Law Essays on Overview of Legal Research

Law Essays on Overview of Legal Research

Steps of interview

In carrying out an interview with a client on legal stance, three stages need to be followed.  These three phases are very vital in ensuring that the lawyer gets all the vital information required to win the case. These three steps are listening, questioning and advising.  These steps are as outlined below.

The first step is listening. The purpose of listening is to get first-hand information from the client to help in decision-making. Before choosing the approach to take on an accident case, it is important for the lawyer to know the client’s side of the story (Schoone & Miner, 2016). As this stage, a lawyer should ask the client to narrate the whole accident, giving every vital detail of the entire accident scene. The client is expected to tell the whole truth to the best of his or her recollection of the events leading to, during and after the accident. The lawyer at this point is expected to take down vital points to be used in building a proper questioning for the client. Additionally, it is at this stage that the lawyer should examine the character of the client through body language (Wise, 2013). As a lawyer, it is important to show more interest in the narration of the client to give them confidence in providing information.

Additionally, there is the stage of questioning. The main aim of this step is to get a clear understanding of the whole case further than what the client is saying. In most cases, the clients usually give their information in a haphazard manner. It is through a question that the lawyer gets to understand some of the details of the customer in trying to come up with the real issues at hand. The best technique to use here is asking probing questions which would lead the lawyer to getting precise information about the accident and giving the best advice on the same.

The last stage is advising. At this stage a thorough analysis of the whole context of the accident as per the view of the client is necessary. The professional expertise is required here in trying to get the whole context of the crash. The main aim of the interview is to ensure that the client gets the best solution for their case after the interview. It is important to carry out an analysis on the connotations of the client as per the case and find a lasting solution (Schoone, & Miner, 2016).

Five Questions to Be Used at the Beginning of the Interview as a Paralegal

In the context of interviewing the client, sets of questions needs to asked to help in better understanding of the client. The following sets of questions are destined to help the lawyer panel understand the whole context of how the accident took place and why. The importance of each issue is also pegged on the question itself. These issues are as outlined below.

Question 1: What time and date did the accident happen? This question is stipulated to help understand the exact timing of the incident. For instance, it will give the information on whether it was at night or daytime that would lead to the probable cause of the accident.

Question 2: How did the crash occur? This issue is very critical in helping the lawyer know who was in the wrong and how. It also gives the answer as to why the accident happened in such a manner and the number of causalities in it.  From this question, the cause of the accident can be clearly discerned (Schoone, & Miner, 2016).

Question 3: In which location did the crash occur exactly? From this question, one can understand the exact place where the accident took place and relate it to its timing. It will, for instance, help us understand some features of the place where the accident took place.

Question 4: what were the conclusions onlookers made on the incident? With this question one can access the real cause of the accident from complaints that observers made about the crash. The complaints might lead to a possible solution for the incident that would help in further analysis of the case (Haig, & New York County Lawyers’ Association. 2005).

Question 5: What were the losses that this accident caused you? This question would help in understanding the level of damage that this accident caused the client. It is from this question that we as the lawyers should know the magnitude of the case and give the right.

Interrogatories

There are some stages in court case where there is need to get response from the opposing client’s attorney. The questions are imperative when building a case to higher levels. Below are some of the interrogatories and their primary information.

The first interrogatory: Give a brief comment on how the accident occurred: This will help the team to understand better how the incident occurred with regard to timing and location. It provides the team with information that would help fathom detailed description of the phenomenon and give a precise location, time and how it happened. The second interrogatory would be recognition of any eye witnesses and their exact position they were when the accident took place. This supposition will enable identification of eye witness and exact position they were while the incident occurred. This will help in building of the case against opposing counsel.

Thirdly there is providing the information on various persons that were present when the accident took place. Apart from eye witness, there could be other people in the scene who could help provide vital information about the accident that would help build a strong case against the opposing party (Haig, & New York County Lawyers’ Association. 2005).

The fourth interrogatory would be the recognition and knowing the persons who entered the scene at the time when the accident happened. This information is vital in understanding how the entire accident transpired and any relevant information that would help in the investigation.

The fifth one would be giving of information that was recorded about the incident by various parties concern. This would help in understanding how the opposing counsel would build their case (Schoone, & Miner, 2016).  The information recorded at police departments is very vital here. They would help in understanding the status of the case and defense to prepare while continuing with the case.

Interrogatory six would be to understand client’s past criminal records. This information is very vital since it gives the lawyer an upper hand in understanding the client and knows how best to defend them based on their past records (Haig, & New York County Lawyers’ Association. 2005). Interrogatory seven is the identification of the recent reports on location where the incident occurred. This will help build a case on whether the causative factor could be location or opposing party.

Interrogatory eight would be the knowledge of persons who entered the scene at the time when the accident happened. This information is vital in understanding how the complete accident transpired and any other relevant information that would help in investigation. The ninth interrogative would be Identification of onlookers and their exact location when the accident took place. This supposition will enable recognition of eye witness and exact position they were while the accident occurred. This will help in building of the case against opposing counsel. Interrogatory ten would be mental state of the person involved in the incident. With this information, the team can understand how to attack the case on the line of ignorance or perception of right mind actions (Haig, & New York County Lawyers’ Association. 2005).

Importance of interrogatories

The primary concern is that it helps in building a formidable case by gaining the knowledge which the opposing counsel has over the team. The interrogatories are imperative when making the case to higher levels. The knowledge on opposing counsel’s strategy helps in providing grounds for a better line of attack for the same.

 

References

Haig, R. L., & New York County Lawyers’ Association. (2005). Commercial litigation in New York State courts. St. Paul, Minn: West Pub. Co.

Schoone, A. P., & Miner, E. L. (2016). Effective Use of Written Interrogatories, The. Marq. L. Rev., 60, 29.

Wise, R. K. (2013). Ending Evasive Responses to Written Discovery: A Guide for Properly Responding (and Objecting) to Interrogatories and Document Requests Under the Texas Discovery Rules. Baylor L. Rev., 65, 510.