July 15, 2025 • 44 mins
What does it take to find the real truth in a high-stakes injury case?
In this episode of The Effective Lawyer Podcast, Jack Zinda and Partner Cole Gumm walk through their real-life trial strategies—from confronting corporate negligence to handling disfiguring dog bites and trucking cases involving drug use. They share how expert witnesses, tactical depositions, and deep client trust can uncover the liability others miss.
Topics Covered:
- Tactics for uncovering apartment complex liability in a dog bite case
- The power of expert witnesses in trucking and pediatric burn injuries
- How to prepare for trial 90+ days out
- Tips for mentoring new attorneys and building client trust
- Mental health and work-life balance as a litigator
Listen to learn how small details can lead to big wins.
Have a question for Jack? Don't hesitate to reach out!
jz@zindalaw.com
https://www.zdfirm.com/
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Jack Zinda (00:05):
Everyone. Jack Zinda here. Thanks for tuning to
another episode of the EffectiveLure podcast. Today, I'm talking
to one of the best trawlers inthe country, one of my good
friends, Cole Gum. Cole's apartner here at Zindalar Group.
Him and I have worked on dozensof catastrophic injury and awful
death cases, everything from gasexplosions to car wrecks to
workplace injuries. He's gonnashare some of the things he's
picked up over the years andsome of the tactics that he's
used to be successful. Hope youenjoy our conversation. Thanks.
(00:28):
Cole, what's up, man?
So good to see you.
Cole Gumm (00:29):
You too.
Jack Zinda (00:30):
How are you doing? I am doing incredible.
Cole Gumm (00:32):
Awesome. It's a great weather, and it's a good day.
Jack Zinda (00:35):
Yeah. It's it really is. I I tell you know, people
complain about the heat here,but I think Austin's such a
beautiful city. It's worthputting up with.
Cole Gumm (00:42):
It's worth its weight in gold.
Jack Zinda (00:44):
It is. So, man, how long have we worked together?
Cole Gumm (00:47):
I think nine, maybe going on ten years.
Jack Zinda (00:49):
Yeah. It's it's been a while, and I can't even
remember what we talked about inyour interview. But why don't
Cole Gumm (00:54):
you bring the listeners back to what got you
interested in practicing law?Yeah, so I've always had a
mission, or a passion forhelping people and wanting to
advance that mission of helpingpeople. And, you know, I decided
I wanted to go to law schoolnear the end of my undergraduate
career and ended up going toBaylor, which I loved. And I
fell in love with litigation atBaylor. And when I got out, I
(01:17):
started working at a smallpersonal injury firm and really
just became attached to thesubject matter, that the
rewarding qualities that it gaveme as an attorney.
And so I got into it and fell inlove with it and run-in since.
Jack Zinda (01:29):
And your wife owns a bailout squalor. Yeah. And she
also works at the firm as well,which is an interesting side
note.
Cole Gumm (01:37):
Yeah. And it's it's great, though. We we have it's
it's fun. We get to do what welove, you know, personally and
professionally together. It'spretty cool.
Jack Zinda (01:44):
Yeah. That's awesome. How how's it been try
you tried a case togetherrecently. How was that?
Cole Gumm (01:48):
It was awesome. It was a great experience. This was
our third trial together whereshe sat there with me last
summer during the first two. Andthis one, just having you there,
it was a lot of fun. It was myfirst trial in Colorado.
So that was one dynamic of, youknow, flying out there and doing
it, you know, in a differentstate. But, know, it was it's
(02:09):
really cool that we can enjoythat together and it was fun
doing that.
Jack Zinda (02:12):
And you're one of the attorneys at our firm that
works on some of the mostcomplicated cases. You know,
sometimes you've had situationswhere you found source of
recovery in one thought or foundliability that didn't appear
obvious. Can you think of anycases you've worked on where,
you know, at first it lookedlike a tough case either because
there weren't enough moneyavailable or man, it's gonna be
tough to prove liability.
Cole Gumm (02:30):
Yeah, I, you know, I think I I go back to that dog
case dog bite case that wehandled out of Longview. Yeah.
When I first started and it wasprobably the biggest case at
that time that I'd ever workedon, and it was something that,
you know, from the outside,looked like a difficult case
because we weren't sure as towhether there would be source of
recovery on dog owner, whetherthe apartment complex can be
(02:52):
held liable. And ultimately,were able to, you know, we found
a bunch of good evidence thatthe apartment complex knew about
the dog and knew that thedangerous propensities. We were
able to uncover that.
We found the source of recoveryand the case was a very big
success. Let's talk about
Jack Zinda (03:06):
that case for a second. So it was an interesting
case. I remember this. So thiswas a case where this wonderful
woman was mauled by, was it one,two, there's a one dog and she
lived in a nice apartmentcomplex in Longview where I'm
from. And I think she waswalking back from, she was going
into her apartment and this dogjust jumped on her and kind of
(03:28):
pushed through the door, right?
Cole Gumm (03:29):
Yeah, so there was a common kind of community area
behind all of the apartmentsthat was in enclosed, it was
fenced in and she was walkingthrough that area and this other
young girl who owned this dogjust opened the door, let the
dog out. Dog just ran andattacked the client and tackled
her. I mean, it was bad, but itcould have been worse. Mean, it
(03:50):
was a vicious attack.
Jack Zinda (03:51):
And it was a situation where the dog owner
actually did not have muchinsurance, if any at all. And so
we obviously had a case againstthe dog owner's insurance
policy, but he was trying tofigure out, okay, how else can
we help this client? And I thinkthey may have talked to three or
four other firms that turneddown the case and you did an
excellent job in figuring outthe next steps. Walk me through
(04:12):
that investigation and how youmade that case work?
Cole Gumm (04:14):
Absolutely. So I think one of the biggest things
that we made a decision on earlyon, and I remember talking to
you about it was the dog owneroffered the policy of limits
right away. And it was whetherdo we accept that and just go
after the apartment complex andwe kept the dog owner in case.
And I think that drove valuefrom the apartment complex. Just
knowing that if we did go totrial, she was a very bad client
(04:38):
for for the defense.
And so we wanted that to beshown at trial. So that was one
thing of just knowing that theapartment complex would would
end up paying by keeping her in.And then, know, as we got
through discovery, I remember wewe filed a motion to compel and
we're trying to compel any notesor anything that the apartment
complex would have had to showthe their knowledge of the
(04:59):
dangerous dog. And I remember wewe filed the motion to compel
and then they ultimatelysubmitted before hearing a lot
of handwritten notes fromemployees who had been chased,
attacked, cornered by that dog.And we were able to use that
obviously to show their theirknowledge of of the dangerous
dog.
Jack Zinda (05:16):
Yeah. I remember I remember we there was this
specific incident reports wherethe they were fighting over who
had to go take care of thatplace in the apartment because
they've been attacked so manytimes from it.
Cole Gumm (05:24):
Yeah. Remember the one of the statements that was
written out by one of employeeswas a a gentleman, a maintenance
man who had went in to to dosome work, and the dog chased
him into an empty unit. Ended uphaving to hide in a closet
basically and until they get ridof the dog. And so we we had
probably three or
Jack Zinda (05:40):
four of those types of statements in that went a
long way. Well, in what decisionprocess did you make to know
that you should push the casefurther than just taking that
initial policy? What made whatwas the trigger? Say, hey. We
need to dig a little deeperhere.
So what else is available?
Cole Gumm (05:52):
You know, think something that we always talk
about, especially something youyou preach is, you know, I think
looking at your damages and whatis the case worth? If if you had
unlimited source of recovery,you could go and spend as much
money on the case, what is itworth? And in this case, I mean,
the dog attacked her face, shehad severe disfigurement to her
face. And so knowing thatallowed us to really just put
(06:16):
the time and effort into, youknow, the amount of money from
the dog owner wasn't going to beenough. There was there was an
upside and a benefit to takingmaybe a little bit of risk and
spending some money to keepgoing.
And we were lucky we did becausewe dug in and found some real
good stuff.
Jack Zinda (06:29):
Yeah, and I think that's a great lesson. So first,
making sure that you aresearching for every source of
recovery in a case. And I knowsomething that I like to do is
make a list of anybody who'sattached to the potential
defendant and then figure outeliminate them as a potential
cause of the incident. Yep.Right?
And in this case, the apartmentcomplex had a lot of notice
(06:51):
about this dog attacking people.The other thing you did a great
job in that was taking the dogowner's deposition even though
they can conceded on liability.And she, like you said, was a
terrible witness. She wasextremely racist in her
deposition, which was reallypowerful showing, and she had
zero remorse whatsoever for whathappened to our poor client. In
fact, made it sound like shethought she deserved it.
Cole Gumm (07:11):
That's I was just gonna say that's kind of on top
of that. It wasn't even that shewasn't sorry. It was that my
client had it coming for somereason or another. Don't know
why.
Jack Zinda (07:20):
I think that brings up an important tip. It's like
you wanna tell the story fromthe perspective of what did the
person that caused the harmlearn from it and how is this
going to make things better? Ifthey don't have your remorse,
that can really add a lot ofdamages at the end of the case.
Cole Gumm (07:32):
Absolutely. We always talk about that of, you know,
sometimes the best answer in adeposition is them fighting you
on something that is so justbasic of, you know, if someone
runs a red light that you say,you know, you you agree that I
want you to stop at a red light.If they say no to that, that's a
pretty powerful, bit of adviceor bit as a fact that you can
use against them that they justnever can accept responsibility.
(07:53):
And you know, another thing Ilove about working with
Jack Zinda (07:55):
you is you were fearless to take cases at trial.
When did you know, like youwould enjoy taking the case
trial? When did that bug hityou? Did it take a while or was
it from the beginning?
Cole Gumm (08:04):
Yeah, would say, you know, obviously there's
apprehension and nerves goinginto any trial, no matter how
many times you've done it. Andso obviously there's more at the
beginning when you've neverreally done it. But, you know, I
would say Baylor really helped,you know, get you ready to be in
the courtroom. And like I said,that's what made me fall in love
with litigation. So I knew Icould do it.
And then going out and doing it,you know, just gives you more
confidence and you feel, youknow, much more comfortable and
(08:26):
you learn from every case.
Jack Zinda (08:27):
Well, but there's no Baylor has a really intense
trial program. That's where Colewent there. I went there as
well. So did Cole's wife. Mhmm.
I don't think you all overlappedat all too. And it's the
professors when you're doing amock trial and they're the
judge. If you get a mistake,like if they'll be in the
audience, listen to you do anopening statement, if you object
wrong, they'll dock you a lettergrade or throw you out of class.
(08:50):
And I've never had a judgenearly as strict as as that.
Cole Gumm (08:55):
I can't agree more in terms of you know, I look back
on we we do something called bigtrial where you you basically
practice a case and and gothrough trial. It's usually two
to three days. And I justremember I don't think I've ever
been as nervous as I was, youknow, in that setting versus a
real courtroom, and a lot ofthat comes from going through
all of that and deal with it.
Jack Zinda (09:15):
I remember there was a there was a woman in my class
and she was like top three, topfour in the the class and we're
doing a mock trial and we're onopposing sides and she never got
anything wrong. She was alwaysreally organized, did a great
job and she objected but didn'tstand. And the professor said,
you know, I'll use a pseudonymMs. Smith. You need to object.
(09:36):
Stand when you object. Okay?Next time comes up. And this is
someone who never makes amistake in class, always gets,
like, perfect grades. Forgets todo it again.
And she says, miss Smith, if youdo not stand up while objecting,
I'm gonna dock you a lettergrade. And this this woman's,
like, third in our class. Sureenough, the third time around,
she doesn't stand. Yeah. I waslike, oh.
And they did it to any doctor ofthe livers.
Cole Gumm (09:56):
Just gonna say, and and they would follow through
with whatever the threat was,and it made you realize that I'd
better do what I'm being askedof me what's being asked me or,
you know, improve on what I'mbeing, you know, critiqued on.
