Example Opening Statements

These example opening statements give lawyers ideas on how to approach a jury trial. Use what works for you and toss the rest.

• Sample closing statements

Our firm has a history of getting exceptional results for our clients at trial. It all begins with the opening statement. There is a new school of thought (last ten years) about the best way for plaintiffs’ counsel to present an opening statement.

This thinking is reflected in the example opening statements our lawyers provide above. It would be nice to pretend we invented this format. But our approach is liberally stolen from Don Keenen (Reptile), David Ball (Damages), and countless others.  

1. Speak in the present tense. This method of storytelling keeps the listener interested and creates a real sense of immediacy that is critical to keeping the jury’s attention
2. Juries expect a high-tech presentation in 2023. Give it to them. Use technology to show them the evidence. Show the evidence you plan to use: deposition testimony, medical records, documents, etc. Don’t use PowerPoint and just give them an outline.
3. That said, please don’t overuse the phrase “the evidence will show.”  (Don’t overuse any phrase.) The time to sprinkle that in is if you are about to say something that you arguably should not say in an opening to throw off an objection.
4. Present your story chronologically. Flashing back and forth is great if you are watching A Handmaid’s Tale. But it can be wildly confusing with an oral story. You must win the battle of keeping it simple and educating the jury.
5. Don’t write checks you can’t cash. Tell them what the evidence will show. Don’t oversell the case you have.
6. Don’t begin advocating until you are more than halfway through your opening. Just give the facts neutrally. You have to develop credibility with the jury before pointing fingers.
7. Educate the jurors about the case. Juries appreciate lawyers that provide real information to them that they can use.
8. Save your long speech about your gratitude for their service. Jurors want to do their jobs corr
   ectly and go home. They don’t care about your gratitude, which almost invariably comes off as hokey.  I’m also not a fan of “ladies and gentlemen” because people do not talk that way in real life. Get right to what this case is about.
9. How long should your opening statement take? It depends on the case. The key is ensuring every word matters and that you are as streamlined as possible. You must have a clear purpose for every point you make in your opening statement.
10. Explain the case to the juror like you would try to explain it to a friend. Save the big words and the pomp and circumstance.
11. Have a single sentence theme. If you can’t find a single sentence to summarize your case, you are not trying hard enough. You need to be able to distill a case, even a complex case, down to one sentence.
12. Don’t tell the jury you are giving them a road map. No one says, “Oh, goodie! A road map!” Just use this first chance to talk to the jury to tell the story.
13. Begin by telling the jury the simple rule that would be applied to the case. Jurors are worried they won’t be able to do their jobs because they won’t understand it. This rule reassures them that there will be a clear road to make their decision. The rule is usually a safety rule.
14. Bonus Tip: read this book. Then reread it.

How to Write an Opening Statement

Every lawyer has a different process for preparing an opening. My process for an opening statement is to spend no more than an hour or two writing it out as if I was required to write a transcript of the opening statement. I read it out loud to myself, then make a shorter handwritten outline, never looking back at the original draft.

I never even bring the opening statement outline to court – it is all just a process. When lawyers draft a script and stick with it, their presentation is too canned, and they are no longer having a real conversation with the jury.

The opening statement template below is patterned in part after David Ball’s suggested chronology of an opening statement (with modifications we have made consistent with our practical experience and the specifics of that case).

Example Opening Statement I. Introduction

(Thoughts on how to begin) – the biggest key here is to make the small talk brief and get right to it.

II. What Are the Rules?

The defendant is Maryland Machine Contractors. The testimony you are going to hear is going to be complicated at times. But the rule you will be asked to apply by the judge is a simple rule: Did Maryland Machine build a mechanical system that was defectively designed that led to the death of Cindy Manning?

III. What Did Defendant Do? (opening focuses first on what the defendant did)

In 2019, the defendant Maryland Machine built a machine system at Crawford Sugar Factory. This is an exhibit of what they built. If you have lived in Baltimore, you have almost certainly seen the Crawford Sugar sign at the Inner Harbor. The factory has been here since the ’20s. But the system was redesigned in 2020 and built by Maryland Machine.

The system is in a place called the Wash House. In the Wash House, a hot, chemical slurry is used to convert the sugar that comes out of the fields into the sugar you put in your coffee.

So Crawford Sugar says to Maryland Machine, we want to redo this area of the Wash House, here are some drawings with our idea of how we think it should be built. And Maryland Machine said okay, we will build you a system.

This is the 2-3-8 tank. It holds approximately 5,000 gallons of hot liquid slurry. As a part of the beginning of the refining process, raw sugar is pumped through pipes into this 5,000-gallon tank, where it is combined with lime and carbon dioxide resulting in a hot liquid slurry that contains calcium carbonate. This solution is heated to 160 to 185 degrees.

