Angela Bruno:
Trial isn't the ultimate success story, and bullying your way for a certain dollar amount isn't either.
Sonya Palmer:
It gives you critical insight to clients.
Angela Bruno:
That's again, another example of me negotiating in my everyday life. I'm negotiating in my mind for women.
Who is Angela Bruno? Lawyer and mediator shaping high-stakes negotiation strategies for women in law.
Sonya Palmer:
For the eighth consecutive year, women outnumber men in law schools across the nation. Yet this wave of change has not reached the shores of power. Women hold just 25% of seats at the table as board members and managing partners, but the tides are turning. Women in law are no longer meekly waiting for an invitation, are boldly striking out, creating a future where success is defined on their own terms. Law firms fit into their lives not the other way around. As this new generation of trailblazers rises, we stand with them, ready to amplify their voices and fuel the transformation. This is LawHer.
I am Sonya Palmer, your host and VP of operations at Rankings, the SEO agency supporting you in claiming your rightful place at the top. We are thrilled to present the third and final miniseries of season two, the art of negotiation. In this series, we explore negotiation not just as a professional skill but as a life-changing art form. We'll sit down with an extraordinary array of women who have mastered the negotiation table in various arenas. A former judge, a federal trade commission attorney who's also competed on Master Chef, skilled mediators and experts in Title IX and workplace disputes. These trailblazers share how they advocate for justice in the courtroom and negotiate the lives they want outside of it. We'll uncover strategies for high stake settlements, techniques for navigating complex deals, and insights on balancing personal ambitions with professional demands.
Let's meet today's guest. Angela Bruno is a powerhouse in the field of negotiation and mediation. After graduating summa cumme laude from UCLA in US Hastings College of Law, she quickly distinguished herself as a force to be reckoned with. During her time at UC Hastings, Angela honed her negotiation skills, winning both regional and national mediation competitions in 2007. Her expertise caught international attention leading to a position in Rome working with the European Union to educate judges and lawyers on mediation. Angela's career has been marked with significant achievements. She co-founded BRUNO | NALU with her husband Keith in 2014, a firm known for handling complex high stakes personal injury and wrongful death cases.
Their early successes included a hundred thousand mediation settlement in the first month and a $40 million wrongful death verdict. Recognized as a super lawyer and named one of the National Trier lawyers top 40 under 40, Angela has built a reputation as a fearless courtroom advocate with a client centric approach. As the lead negotiator at her firm, she's driven its success through skillful mediation and high settlements. In our conversation, Angela shares strategies for developing crucial negotiation skills, how to leverage these skills both in and out of the courtroom, unique challenges and opportunities for women in negotiation, and insights on building a successful legal career. Let's dive in.
Angela Bruno:
So it is interesting. I always thought I would go and get my MBA. I loved business, I loved the idea of building something, growing something. I quickly learned when I went out to the workforce, and you're really bottom of the totem pole and the rise to the top is 20 years. I just quickly realized the structure of business in what I had perceived it to be, the reality wasn't going to be the same. So of course I started looking at a business school and really what happens in business school, a lot of times, not all the time, there's a small percentage where people go to business school and actually start their own business. But the vast majority just go back to another big firm and instead of being at the very bottom, maybe they're in the middle, but you don't have autonomy or you're not really part of the decision making.
And the more I started to talk to people, they would say, "You should really just go to law school. It'll give you the foundation for business. Maybe you want to be a lawyer, maybe you don't, but it's not going to hurt you." I saw how many people I met had their own law firms at a law school, that percentage was significantly higher. You don't have the overhead, your talent is the business or less moving pieces. And I thought, "Well, I don't know if I want to be a lawyer, but I definitely know this is going to help me anyway I go." And so that's how I ended up in law school believing I'd own my own practice, but really I didn't know which area or how it would actually all play out.
Sonya Palmer:
I love that it's almost a total opposite where so many people go to law school to be lawyers and then find themselves starting a business. So to want to start a business and then decide to be a lawyer, I love that.
Angela Bruno:
Yeah, that is really what happened. I mean, I couldn't have totally predicted how it would all play out. In hindsight, it was the right way for me.
Proven strategies for developing negotiation skills for women lawyers that improve outcomes in mediation.
Sonya Palmer:
And then while you were in law school, you studied the art of communication with a focus on negotiation and mediation. What does that mean? Were there specific courses? After school things? Was it self-taught?