So very powerful.
Jack Zinda (10:09):
I know. I remember that and also, like, objecting
the right way and taking thatpositions. I think you bring up
a good point is if you're a newlitigator, get yourself out
there and get in the courtroom,try things. Don't you know, some
of it is just things in life ingeneral. If you don't go out
there and do it, you're notgonna have the confidence to do
it again, and it becomes more ofa game more fun what you've done
a couple times.
Cole Gumm (10:28):
Absolutely. And I think looking at just who, you
know, our most successfullawyers at our firm are
generally, you know, people whoearly on are ready to, you know,
dive in and do whatever's askedof them, teaming up with a more
experienced lawyer, learningkind of the ropes. Remember when
I started, you know, we wouldhave a morning huddle, I
remember, and you were my directsupervisor, and that was just
such a great experience ofseeing how it should be done,
(10:51):
how to
Jack Zinda (10:51):
do it
Cole Gumm (10:51):
right. And now I hope to pass that on to the people
that you know are on your end.
Jack Zinda (10:56):
When when you're getting ready for trial, what
are when you really startgetting ready for go time? It's
like I know we're preppingthroughout the whole case, but
when you say, now it's time toget down and really focus on
this case and let's get thisready to go.
Cole Gumm (11:07):
You know, I think we always preach ninety to one
hundred and twenty days. We havewe have checklists starting at
one hundred and twenty days, anda lot of that is obviously
before discoveries ended. Andand so it allows you makes you
put it makes sure all of yourare in a row. So you're really
prepping for, you know, eight,five months out of what will a
trial look like? What evidencedo I still need to get?
What do I need to compel? Andand so it starts there. And then
(11:30):
obviously, as you get closer,there are you know, it's much
more regimen and how much timeyou're spending on on prepping.
But, yeah, ninety to a hundredand twenty days is when you're
you should be full blown. I'mI'm getting ready for trial.
Jack Zinda (11:41):
What about putting together your opening statement
board? Do you have any tips forthat? Do you like to practice it
a lot? Do you like to kind ofweigh closer to Toronto? And
I've heard it work both ways.
In fact, I found when I try toget that ready too soon, it
doesn't feel right when it getsclose to trucks. Things have
changed so much, and you kindaget a feel for the case.
Cole Gumm (11:56):
I I agree. So generally, like, for Vordeaux
Vordeaux outlines, I'm usuallydoing those maybe a week in
advance of of trial, and that'sbecause at that point I've had a
lot of discussions with theother side. I know what their
issues are, and I know thethings that I need to question
the potential jurors about. Andso that's it's usually about a
week that I'm, you know, outthat I'm starting to work on on
those outlines. And when itcomes to opening or closing
(12:19):
arguments, those outlines arealways changing even through
trial as you're seeing theevidence come in or you're
seeing the reaction from thejury to certain facts and just
always wanting to to make sureyou're advocating in the best
possible way.
Jack Zinda (12:32):
And was it tough developing your own style? I
know there's all sorts ofadvocacy books. You know,
there's David Ball. There's allsorts of books out there. Here's
how you should give an openingstatement, and here's how you
should do poor dire.
How did you develop your style,or did you say, I'm gonna just
go after the same way thisperson does it?
Cole Gumm (12:46):
Well, I think it's a little bit of both in terms of
you know the those outlines orkind of the templates that you
can go and find anywhere. Thoseare very helpful. They obviously
work and there's reasons whythey are so popular, But then
being able to adopt that in away where by you following that
outline, you're still beingyourself. I think I truly
(13:06):
believe that jury jurors willwill understand if someone is
being themselves and beingcandid versus not. And so I
think a lot of it is tellingyour story in a way that you
believe it with conviction andand adopting your own style, but
following a lot of, you know,what what you can find out there
from other sources.
Well, to me,
Jack Zinda (13:25):
it's always amazing how small a courtroom feels when
you're in it. You see it on TV,in your head, you think this
giant place, really, it's like aa conference room. Absolutely.
And you're from here to there tothe jurors. And if you act like
you're putting on a show orplay, it becomes so stilt and
becomes so unattenticinauthentic.
And I've seen some greattrawlers get big results that
aren't very articulate. Youknow, the jury just believes in
what they're saying and knowsthey're being credible.
Cole Gumm (13:46):
Yep. And for example, in in my opening and or closing,
a lot of times I find myselfreading my the outline of of
what I put together because Iknow that I've spent so much
time on making sure that everyword in there is right and
everything that I wanna say isin there that at that point, I
know that even if I'm reading itand I'm not, you know, engaged
with the jury so much, I knowthat I'm they can tell that what
(14:09):
I've written down here is myit's my own words and my own
take on the case. And luckilythat, you know, I I I found that
jurors will follow that.
Jack Zinda (14:16):
Yeah. I think keeping yourself through is so
critical. And whatever yourstyle is, you know, that's the
way you should try your case anddon't try to be someone else.
You wanna be what feelsauthentic to you so you can
connect with people on a humanlevel. You know, Mark Lanier, I
went to hear him speak a fewyears ago, and he had a good
saying, which I really had animpression on me.
He said, know, our job is totell the truth. And when I
(14:38):
started thinking about that, itreally made my approach to
practicing law and being atrawler seem a lot easier. Like,
we're not trying to hide stuff,we're trying to explain what
happened from our client's pointof view and why we have a
righteous case. Like it was thecase selection, right? If you
don't have a good caseselection, you can't do that.
But if you do, you really needto pull out what the client
story is. And you've done agreat job in building a great
relationship with your clients.They all love you and you're
(15:00):
getting good rapport and theylisten to you. What tips do you
have for building that rapportwith clients?
Cole Gumm (15:05):
It starts, I think, from the first conversation. I
always want to, you know, Ialways start by introducing
myself, telling them who I am,how long I've been here, what
types of cases I work on, howtheir case fits into what I do
and how much experience I haveand really developing that
rapport, like you said, rightfrom the very beginning. And I
think the more genuine you are,the more candid you are, the
(15:27):
more you care. And I think, youknow, good trial lawyers, they
absolutely care about theirclients. And so I think, like we
talked about, I mean, a clientcan tell if you're being genuine
or not.
I truly believe in everythingthat I do. So there's nothing
fake about, you know, developingthat rapport.
Jack Zinda (15:44):
And I think time is really important, especially if
you have a client that sufferedreally catastrophic injuries,
cannot substitute time. Everytime I've gone to a client's
house, haven't rereaded it. Andyou really get a sense of what
their real story, what theirreal life is, what they've been
through. But if they were awrongful death case going
through photo albums, meetingneighbors, seeing what they have
(16:04):
on the walls and also helps yougot a real stoic client that
will not has a hard time tellingtheir story. You can tell it
through other people.
I cannot tell you how many timeswe've had cases where the client
says, I don't have anyone whocould be a non economic damages
witness. And then you startasking, well, who do you meet in
the morning? Oh, I have thisneighbor that I walk with every
day and I have a coworker I seeevery day and I go volunteer at
(16:27):
this place. Before you know, youhave eight or nine witnesses you
work with, but if you don'tspend that time, you can get out
of that.
Cole Gumm (16:34):
I I remember from again when very early on, I
remember you you teaching meabout, hey, just have a walk
through the day. What do they doday to day? What's their Monday,
Tuesday, Wednesday, and so on?And they will start telling you
a story where you can pick up onwhat's important to them and go
and find those people that canspeak to what is important to
them. So I absolutely agree.
Jack Zinda (16:53):
It drives me nuts sometimes when attorneys are
working on large damages casesand they don't want to put in
that time and effort becausewhat are you getting paid to do
then, right? That's how you getthe extra value for your clients
is going and be able to telltheir story what they've been
through. It also builds amazingtrust with the client. They'll
trust you so much more ifthey've seen you on a human
level And you've been them, seewhat their lives are like day
(17:15):
in, out, you know?
Cole Gumm (17:16):
And even when you've you've got difficult clients, I
find that working through thatthat relationship when when
things aren't going the way thatthey expect it to be going, You
know, litigation can be verystressful for the client. And I
think the more you just you youaddress those issues and you you
take them head on, you talk tothe client, counsel them on why
(17:37):
things are the way they are,again, they will understand that
you're doing everything in yourpower. And and over time, I
think even the most difficultclients will respect and
appreciate once they realize,yeah, that person's on my side
and and they've got my story,you know, in my best interest in
mind. You know, you had a
Jack Zinda (17:56):
case recently where it involved a truck driver and
some illicit drugs. Yep. And yougot even more great information
than just the fact they were ondrugs at the time of the
incident. Tell tell me aboutthat case and how you were able
to pull that information outbecause it added, you know, ten,
twenty x value to the case.
Cole Gumm (18:12):
Yes. It was a trucking case out of Houston. I
represented a young college kidwho was home for the summer and
he was working at a warehousethere in Houston and he was out
sitting in his truck for lunch,just eating his lunch, when all
of a sudden he was struck bythis work truck and that driver
was on drugs at the time. And sowe obviously filed the lawsuit.
(18:37):
And by getting it, we learnedthat not only obviously, this
wasn't his first time he had hada prior stint with the company.
He had actually taken a yearwhere he was he was in jail for
a year. And during that time,the company was talking to him
about giving him his job back.And all of those those charges
and his ongoing criminal stuffwas all related to drugs. And so
we were able to show that it'snot just this one time, it's a
(18:59):
pattern of behavior of youallowing and just turning your
eye, know, turning a blind eyeto very blaring red flags. And
so at the end of the case, youknow, we just, at some point
they were, they didn't want toproduce any more documents or
put anyone else up fordeposition.
And at that point, we were ableto get resolved.
Jack Zinda (19:16):
Alright. So let me set this scene. Alright. So our
client is parked, and this guycomes and hits him in his
commercial work truck, then heflees. Right?
Cole Gumm (19:23):
Yep. Well, no. He ended up actually, he was
stopped afterwards because heended up plowing into about four
cars cars out there. And so, no,he was ended he was found at the
scene incoherent, and the policeended up almost having to break
in to his vehicle to get himout. And and that's when he was
brought to the hospital.
Jack Zinda (19:40):
Was brought to the hospital, and then he gets
caught puffing, which I guess isnot, he's taking on a drug test,
which for all you who arelooking for ways to do
Cole Gumm (19:48):
that, he's like
Jack Zinda (19:49):
pro tip. And so then we find out he's huffing at the
hospital and you keep diggingfurther, right? You know, most
attorneys would have taken that,you know, that and just given up
and taken because they made areally good offer. The damages
in this case weren't massive andthey made a really strong offer
earlier, but we kept diggingfurther. So tell us, tell me
about what you found when youstarted talking to the employer
(20:11):
and doing your written discover.
Cole Gumm (20:13):
Yeah. And so, you know, we always talk about if
something happens, it's not justa coincidence. It's usually a
pattern of some type of badbehavior that ultimately led to
what happened. And so by digginginto the, employer, we were able
to, again, find all of the priordrug issues that he had had,
their knowledge of it. As westarted and kept digging into
(20:33):
it, we obviously got the 911calls, and we found that there
had been calls about his Iraqdriving for forty five minutes
or so leading up to this.
People calling and saying, youknow, he's gonna this guy's
gonna kill someone. And so therewas a lot of that. And and then
when we took the the corporaterepresentatives deposition, and
it was the female owner of thecompany, and I think they had
(20:54):
probably 100 employees or so. Soit was a decent sized operation.
She told us about multiple callsthat were made in the minutes
leading up to that to theiroffice of people saying, you
know, you've got this guy outhere, you need to do something.
