Picking Justice

A juror who promises to be fair may still not belong on your jury. Arash Homampour of The Homampour Law Firm, a trial lawyer known for winning eight-figure verdicts in cases others wouldn’t take, joins hosts Harry Plotkin and Dan Kramer to discuss making for-cause challenges stick. Arash explains why a juror who can’t be entirely impartial on even one issue, such as pain and suffering, may still be disqualified, and how he builds a record to prevent that bias from being rehabilitated. He also shares what to ask when a judge bars dollar figures in voir dire and why leading with a big number can work against you.Learn More and Connect☑️ Arash Homampour | LinkedIn☑️ The Homampour Law Firm | LinkedIn | Facebook | Instagram☑️ Harry Plotkin | LinkedIn | Facebook | Instagram☑️ Dan Kramer | LinkedIn☑️ Kramer Trial Lawyers on LinkedIn | Facebook | YouTube | Instagram☑️ Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | YouTubeProduced and Powered by LawPods, a podcast marketing agency for law firms

The juror who looks worst on paper can end up delivering your biggest verdict. Jon Marko, a Detroit trial lawyer fresh off an $896 million verdict, has seen it happen more than once. While the defense in one of his trials ran AI searches on every juror, Jon stuck to quick social media checks, and he tells hosts Harry Plotkin and Dan Kramer why he wouldn't trust AI to pick his strikes. He also makes the case that repetition, not study, is what builds great voir dire. Tune in to hear how he handled a lawsuit-skeptical juror after using his last strike, and why she ended up leading the jury to a $36 million verdict.Learn More and Connect☑️ Jonathan R. Marko | LinkedIn | Instagram☑️ Marko Law | LinkedIn | Facebook | Instagram | TikTok | YouTube☑️ Harry Plotkin | LinkedIn | Facebook | Instagram☑️ Dan Kramer | LinkedIn ☑️ Kramer Trial Lawyers on LinkedIn | Facebook | YouTube | Instagram☑️ Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | YouTubeProduced and Powered by LawPods

A juror who says they won't award money for pain and suffering only becomes a cause challenge if that answer holds up when the judge or defense tries to rehabilitate them. Steve Vartazarian, founder of The Vartazarian Law Firm, shares with hosts Harry Plotkin and Dan Kramer the simple questions he uses to lock those jurors in, and why he stops short of pushing them too far. He also explains why he welcomes jurors' worst answers, why he calls it "human harm" instead of pain and suffering, and the one line about damages that jurors love to hear. Tune in for jury selection techniques to use in your next voir dire.Learn More and Connect☑️ Steve Vartazarian | LinkedIn☑️ The Vartazarian Law Firm | LinkedIn | Facebook☑️ Harry Plotkin | LinkedIn | Facebook | Instagram☑️ Dan Kramer | LinkedIn ☑️ Kramer Trial Lawyers on LinkedIn | Facebook | YouTube | Instagram☑️ Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | YouTubeProduced and Powered by LawPods

Some of the toughest jurors aren't the ones to strike; they're the ones to win over. Joe Fried, an Atlanta trial lawyer with Fried Goldberg who has tried cases in 43 states, builds his approach around what jurors share rather than what divides them. He joins hosts Harry Plotkin and Dan Kramer to unpack what turns skepticism into trust: modeling "shockingly vulnerable" honesty, framing a case around a juror's oath, and running a voir dire that surfaces the universal values a case is really about. Joe also explains why he now drops his exact damages number in his opening, and why less is more when arguing them. Tune in for practical takeaway on inclusive jury selection.Learn More and Connect☑️ Joe Fried | LinkedIn☑️ Fried Goldberg | LinkedIn | Facebook | YouTube | Instagram | X☑️ Harry Plotkin | LinkedIn | Facebook | Instagram☑️ Dan Kramer | LinkedIn ☑️ Kramer Trial Lawyers on LinkedIn | Facebook | YouTube | Instagram☑️ Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | YouTubeProduced and Powered by LawPods

Most jurors haven't decided how they feel about giving millions for pain and suffering until the trial's nearly over — so how do you spot the ones who never will? In this deep dive, hosts Harry Plotkin and Dan Kramer unpack the "Health Is Wealth" question sequence Harry uses to surface which jurors value non-economic damages. They dig into the counterintuitive power of telling jurors the money isn't meant to help, how to read jurors who dodge or push back on open-ended questions, and the tricky calculus of brain-injury cases and waiving future care. Tune in for a practical playbook on making quality of life feel like real wealth to a jury.Learn More and Connect☑️ Harry Plotkin | LinkedIn | Facebook | Instagram☑️ Dan Kramer | LinkedIn☑️ Kramer Trial Lawyers on LinkedIn | Facebook | YouTube | Instagram☑️ Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | YouTubeProduced and Powered by LawPods