Angela Bruno:
Like you said, most people go to law school with the goal of being a trial lawyer, or at least I went to UC Hastings. That was the emphasis there, was, "You're going to go here and you're going to be in court." I just knew that probably wasn't exactly what I was trying to do. And so there's mock trial teams, moot court, and then they also had this negotiation team. My whole thing was I wanted to make deals. I was a deal maker. In my mind, that's where this was all going. So when I found out there was a negotiation team, I had to try out. And you try out just like you're going for a trial team. I mean it was like a fish to water. I loved it. It was kind of how theater people, when they're on stage, it all makes sense to them. Really reason I made it through law school was because I had such a deep passion for negotiating.
After school hours, multiple days a week, I mean it was really my whole life through law school was the negotiation team. And we traveled locally, we traveled all over the United States. We traveled actually internationally. The people that are passionate about it are deeply passionate about it, and want to expand the practice. Because the more people that understand how to negotiate, the better the deals are that are made, the happier people are in the end. And if you know anything about people in life, it's not really the facts that are the issue or the ultimate conclusion, but it's how you make people feel. And that is the art of negotiating is having people walk away feeling like that went well. It's an art. It has to be practiced. And I think I had a really huge advantage out of law school having had those skills over maybe some of the more technical skills, at least for what I do in my job.
Sonya Palmer:
Yeah, 100%. And making deals is fun. I love that you draw that. It's very, very fun to make deals. So if it's something that you're passionate about, and you're good at and it's fun, negotiation is good for all of the parties involved, not just one or the other. You mentioned international travel. You worked in Rome promoting mediation after law school, not a common path.
Angela Bruno:
No.
Sonya Palmer:
How did that happen?
Angela Bruno:
Well, I was on the negotiation team for I think nearly three years, maybe at the end of my first year and then all through the next two years. And you get recognized very quickly in that field. It's small. I won a competition against Harvard while in DC, and that sort of put me to the top of the list of where other law firms would be interested in looking at. A professor at Harvard reached out to me to go to their business school after that competition. So it opened doors that you didn't know existed. And so I took the opportunity to go to Rome. I always wanted to live in Europe. I didn't do it in college. It was a great opportunity to go out there and learn really how much they struggle with people not having the skills to negotiate.
It was creating huge conflict between countries and we would go in and teach really the fundamentals of why this makes sense to do it this way. And not ironically, their perspective of, "For every dollar I give up I'm losing," is a very similar perspective to people here that insist on going to trial. Because they view everything as you're giving something up that you shouldn't have to give up versus, no, you're gaining something that you would never have if you went to trial. Trial isn't the ultimate success story, and bullying your way for a certain dollar amount isn't either. There's so much more to these pieces. And so teaching people in their fifties and sixties these concepts was hugely beneficial.
Sonya Palmer:
So what was Rome like? What was your time in Europe like?
Angela Bruno:
So I mean I was living kind of a fantasy. I worked in Piazza di Spagna, which is where everyone wants to be. I will say I was massively underpaid, so it wasn't like money was flowing. The only thing I had was myself in a foreign country and a place to go to work. But I loved it. One of the sayings I always have is make every situation fun. Every part of life is not fun. I mean I'm in so many situations that are not fun, and there is some level of fake it till you make it. I could have easily gone to Rome and been miserable with my equivalent of 450 US dollars a month while living there. It was brutal. I made friends, they took me under their wing, they had cars.
I just did whatever I had to do to make it a good experience. And it was a great experience, and they asked me to stay another year and increased my pay. I declined it, but it was such a good opportunity for me to see what life would be like in Europe. I'd rather experience something and reject it than not have the opportunity. And that was a lot of what I wanted, and I was trying to make a decision at that point if I would go to Harvard for business school or where I was was enough. And it gave me that time and opportunity to say, "I have so many opportunities in the legal field, this is really what I want to do."
Sonya Palmer:
You started your firm with your husband, Keith, in 2014. Walk us through that decision. You wanted to own a business. So how did that sort of come to be?
Angela Bruno:
So we started dating, and we were doing two very different practice areas, and he got an opportunity to try a civil case. It was a car accident case, just a very basic rear render. And he told the attorney who asked him to do it, that's just not his background. He doesn't have that experience, just to give the case away to someone else because he was primarily doing criminal defense work. The referral attorney just wasn't taking no for an answer, basically said, "Look, you have great trial experience. There's no reason you can't do this." So he capitulated and decided to take it not realizing that I had PI experience. I had a very brief stint at a civil law firm. And so we started working on the case. Literally we're dating, working on it at night, like law students basically, while we're doing totally different practice during the day.