And at which point they had thecapability of, you know, they
tracking his vehicle and theyjust didn't do anything, didn't
(21:14):
try to reach out to him. Andagain, that pattern of behavior,
their hiring practices, allowingthis guy to come back after
he's, you know, incarcerated fordrugs and and all of that. Those
circumstances lamp to the resultthat we got
Jack Zinda (21:28):
when I think that's that's a great point too. So you
know, Cole's doing a great jobhere in telling the story from
way before the incidenthappened. And this driver who
Trimble Soul, you know, had beenarrested for similar things
before while working at theemployer goes incarcerated,
comes back and works for theemployer again. And it's not
something where you shouldn'tgive people second chances, but
(21:49):
they didn't have any guardrails.They weren't going to do direct
testing themselves and they putthis person back on the streets
and put the whole community indanger by that decision, which
probably there were some costsavings involved because he was
probably cheaper than gettingsome with a clean driving
history.
And it's fine to be charitable,but not at the risk of
everyone's safety and health.And thank goodness our client
(22:10):
wasn't killed because it couldhave been way worse than what it
was.
Cole Gumm (22:14):
And to speak to that point even a little bit further,
when when it got to the point ofexperts and hiring our experts,
we hired a liability expert, afleet safety expert who could
talk about the hiring practices.And their defense was that we
are a second chain supplier. Andour expert was able to actually
kind of turn that on them andsay, then that is why it's so
(22:35):
important that you if you'regonna be a second chance
employer, that you take all ofthe necessary steps to ensure
that whatever that pattern ofbehavior was before is not
continuing. And here they justturned a blind eye to it and
didn't didn't wanna know, Ithink, the truth.
Jack Zinda (22:48):
Yeah. For sure. And that's that's second chance
employer is someone who's goingto give someone a second chance
with boundaries and control, notsomeone who's going to send them
back out there with a bunch ofpaint.
Cole Gumm (22:58):
Yep, exactly.
Jack Zinda (23:00):
Call something else. That's another reason I really
like working. You can go reallydeep on cases and kinda get into
the weeds on the tactics. Canthink of any cases where you
hired an expert and they kindarevealed something that you
didn't expect or you were topull something out that was
really important?
Cole Gumm (23:14):
Yeah. I think I can think of a couple trucking
cases, for example, where, Itruly believe in leaning on your
expert to they're the subjectmatter experts. And so, there
have been a couple truckingcases where there's regulations
that have been violated that I'mnot spotting that issue. And so
and that can be the differencebetween a, you know, a good
(23:35):
result and a great result onceyou uncover some of those
things. And so specifically intrucking cases, can think of
several where the regulationsup, those violations ultimately
added, you know, its weight andgoal with what ultimately we
were able to get out of thecase.
Jack Zinda (23:48):
Yeah. And I also say, I think it's really good
advice to go to the scene withyour experts if you can or send
someone to that because one, youwanna make sure they're looking
at everything you want them tolook at. I remember we had a new
attorney that joined the firmand I thought they had a lot of
trucking experience and we had acase, it was a death case and a
truck had been crossing the roadand it was at night and so it
(24:09):
was blocking the roadway and ourclient's vehicle ran into it. So
I send this new attorney, notnew to the practice, but new to
us, said they had a lot ofexperience and go out with the
expert and they do thisinspection and guess what they
don't look at? They don't lookat the reflectors.
And this, the whole case was areflector case. And I was like,
how did Joe
Cole Gumm (24:27):
not look at the reflectors?
Jack Zinda (24:29):
And he was like, oh yeah, we should have looked at
the reflectors. And it just wasa lesson to me of don't take
anything for granted. Everybodyhas a bad day and no one's gonna
care about the case as much asyou do. Sometimes the client
doesn't care as much as you. So,like, getting out there to see
with your own eyes what's goingon.
And we always preach,
Cole Gumm (24:44):
you know, having an attorney at whatever inspection
you're doing for that exactreason. The expert doesn't know
the the case like you do andwhat the issues that you're you
know are very important. Andgetting out there and being with
the expert, having them show youwhat they're finding. Again, it
allows you to understand thecase in a way that I think a lot
of attorneys don't get tounderstand the case because
they're not going out and doingthose things.
Jack Zinda (25:05):
Well, and another tip to remember is don't share a
lot on your side, but listen tothe other side a lot. I can't
tell you how many times thedefense will send a junior
associate out to the scene.Yeah. And I'll be in the
inspection or you'll be in theinspection. And this associate
tells us everything.
Like, we don't know why youhaven't painted. We saw the
file. These damages are bad.We're so screwed on liability.
(25:26):
And we're like, wow, thank youfor sharing all this
information.
So we know like where you're atin the case.
Cole Gumm (25:30):
It's crazy. It happens more than you think. It
really does. I remember a casethat went to trial last summer.
We had a there was a juniorassociate and she was new to the
firm.
She and she came into adeposition and kind of some of
the same things. She juststarted off the record telling
me how she felt about the case,what they've been reporting to
the carrier. And it allowed meto kind of tailor how I argued
(25:52):
the case knowing what wouldaffect their decisions.
Jack Zinda (25:55):
Yeah. A 100%. And I I know some people have kind of
a scourge to earth approach withtheir opponents. I like to get
to know defense attorneys we'reworking with. One, it's good
just to to have a good cordialrelationship.
But two, you know, in myexperience, they will share way
more than we will if and theirtheir level of dedication to the
insurance company is not asstrong as ours too. The the
client doesn't mean they'redoing anything unethical, but
(26:16):
they'll they'll lead up you tosomething that you may not know
otherwise.
Cole Gumm (26:19):
Absolutely. And I I think, you know, reputation
matters in this industry. And Ithink you can be a jerk all the
time if you want to be. But Ithink that, you know, very
quickly, you're going find thatyou're not going to have any
clients and you're probably notgoing to get paid on many cases.
And I think just a pattern ofbeing respectful, but being
diligent in what you do,advocating for your client.
(26:40):
I know that defense attorneyswill respect some of the
decisions I make knowing thatI'm out there trying to do the
best for my client and it'snothing personal, you know, with
the other attorney on the otherside.
Jack Zinda (26:49):
I agree and never be dishonest with opposing counsel,
you know, never lie. I thinkonce you've lied, you're kind of
screwed your reputation and Itry to always be professional,
but also be firm. And it'sfunny, even if you are putting
them in a tough spot, if you'rebeing ethical about it, they
don't, they're not gonna hold itagainst you because you're just
doing your job for your client.Now if you're a jerk for no
reason, that's gonna follow youand just buyer beware because
you're gonna be in that spot atsome point needing that.
Cole Gumm (27:11):
Yeah. And defense attorneys, know if if what
you're telling is the truth.They they can tell. Just like I
can tell if a defense lawyerreally believes what he's
saying. And and so by beinghonest but firm, like you said,
I think once you gain therespect of your opponent or the
defense attorney, it makesthings a lot easier.
(27:33):
Yeah. As you've kind of gonethrough all of that.
Jack Zinda (27:35):
Well, you've worked on, to switch gears a little
bit, on a lot of cases withkids, and that can be tough to
both pull out the damages and totry to get, you know, a
settlement done sometimesbecause the parents are
involved. They may notunderstand that they're not
gonna get any of money and alsogetting what happened to the
kids pulled out of them. Can youthink of a case where you dealt
with kids and you were able to,you know, explain the damages
(27:56):
more than maybe were there?
Cole Gumm (27:57):
Yeah, so we've got a case against a diner where a cup
of coffee was put in front of an11 old baby and he grabbed the
coffee cup and poured it allover himself, requiring him to
be life flighted and stayed inthe burn units. And, you know,
that child can talk. And so tobe able to really understand
(28:19):
what he's going through, wehired, you know, a pediatric
burn expert who could talk aboutwhat burn injuries do to a
person, especially a youngchild, how that developmental
delays can begin at such anearly age when something like
that happens. And then we didhire a mental anguish
psychologist who could talk tojust exactly what this kid who
(28:41):
can't speak now is going to dealwith for the rest of his life.
And being able to show thatthrough not only your experts,
but then also, you've got all ofthe non economic damages
witnesses.
So this kid lives with hisgrandparents and his mom and
dad. And so going and taking thedeposition of the grandparents,
what have you noticed? You know,kind of taking all the further
you can get the the better youcan get information from someone
(29:04):
who's as disinterested in thecase, the better. And so, you
know, the parents are alwaysgonna be there and advocating
for their their child. But whenyou hear it from a neighbor, a
teacher, someone who reallydoesn't have any interest in it
as to how that changed the kidspatterns of behavior, I think
that goes a long way and againgoes to being able to show and
tell your client story.
Jack Zinda (29:24):
Oh, 100%. I think taking what happened to them and
what they've gone through andtrying to slow it down and
explain what those thingsactually mean. I remember the
first burn case I worked on andactually walking through how you
debride skin and how you feel itfor months and months and you
hit phantom pain, phantom allsorts of things that you
wouldn't think of. And if youjust say, hey, they had a burn
(29:44):
recovery, it doesn't break thosethings down into small pieces.
And I remember I had a case whenI first started practicing when
I went to mental anguish whereour client had a seeing eye dog
and they were hit with theseeing eye dog.
The seeing eye dog wasn't hurt,but it had PTSD, so it couldn't
be a seeing eye dog anymorebecause it got freaked out
around cars. And of course, thisyoung man couldn't have a dog
(30:07):
like that because he needed a Cand I dog. And he was just
devastated about that. And so wehired someone who dealt with C
and I dogs and he raised them,trained them, and his wife had
had three, she was blind. And heexplained how the relationship
between an owner and a dog canbe stronger than that between a
mother and a child becausethey're so codependent.
(30:27):
And that story was so powerfulcoming from this gentleman whose
wife, he does this for a living,his wife had had two dogs,
really brought out a lot ofdamage. You say, it's just a
just a dog that has PTSD, butthen you hear the whole story
and explain what actuallyhappened. What did that mean?
That brings out so muchAbsolutely. So much richness to
the case.
Cole Gumm (30:44):
And that's a great example of where think a lot of
people would just, you know,what is the value of that dog? I
know in that case, went out andpriced how much does it actually
take to to create a good seeingeye dog? What you learned was it
takes years and it's yeah,hundreds, $100,000 or something
like that. And you were able tobuild up a bit damage model on
(31:06):
something that I think a lot ofpeople would have, you know,
chalked up as a few $100 lossand, and really just digging in
and, and understanding what yourclient's story and what that
damage really is can add a lot
Jack Zinda (31:19):
of value. And if you've got a death case and
you're trying to, let's say youdon't have a great relationship
between your client and theperson was deceased or on its
face doesn't look like a goodrelationship. You can really
tell the story about what couldhave been, what's missing. I had
a case where this gentleman, hewas a nice guy. He worked in
construction, kind of acarpenter, and he died in his
(31:42):
early fifties from a fallbecause there was a lack of fall
protection.
And his adult daughter hired us,but he wasn't there to raise
her. They had just rekindled therelationship, like, that year,
and she was in her mid twenties.And you think, that's a tough
case. You have an adult child,not a great relationship. This
is the only person that couldtell that story, the only person
who has a claim.
(32:03):
But we were able to tell thestory about what was hoping for
the future. You know, he wasgonna be at her wedding. You
know? They had a Disney they'vedone a Disney role together that
year, there's pictures of themtogether. How she pictured him
being involved in her futurekids' lives.
And that story brought out a lotof what could have been.
Absolutely. And that's that'syou gotta be able to tell that.
Cole Gumm (32:21):
Yep. And and again, it takes time. It takes effort.
You've got to go out and learnthat. And I think doing it day
in and day out will add so muchvalue to your practice.
Jack Zinda (32:32):
Tell me about, you know, when you're at trial, what
is your setup like with yourteam and how do you are you able
to stay focused on what'shappening in the trial without
getting distracted by all thisstuff like, hey, do have the
right exhibit? Do I have rightnoise? What do you like to do
set up practically?
Cole Gumm (32:44):
So I like to focus on I take it day by day. So I I
know which witnesses are gonnabe called that day or whether
we're doing opening or go dire.And and that usually, obviously,
we've prepped it up to, youknow, a week, two weeks out from
trial. Everything should bebasically put together. And like
I said, the outlines may change.
