Jason Doucette

[Theme Music Plays]

Jason Doucette: There is this idea that, all you have to do is try a bunch of cases — I don’t think that’s true…  but what I think is really important is to practice… the general contractor lied and said they locked all the energy sources… And he’s like, “No.” And I go, “Didn’t you testify on behalf of Marlboro that nicotine isn’t addictive?” And you could tell the jurors were kind of like, “What?”….

Narrator: Welcome to “Celebrating Justice,” presented by the Trial Lawyers Journal and CloudLex. The next gen legal cloud platform built exclusively for personal injury law. Get inspired by the nation’s top trial lawyers and share in the stories that shape our pursuit of justice. Follow the podcast and join our community at www.triallawyersjournal.com. Now, here’s your host, Editor of TLJ and VP of Marketing at CloudLex, Chad Sands.

Chad Sands: Tell me why you want to become a trial lawyer.

Jason Doucette: Sure. So it was never the plan. I don’t have a great origin story. No one in my family’s lawyers. They don’t really like lawyers. I went to college to pre-med. I didn’t really like the math. Didn’t like the chemistry. Happened to just take an intro to criminal justice class just because it fit in my schedule. I like that more. I remember telling my dad, like, yeah, I don’t think I’m gonna be pre-med anymore, and he’s like … And I go pre-law, and he goes, “That’s good. You don’t really have bedside manner.” I started reading a bunch of Clarence Darrow, closing arguments, books, you name it. I initially went to law school thinking I would do criminal defense, specifically appellate law, because I grew up wrestling and that kind of seems like the intellectual equivalent of wrestling. Then I went to law school. I focused mostly on criminal law. I graduated 2009. Not a great time to graduate from law school. You couldn’t really get a job. And then I eventually found a job at this small personal injury firm, worked there for a while, went to a different firm, and then I felt kind of stagnant. Like I said, I grew up wrestling, competitions, you know, important to me. So I wanted to do something that was more challenging. And that’s when I decided to become a trial attorney.

Chad Sands: I grew up in Montana, big sky country, yeah. And was your d… was your dad like a doctor, or did he just call out your bedside manner ‘cause he… he could s… he could tell you didn’t have it?

Jason Doucette: I did, yes. I don’t… I’m not… I don’t… not saying I agree with that analysis. My dad worked for what eventually became Albertsons. Okay. So really no one in my family really is in the medical field. And my sister now is an occupational therapist, but no one was in the medical field at that point.

Chad Sands: And then you… you went down to Arizona and then made your way back. Did… was that first firm in LA? When did you move to LA?

Jason Doucette: I moved to LA right after I graduated from law school. It was the first firm I worked at was in Long Beach.

Chad Sands: Then you made your way to Wilshire Boulevard eventually?

Jason Doucette: Yes. So I’ve been an attorney now sixteen years, going on seventeen years, and now I work at the Dominguez Firm, which is on Wilshire in Koreatown.

Chad Sands: I lived in LA for about seven years. A lot of advertising billboard attorneys down there, very, very fierce competition. Some maybe say there’s some nefarious activity that goes on with some of those firms down in LA. How do you stand out? What makes you unique as a trial lawyer?

Jason Doucette: I think what I really try to focus on is storytelling. If you sit in a trial, you know, TV makes it look exciting, but I think most trials are incredibly boring. And if you can tell your client’s story in a way that is engaging, then jurors will return verdicts that recognize the full extent of what they’ve lost.

Chad Sands: And did you kind of, obviously, Clarence Darrow was an influence on you early on, but I also saw that you graduated and went to Thunderhead Ranch and the Gerry Spence Method. Can you tell me a little bit about your experience at Thunderhead Ranch?

Jason Doucette: Sure. So growing up in Montana, you know, you always knew a Gerry Spence, and when I went to law school I read his book and he talks about, you know, going to the ranch. So it’s something I always wanted to do. And then they had the split up, or whatever you want to call it, and then the Gerry Spence Method started, and that was the first year I applied. I got in. I mean, I loved it, right? So you’re in this ranch, it’s beautiful, it’s very much more my, where I feel comfortable. You just work on trial skills from, I think, eight o’clock in the morning till nine o’clock at night. For three weeks you have one day off. You don’t have any cell phone reception, you don’t have any TV, internet. So you have nothing but just to focus on. They plan your meals for you, so you don’t have to think about that. And I think it really helps with just thinking on your feet, right? So how it works is you stand up and they say, “Okay, give, give an opening statement,” and you’re like, “I have nothing prepared.” They’re like, “I don’t care, just give an opening statement.” And then you stand up and then you give an opening statement, and then everyone else is like, “Okay, what do you think about that?” And everyone’s like, “It was awful. I don’t know what you were doing.” And when you start doing that, you start to realize you kind of, those barriers that stop you from performing kind of go down, because you just get used to just standing up and doing stuff. And then once you actually have time to prepare for things, you realize how much easier it is than it was before.