So he takes the case to trial, really hits it out of the park. I mean there's no question it was such a basic small $10,000 type case, ends up getting mid six figures. I mean it was really outrageous, and everyone wanted to know who did your closing argument? How did you come up with these ideas? And he is like, "Well, Angela wrote the closing argument." And everyone was like, "You've got to be kidding me. You two have to have a firm." And that was really the beginning. His passion is being in front of an audience, and he has a power of persuasion and his ability to bring things to life is second to none. And I have my skills, and just together we realized how we could make this magic happen, not just once, but over and over. And that trial happened, it was basically eight months later we started our firm.
Sonya Palmer:
You had some early wins because you had 100K settlement first month.
Angela Bruno:
So yeah, we started our firm. I mean literally we get married, maybe four or five months later we took our honeymoon. So we're in Paris, and we get asked to do a case the day we were flying home, the mediation was the next day. And so we go, "Okay." I'm literally reading the mediation binder, the whole file in the car drive from Orange County to LA, and they had demanded a hundred grand in the brief. And I'm looking at Keith going, "This is insane. This is not a hundred thousand dollars case." And he is like, "Well, what do you want to do?" And I'm like, "Well, we're going to have to tell them that we're trial counsel and this is off the table." I mean, I don't know who we thought we were, but we thought we were something. So we walk in, I mean the referral lawyer's like, "What are you doing? I just need 100K. The client's happy with it."
I'm like, "There's no way. This is a massive shoulder surgery." And when I say I literally just told everyone to move aside, and I'm not being dramatic, I was like, "You guys can't do this." And I just work that room for six hours straight, and it was just, I mean obviously it was coming off my honeymoon. I'm telling everyone I know what I'm doing, but really, I mean this guy doesn't know this is my first mediation since starting a practice. So that was just an incredible experience. I loved every second of it. And it's one of those things where you've been trained to do something, but until you do it in real life, you don't know like, "Is it really going to work?" And so it was nice because, again, my husband's entire background is going to trial. He is diehard passionate about trial and he got to see what I have been saying about mediation, negotiating, how there is an alternate path. It doesn't mean you're going to get less money, arguably you get more. And it was so validating.
Sonya Palmer:
My notes literally said diehard trial attorney, as you said that. He had a $857 million verdict in the state of Washington.
Angela Bruno:
That's true. Just December of 2023. Yeah, I mean we knew the case was worth a lot. I can't say we could have predicted that verdict. It was truly jaw dropping, almost unbelievable. I mean the amount of times we had to re-add up the numbers to make sure what we thought we heard was really what it was adding up to. I mean, it's still kind of surreal. I mean you can't prepare yourself for something like that.
Sonya Palmer:
No, it's amazing. Yeah. So how you were operating back then when you started it, is that still sort of how you operate? Have you divided work streams or practice areas, or you kind of are a team?
Angela Bruno:
Yeah, so it's definitely changed. So in the beginning, I would say the first three years without a doubt, we were doing every trial together. So every single trial, he was first chair, I was second chair. We had different roles within the trial, but we attended every mediation together and every trial together and we were really a partnership that worked well together because we have different strengths. Over time it became a bad use of time. The volume of cases were just getting too high. Two people couldn't be on every single case. And so our business model has absolutely changed to today where I probably take 90 to 95% of our cases to negotiation, to mediation before he really touches it. If I'm unable to get it done, or sometimes the handwriting's just on the wall early on, then he's really handling those cases more primarily.
And people ask us all the time, I feel like I should just address the elephant in the room. "How can you work with your husband?" So many people are like, "There's just absolutely no way I could do it." And obviously every personality is different. Our personalities are unique, but what I think works for us is that we are so highly specialized individually in separate areas. I'm not questioning him about the evidence code and whether or not he's right, and he's not questioning me about my case valuation. So there's not that conflict that would naturally be there where you're arguing over how you're doing the job. We really don't do that. We can still have difference of opinions about the case approach or the way we see the client, but when it comes to the heart of what we bring to the table, no one's stepping on each other's toes.