And so during the day that I'myou may have three witnesses,
(33:05):
I'm focused on solely what areyou know, what evidence do I
need to get out of thosewitnesses, making sure that I've
got the questions that are themost important mapped out. And
then I've got Chelsea who, youknow, can handle all of the
other stuff. And so I thinkfocusing on what's important is
very important, knowing what youcan delegate to someone else to
handle. And and, again, it's allabout just being able to tell
(33:28):
the client's story whatever waythat whatever that means.
Jack Zinda (33:30):
Yeah. And Chelsea is Cole's wife, for doesn't catch
that. And she is one of the bestattorneys I've ever worked with.
So smart. Such so great onstrategy and so great on her
motion practice and her pelletwork.
It's just unreal. And she's madeher break, broke in a couple of
cases first for sure in thatfront. You know, and I would
tell you thinking ahead isreally key for trial, I think.
You know, I think and I foundrelaxing is important, know,
(33:52):
because every trial, a lot ofstuff is gonna go wrong. Judge
is gonna say you have to callthis witness now, not later,
move the order.
And I'm so OCD that took a whilefor me to get over, but we can
just relax. Okay. It's justnatural. It's gonna happen. Yep.
Just get ready to roll with thepunches and and figure out what
is it that I need to do to win.
Cole Gumm (34:07):
Yep. No. Exactly. And I I I cannot wholeheartedly
agree about relaxing. I know theSaturdays before trial, you
know, I think a lot of peoplewould be prepping.
I take that entire day off.Yeah, just knowing that I need I
need that time just to clearyour mind of whatever you're
about to have to go through. Andthen get back on it the next
day. Even at night when we getout of trial, there's still a
(34:30):
lot of work to do that night,but take an hour or two.
Jack Zinda (34:32):
Go,
Cole Gumm (34:32):
you know, go for a run, go, you know, walk around
the block, whatever you need todo to kind of clear your mind
and restart. I said, true, Ifind
Jack Zinda (34:39):
that when I get a good night's sleep and I've
exercised, I'm so much moresharp. Wish in law school I had
not crammed as much. Becausestaying up late and not
sleeping, you're just not assharp, you know.
Cole Gumm (34:50):
And that is important with trial. You know, you could
stay up all night if you want,keep working and keep prepping,
but the next day that's notgoing to be the best for you. So
kind of that balance of beingable to do the things that need
to get done, but also givingyourself the time to relax and
get the sleep that you need.
Jack Zinda (35:07):
And what about, you know, when you're deciding how
to value a case? So at whatpoint do you start looking at
the value of file? Let's sayit's a bigger case, something
with serious injuries that, youknow, you're not sure what the
range is going be. When do startlooking at that and trying to
line that up?
Cole Gumm (35:22):
I I mean, wanna be doing it as, you know, as soon
as you can from the time you getthe intake of what do you think
the case could be worth. Andobviously, that's always gonna
be changing. But as you aregetting closer, let's say, a
mediation, you know, we usuallystart probably thirty to forty
five days out, making sure we'vegot all of, you know, our
evidence in line that thedefense has everything that
(35:42):
they're gonna need to value it.And then, you know, we often
will, you know, roundtable casestogether, talk about what do you
think this case is worth, whatdoes, you know, the attorney
down the hall think, ask yourfriends and family, people who
aren't lawyers, what do youthink about this case? Because
those are ultimately yourjurors.
And then focus groups. We usefocus groups to tell to let us
(36:02):
or give us some more data pointsof what what do strangers think
about this case? Becausesometimes it's hard when you're
so personally involved in thecase to see it from kind of a
bird's eye view. Yeah.
Jack Zinda (36:13):
I I completely agree. And, you know, look at
what the upside is not. You wantto consider the downside, but
especially early in a case, lookat what could the upside be
because usually a case getsbetter for us as you get more
litigation. Really, does it getworse unless you don't know
what's going on with the clientand then it could get worse if
you're surprised by somethinglike that.
Cole Gumm (36:29):
Well, I think of some of our biggest cases at the firm
have been cases that I think ifif we look at the intake, it
looks like something it's aminor case.
Jack Zinda (36:36):
It's a
Cole Gumm (36:36):
moderate motor vehicle collision and it ends up
being a multimillion dollarresult. And so like you said,
look at the upside, knowingwhat, you know, who the bad
actor is on the other side, alot of that plays a role in the
value of the case.
Jack Zinda (36:49):
Yeah, I cannot tell how many times we've had a
situation like that. I rememberwe had a case early in my
career. We got a call from awoman. She was a grandmother and
her son had been killed in atruck wreck near here in San
Marcos and everybody blamed thedriver of that vehicle, which
was her son. So it was acommercial truck 18 wheeler,
actually a cement truck, hitsand kills our client and injures
(37:10):
three others.
And everyone says our client ranthe red line. And she called
three law firms, turned down bythree law firms and she comes to
us and hires me and this isearly in my career and so I'm,
you know, trying to figure outhow to investigate it and we get
the nine one one tapes. And sureenough, several people in the
(37:30):
nine one one tapes said that thecement driver ran the red light.
And then we also got thedownload from the cement truck
that showed they were actuallyaccelerating at the time of the
wreck, which showed they weretrying to be the yellow. And
they always went to lunch atthis Whataburger across the
street, this truck driver did,and he was late for when he
usually goes to lunch.
And so those things put togetherturn that case from nothing to a
(37:52):
policy limits case.
Cole Gumm (37:53):
And one of the things that I like to do, and I learned
it from another attorney who,works here, is I love when I get
body cam or dashcam footage,sending that to a transcription
service so that instead ofsitting there for hours and
watching video, you don't knowwhen something's going to be
pulled out, you kind of have topay attention. You can kind of
get it down to written form andread through what is the and you
can find things in there thatyou don't even pick up on just
(38:14):
by watching the video.
Jack Zinda (38:15):
Yeah. Remember I had a case one time where we got
video footage from a taser. Yep.It was a police death case that
we worked on. And this gentlemanwho was in his fifties had some
drug addiction issues, but was anice guy.
He from this, like, really smalltown. And everyone there knew
each other. The police thatarrested the guy, grew up with
him, it's one of those types ofcommunities. And he ends up
(38:39):
somehow dying on a routine stopthat he actually called the
police on himself because he washaving kind of a panic attack
from taking drugs. And theysaid, well, we we brought him in
and he was dead when he showedup at the police station.
And which didn't make a lot ofsense. Yeah. And so we start
investigating. Like, the the carfootage is too far away, and
(38:59):
this is a this is probablyfifteen ten years ago, twelve
years ago. I'm not sure.
Some point. And so we couldn'tsee from the car. We could hear
just a little bit, and I startedlooking into tasers because I
knew it'd gotten tased, and sureenough, the tasers actually have
little cameras on. Wow. Thatwhen you fire him, the cameras
go off.
And the taser footage showedthat they had tased him, like,
(39:21):
nine times. This guy's, like,six to a hundred and thirty five
pounds. Not a not a violentcriminal record in his whole
history. And it at first, wasalmost kinda comical because
they tried to they came in andsaid, hey, do you want us to
take you to the hospital or tojail? He's like he's having kind
of a weird moment.
He said, well, take me to jailbecause they're gonna steal my
blood And so then they said,okay. We'll come with us. And
(39:43):
then he starts running from themkind of in circles in this,
like, little, like, ranch areathat he lives. He's in this
little ranch. And it's kindalike he's not armed.
They're getting annoyed at himthat he's doing it. And so they
start tasing him and put someoneputs their knee on his throat
until he passes out. They puthim in the back of the car. They
drive by two hospitals, get tothe police station, put him in
(40:06):
the cell, then check on him.They said, oh, he must have died
in the cell.
And it was clear from thefootage that he was dead when
they like put him in the car.
Cole Gumm (40:12):
And that goes to, you know, trusting your instincts.
So, know, when you whensomething smells a little fishy
or it's not it doesn't seemright, it's probably not right.
And, you know, in some of thecases we've just discussed of,
you know, digging deep into, youknow, trying to compel, you
know, documents or information,it's really based on some type
of just internal gut reaction ofsomething doesn't seem right and
trusting that instinct. Andthere's plenty of cases you
(40:35):
don't find anything. But butusually, you know, I think I do
believe in trusting yourinstinct and knowing what, you
know, what you believe about thecase and and ultimately, you
know, following whatever youryour belief is.
Jack Zinda (40:46):
Yeah. That and that case was I remember I was being
so so in the borderline if I wasgonna take that case or not
because the daughters of theperson that was killed were so
nice. They were such greatpeople. And even though he
wasn't super involved in lives,they were they turned out great
good professionals. And there's,like, he is not a violent guy.
There's no way he assaultedthese people. Yeah. And it was
(41:07):
just something about them.Think, you know, let's let's
look into this. This is a pre,you know, all this the latest
police abuse situation we seelast few years.
It was, like, fifteen, six along time ago when those were
not, you know, some of the casesyou took at all.
Cole Gumm (41:20):
One, it goes back to, you know, talking to the family
members and learning who wasthis this individual, and
knowing his patterns of behaviorand knowing he's not a violent
guy kinda led you down that pathof finding what you found.
Jack Zinda (41:30):
You know, one thing I also like about working with
you is you're good about havingtime off to where you can
recharge. I find that's reallythat's actually a tough skill
for people to develop. I feellike people either can never
turn off and get burnt out orjust can never turn on. Just
lazy or not in our standards.But you do a great job of being
you you work hard, and then youknow when to check out and have
(41:52):
a good time and, like, alright.
I need to take a step back. Hasthat always been the case with
something you had to developover time?
Cole Gumm (41:57):
Definitely developing over time. You know? I think
practice in law is just that'swhat I love about it is you're
always kind of learning. AndI've learned that that is how
I'm most successful for myclients is to take that time,
get away, and I'm a betterlawyer when I come back. I think
what I found early on was youcan get that burnout if you're
just continuously doing it.
At some point it becomes toomuch. And so I learned that I
(42:20):
become a better lawyer when Itake that time. You know, and I
think that's
Jack Zinda (42:23):
a great point. What I think of us as athletes and a
good athlete knows when to takea rest day, knows when to, you
know, work a different part oftheir brain, their muscles, and
it's the same with whetheryou're a professional or
practice on really anything youdo. If you think about it like
if you're gonna, you know, trainfor a marathon, if you just ran
every day for nine hours, you'renot gonna do it very well
because your body is justexhausted. Yeah. The same with
(42:45):
our brains.
And I think that's why there's alot of depression in our
industry is people don't knowhow to turn off. Yeah. And
sometimes they turn tosubstances and other things that
can make it even worse. Yeah.Like huffing paint
Cole Gumm (42:55):
and stuff. Exactly. Exactly. Don't go do that. Don't
be don't huffing pain.
Jack Zinda (43:00):
Well, this is great, man. I've really enjoyed our
conversation. Before we stepout, is there anything you'd
wanna leave, a young trialerwith any tips or tactics to say,
hey. I would really rememberthis when you're, you know,
young in your career.
Cole Gumm (43:12):
Yeah, I think, you know, we talked a little bit
about it, but when you're, youknow, when you're getting out
there, the the more youexperience any, you know,
situation and and whether that'sa hearing or, you know, sitting
in on a deposition, I've what Ilearned was really just from
watching other good lawyers dowhat they do and adopting the
things that I found to behelpful and letting go of the
things I didn't think werehelpful. And, you know, just
(43:33):
putting yourself out there. Youknow, I know we talk about it,
but the young attorneys that arethe most successful are the ones
that come in and are offering tohelp. They want to see how these
bigger cases work. And, youknow, slowly but surely, they
start to develop those tacticsand they can handle them on
their own.
Jack Zinda (43:48):
That's a great tip. Well, Cole, this is an awesome
man. Love talking to you. Ifanyone has any other questions
for myself or Cole, please reachout to the firm. Always happy to
help on this or any other cases.