Chad Sands: You know, you mentioned your, your wrestling background, and I think that that analogy of a, of an appellate lawyer makes sense, but I also see you’re a jujitsu guy. Can you draw some parallels between trial law work and jujitsu?

Jason Doucette: I think the most important part about both jujitsu and trials is that you have to find a system that is one comprehensive and two fits your style. Right. People have different body types, they have different strengths. So in jiu-jitsu, you have to create a system that plays with that. And you also have to have a system that is comprehensive, right? You can’t just be good at one move and then the person stops that and then you’re kind of stuck. And I think the same is true for trial work is you have to have a system that works for you. It’s not going to be the same system as anyone else. And it has to be consistent. You can’t, like, you know, during jury selection, be the nicest guy in the world, and then during cross-examination, be a jerk. Right. Because then people are going to think that you’re fake, and they’re right, you are a fake. So I think it’s about creating systems that are comprehensive and systematic.

Chad Sands: And so I also see, so like in addition to your trial work you support the Moth. Is that the NPR Moth organization? The NPR show that I hear on the weekend?

Jason Doucette: Yeah. So the Moth is its own organization, but I know that NPR does air a lot of programming from the Moth. The Moth is a storytelling organization where you go to the events, you basically put your name in the jar. They pick you, you know, depending. There’s a lot more names in the jar than times. And then someone, you go up there, and I think you have, I don’t remember the exact time period, which I should know that, you go up there and you tell a story. And I’ve read a lot of books by the Moth. I listen to podcasts and a lot of the ways that I tell stories in trials comes from that method.

Chad Sands: And have you, like, put your name in the ha, in the bucket or whatever, and been called up a couple of times?

Jason Doucette: No, I’ve only gone a few times and I’ve never been picked.

Chad Sands: You’ve just never been picked, huh? I guess you have to go more, huh?

Jason Doucette: Yeah. Yeah, it’s just the luck of the draw, I suppose.

Chad Sands: Let’s get back to, and hear some stories about, you know, your cases that had an impact on you. Can you share a story about a case that really had a significant impact on you? And…

Jason Doucette: I think the most impactful case that I’ve had was a case in Monterey County. I tried it with a couple of my friends. Monterey County is up north in California. The highest verdict they ever had up there at the time was 10 years before of a 14-year-old girl quadriplegic against Toyota. They awarded 11.4 million. Our case, my client was working. The company, the general contractor, lied and said they had locked all the energy sources. They hadn’t. My client was fixing something and at the last moment they turned on electricity and he got hit with so much electricity that if he wasn’t a very large man, he would have died. They brought in these attorneys from out of state, that’s what they do. They go all throughout the nation and they try these type of cases.

Chad Sands: In, like, different construction companies or whatever?

Jason Doucette: Yeah, this was, it’s the largest solar manufacturer in the world. It’s worth twenty-two billion dollars. And their liability expert alone, they paid a hundred and fourteen thousand dollars and he never even visited the site or spoke to anyone from the company.

Chad Sands: He must make a, a pretty good living then if he does a lot of cases for those guys.

Jason Doucette: He was very defensive, and he’s like, “Well, that’s my company. I don’t really make that kind of thing.” Yeah. So we were up in Monterey, Airbnb, the four of us, for five weeks. And the judge, I would say, was pretty hostile to us. He liked me, really didn’t like my co-counsel. But the j, the jurors were fantastic. And our client is fantastic. Like you can tell you call anyone and say his name, and their eyes light up. He’s just a great guy and his wife is incredible as well, their daughter. And I still talk to him to this day. And the defense basically was like, “Well, they don’t give money here. You guys don’t really know what you’re doing,” so forth. After five weeks, the jury deliberated a day and a half. They come back, they awarded him four forty-six point eight million and her four and a half million for loss of consortium with no liability. And the judge basically thought that we should just at the very least like get compar, like get comparative against the client’s employer. I think that was the most upsetting part of him of the verdict for him was that it was a hundred percent on the defendant.

Chad Sands: Do what, like the judge was like, you know, some of this should be blamed on him and not, why are you guys blaming the whole, the company for all of it? More or less?