Sonya Palmer:
So there's a lot of structure. The lines aren't really blurred, but also that you've always done it together. You talked about honeymoon, coming in, so this is how you do law.
Angela Bruno:
Yes.
Sonya Palmer:
I love that.
Angela Bruno:
Yes, for sure.
Sonya Palmer:
How has the firm's trajectory and success matched that earlier vision?
Angela Bruno:
Early on we were probably naive in thinking that we could just continue to forever work on every single case together. And what we sort of appreciated over time was that that's just a bad use of our time, especially in a small firm. If we were at a big firm and we weren't also doing all of the business side of it, maybe it would be more practical to be a real trial team. And we've had that offer made to us many times. It's just not one that we want. So we've had to learn that if we want to stay small, which we do, it's not for everyone, but for us, we have expanded our firm, and we purposely reduced it.
It's really just a better fit for us to have low volume, high quality cases that we have a lot of control over. We are knee-deep in every case. There's not a case that we don't know who's handling it or we don't know where it is in the process. We like it that way. We feel we are the secret sauce to these cases, and so we don't want to dilute that brand. I think that's been the big difference between the beginning of, "Let's do everything together." We do like working together. There's no question. I think in a perfect world we work on everything together and it would be fun, but practically speaking it made more sense to find ways to separate when I can do something and really handle it myself for an entire length of the case versus him. And again, we just have such compatible but different strengths. He over the course of time, his interest in doing trials has only grown.
And if you look at most trial attorneys, that's not the trajectory of that they take, they usually start out hot and heavy, and they have a very successful track record for a few years, and then they burn out. And that's typical, which I would've thought that's what would happen to us as well. If you're just looking statistically, absolutely not what happened. He will put himself in a position to try a case no matter what. That's great. It's what he likes to do. That's what he should do. He gets a lot out of it personally, it's good for clients, it's good for the bar. Judges love him. So it's an all around good thing, which gives me the freedom to take cases and if I can settle them, I know that I have a very strong backup plan, which I think gives us a lot of leverage.
Sonya Palmer:
While the goal of mediation is to settle a case, Angela's perspective offers additional depth. She explains the often overlooked benefits that the mediation process provides.
Angela Bruno:
Everyone goes to mediation with the intent, and you should go with the intent of settling the case. I think that's an important part of mediation is that both sides are showing up with an interest in settling. It's never fun to show up and be told the other side has no authority or they're showing up because they had to, but this isn't what they want to do. That doesn't help anyone. So everyone should go in thinking to themselves, "I'm going to settle this case." However, there should also be an understanding that you're going to learn things in mediation that you cannot and will never learn in another setting, which I think people don't appreciate. Because everyone thinks, "Well, I've talked to my client, I've met with my client, I've met with family members, I've done all these things in preparation, therefore there's nothing I don't know."
And here is the really key element and why it's different in mediation. In mediation, it is the only time that the client is truly confronted with a dollar amount that is not coming from their attorney's mouth, and you cannot create that environment. You can't create that stress, you can't create that reality in your office, in their home, in the abstract. It's where the rubber meets the road and they're going to have to make decisions, and they're going to have to make it in usually a particular timeframe. And they feel that pressure, and that can't be replicated, and it shouldn't be. It is an opportunity for them to understand really the value of the case, what that means about their take home, what that means about their medical bills, and you learn so much about your client's interest in trial at that point. A lot of them have a really sincere interest in going to trial until they're in the pressure cooker of mediation and they want this to end faster than you ever could have imagined.
So now you're getting a different sense of what their tolerance is. Another huge part, obviously you might learn new facts that you didn't know. Trust me, I know lawyers that say that just doesn't happen. I can tell you we are very successful lawyers. We have been doing this for a very long time. We know what we're looking for. We have had clients, specifically a client who lost his leg. This case went on for four years. We've reviewed all of his medical records, we've spoken to him. There's, in our minds, nothing we don't know about the case. We go to mediation only to find out for the first time he's unable to get erect and never told anyone. So how are we ever going to get that information? Were we going to get that at trial? It's almost a disservice, everything depends on the case. I'm not going to make pronouncements, but it is almost a disservice to not go to mediation because you just absolutely don't know what you're going to find out.
