Pfeifer v. Covino — Every Dollar We Asked For

In September 2007, I tried Pfeifer v. Covino to a jury.

The jury awarded our client every dollar we asked for.

The court subsequently awarded substantial attorney fees as well.

It remains one of the most satisfying verdicts from the early years of my trial practice.

A Difficult Pair of Defendants

The defendants in Pfeifer were difficult opponents.

They were aggressive, slippery, and unwilling to accept responsibility for what had occurred.

That made credibility particularly important.

A jury trial has a way of stripping a dispute down to its essentials.

Witnesses have to take the stand. They have to answer questions under oath. Documents can be placed in front of them. Explanations can be tested. And ultimately twelve members of the community get to decide whom and what they believe.

That process mattered in Pfeifer.

We presented our client's case and asked the jury for a specific amount of money based upon the evidence.

We got every dollar we asked for.

Asking a Jury for a Number

There is something fundamentally different about standing in front of a jury and asking for a specific verdict.

You cannot hedge.

You have to tell the jury what you believe the evidence justifies and explain why.

Then you sit down and give the case to them.

In Pfeifer, the jury agreed with us completely.

The verdict awarded our client the full amount we requested.

The court later awarded attorney fees as well.

For a young trial lawyer, that was an important experience.

It reinforced the value of being precise about damages, giving jurors a reason for the number being requested, and having enough confidence in the evidence to actually ask for it.

Two Juries at the Same Time

There is another reason I will never forget the Pfeifer trial.

While I was selecting the jury in Pfeifer in September 2007, another jury was still out deliberating in a case I had just tried: Hedges v. Hessing.

During jury selection in Pfeifer, the Hedges jury came back with its verdict.

I had one jury returning a verdict while I was picking another jury.

That is not something that has happened to me since.

At the time, however, I was simply trying cases.

There wasn't much opportunity to stop and think about what an unusual moment it was.

One case had been presented to a jury and was awaiting a decision.

Another was beginning.

My job was to stay focused on the twelve people in front of me and get ready to try the next case.

Looking back nearly two decades later, that sequence of trials represents an important period in my development as a trial lawyer.

The Verdict

The Pfeifer jury returned a verdict for our client.

More importantly, it awarded every dollar we asked for.

The court subsequently awarded attorney fees.

It was a complete result for the client.

But the lesson I carried forward was not simply that we had won.

It was that jurors will hold difficult people accountable when the evidence gives them a sound reason to do so.

Our responsibility as trial lawyers is to make that evidence understandable.

We have to identify the important facts, confront the difficult ones, test credibility, and ultimately tell the jury exactly what we are asking them to do.

In Pfeifer, they did it.

Every dollar.

Part of My Trial Record

Pfeifer v. Covino was one of my early civil jury trials.

It came during a remarkable stretch in September 2007 when I moved almost directly from trying Hedges v. Hessing into selecting the jury for Pfeifer.

Those trials taught me lessons that have stayed with me throughout my career.

There is no substitute for actually trying cases.

You can study trial advocacy. You can watch other lawyers. You can attend seminars. You can practice openings, examinations, and closing arguments.

All of those things help.

But eventually a jury walks into the courtroom.

Then it is real.

In September 2007, one jury was returning its verdict while I was selecting another.

The second jury ultimately gave our client exactly what we asked them to give her.

I have never forgotten it.

Case: Pfeifer v. Covino

Trial: September 2007

Trial Counsel: William L. Smith

Result: Jury verdict for our client awarding every dollar requested.

Post-Trial: Attorney fees awarded by the court.

Trial Note: The jury in Hedges v. Hessing returned its verdict while Smith was selecting the jury in Pfeifer v. Covino.

William L. “Bill” Smith is an Idaho trial lawyer and founding partner of Smith Horras, P.A. His professional record includes civil jury trials, bench trials, and oral arguments before the Idaho Supreme Court and Idaho Court of Appeals.

Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Every case depends upon its own facts, evidence, law, and circumstances.