Jason Doucette: He thought that the defendant’s argument was be, you ha, the employer has a non-delegable duty to provide a safe work environment. And because they let the general contractor turn off and lock all the power sources, they delegated that, that duty. That was an overly simplistic and quite frankly inaccurate view of workplace safety. Because under the OSHA regulations, or which are very confusing and easily manipulated, under those regulations, what the client’s employer did was absolutely correct. The judge just kind of caught, caught up with, like, it’s a non-delegable duty. It seems like you’re delegating it. Therefore the employer’s at fault.

Chad Sands: And this is like, Monterey, like Pebble Beach, Clint Eastwood territory, right? Pretty conservative, yeah, upper class area where I’m assuming even the judge thought that the jury would never come back with a verdict like that.

Jason Doucette: Yeah, he told us that he really liked our client when we were, you know, doing settlement discussions. He was like, “My concern is that the jurors are gonna come back at three to four million and think that’s a ton of money.” And then when we got the verdict, of course they filed a motion for new trial and asked for a remittitur. And I knew I had to say something to kind of shake him up because I figured he was gonna reduce the verdict. And I brought up the fact that if the jury had come back at three million, you wouldn’t have done anything about it. So you really shouldn’t do anything about it now that they brought back the number that we wanted. And you could tell that really hit a nerve because that was like the first and only time that he kind of yelled at me. All twelve of the jurors agreed on the numbers. They were very thoughtful. There was one juror who wanted to find, I think, our client’s employer, our client, or someone ten percent at fault, but the jurors were very much in unison.

Chad Sands: Tell me a little bit about, like, his injury, because I mean, I don’t know how many volts he got sh, went through his body, but obviously enough to kill, you know, maybe most people out there, but you know, d, this chronic pain syndrome and the, the TBI and cardio, I don’t think I can pronounce it because I’m not a doctor. I mean, tell me a little bit about the injuries and how you kind of presented that to the jury to tell that story about, hey, like, not only this did this guy kind of survive, but he is seriously injured for the rest of his life.

Jason Doucette: Yeah, so the week before he was benching four hundred pounds. He was just a monster of a man, incredible athlete. He would do CrossFit with his wife on the weekends. He just had nonstop energy. He could do the job of three or four men. And when he gets electrocuted, he, it was so much electricity that he couldn’t let go of it. And someone had to tackle him off of it. He happened to go to the Fresno ICU and they had the most amazing doctors you can imagine. And if you saw the injury, it’s, you wouldn’t even think it was real. It looks like something from a science fiction movie.

Chad Sands: Like, because his arm was like completely like black, or bolts going up?

Jason Doucette: Like it was like you could see like the tendons and the muscles, and like there was just a huge hole where you would think it was like some sort of like anatomical display. And I think he was in ICU for three weeks. When I was examining the orthopedic doctor, I asked him, you know, on a scale of, you know, zero is not having your arm, a hundred’s having your, having full use of it, where’s he at? And he’s like, “A twenty.” He lost 80% of his arm. And what we did was just focus on how much he’s done to get better. I was examining his wife, and we hadn’t shown the picture of his arm. And the defense had brought up in the jury selection, like, “You’re gonna see gruesome photos. Is that gonna bother you?” kind of thing. So when I’m examining his wife, I say, “I’m sorry I have to do this, but Your Honor, may I approach, can I show the photo?” And I show the photo to her and I say, “What is this depict?” And she’s like, “That’s what his arm looked like at the ICU.” I said, “Your Honor, I move to admit this into evidence.” And he goes, “Would you like to publish it?” And I said, “No, Your Honor, I’ll let the juries decide if they want to look at it.” So then during the break when the jurors were deliberating, what do you think they were talking about?

Chad Sands: The picture they wanted to see.

Jason Doucette: Right. They, they looked at the picture and they’re talking about the picture.

Chad Sands: I mean, how did you feel when it did go to the jury and, did they really offer a strong settlement, or were you guys kinda committed to going all the way through?

Jason Doucette: So before the trial their top offer was three and a half million. They had filed a cross-complaint against the client’s employer. The employer had given them five million. So they wanted to basically make a profit of one and a half million from electrocuting a guy.

Chad Sands: So, so wait, like, the, your client had, and you know, worked for a company who had insurance, and they basically paid the solar company. And then they were offering your client three point five and they were gonna, you know, invest the other million and a half into their coffers or whatever.

