Litigation strategies are either primarily direct or primarily indirect, though they usually include elements of both.In litigation, direct strategies argue what the law does or does not say; what the facts are or are not; or who has the more believable witnesses.Moreover, an individual’s perception of a situation affects how he frames his decisions.
Litigation strategy is the process by which counsel for one party to a lawsuit intends to integrate their actions with anticipated events and reactions to achieve the overarching goal of the litigation.
The strategic goal may be the verdict, or the damages or sentence awarded in the case.
Indirect strategies, on the other hand, shift the point of conflict, alter perceptions of what is central, or undermine the opposing counsels’ case without direct confrontation, often through deception, surprise or misdirection of the opponent—though never of the jury.
Trial advocacy offers a number of tools and methods for constructing sound strategies.
Attorneys who apply advanced strategic concepts (such as Maneuver and the Boyd Loop), which are not taught in most law schools, may gain a decisive advantage over attorneys who are unfamiliar with the skill set and who, because of their unfamiliarity, can be unwittingly maneuvered into disadvantageous actions.