It could be case law from the other side. It could be evidence from the other side. It could be new facts from your own client. But what you will find out without a question is their tolerance for trial. And that alone could be worth it. There is an idea out there that you could just resolve things on the phone. Okay, you can. But if I resolve my leg off case without knowing that he had erectile dysfunction for four years and is never going to get it back, did I just undersell and undervalue the case? Yes, I absolutely did, right? So I hope there is a genuine understanding that this is real, these are real things that happen. I can just go on and on and on with examples, but you can't know your client without knowing their actual reaction to numbers. And they will never have a real reaction to numbers outside of a setting where they're confronted with making a decision.
You can have a client go to deposition, they can perform amazingly. Well, why is that? Why in their deposition are they so calm and so cool? What's the difference between that and any other setting? Well, in deposition, money never comes up. I mean, this is like a key distinction. Money is never addressed. I mean maybe there's a hint that their medical bills are a certain amount of money, but their take home isn't addressed. What will get paid and what won't get paid gets addressed. They're really just talking about their experience, their feelings, and what injuries they have. They're really not on the spot in the way that we kind of perceive it. So they walk away from deposition as if they're ready for trial. Mediation's the next time that they experience something much more real and what's more realistic to happen, and the perception that the mediator might have about the value of their case.
How lawyers can apply advanced mediation and negotiation techniques inside and outside the courtroom.
Sonya Palmer:
When thinking about negotiation, it's easy to conjure up the notion of large sums of money scribbled on a piece of paper slid across large boardroom tables from one group of lawyers to another, but that's not what happens. And you use negotiation tactics in every aspect of your cases. How do your finely tuned negotiation skills play a role in your approach to jury selection?
Angela Bruno:
So this is what I'll say generally about negotiation style and tactic. It's kind of what I had talked about earlier on. So much of deal making is getting the buy-in from the other side, right? And I talked about this in some of my speeches where negotiating is really like dating. You want to go on a date with someone that makes you happy, they ask you questions about yourself. There's a nice ping pong back and forth. It's very comforting. There's elements of dating that you could scientifically sort of break down. You ask two questions, then you ask one question, he pays, she pays, whatever it is, but if it's going well because you feel good about it. And when you're negotiating, it's the same idea. Taking the whole pie doesn't make anyone feel good. That's not reasonable, that's not what goes well. You want to take that same approach with jury selection.
A lot of times what we talk about is if I'm the team captain, the jury are my teammates, so we need a connection where I feel like they understand what I'm talking about and they will rally and take the ball and shoot when I need them to. And that's what you're trying to create. You're trying to create a team work approach where they're invested in your side. If someone's crossing their arms and rolling their eyes, that's not a good teammate. Sometimes hard when you're in trial, you have a lot of pressure from the judge often to pick a jury quickly. The judges, they have no tolerance for jury selection as a general rule. There are some that are a little bit more forgiving, but a lot of times their calendars are so packed, they will basically handcuff you, make it very difficult to not pick a jury within those first 45 or however many people.
So you need to be scanning that room from minute one saying to yourself, "Who doesn't want to be here because they need to be gone." You have to have people that are at least vested in the process. A lot of times you might want someone that's good on paper or their answers are good, and the second you sit down, they're yawning and rolling their eyes. And so that's one of the reasons having two of us was always very helpful because whoever's standing up doing voir dire can't necessarily appreciate what these 12 other people are doing while they're talking. And so you need eyes on them. It's in the silence that you kind of figure out, "Okay, you don't want to be here." Or, "You just don't like me." Or, "You don't like our case." Once you do a mini opening, you might kind of get a reaction from people that makes you realize they just don't like this type of case.
It's not going to go well for us. And so much of jury selection is negotiating, but it's in the silence. It's usually not what people are saying. People are really interested in saying what is socially acceptable and not always in what they actually feel. Because you're putting them on the spot. Most people don't like public speaking, they don't want to be controversial. They pretty much just want to get out of there. Having that connection with them, whether it's through body language or even an anecdote or an analogy that they can relate to, so you can kind of tap into their natural bias and whether they'd be a good fit is so critical.
Sonya Palmer:
What strategies from your negotiation toolbox do you use to prepare a witness to deliver clear persuasive testimony?
Angela Bruno:
So of course we do a lot of preparation. I mean, preparation is critical, but you can never be too confident on how someone's going to be on the stand. You can't emphasize that enough. People that really struggle in a meeting can light up on the stand when they recognize that this is their one chance. Other people can be great in meetings, but they get on the stand and they really say things so opposing to what you've talked about the whole time, and that's why trial's so risky. There's just so many more opportunities for things like that to happen. Just to kind of round it out, it's one of the reasons mediation and negotiating is so successful because you can control those elements. I'm the one that tells the mediator, this person's going to testify to these facts. Well, when you go to trial, the chance of those things coming out the way I just said them is very low, right?
