Misdirection in the context of litigation refers to a situation where a party attempts to divert the attention of the court, the opposing party, or the jury from the real issues of the case. It can take many forms, such as presenting irrelevant evidence, making irrelevant arguments, or using emotional appeals to distract from the facts at hand.
Misdirection can be a strategic tactic used by lawyers to gain an advantage in a case. For example, a lawyer might try to shift the focus of the case to a peripheral issue in order to distract from a weakness in their client’s case. Alternatively, a lawyer might try to use emotional appeals to manipulate the jury into disregarding the evidence presented by the opposing party.
As an example of how misdirection worked very well for my clients in the context of litigation let me bring you to what I called the Italian Family Business Divorce. Years ago I was representing 4 siblings in an extremely contentious business divorce litigation. It was a very Italian New York family suing their father because of his gross mismanagement and breach of fiduciary duties. The father’s overt narcissistic self-entitlement didn’t help the situation either. My clients’ father’s ego was astounding only to be matched by the ego of their attorney Anthony. This would work well for me going forward. One of the key takeaways from 15 years of litigation and dispute resolution, along with a lifetime of martial arts, is that you cannot have ego in a battle. Ego is a limitation in every conceivable respect. You need to let go of yourself and your ego in order to be able to see the path clearly.
The lawsuit had substantial factual issues not to mention a lack of solid supporting evidence. We had to make due with the evidence we did have and bank on the opposing side’s inability to see the bigger picture. The bigger picture here was not going to rectify the wrongs of the past. The past is done and there’s little one can do to control that. All that could be done was controlling the opportunity for wrongs in the future. We need the father out of the business completely. So, while the father and his attorney were spending time and resources opposing motions that I filed in Court, I helped my clients devise a strategy to oust their father from the business completely.
We cut the father’s compensation, access to records, access to bank accounts, cut off his business-phone, opened new bank accounts, and all of this was done legally through the process set forth in New York Business Corporation Law. While the opposing counsel was focusing on fighting motions that served little purpose, we were restructuring the entire business and ensuring a profitable future for the company.
At the end of the day, once those strategies were implemented, the father and his attorney came to the table and gave us a settlement that was fair and reasonable.