Absolutely. And until next time.Thanks.
Cole Gumm (44:00):
I appreciate it.
Narrator (44:06):
That wraps up another episode of The Effective Lawyer.
Don't forget to subscribe so younever miss an episode. And if
you've got a minute, a quickrating or review goes a long
way. Want more tips, insights,and stories from the field? Head
over to zindalaw.i0 to learnmore.
Thanks for listening. Until nexttime.
Everyone. Jack Zinda here. Thanks for tuning to
another episode of the EffectiveLure podcast. Today, I'm talking
to one of the best trawlers inthe country, one of my good
friends, Cole Gum. Cole's apartner here at Zindalar Group.
Him and I have worked on dozensof catastrophic injury and awful
death cases, everything from gasexplosions to car wrecks to
workplace injuries. He's gonnashare some of the things he's
picked up over the years andsome of the tactics that he's
used to be successful. Hope youenjoy our conversation. Thanks.
(00:28):
Cole, what's up, man?
So good to see you.
Cole Gumm (00:29):
You too.
Jack Zinda (00:30):
How are you doing? I am doing incredible.
Cole Gumm (00:32):
Awesome. It's a great weather, and it's a good day.
Jack Zinda (00:35):
Yeah. It's it really is. I I tell you know, people
complain about the heat here,but I think Austin's such a
beautiful city. It's worthputting up with.
Cole Gumm (00:42):
It's worth its weight in gold.
Jack Zinda (00:44):
It is. So, man, how long have we worked together?
Cole Gumm (00:47):
I think nine, maybe going on ten years.
Jack Zinda (00:49):
Yeah. It's it's been a while, and I can't even
remember what we talked about inyour interview. But why don't
Cole Gumm (00:54):
you bring the listeners back to what got you
interested in practicing law?Yeah, so I've always had a
mission, or a passion forhelping people and wanting to
advance that mission of helpingpeople. And, you know, I decided
I wanted to go to law schoolnear the end of my undergraduate
career and ended up going toBaylor, which I loved. And I
fell in love with litigation atBaylor. And when I got out, I
(01:17):
started working at a smallpersonal injury firm and really
just became attached to thesubject matter, that the
rewarding qualities that it gaveme as an attorney.
And so I got into it and fell inlove with it and run-in since.
Jack Zinda (01:29):
And your wife owns a bailout squalor. Yeah. And she
also works at the firm as well,which is an interesting side
note.
Cole Gumm (01:37):
Yeah. And it's it's great, though. We we have it's
it's fun. We get to do what welove, you know, personally and
professionally together. It'spretty cool.
Jack Zinda (01:44):
Yeah. That's awesome. How how's it been try
you tried a case togetherrecently. How was that?
Cole Gumm (01:48):
It was awesome. It was a great experience. This was
our third trial together whereshe sat there with me last
summer during the first two. Andthis one, just having you there,
it was a lot of fun. It was myfirst trial in Colorado.
So that was one dynamic of, youknow, flying out there and doing
it, you know, in a differentstate. But, know, it was it's
(02:09):
really cool that we can enjoythat together and it was fun
doing that.
Jack Zinda (02:12):
And you're one of the attorneys at our firm that
works on some of the mostcomplicated cases. You know,
sometimes you've had situationswhere you found source of
recovery in one thought or foundliability that didn't appear
obvious. Can you think of anycases you've worked on where,
you know, at first it lookedlike a tough case either because
there weren't enough moneyavailable or man, it's gonna be
tough to prove liability.
Cole Gumm (02:30):
Yeah, I, you know, I think I I go back to that dog
case dog bite case that wehandled out of Longview. Yeah.
When I first started and it wasprobably the biggest case at
that time that I'd ever workedon, and it was something that,
you know, from the outside,looked like a difficult case
because we weren't sure as towhether there would be source of
recovery on dog owner, whetherthe apartment complex can be
(02:52):
held liable. And ultimately,were able to, you know, we found
a bunch of good evidence thatthe apartment complex knew about
the dog and knew that thedangerous propensities. We were
able to uncover that.
We found the source of recoveryand the case was a very big
success. Let's talk about
Jack Zinda (03:06):
that case for a second. So it was an interesting
case. I remember this. So thiswas a case where this wonderful
woman was mauled by, was it one,two, there's a one dog and she
lived in a nice apartmentcomplex in Longview where I'm
from. And I think she waswalking back from, she was going
into her apartment and this dogjust jumped on her and kind of
(03:28):
pushed through the door, right?
Cole Gumm (03:29):
Yeah, so there was a common kind of community area
behind all of the apartmentsthat was in enclosed, it was
fenced in and she was walkingthrough that area and this other
young girl who owned this dogjust opened the door, let the
dog out. Dog just ran andattacked the client and tackled
her. I mean, it was bad, but itcould have been worse. Mean, it
(03:50):
was a vicious attack.
Jack Zinda (03:51):
And it was a situation where the dog owner
actually did not have muchinsurance, if any at all. And so
we obviously had a case againstthe dog owner's insurance
policy, but he was trying tofigure out, okay, how else can
we help this client? And I thinkthey may have talked to three or
four other firms that turneddown the case and you did an
excellent job in figuring outthe next steps. Walk me through
(04:12):
that investigation and how youmade that case work?
Cole Gumm (04:14):
Absolutely. So I think one of the biggest things
that we made a decision on earlyon, and I remember talking to
you about it was the dog owneroffered the policy of limits
right away. And it was whetherdo we accept that and just go
after the apartment complex andwe kept the dog owner in case.
And I think that drove valuefrom the apartment complex. Just
knowing that if we did go totrial, she was a very bad client
(04:38):
for for the defense.
And so we wanted that to beshown at trial. So that was one
thing of just knowing that theapartment complex would would
end up paying by keeping her in.And then, know, as we got
through discovery, I remember wewe filed a motion to compel and
we're trying to compel any notesor anything that the apartment
complex would have had to showthe their knowledge of the
(04:59):
dangerous dog. And I remember wewe filed the motion to compel
and then they ultimatelysubmitted before hearing a lot
of handwritten notes fromemployees who had been chased,
attacked, cornered by that dog.And we were able to use that
obviously to show their theirknowledge of of the dangerous
dog.
Jack Zinda (05:16):
Yeah. I remember I remember we there was this
specific incident reports wherethe they were fighting over who
had to go take care of thatplace in the apartment because
they've been attacked so manytimes from it.
Cole Gumm (05:24):
Yeah. Remember the one of the statements that was
written out by one of employeeswas a a gentleman, a maintenance
man who had went in to to dosome work, and the dog chased
him into an empty unit. Ended uphaving to hide in a closet
basically and until they get ridof the dog. And so we we had
probably three or
Jack Zinda (05:40):
four of those types of statements in that went a
long way. Well, in what decisionprocess did you make to know
that you should push the casefurther than just taking that
initial policy? What made whatwas the trigger? Say, hey. We
need to dig a little deeperhere.
So what else is available?
Cole Gumm (05:52):
You know, think something that we always talk
about, especially something youyou preach is, you know, I think
looking at your damages and whatis the case worth? If if you had
unlimited source of recovery,you could go and spend as much
money on the case, what is itworth? And in this case, I mean,
the dog attacked her face, shehad severe disfigurement to her
face. And so knowing thatallowed us to really just put
(06:16):
the time and effort into, youknow, the amount of money from
the dog owner wasn't going to beenough. There was there was an
upside and a benefit to takingmaybe a little bit of risk and
spending some money to keepgoing.
And we were lucky we did becausewe dug in and found some real
good stuff.
Jack Zinda (06:29):
Yeah, and I think that's a great lesson. So first,
making sure that you aresearching for every source of
recovery in a case. And I knowsomething that I like to do is
make a list of anybody who'sattached to the potential
defendant and then figure outeliminate them as a potential
cause of the incident. Yep.Right?
And in this case, the apartmentcomplex had a lot of notice
(06:51):
about this dog attacking people.The other thing you did a great
job in that was taking the dogowner's deposition even though
they can conceded on liability.And she, like you said, was a
terrible witness. She wasextremely racist in her
deposition, which was reallypowerful showing, and she had
zero remorse whatsoever for whathappened to our poor client. In
fact, made it sound like shethought she deserved it.
Cole Gumm (07:11):
That's I was just gonna say that's kind of on top
of that. It wasn't even that shewasn't sorry. It was that my
client had it coming for somereason or another. Don't know
why.
Jack Zinda (07:20):
I think that brings up an important tip. It's like
you wanna tell the story fromthe perspective of what did the
person that caused the harmlearn from it and how is this
going to make things better? Ifthey don't have your remorse,
that can really add a lot ofdamages at the end of the case.
Cole Gumm (07:32):
Absolutely. We always talk about that of, you know,
sometimes the best answer in adeposition is them fighting you
on something that is so justbasic of, you know, if someone
runs a red light that you say,you know, you you agree that I
want you to stop at a red light.If they say no to that, that's a
pretty powerful, bit of adviceor bit as a fact that you can
use against them that they justnever can accept responsibility.
(07:53):
And you know, another thing Ilove about working with
Jack Zinda (07:55):
you is you were fearless to take cases at trial.
When did you know, like youwould enjoy taking the case
trial? When did that bug hityou? Did it take a while or was
it from the beginning?
Cole Gumm (08:04):
Yeah, would say, you know, obviously there's
apprehension and nerves goinginto any trial, no matter how
many times you've done it. Andso obviously there's more at the
beginning when you've neverreally done it. But, you know, I
would say Baylor really helped,you know, get you ready to be in
the courtroom. And like I said,that's what made me fall in love
with litigation. So I knew Icould do it.
And then going out and doing it,you know, just gives you more
confidence and you feel, youknow, much more comfortable and
(08:26):
you learn from every case.
Jack Zinda (08:27):
Well, but there's no Baylor has a really intense
trial program. That's where Colewent there. I went there as
well. So did Cole's wife. Mhmm.
I don't think you all overlappedat all too. And it's the
professors when you're doing amock trial and they're the
judge. If you get a mistake,like if they'll be in the
audience, listen to you do anopening statement, if you object
wrong, they'll dock you a lettergrade or throw you out of class.
(08:50):
And I've never had a judgenearly as strict as as that.
Cole Gumm (08:55):
I can't agree more in terms of you know, I look back
on we we do something called bigtrial where you you basically
practice a case and and gothrough trial. It's usually two
to three days. And I justremember I don't think I've ever
been as nervous as I was, youknow, in that setting versus a
real courtroom, and a lot ofthat comes from going through
all of that and deal with it.
Jack Zinda (09:15):
I remember there was a there was a woman in my class
and she was like top three, topfour in the the class and we're
doing a mock trial and we're onopposing sides and she never got
anything wrong. She was alwaysreally organized, did a great
job and she objected but didn'tstand. And the professor said,
you know, I'll use a pseudonymMs. Smith. You need to object.
(09:36):
Stand when you object. Okay?Next time comes up. And this is
someone who never makes amistake in class, always gets,
like, perfect grades. Forgets todo it again.
And she says, miss Smith, if youdo not stand up while objecting,
I'm gonna dock you a lettergrade. And this this woman's,
like, third in our class. Sureenough, the third time around,
she doesn't stand. Yeah. I waslike, oh.
And they did it to any doctor ofthe livers.
Cole Gumm (09:56):
Just gonna say, and and they would follow through
with whatever the threat was,and it made you realize that I'd
better do what I'm being askedof me what's being asked me or,
you know, improve on what I'mbeing, you know, critiqued on.
So very powerful.
Jack Zinda (10:09):
I know. I remember that and also, like, objecting
the right way and taking thatpositions. I think you bring up
a good point is if you're a newlitigator, get yourself out
there and get in the courtroom,try things. Don't you know, some
of it is just things in life ingeneral. If you don't go out
there and do it, you're notgonna have the confidence to do
it again, and it becomes more ofa game more fun what you've done
a couple times.