I don't care how much you practice it. So a lot of what I try to do is really talk to the client about the importance of trial, and that this is what the jury is going to base their decision on. It's on you, right? They're not looking at me at this point. They are looking to you. You're the client. They want to know from you how this affected your life. And I think that's why something like mediation, but even depositions are good opportunity to start assessing your client in whether or not they can actually deliver. More often than not, I would say they cannot. It's not an easy skill. It's not as easy as it seems. It's just kind of telling your story. It's very intimidating. Some people are soft-spoken. That really hurts your case significantly because no matter how much you tell someone that is soft-spoken to speak up, they don't get louder.
They just don't. And juries don't like that. They want to hear you, and they want to hear clearly. They're already annoyed. This is a very long day. So there's a lot of things you can do to try to help ensure that you're going to get a good testimony. But if you already see the handwriting on the wall that this person just can't deliver, then you have to be honest with them that perhaps trial isn't the right route for you. Trial is great when there's no money on the table or it's so low, it's unjustifiable. Then you just dig in and you prep your client the best you can, and if your client's not great, you prep the friends around them. You've got to find someone or something that's going to hook your case if it's not going to be the client. Because sometimes they are the best people.
I mean, I've had cases where the client, although highly accomplished, intelligent, achieved in their career kind of crumbles because they're male, they don't want to admit how severe their injuries are. And so they do horrible on the stand, which can help you because then the wife comes in and just unloads. You see what I mean? You can take a negative and make it a positive, but you got to have that positive. If there's no wife or neighbor or sister or friend or coworker that can explain why this person's acting this way because it's so common, I do it myself. You get injured and you excuse away how bad it is because you just want to get better versus really being genuine and authentic about how much it's ruining your life.
Sonya Palmer:
How do your negotiation abilities help you develop and sell a compelling overall case and narrative?
Angela Bruno:
The whole undercurrent of negotiations and learning about people is understanding really the heart of what's going on. So for example, the leg off case, it was a horrific case. There's no question just the facts as we knew them for four years, but when you're then confronted with a new fact that there's erectile dysfunction and this person has hidden it for four years, you can't just take that and say, "Okay, well now that's the story." You need to take some time and step away, and now you got to find out a lot more information about what's been going on. How has this really affected you? Because that story went far and deep, which you would imagine that it would, right? So negotiating some of it is just in timing, and that's the interesting part of negotiating. People think it's just you're coming up with the right number.
It's like, "How do you come up with the right number if you don't have the right facts? How do you come up with the right facts if you don't have the time to discover them?" It is like a hundred different things coming together to finally create what should be the outcome. And sometimes, hey, it can go the other way. You learn bad facts about your client and the value of the case goes down. And sometimes you want to make a deal before you find that out. Sometimes there's warning flags that this is going south, so it goes both ways. Time is not always on your side. I would argue it is often not the way to go. More time on these cases often leads to bigger problems. The leg off case is a rare example that also happens, right? I mean we're always in the position where we're balancing time and money spent versus value of the case, or we should be always balancing.
Sonya Palmer:
It gives you critical insight to clients. You've mentioned an example where you learned something that then affected it. How do you counsel your clients then to get the most value from mediation?
Angela Bruno:
Right. Okay, so when you're about to go to mediation, most clients have never been to mediation. I mean you would hope they have never been. A lot of time is spent on explaining to them what to expect, and it's very different today than pre COVID because 90% of mediations are now happening on Zoom. It's a very different environment. Why is it so different? And part of the reason it's so different is because we're what they call people those keyboard warriors, right? People act so different behind a screen, and you don't have the same personal connections that you had before. Now this doesn't mean that mediations aren't going as well, they're going equally as well, I would say, but you have to take different things into consideration now. A lot of clients, a lot, because of COVID want to do mediations from home. I will argue that that is a bad idea a vast majority of the time.