Now in this tank is raw sugar and these chemicals but also a lot of junk: rocks, wood, debris, you name it. And it all comes down this pipe into this strainer and then gets sent up for more processing.

This is a valve you can turn on and off to stop the flow. So if you want to service the strainer, clean it out, or whatever, you need to close this value.

The strainer needs to be cleaned between three and six times a day. So when they regularly cleaned the strainer, they had to:

1. Close this valve, and
2. Close this valve over here that is downstream of the strainer,
3. Let the slurry drain out of a small elbow valve right here,
4. And then there is a little valve at the bottom of the strainer right here, then a small valve at the top of the strainer right here.
5. If the slurry has been drained out of the system, the Earth System’s Operator – this job is called – removes the 15-pound strainer cover, pulls out the strainer basket, cleans it out, and starts over again.

That is the normal cleaning process or if a full filter clogs the system.

Now, what if the system was blocked in the pipes instead of the strainer? The operator would not know the difference. This situation creates a risk of the unexpected release of stored energy that could cause injury to employees, which is what happens here.

One night, Cindy Manning arrives at work and found that the system she was working on was clogged. Being a new employee, she calls her supervisor, a gentleman named Joe Rivera. She asks for help. Mr. Rivera asks Henry Taylor to help who in turn asks Mike Foster to assist Cindy in unclogging the system. You are going to have the opportunity to meet Mr. Foster. Foster is an important witness because he is the only living eyewitness to the accident.

Mr. Foster goes and sees – as he was told to expect – that the 2-3-8 Strainer is blocked. So he did what he was supposed to do, what he was trained to do. He shut off all of the valves that could bring about an unexpected release of the hot slurry, and he takes off the lid to the strainer.

So Mr. Foster tries to stick a rod up to clean out the blockage. Then he attempts to squirt some water. Nothing worked. So they stand there talking, trying to figure out what to do next. Suddenly, hot slurry heated to between 160 and 185 degrees comes down on Cindy Manning. She tries to escape, but she falls. When she gets up, she is covered in this hot chemical slurry.

IV. What Were the Immediate Harms? (sticking just to the immediate harm for now).

After six days of unimaginable suffering, Cindy Manning died.

V. Who Are We Suing and Why?

After the accident, Crawford did an investigation as to how the accident could have been avoided. A week later, Crawford issued a report on the accident because they wanted to find out how the accident happened and how it could be avoided in the future.

A lot of smart and qualified people with years of experience looked at this question and concluded that this accident could have been avoided. While I suspect none of you are plumbers, engineers, or pipe fitters, I bet if I gave each of you five minutes with this question, you could figure out how Cindy Manning’s death could have been easily avoided just as the folks at Crawford’s did.

The report said that there should have been a valve right in front of the strainer. And had that been there, Cindy Manning&rs
quo;s life would have been saved. That hot slurry would never have come out if Maryland Machine had put a valve in front of that strainer. The minor expense of setting that valve (showing exhibit) in a way that protects Cindy Manning from those hot chemicals.

Now AFTER the accident, Crawford did what should have been done in the first place – they put in the valve that would have saved Cindy Manning’s life. But at that point, it was too late.

You are going to hear more on this from Dr. David Donahue. Dr. Donahue served for 15 years as the chairman of the Machine Engineering department at the University of Maryland. Now, he spends his time working for the Navy in fighting against terrorism. While the engineering needed to fight terrorism is probably a lot more complicated than the issues, in this case,

Dr. Donahue will tell you that it is not at all complicated, the need for this valve was a simple thing that anyone should know. Dr. Donahue is also going to talk to you about pressure gauges and how cheap they are to install and how they would have helped provide information that would have prevented her death.

You are also going to hear from Lee Tompkins. He is going to tell you the same thing as Dr. Donahue – that putting a valve here before the accident was common sense that any reasonable plumber or installer should have known.

You are also going to hear from Dr. Henry from Johns Hopkins. He is going to tell you that this accident at Crawford caused Cindy Manning’s death. He is also going to tell you that it does not take much of this slurry on your body to cause grave pain and, ultimately, death.

You are going to hear from an economist who is going to tell you what Cindy Manning’s lost wages were over the rest of Brenna’s life.

You are going to hear from Cindy Manning’s family. They are going to give you an idea of what her death was like.

Finally, and for your purposes, most importantly, you are also going to have the opportunity to hear from Michael Foster, the only living witness of the accident.

VI. What is Wrong with the Defense? (Before Coming to Court, What Did We Have to Make Sure of First?)