Cole Gumm (10:28):
Absolutely. And I think looking at just who, you
know, our most successfullawyers at our firm are
generally, you know, people whoearly on are ready to, you know,
dive in and do whatever's askedof them, teaming up with a more
experienced lawyer, learningkind of the ropes. Remember when
I started, you know, we wouldhave a morning huddle, I
remember, and you were my directsupervisor, and that was just
such a great experience ofseeing how it should be done,
(10:51):
how to
Jack Zinda (10:51):
do it
Cole Gumm (10:51):
right. And now I hope to pass that on to the people
that you know are on your end.
Jack Zinda (10:56):
When when you're getting ready for trial, what
are when you really startgetting ready for go time? It's
like I know we're preppingthroughout the whole case, but
when you say, now it's time toget down and really focus on
this case and let's get thisready to go.
Cole Gumm (11:07):
You know, I think we always preach ninety to one
hundred and twenty days. We havewe have checklists starting at
one hundred and twenty days, anda lot of that is obviously
before discoveries ended. Andand so it allows you makes you
put it makes sure all of yourare in a row. So you're really
prepping for, you know, eight,five months out of what will a
trial look like? What evidencedo I still need to get?
What do I need to compel? Andand so it starts there. And then
(11:30):
obviously, as you get closer,there are you know, it's much
more regimen and how much timeyou're spending on on prepping.
But, yeah, ninety to a hundredand twenty days is when you're
you should be full blown. I'mI'm getting ready for trial.
Jack Zinda (11:41):
What about putting together your opening statement
board? Do you have any tips forthat? Do you like to practice it
a lot? Do you like to kind ofweigh closer to Toronto? And
I've heard it work both ways.
In fact, I found when I try toget that ready too soon, it
doesn't feel right when it getsclose to trucks. Things have
changed so much, and you kindaget a feel for the case.
Cole Gumm (11:56):
I I agree. So generally, like, for Vordeaux
Vordeaux outlines, I'm usuallydoing those maybe a week in
advance of of trial, and that'sbecause at that point I've had a
lot of discussions with theother side. I know what their
issues are, and I know thethings that I need to question
the potential jurors about. Andso that's it's usually about a
week that I'm, you know, outthat I'm starting to work on on
those outlines. And when itcomes to opening or closing
(12:19):
arguments, those outlines arealways changing even through
trial as you're seeing theevidence come in or you're
seeing the reaction from thejury to certain facts and just
always wanting to to make sureyou're advocating in the best
possible way.
Jack Zinda (12:32):
And was it tough developing your own style? I
know there's all sorts ofadvocacy books. You know,
there's David Ball. There's allsorts of books out there. Here's
how you should give an openingstatement, and here's how you
should do poor dire.
How did you develop your style,or did you say, I'm gonna just
go after the same way thisperson does it?
Cole Gumm (12:46):
Well, I think it's a little bit of both in terms of
you know the those outlines orkind of the templates that you
can go and find anywhere. Thoseare very helpful. They obviously
work and there's reasons whythey are so popular, But then
being able to adopt that in away where by you following that
outline, you're still beingyourself. I think I truly
(13:06):
believe that jury jurors willwill understand if someone is
being themselves and beingcandid versus not. And so I
think a lot of it is tellingyour story in a way that you
believe it with conviction andand adopting your own style, but
following a lot of, you know,what what you can find out there
from other sources.
Well, to me,
Jack Zinda (13:25):
it's always amazing how small a courtroom feels when
you're in it. You see it on TV,in your head, you think this
giant place, really, it's like aa conference room. Absolutely.
And you're from here to there tothe jurors. And if you act like
you're putting on a show orplay, it becomes so stilt and
becomes so unattenticinauthentic.
And I've seen some greattrawlers get big results that
aren't very articulate. Youknow, the jury just believes in
what they're saying and knowsthey're being credible.
Cole Gumm (13:46):
Yep. And for example, in in my opening and or closing,
a lot of times I find myselfreading my the outline of of
what I put together because Iknow that I've spent so much
time on making sure that everyword in there is right and
everything that I wanna say isin there that at that point, I
know that even if I'm reading itand I'm not, you know, engaged
with the jury so much, I knowthat I'm they can tell that what
(14:09):
I've written down here is myit's my own words and my own
take on the case. And luckilythat, you know, I I I found that
jurors will follow that.
Jack Zinda (14:16):
Yeah. I think keeping yourself through is so
critical. And whatever yourstyle is, you know, that's the
way you should try your case anddon't try to be someone else.
You wanna be what feelsauthentic to you so you can
connect with people on a humanlevel. You know, Mark Lanier, I
went to hear him speak a fewyears ago, and he had a good
saying, which I really had animpression on me.
He said, know, our job is totell the truth. And when I
(14:38):
started thinking about that, itreally made my approach to
practicing law and being atrawler seem a lot easier. Like,
we're not trying to hide stuff,we're trying to explain what
happened from our client's pointof view and why we have a
righteous case. Like it was thecase selection, right? If you
don't have a good caseselection, you can't do that.
But if you do, you really needto pull out what the client
story is. And you've done agreat job in building a great
relationship with your clients.They all love you and you're
(15:00):
getting good rapport and theylisten to you. What tips do you
have for building that rapportwith clients?
Cole Gumm (15:05):
It starts, I think, from the first conversation. I
always want to, you know, Ialways start by introducing
myself, telling them who I am,how long I've been here, what
types of cases I work on, howtheir case fits into what I do
and how much experience I haveand really developing that
rapport, like you said, rightfrom the very beginning. And I
think the more genuine you are,the more candid you are, the
(15:27):
more you care. And I think, youknow, good trial lawyers, they
absolutely care about theirclients. And so I think, like we
talked about, I mean, a clientcan tell if you're being genuine
or not.
I truly believe in everythingthat I do. So there's nothing
fake about, you know, developingthat rapport.
Jack Zinda (15:44):
And I think time is really important, especially if
you have a client that sufferedreally catastrophic injuries,
cannot substitute time. Everytime I've gone to a client's
house, haven't rereaded it. Andyou really get a sense of what
their real story, what theirreal life is, what they've been
through. But if they were awrongful death case going
through photo albums, meetingneighbors, seeing what they have
(16:04):
on the walls and also helps yougot a real stoic client that
will not has a hard time tellingtheir story. You can tell it
through other people.
I cannot tell you how many timeswe've had cases where the client
says, I don't have anyone whocould be a non economic damages
witness. And then you startasking, well, who do you meet in
the morning? Oh, I have thisneighbor that I walk with every
day and I have a coworker I seeevery day and I go volunteer at
(16:27):
this place. Before you know, youhave eight or nine witnesses you
work with, but if you don'tspend that time, you can get out
of that.
Cole Gumm (16:34):
I I remember from again when very early on, I
remember you you teaching meabout, hey, just have a walk
through the day. What do they doday to day? What's their Monday,
Tuesday, Wednesday, and so on?And they will start telling you
a story where you can pick up onwhat's important to them and go
and find those people that canspeak to what is important to
them. So I absolutely agree.
Jack Zinda (16:53):
It drives me nuts sometimes when attorneys are
working on large damages casesand they don't want to put in
that time and effort becausewhat are you getting paid to do
then, right? That's how you getthe extra value for your clients
is going and be able to telltheir story what they've been
through. It also builds amazingtrust with the client. They'll
trust you so much more ifthey've seen you on a human
level And you've been them, seewhat their lives are like day
(17:15):
in, out, you know?
Cole Gumm (17:16):
And even when you've you've got difficult clients, I
find that working through thatthat relationship when when
things aren't going the way thatthey expect it to be going, You
know, litigation can be verystressful for the client. And I
think the more you just you youaddress those issues and you you
take them head on, you talk tothe client, counsel them on why
(17:37):
things are the way they are,again, they will understand that
you're doing everything in yourpower. And and over time, I
think even the most difficultclients will respect and
appreciate once they realize,yeah, that person's on my side
and and they've got my story,you know, in my best interest in
mind. You know, you had a
Jack Zinda (17:56):
case recently where it involved a truck driver and
some illicit drugs. Yep. And yougot even more great information
than just the fact they were ondrugs at the time of the
incident. Tell tell me aboutthat case and how you were able
to pull that information outbecause it added, you know, ten,
twenty x value to the case.
Cole Gumm (18:12):
Yes. It was a trucking case out of Houston. I
represented a young college kidwho was home for the summer and
he was working at a warehousethere in Houston and he was out
sitting in his truck for lunch,just eating his lunch, when all
of a sudden he was struck bythis work truck and that driver
was on drugs at the time. And sowe obviously filed the lawsuit.
(18:37):
And by getting it, we learnedthat not only obviously, this
wasn't his first time he had hada prior stint with the company.
He had actually taken a yearwhere he was he was in jail for
a year. And during that time,the company was talking to him
about giving him his job back.And all of those those charges
and his ongoing criminal stuffwas all related to drugs. And so
we were able to show that it'snot just this one time, it's a
(18:59):
pattern of behavior of youallowing and just turning your
eye, know, turning a blind eyeto very blaring red flags. And
so at the end of the case, youknow, we just, at some point
they were, they didn't want toproduce any more documents or
put anyone else up fordeposition.
And at that point, we were ableto get resolved.
Jack Zinda (19:16):
Alright. So let me set this scene. Alright. So our
client is parked, and this guycomes and hits him in his
commercial work truck, then heflees. Right?
Cole Gumm (19:23):
Yep. Well, no. He ended up actually, he was
stopped afterwards because heended up plowing into about four
cars cars out there. And so, no,he was ended he was found at the
scene incoherent, and the policeended up almost having to break
in to his vehicle to get himout. And and that's when he was
brought to the hospital.
Jack Zinda (19:40):
Was brought to the hospital, and then he gets
caught puffing, which I guess isnot, he's taking on a drug test,
which for all you who arelooking for ways to do
Cole Gumm (19:48):
that, he's like
Jack Zinda (19:49):
pro tip. And so then we find out he's huffing at the
hospital and you keep diggingfurther, right? You know, most
attorneys would have taken that,you know, that and just given up
and taken because they made areally good offer. The damages
in this case weren't massive andthey made a really strong offer
earlier, but we kept diggingfurther. So tell us, tell me
about what you found when youstarted talking to the employer
(20:11):
and doing your written discover.
Cole Gumm (20:13):
Yeah. And so, you know, we always talk about if
something happens, it's not justa coincidence. It's usually a
pattern of some type of badbehavior that ultimately led to
what happened. And so by digginginto the, employer, we were able
to, again, find all of the priordrug issues that he had had,
their knowledge of it. As westarted and kept digging into
(20:33):
it, we obviously got the 911calls, and we found that there
had been calls about his Iraqdriving for forty five minutes
or so leading up to this.
People calling and saying, youknow, he's gonna this guy's
gonna kill someone. And so therewas a lot of that. And and then
when we took the the corporaterepresentatives deposition, and
it was the female owner of thecompany, and I think they had
(20:54):
probably 100 employees or so. Soit was a decent sized operation.
She told us about multiple callsthat were made in the minutes
leading up to that to theiroffice of people saying, you
know, you've got this guy outhere, you need to do something.
And at which point they had thecapability of, you know, they
tracking his vehicle and theyjust didn't do anything, didn't
(21:14):
try to reach out to him. Andagain, that pattern of behavior,
their hiring practices, allowingthis guy to come back after
he's, you know, incarcerated fordrugs and and all of that. Those
circumstances lamp to the resultthat we got
Jack Zinda (21:28):
when I think that's that's a great point too. So you
know, Cole's doing a great jobhere in telling the story from
way before the incidenthappened. And this driver who
Trimble Soul, you know, had beenarrested for similar things
before while working at theemployer goes incarcerated,
comes back and works for theemployer again. And it's not
something where you shouldn'tgive people second chances, but
(21:49):
they didn't have any guardrails.They weren't going to do direct
testing themselves and they putthis person back on the streets
and put the whole community indanger by that decision, which
probably there were some costsavings involved because he was
probably cheaper than gettingsome with a clean driving
history.