Jason Doucette: Correct, five million dollars. Yeah, exactly. So in in closing, the defense I think said that they should give my client two point one, but find him a third at fault, his employer a third at fault. So basically he gets seven hundred thousand dollars. We knew that the jurors were on our side. You could tell body language. I’ll give you an example of that. I was cross-examining their psychiatrist, and he was this very kind of upbeat older guy. And I was like, “How many times have you testified in trial?” And he’s like, “Over a hundred.” And I go, “Any trials that the jurors might know of?” And he’s like, “No.” And I go, “Didn’t you testify on behalf of Marlboro that nicotine isn’t addictive?” And you could tell the jurors were kind of like, “What?” Which I think goes to his credibility because the fact of the matter is if he’s willing to say that, he’s willing to say anything. Right. The judge sustained it. But then the guy comes out and my co-counsel was in in the gallery and he walks up to my co-counsel and he shakes his hand. And the jurors just looked at my co-counsel like, “Why are you shaking his hand?” And my co-counsel comes up to me and he’s like, “I’m so sorry. I don’t know why I shook his hand. I feel so stupid. I messed this up.” And I go, “Listen. The fact that the jurors were mad at you for shaking his hand means that they hated him.” Yes.

Chad Sands: They might not like you a little bit, but they hate this guy.

Jason Doucette: Yeah. So we felt good about where we were at, but we had no idea what they were kinda come back at. Yes. Right? Because they’ve never awarded more than eleven point four. But again, like it’s not like people are told like you’re not supposed to give money in this jurisdiction, right? They’re not told that. Yeah. So we didn’t really know where they were gonna come back at. Did I think they’re gonna come back at the full fifty that we asked for? No, I didn’t think that. Yeah. I would thought that it was gonna be coming, you know, somewhere in between, but we were expecting a pretty favorable verdict.

Chad Sands: What about, so I mean w, was this, was this the one that kinda really, you know, got you nominated for trial attorney of the year with CAALA and…

Jason Doucette: I think I actually tried a case a month or two before that case where it was a slip and fall. My client had walked on this walkway over a thousand times. It was where she lived. And she slipped and she fractured her knee. And the highest offer before trial was 150,000. And the jury awarded 2.47 million. And because we had made an offer four years before, the judgment ended up being three point seven million. So I think that nomination was more for that verdict than the Monterey one.

Narrator:  At CloudLex, we understand the unique demands and opportunities that personal injury law firms face every day. That’s why we’ve built a comprehensive platform designed exclusively for personal injury law. Our seamless case management, AI engine litigation support and record retrieval solutions empower you at every stage from intake through settlement and beyond helping you stay productive, organized, and focused on achieving successful outcomes for your clients.

Explore what’s possible at www.cloudlex.com. Now here is this episode’s “Closing Argument.”

Jason Doucette: So what I’ve learned is there’s this idea that you have to try twenty cases or however many cases to be a great trial attorney. I don’t think that’s true. I think you probably need to try two or three cases to get used to the chaos of trial, the stress of it. But I think what’s really important is to practice. And as I mentioned, I grew up wrestling. I wrestled from three years old into college. And I went to a wrestling camp when I was in high school. I remember one of the coaches saying that whatever you do every single day, you should do something to make yourself better at wrestling. If that’s fifty double legs or doing fifty push ups, you should always do something to make yourself better. That’s what I used to do in wrestling, and that’s what I do now as a trial attorney. There’s this idea that all you have to do is try a bunch of cases. And I think that’s really a mistake. You do a sport, you don’t just show up to the tournaments or show up to the games. You put in a lot of practice before you ever show up to the game or tournament. And as a trial attorney, I think we should all do the same. And there’s different ways to get better at becoming a trial attorney that don’t involve actually having to try cases because it’s hard to get into a courtroom. So what I do is I think of all the skills that it takes to be a great trial attorney, and then what are the ways I can practice those skills? For example, presence. Presence is very important to do in trial. One of the things I think that really helps with presence is doing improv. I also constantly read trial advocacy books. I’ve probably read over 50. I read a lot of books on psychology, how people learn, how people think, how people make decisions. Watch CVN, I read trial transcripts. What I try to do each and every day is to make myself a better attorney. So when I go against someone who’s had 50, 100 trials, I can feel confident that I’m a better trial attorney than them. My last trial, I actually tried a case against someone who probably has a hundred trials. And it doesn’t really matter. I think what’s more important than having all this trial experience is practicing and doing what you need to do to get better. And I think that’s what I would really try to impress on people is that you don’t need to be intimidated by all these people who have a bunch of trials. What you need to do is practice.

Narrator: You’ve been listening to “Celebrating Justice” presented by. CloudLex and the Trial Lawyers Journal. Remember, the stories don’t end here. Visit www.triallawyersjournal.com to become part of our community and keep the conversation going. And for a deeper dive into the tools that empower personal injury law firms, visit www.cloudlex.com/tlj to learn.