand. Like, cause then they’ll still be stuck in their mindset of like, I need that for like, they need to know the injustice that I had. And it’s like, Ooh, actually that fuels the fire for this whole other, like, you know, fraudster thing that we are trying to tamp down that is, could get out of hand and we’d turn around and get, you know, a zero verdict and not [00:33:00] understand.
The jurors have been like, Oh, they’re just fraudsters. Like huge thing to really learn in a focus group and not in
Ashley Leavitt: the courthouse. Exactly. And I did not have my clients watch the video and I didn’t give them quotes or anything just because I didn’t think it was necessary. They understood what I was trying to tell them when I explained it to them.
So I didn’t feel the need to, to share that I’ve never had a client watch a focus group at this point. There may be a time when I need to, but I have enough rapport with my clients that I’m able to tell them, communicate what I learned and how I’m using that. And this is where we’re going because of, of this focus group.
So,
Elizabeth Larrick: so helpful. I mean, cause a lot of people think sometimes we get Excited and sometimes it’s hard to like translate that into like, okay, you know, we had to get this information in, then we had to dissect it and process it and put it into the action plan for the case. And then, you know, if it’s against what the client wants or, you know what I mean, like getting them on board, [00:34:00] they kind of have to go through that process on their, like themselves with the information you give them.
Ashley Leavitt: Right. I had already gotten over my hurt feelings. I didn’t need to coach them through theirs.
Elizabeth Larrick: Oh, that’s funny. Awesome. Well, let me ask you one other question, and I know I want to respect your time, but if there’s somebody out there who’s listening who’s just not really sure whether virtual is the way to go or not, like, what would you tell them?
Ashley Leavitt: I would tell them, especially if they’ve already done a focus group that was live, A virtual one, it’s so much better than the live because the camera on somebody’s face that you get to watch back over and over and over and all of the audio that picks up the transcript that you get, that types it all out for you.
Like all of those things are just compounded on top of, you know, the benefits that you know, that you’ll get from. a live focus group or in person focus group. But if you haven’t done a focus group at all, then you’re missing what the average person thinks about your case. And these, these simple little things that [00:35:00] are like, duh, Ashley, why didn’t you know that?
But I mean, it took a focus group for me to realize those things. So it puts cases into the perspective of a juror, what a juror is going to think about it. And there’s multiple thought processes and you get those. in the focus groups and you get those people arguing with you so it’s a or arguing with themselves each other and you’ll know what deliberations are going to be like
Elizabeth Larrick: even if it is guided i mean and we’ve had some you guys have brought some unusual unusual cases where it’s just been like wow i was not anticipating like this kind of discussion I guess maybe I should have, but I mean, you guys just have some cases that have like several layers to it and it’s hard to know like which layer is going to catch with people and then which way people like with their experience, they’re going to talk about it.
So, right. Yeah. We’ve had some fun ones. Yeah, that’s for
Ashley Leavitt: sure. Ashley, well, thank you so much for joining the [00:36:00] podcast. I really appreciate it. Thank you very much for having me. I hope that I was able to communicate a little bit about why I think it’s so important to have these virtual focus groups. And I appreciate so much your willingness to have me on and to keep dealing with me.
Elizabeth Larrick: With focus groups. In our crazy cases. It is always fun to work with you guys and I always enjoy like, we’ve got a different one. I’m like, okay, let’s do it. Let’s see what they say. So it’s always a good time. So, you know, it’s always helpful just to give your thoughts and feedback and you know, you were disappointed and that’s going to happen.
And like you came back for another round, even though it was disappointing.
Ashley Leavitt: Yes. Yes. I wouldn’t have done that with a lot of people, so I knew, I don’t even fully remember the review that I gave the focus group,
Elizabeth Larrick: but I think it was like on a scale of one to 10 and it was not, it was not, I was like, Oh no, like it was, it was not a personal,
Ashley Leavitt: no, nothing to do with the process, everything to do with my [00:37:00] disappointment in myself, but we fixed it.
So that’s what matters.
Elizabeth Larrick: We did. We did. So awesome. Well, again, thank you so much for coming on the podcast. I know everyone appreciates hearing your experience. Thank you. Awesome. Well, everybody, thank you so much for listening. If you have a property damage claim, Ashley’s contact information is going to be in the show notes, or if you have questions about her experience with virtual focus groups, I know she’d be happy to answer questions as what I, so as you haven’t may have heard.
I do virtual focus groups, so if you are interested in a virtual focus group or are curious about how may help to help your case, just set up a free consultation call. That link will be in the show notes. Otherwise, please like review, follow the podcast on your favorite podcast platform. Until next time, thank [00:38:00] you.