And it's fine to be charitable,but not at the risk of
everyone's safety and health.And thank goodness our client
(22:10):
wasn't killed because it couldhave been way worse than what it
was.
Cole Gumm (22:14):
And to speak to that point even a little bit further,
when when it got to the point ofexperts and hiring our experts,
we hired a liability expert, afleet safety expert who could
talk about the hiring practices.And their defense was that we
are a second chain supplier. Andour expert was able to actually
kind of turn that on them andsay, then that is why it's so
(22:35):
important that you if you'regonna be a second chance
employer, that you take all ofthe necessary steps to ensure
that whatever that pattern ofbehavior was before is not
continuing. And here they justturned a blind eye to it and
didn't didn't wanna know, Ithink, the truth.
Jack Zinda (22:48):
Yeah. For sure. And that's that's second chance
employer is someone who's goingto give someone a second chance
with boundaries and control, notsomeone who's going to send them
back out there with a bunch ofpaint.
Cole Gumm (22:58):
Yep, exactly.
Jack Zinda (23:00):
Call something else. That's another reason I really
like working. You can go reallydeep on cases and kinda get into
the weeds on the tactics. Canthink of any cases where you
hired an expert and they kindarevealed something that you
didn't expect or you were topull something out that was
really important?
Cole Gumm (23:14):
Yeah. I think I can think of a couple trucking
cases, for example, where, Itruly believe in leaning on your
expert to they're the subjectmatter experts. And so, there
have been a couple truckingcases where there's regulations
that have been violated that I'mnot spotting that issue. And so
and that can be the differencebetween a, you know, a good
(23:35):
result and a great result onceyou uncover some of those
things. And so specifically intrucking cases, can think of
several where the regulationsup, those violations ultimately
added, you know, its weight andgoal with what ultimately we
were able to get out of thecase.
Jack Zinda (23:48):
Yeah. And I also say, I think it's really good
advice to go to the scene withyour experts if you can or send
someone to that because one, youwanna make sure they're looking
at everything you want them tolook at. I remember we had a new
attorney that joined the firmand I thought they had a lot of
trucking experience and we had acase, it was a death case and a
truck had been crossing the roadand it was at night and so it
(24:09):
was blocking the roadway and ourclient's vehicle ran into it. So
I send this new attorney, notnew to the practice, but new to
us, said they had a lot ofexperience and go out with the
expert and they do thisinspection and guess what they
don't look at? They don't lookat the reflectors.
And this, the whole case was areflector case. And I was like,
how did Joe
Cole Gumm (24:27):
not look at the reflectors?
Jack Zinda (24:29):
And he was like, oh yeah, we should have looked at
the reflectors. And it just wasa lesson to me of don't take
anything for granted. Everybodyhas a bad day and no one's gonna
care about the case as much asyou do. Sometimes the client
doesn't care as much as you. So,like, getting out there to see
with your own eyes what's goingon.
And we always preach,
Cole Gumm (24:44):
you know, having an attorney at whatever inspection
you're doing for that exactreason. The expert doesn't know
the the case like you do andwhat the issues that you're you
know are very important. Andgetting out there and being with
the expert, having them show youwhat they're finding. Again, it
allows you to understand thecase in a way that I think a lot
of attorneys don't get tounderstand the case because
they're not going out and doingthose things.
Jack Zinda (25:05):
Well, and another tip to remember is don't share a
lot on your side, but listen tothe other side a lot. I can't
tell you how many times thedefense will send a junior
associate out to the scene.Yeah. And I'll be in the
inspection or you'll be in theinspection. And this associate
tells us everything.
Like, we don't know why youhaven't painted. We saw the
file. These damages are bad.We're so screwed on liability.
(25:26):
And we're like, wow, thank youfor sharing all this
information.
So we know like where you're atin the case.
Cole Gumm (25:30):
It's crazy. It happens more than you think. It
really does. I remember a casethat went to trial last summer.
We had a there was a juniorassociate and she was new to the
firm.
She and she came into adeposition and kind of some of
the same things. She juststarted off the record telling
me how she felt about the case,what they've been reporting to
the carrier. And it allowed meto kind of tailor how I argued
(25:52):
the case knowing what wouldaffect their decisions.
Jack Zinda (25:55):
Yeah. A 100%. And I I know some people have kind of
a scourge to earth approach withtheir opponents. I like to get
to know defense attorneys we'reworking with. One, it's good
just to to have a good cordialrelationship.
But two, you know, in myexperience, they will share way
more than we will if and theirtheir level of dedication to the
insurance company is not asstrong as ours too. The the
client doesn't mean they'redoing anything unethical, but
(26:16):
they'll they'll lead up you tosomething that you may not know
otherwise.
Cole Gumm (26:19):
Absolutely. And I I think, you know, reputation
matters in this industry. And Ithink you can be a jerk all the
time if you want to be. But Ithink that, you know, very
quickly, you're going find thatyou're not going to have any
clients and you're probably notgoing to get paid on many cases.
And I think just a pattern ofbeing respectful, but being
diligent in what you do,advocating for your client.
(26:40):
I know that defense attorneyswill respect some of the
decisions I make knowing thatI'm out there trying to do the
best for my client and it'snothing personal, you know, with
the other attorney on the otherside.
Jack Zinda (26:49):
I agree and never be dishonest with opposing counsel,
you know, never lie. I thinkonce you've lied, you're kind of
screwed your reputation and Itry to always be professional,
but also be firm. And it'sfunny, even if you are putting
them in a tough spot, if you'rebeing ethical about it, they
don't, they're not gonna hold itagainst you because you're just
doing your job for your client.Now if you're a jerk for no
reason, that's gonna follow youand just buyer beware because
you're gonna be in that spot atsome point needing that.
Cole Gumm (27:11):
Yeah. And defense attorneys, know if if what
you're telling is the truth.They they can tell. Just like I
can tell if a defense lawyerreally believes what he's
saying. And and so by beinghonest but firm, like you said,
I think once you gain therespect of your opponent or the
defense attorney, it makesthings a lot easier.
(27:33):
Yeah. As you've kind of gonethrough all of that.
Jack Zinda (27:35):
Well, you've worked on, to switch gears a little
bit, on a lot of cases withkids, and that can be tough to
both pull out the damages and totry to get, you know, a
settlement done sometimesbecause the parents are
involved. They may notunderstand that they're not
gonna get any of money and alsogetting what happened to the
kids pulled out of them. Can youthink of a case where you dealt
with kids and you were able to,you know, explain the damages
(27:56):
more than maybe were there?
Cole Gumm (27:57):
Yeah, so we've got a case against a diner where a cup
of coffee was put in front of an11 old baby and he grabbed the
coffee cup and poured it allover himself, requiring him to
be life flighted and stayed inthe burn units. And, you know,
that child can talk. And so tobe able to really understand
(28:19):
what he's going through, wehired, you know, a pediatric
burn expert who could talk aboutwhat burn injuries do to a
person, especially a youngchild, how that developmental
delays can begin at such anearly age when something like
that happens. And then we didhire a mental anguish
psychologist who could talk tojust exactly what this kid who
(28:41):
can't speak now is going to dealwith for the rest of his life.
And being able to show thatthrough not only your experts,
but then also, you've got all ofthe non economic damages
witnesses.
So this kid lives with hisgrandparents and his mom and
dad. And so going and taking thedeposition of the grandparents,
what have you noticed? You know,kind of taking all the further
you can get the the better youcan get information from someone
(29:04):
who's as disinterested in thecase, the better. And so, you
know, the parents are alwaysgonna be there and advocating
for their their child. But whenyou hear it from a neighbor, a
teacher, someone who reallydoesn't have any interest in it
as to how that changed the kidspatterns of behavior, I think
that goes a long way and againgoes to being able to show and
tell your client story.
Jack Zinda (29:24):
Oh, 100%. I think taking what happened to them and
what they've gone through andtrying to slow it down and
explain what those thingsactually mean. I remember the
first burn case I worked on andactually walking through how you
debride skin and how you feel itfor months and months and you
hit phantom pain, phantom allsorts of things that you
wouldn't think of. And if youjust say, hey, they had a burn
(29:44):
recovery, it doesn't break thosethings down into small pieces.
And I remember I had a case whenI first started practicing when
I went to mental anguish whereour client had a seeing eye dog
and they were hit with theseeing eye dog.
The seeing eye dog wasn't hurt,but it had PTSD, so it couldn't
be a seeing eye dog anymorebecause it got freaked out
around cars. And of course, thisyoung man couldn't have a dog
(30:07):
like that because he needed a Cand I dog. And he was just
devastated about that. And so wehired someone who dealt with C
and I dogs and he raised them,trained them, and his wife had
had three, she was blind. And heexplained how the relationship
between an owner and a dog canbe stronger than that between a
mother and a child becausethey're so codependent.
(30:27):
And that story was so powerfulcoming from this gentleman whose
wife, he does this for a living,his wife had had two dogs,
really brought out a lot ofdamage. You say, it's just a
just a dog that has PTSD, butthen you hear the whole story
and explain what actuallyhappened. What did that mean?
That brings out so muchAbsolutely. So much richness to
the case.
Cole Gumm (30:44):
And that's a great example of where think a lot of
people would just, you know,what is the value of that dog? I
know in that case, went out andpriced how much does it actually
take to to create a good seeingeye dog? What you learned was it
takes years and it's yeah,hundreds, $100,000 or something
like that. And you were able tobuild up a bit damage model on
(31:06):
something that I think a lot ofpeople would have, you know,
chalked up as a few $100 lossand, and really just digging in
and, and understanding what yourclient's story and what that
damage really is can add a lot
Jack Zinda (31:19):
of value. And if you've got a death case and
you're trying to, let's say youdon't have a great relationship
between your client and theperson was deceased or on its
face doesn't look like a goodrelationship. You can really
tell the story about what couldhave been, what's missing. I had
a case where this gentleman, hewas a nice guy. He worked in
construction, kind of acarpenter, and he died in his
(31:42):
early fifties from a fallbecause there was a lack of fall
protection.
And his adult daughter hired us,but he wasn't there to raise
her. They had just rekindled therelationship, like, that year,
and she was in her mid twenties.And you think, that's a tough
case. You have an adult child,not a great relationship. This
is the only person that couldtell that story, the only person
who has a claim.
(32:03):
But we were able to tell thestory about what was hoping for
the future. You know, he wasgonna be at her wedding. You
know? They had a Disney they'vedone a Disney role together that
year, there's pictures of themtogether. How she pictured him
being involved in her futurekids' lives.
And that story brought out a lotof what could have been.
Absolutely. And that's that'syou gotta be able to tell that.
Cole Gumm (32:21):
Yep. And and again, it takes time. It takes effort.
You've got to go out and learnthat. And I think doing it day
in and day out will add so muchvalue to your practice.
Jack Zinda (32:32):
Tell me about, you know, when you're at trial, what
is your setup like with yourteam and how do you are you able
to stay focused on what'shappening in the trial without
getting distracted by all thisstuff like, hey, do have the
right exhibit? Do I have rightnoise? What do you like to do
set up practically?
Cole Gumm (32:44):
So I like to focus on I take it day by day. So I I
know which witnesses are gonnabe called that day or whether
we're doing opening or go dire.And and that usually, obviously,
we've prepped it up to, youknow, a week, two weeks out from
trial. Everything should bebasically put together. And like
I said, the outlines may change.
And so during the day that I'myou may have three witnesses,
(33:05):
I'm focused on solely what areyou know, what evidence do I
need to get out of thosewitnesses, making sure that I've
got the questions that are themost important mapped out. And
then I've got Chelsea who, youknow, can handle all of the
other stuff. And so I thinkfocusing on what's important is
very important, knowing what youcan delegate to someone else to
handle. And and, again, it's allabout just being able to tell
(33:28):
the client's story whatever waythat whatever that means.
