Smith Duggan Prevails at Supreme Judicial Court in Case Challenging "Reptile" Tactics

In Fitzpatrick v. Wendy’s Old Fashioned Hamburgers, et al., SJC 12937, ___ N.E.3d __ 2021 WL 2024453, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court affirmed a trial judge’s decision ordering a mistrial based upon plaintiff’s Reptilian closing argument. 

The Court also reaffirmed the longstanding Massachusetts practice that trial counsel need not interrupt an opponent’s closing argument to lodge an objection as long as the objection is made immediately after the argument concludes.  

This case underscores the following principles. Trial lawyers are expected to know and follow the rules of proper advocacy and trial judges retain the authority to act when counsel violates those rules.  

The goal is a fair trial for all parties. Zealous advocacy does not justify a “win at any cost” approach to trial practice.

In Lawyers Weekly Christopher Duggan described his successful appeal before the Supreme Judicial Court in overcoming "Reptile Tactics" by plaintiff's counsel. He served trial and appellate counsel for both defendants throughout the Fitzpatrick case. His commentary for Lawyers Weekly can be found here.