This is a three-session webinar series: Session 1 – August 20 | Session 2 – September 10 | Session 3 – September 22. This case involves overly aggressive bouncers and their friends becoming violent with a guest in a Las Vegas nightclub. After recklessly escalating a normal conversation into a physical altercation with a non-violent guest, bouncers hand the guest off to violent friends and literally turn the other way as the guest is beaten nearly to death. The violent friends repeatedly punch Mr. Alrabadi in the head as he tries to flee until one of the blows knocks him unconscious. The bouncers' friend then stomps on Mr. Alrabadi's head 6-8 times as he lays motionless inside the doors of the Flamingo Hotel & Casino, fracturing his skull and causing hemorrhages throughout his brain. No one from Caesars or Chayo made any effort to protect Mr. Alrabadi, nor did they call for medical services as he lay unconscious for several minutes. Not only did Defendants claim they did nothing wrong, they brought a comparative negligence claim, blaming Mr. Alrabadi for his own injuries. After a 3-week trial, the jury returned a verdict of $56,500,000.96 with liability split 50/50 between Caesars Entertainment and Chayo Tequila Bar, with no comparative fault to Mr. Alrabadi. Topics covered: Strategic Negotiations - do NOT show your cards Structure advantages through depositions and experts Big Data - know case value and juror profiles Voir Dire - eliminating biased jurors and restructuring the venire (chess vs. checkers) Winning from the beginning (Mitnik and Sach) Great experts can make a big difference Win your case on cross The Element of Surprise Session 1: Strategic decisions and performance to prepare the case for trial Topics covered in Session 1: The Incident - limited video of what happened and the layout of the scene Strategic Negotiations - do NOT show your cards Documents and Video - getting (and framing) the evidence you need Depositions - getting what you need and knowing when to stop Winning through the depositions of adverse parties and employees Witness order is a strategic decision Defanging defense experts while locking down their vulnerabilities Incorporating Sach's 1, 2, 3 method (in varying degrees) in every deposition Stipulations - sometimes agreeing is better for everyone Unnecessary or cumulative depositions Past medical specials Experts with inadmissible opinions Spoliated evidence Pre-trial motions and destruction of evidence