Jack Zinda (33:30):
Yeah. And Chelsea is Cole's wife, for doesn't catch
that. And she is one of the bestattorneys I've ever worked with.
So smart. Such so great onstrategy and so great on her
motion practice and her pelletwork.
It's just unreal. And she's madeher break, broke in a couple of
cases first for sure in thatfront. You know, and I would
tell you thinking ahead isreally key for trial, I think.
You know, I think and I foundrelaxing is important, know,
(33:52):
because every trial, a lot ofstuff is gonna go wrong. Judge
is gonna say you have to callthis witness now, not later,
move the order.
And I'm so OCD that took a whilefor me to get over, but we can
just relax. Okay. It's justnatural. It's gonna happen. Yep.
Just get ready to roll with thepunches and and figure out what
is it that I need to do to win.
Cole Gumm (34:07):
Yep. No. Exactly. And I I I cannot wholeheartedly
agree about relaxing. I know theSaturdays before trial, you
know, I think a lot of peoplewould be prepping.
I take that entire day off.Yeah, just knowing that I need I
need that time just to clearyour mind of whatever you're
about to have to go through. Andthen get back on it the next
day. Even at night when we getout of trial, there's still a
(34:30):
lot of work to do that night,but take an hour or two.
Jack Zinda (34:32):
Go,
Cole Gumm (34:32):
you know, go for a run, go, you know, walk around
the block, whatever you need todo to kind of clear your mind
and restart. I said, true, Ifind
Jack Zinda (34:39):
that when I get a good night's sleep and I've
exercised, I'm so much moresharp. Wish in law school I had
not crammed as much. Becausestaying up late and not
sleeping, you're just not assharp, you know.
Cole Gumm (34:50):
And that is important with trial. You know, you could
stay up all night if you want,keep working and keep prepping,
but the next day that's notgoing to be the best for you. So
kind of that balance of beingable to do the things that need
to get done, but also givingyourself the time to relax and
get the sleep that you need.
Jack Zinda (35:07):
And what about, you know, when you're deciding how
to value a case? So at whatpoint do you start looking at
the value of file? Let's sayit's a bigger case, something
with serious injuries that, youknow, you're not sure what the
range is going be. When do startlooking at that and trying to
line that up?
Cole Gumm (35:22):
I I mean, wanna be doing it as, you know, as soon
as you can from the time you getthe intake of what do you think
the case could be worth. Andobviously, that's always gonna
be changing. But as you aregetting closer, let's say, a
mediation, you know, we usuallystart probably thirty to forty
five days out, making sure we'vegot all of, you know, our
evidence in line that thedefense has everything that
(35:42):
they're gonna need to value it.And then, you know, we often
will, you know, roundtable casestogether, talk about what do you
think this case is worth, whatdoes, you know, the attorney
down the hall think, ask yourfriends and family, people who
aren't lawyers, what do youthink about this case? Because
those are ultimately yourjurors.
And then focus groups. We usefocus groups to tell to let us
(36:02):
or give us some more data pointsof what what do strangers think
about this case? Becausesometimes it's hard when you're
so personally involved in thecase to see it from kind of a
bird's eye view. Yeah.
Jack Zinda (36:13):
I I completely agree. And, you know, look at
what the upside is not. You wantto consider the downside, but
especially early in a case, lookat what could the upside be
because usually a case getsbetter for us as you get more
litigation. Really, does it getworse unless you don't know
what's going on with the clientand then it could get worse if
you're surprised by somethinglike that.
Cole Gumm (36:29):
Well, I think of some of our biggest cases at the firm
have been cases that I think ifif we look at the intake, it
looks like something it's aminor case.
Jack Zinda (36:36):
It's a
Cole Gumm (36:36):
moderate motor vehicle collision and it ends up
being a multimillion dollarresult. And so like you said,
look at the upside, knowingwhat, you know, who the bad
actor is on the other side, alot of that plays a role in the
value of the case.
Jack Zinda (36:49):
Yeah, I cannot tell how many times we've had a
situation like that. I rememberwe had a case early in my
career. We got a call from awoman. She was a grandmother and
her son had been killed in atruck wreck near here in San
Marcos and everybody blamed thedriver of that vehicle, which
was her son. So it was acommercial truck 18 wheeler,
actually a cement truck, hitsand kills our client and injures
(37:10):
three others.
And everyone says our client ranthe red line. And she called
three law firms, turned down bythree law firms and she comes to
us and hires me and this isearly in my career and so I'm,
you know, trying to figure outhow to investigate it and we get
the nine one one tapes. And sureenough, several people in the
(37:30):
nine one one tapes said that thecement driver ran the red light.
And then we also got thedownload from the cement truck
that showed they were actuallyaccelerating at the time of the
wreck, which showed they weretrying to be the yellow. And
they always went to lunch atthis Whataburger across the
street, this truck driver did,and he was late for when he
usually goes to lunch.
And so those things put togetherturn that case from nothing to a
(37:52):
policy limits case.
Cole Gumm (37:53):
And one of the things that I like to do, and I learned
it from another attorney who,works here, is I love when I get
body cam or dashcam footage,sending that to a transcription
service so that instead ofsitting there for hours and
watching video, you don't knowwhen something's going to be
pulled out, you kind of have topay attention. You can kind of
get it down to written form andread through what is the and you
can find things in there thatyou don't even pick up on just
(38:14):
by watching the video.
Jack Zinda (38:15):
Yeah. Remember I had a case one time where we got
video footage from a taser. Yep.It was a police death case that
we worked on. And this gentlemanwho was in his fifties had some
drug addiction issues, but was anice guy.
He from this, like, really smalltown. And everyone there knew
each other. The police thatarrested the guy, grew up with
him, it's one of those types ofcommunities. And he ends up
(38:39):
somehow dying on a routine stopthat he actually called the
police on himself because he washaving kind of a panic attack
from taking drugs. And theysaid, well, we we brought him in
and he was dead when he showedup at the police station.
And which didn't make a lot ofsense. Yeah. And so we start
investigating. Like, the the carfootage is too far away, and
(38:59):
this is a this is probablyfifteen ten years ago, twelve
years ago. I'm not sure.
Some point. And so we couldn'tsee from the car. We could hear
just a little bit, and I startedlooking into tasers because I
knew it'd gotten tased, and sureenough, the tasers actually have
little cameras on. Wow. Thatwhen you fire him, the cameras
go off.
And the taser footage showedthat they had tased him, like,
(39:21):
nine times. This guy's, like,six to a hundred and thirty five
pounds. Not a not a violentcriminal record in his whole
history. And it at first, wasalmost kinda comical because
they tried to they came in andsaid, hey, do you want us to
take you to the hospital or tojail? He's like he's having kind
of a weird moment.
He said, well, take me to jailbecause they're gonna steal my
blood And so then they said,okay. We'll come with us. And
(39:43):
then he starts running from themkind of in circles in this,
like, little, like, ranch areathat he lives. He's in this
little ranch. And it's kindalike he's not armed.
They're getting annoyed at himthat he's doing it. And so they
start tasing him and put someoneputs their knee on his throat
until he passes out. They puthim in the back of the car. They
drive by two hospitals, get tothe police station, put him in
(40:06):
the cell, then check on him.They said, oh, he must have died
in the cell.
And it was clear from thefootage that he was dead when
they like put him in the car.
Cole Gumm (40:12):
And that goes to, you know, trusting your instincts.
So, know, when you whensomething smells a little fishy
or it's not it doesn't seemright, it's probably not right.
And, you know, in some of thecases we've just discussed of,
you know, digging deep into, youknow, trying to compel, you
know, documents or information,it's really based on some type
of just internal gut reaction ofsomething doesn't seem right and
trusting that instinct. Andthere's plenty of cases you
(40:35):
don't find anything. But butusually, you know, I think I do
believe in trusting yourinstinct and knowing what, you
know, what you believe about thecase and and ultimately, you
know, following whatever youryour belief is.
Jack Zinda (40:46):
Yeah. That and that case was I remember I was being
so so in the borderline if I wasgonna take that case or not
because the daughters of theperson that was killed were so
nice. They were such greatpeople. And even though he
wasn't super involved in lives,they were they turned out great
good professionals. And there's,like, he is not a violent guy.
There's no way he assaultedthese people. Yeah. And it was
(41:07):
just something about them.Think, you know, let's let's
look into this. This is a pre,you know, all this the latest
police abuse situation we seelast few years.
It was, like, fifteen, six along time ago when those were
not, you know, some of the casesyou took at all.
Cole Gumm (41:20):
One, it goes back to, you know, talking to the family
members and learning who wasthis this individual, and
knowing his patterns of behaviorand knowing he's not a violent
guy kinda led you down that pathof finding what you found.
Jack Zinda (41:30):
You know, one thing I also like about working with
you is you're good about havingtime off to where you can
recharge. I find that's reallythat's actually a tough skill
for people to develop. I feellike people either can never
turn off and get burnt out orjust can never turn on. Just
lazy or not in our standards.But you do a great job of being
you you work hard, and then youknow when to check out and have
(41:52):
a good time and, like, alright.
I need to take a step back. Hasthat always been the case with
something you had to developover time?
Cole Gumm (41:57):
Definitely developing over time. You know? I think
practice in law is just that'swhat I love about it is you're
always kind of learning. AndI've learned that that is how
I'm most successful for myclients is to take that time,
get away, and I'm a betterlawyer when I come back. I think
what I found early on was youcan get that burnout if you're
just continuously doing it.
At some point it becomes toomuch. And so I learned that I
(42:20):
become a better lawyer when Itake that time. You know, and I
think that's
Jack Zinda (42:23):
a great point. What I think of us as athletes and a
good athlete knows when to takea rest day, knows when to, you
know, work a different part oftheir brain, their muscles, and
it's the same with whetheryou're a professional or
practice on really anything youdo. If you think about it like
if you're gonna, you know, trainfor a marathon, if you just ran
every day for nine hours, you'renot gonna do it very well
because your body is justexhausted. Yeah. The same with
(42:45):
our brains.
And I think that's why there's alot of depression in our
industry is people don't knowhow to turn off. Yeah. And
sometimes they turn tosubstances and other things that
can make it even worse. Yeah.Like huffing paint
Cole Gumm (42:55):
and stuff. Exactly. Exactly. Don't go do that. Don't
be don't huffing pain.
Jack Zinda (43:00):
Well, this is great, man. I've really enjoyed our
conversation. Before we stepout, is there anything you'd
wanna leave, a young trialerwith any tips or tactics to say,
hey. I would really rememberthis when you're, you know,
young in your career.
Cole Gumm (43:12):
Yeah, I think, you know, we talked a little bit
about it, but when you're, youknow, when you're getting out
there, the the more youexperience any, you know,
situation and and whether that'sa hearing or, you know, sitting
in on a deposition, I've what Ilearned was really just from
watching other good lawyers dowhat they do and adopting the
things that I found to behelpful and letting go of the
things I didn't think werehelpful. And, you know, just
(43:33):
putting yourself out there. Youknow, I know we talk about it,
but the young attorneys that arethe most successful are the ones
that come in and are offering tohelp. They want to see how these
bigger cases work. And, youknow, slowly but surely, they
start to develop those tacticsand they can handle them on
their own.
Jack Zinda (43:48):
That's a great tip. Well, Cole, this is an awesome
man. Love talking to you. Ifanyone has any other questions
for myself or Cole, please reachout to the firm. Always happy to
help on this or any other cases.
Absolutely. And until next time.Thanks.
Cole Gumm (44:00):
I appreciate it.
Narrator (44:06):
That wraps up another episode of The Effective Lawyer.
Don't forget to subscribe so younever miss an episode. And if
you've got a minute, a quickrating or review goes a long
way. Want more tips, insights,and stories from the field? Head
over to zindalaw.i0 to learnmore.
Thanks for listening. Until nexttime.
Popular Podcasts
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.