We’re trial lawyers.

Our core competency – above everything else – is trying cases to juries.  We think like jurors and specialize in refining complex sets of facts into compelling narratives that juries find persuasive.

Of the thousands of pages of documents in your case, there are about 10 that actually matter to a jury.  As trial lawyers, we specialize in identifying them and using them to create winning themes for our clients.

If you think that you want your case to settle and therefore don’t need a trial lawyer, please think again.  While it’s true that most cases settle, the best trial lawyers get the best settlements.  The other side won’t give what it should until it is totally convinced that it will lose at trial – at Madia Law, we specialize in helping them gain that clarity.

Madia Law Gets Jury Trial Results

We routinely take on some of the largest law firms in the country and get exceptional results.  For example,

•  We tried a breach of fiduciary duty case to a jury on behalf of a minority shareholder in a limited liability company.  The defendant was represented by one of the top 5 largest firms in Minnesota.  Prior to trial, the largest offer by the defendant was $40,000.  The jury returned a verdict of $1.3 million.
•  We represented a small business that was sued in a wage and hour class action involving nearly 1,000 plaintiffs represented by one of the largest and best employment firms in the nation.  The lowest offer to settle by plaintiffs before trial was $2 million.  We tried the case, and the jury dismissed most charges and returned a verdict of just $13,000.
•  We represented a young man who claimed that he was assaulted by St. Paul police officers.  St. Paul refused to offer favorable settlement terms because it claimed that it had not lost a police misconduct case at trial in 15 years.  We tried the case and beat them – the jury awarded nearly $35,000 in punitive damages for the officers’ actions.
• We represented a small business that sued the downtown Minneapolis building it leased space from because faulty plumbing caused damage during a rain storm.  A large insurance company defense firm represented the defendant.  Though they offered only $50,000 before trial, the jury returned a verdict of $298,000.
• We represented a businessman who sued his partner for breach of fiduciary duty.  Another firm handled the matter for a year until the dissatisfied client switched to us.  Prior to our representation, the best offer from the defendant was $2 million.  We took over the discovery and handled depositions and motions practice.  Two months before trial, the defendant settled for approximately $4.5 million.
• Another firm brought us in to try a breach of fiduciary duty case against a real estate agent and large real estate company to jury, just 3 months before trial.  Prior to our retention, the best settlement offer the company made was $2,000.  After we were retained, the company offered $25,000 and later $50,000.  We turned down their offers and tried the case: the jury awarded every dime that we asked for: over $115,000.
• We were brought on 3 weeks before trial in a tortious interference with contract case.  The district court had previously dismissed the case on summary judgment, but the Court of Appeals reversed and remanded for trial. The defense had made no settlement offers – at all – through the entire litigation.  We tried the case and the jury awarded $175,000 to our client.
• Another firm brought us into an age discrimination case about 5 weeks before trial.  The district court had previously dismissed the case, but the Court of Appeals reversed and remanded for trial.  The defense made no offers of settlement.  Though each of our 2 clients only had about $11,000 in damages each (as it was a failure to promote case, and they still had their jobs, so their wage loss was limited), the jury awarded $50,000 in damages to one plaintiff and $25,000 in damages to the second.  The jury additionally awarded each plaintiff $25,000 in punitive damages – which is the statutory maximum allowed.

Madia Law Takes Cases on the Eve of Trial

We ramp up quickly.  Very quickly.  We take pride in being hired by clients (and often, other lawyers) just weeks before trial.
One of the first things we’ll do with your case is develop the themes for our closing argument.  We’ll think about exactly what we want our last words to the jury to be, and what we want jurors thinking about as they deliberate.  Based on the closing, we’ll develop our trial strategy: which witnesses to call and what we need from their testimony, what we want to develop in cross, and how we’ll use documents and other exhibits to build the evidentiary record that we’ll draw on in closing.
Because we’ve tried so many cases, and have so much experience with so many different judges and juries, we’re able to quickly work through stacks of paper to identify and focus on the documents that will matter to a jury.  We develop a case theme that’s clear, logical, and respects the jury.

Other Counsel

If you are an attorney who’s litigated a case all the way to trial, but you feel that you need trial support, we’re here to help.  We can assist any way that you feel would be helpful, whether it’s working with you on opening, closing, and trial exams; trying the case together; or trying the case on our own – we can get it done.  We understand the investment you’ve made in getting the case to trial, the value you have for your client, and the importance of finishing the job right.  We’re confident in our ability to take cases on the eve of trial and bring them home.

We believe in success based fee arrangements.

We take pride in contingency fee and blended hourly/contingent fee arrangements.  We believe in our ability to try cases so strongly that we welcome and, in fact, insist on creative fee arrangements that tie fees to success.