If your client can come to your office, that is the better way of doing it because what I see happens is they are emotionally checked out. They are much more argumentative, and the risk of them not taking a deal while sitting at home cooking dinner, it just goes up like 90%. They also are much more likely to argue why your fees are so high. It's my rule that they will at least come to the office because they don't appreciate or see the amount of work and effort you're putting into this mediation. They just see your screen turn off. They see you come back on, they ask what happened. When they're in the office with me, they see me up, down texting, scrambling for documents, and when they don't see that, then they think you're not doing anything.
And I don't care if you get them $3 million, they see their take home, they see your take home and they don't think it's justified, and you end up with really big problems over something that should be a happy moment. Again, it's not about the results, it's about how they feel about it. So if you want your client to feel happy about it, they need to be in your office watching you fight for them. Is there a client that sits at home and says, "Angela, you're the greatest thing ever"? Yeah, there is. Is it less likely and rare? Absolutely. We've gotten people hotel rooms just right by our office if they want to drive down the night before. I mean it's that important to have them here.
Sonya Palmer:
You have renowned skills as a negotiator and mediator. If you're talking to new attorneys specifically, what are the most important skills to develop in order to become an effective negotiator?
Angela Bruno:
So the most important skills for an effective negotiator is one, you need to understand your bottom line in a very real way. So this isn't, "Okay, my client has a shoulder injury. Those are somewhere between 350 and 500. I called a couple friends and that's what it's worth." I mean, it's a good starting point. Trust me, you need to ask people, okay? But then you need to look at your case, your client, are they on drugs? Did they not do any rehabilitation? Did they not do physical therapy? There's so many things that clients do in the positive and the negative that are going to affect your case value specifically. And your venue is a huge component. Are you going to get the same in Bakersfield as you are in Orange County, as you are in San Francisco? The numbers aren't the same. We don't get paid the same.
These results aren't the same. I often tell people, you should have a trial lawyer on speed dial that will take your calls. We talk to tons of lawyers, we're not taking a fee, we're not co-counseling. They're just asking our opinion, it betters our skills. It helps us see what's going on out there. If the case goes south, great, maybe now we're invested we can try and help try it for you. Most likely not, but we are happy to give our knowledge because you're just rising the level of these settlements across the board. I don't want someone down the street settling a shoulder case for 200 grand. I mean that's just going to bring it down for all of us. I'd rather explain to them why this case is worth more like 700, or maybe it is worth 200.
Speaking to someone that goes to trial gives you so much ammunition with your own client to explain, "Hey, Google this lawyer, I talked to them for 30 minutes. Assume you don't go to trial yourself. This is someone that would take this case. They're valuing it at this. I also spoke to Angela or someone else that specializes in mediation. I know what things are going for in mediation in certain venues because I've probably had that case. Just like everything in life, what it's settling for today maybe isn't what it settled for 10 years ago." I mean interestingly, 10 years ago, trying to get an adjuster to agree to the medical expenses for a chiropractor was literally like pulling teeth. It was whack science, it was unnecessary. Today, 10 years later, they'll pay every single penny for a chiropractor because they just don't want you going into surgery. The environments change. Maybe the laws don't change, but the way that they are interpreted and applied do, it can be very helpful to have people that specialize in mediation or specialize in trial in the moment, not someone that did it 20 years ago.
How is this coming out? What evidence is getting into a trial? What's getting left out during motions in limine? These things change quickly. It evolves, and I think having a real case evaluation with a real number is the biggest fault because people go into these mediations... I hate this, it actually makes me insane, and I wish I were lying, but I'm not. They just think a shoulder case is worth X amount, so that's my bottom line. You cannot do that. Your bottom line has to be very specific to your client and your client's needs. I mean every client with that same shoulder injury is going to have massively different medical expenses. One's going to be on Medicaid, one's going to have private insurance, one's going to have no insurance. That completely changes their in pocket would ultimately be, how much medical specials you're going to have, what your reimbursement rate's going to look like.
You really have to develop the whole case to then have a bottom line. Mediation is not your attempt to just throw numbers around and see if you can get the highest that you can. You want to go to mediation like you go to trial. You've prepped the client on expectations. You've prepped the client on case valuation. You have a clear understanding, at least to the amount that you can have a clear understanding, their interest in mediation and a settlement versus trial. Their interest in a settlement because the money comes in 30 to 90 days. I mean, are you explaining that to your client? Right now is this very interesting environment because the amount of money you can get in interest is very high. You're not a financial planner, but you might want to explain to your clients that if I get you 200 grand in your pocket today and you invest that for three years, but we don't go to trial for three years, do you know how high of a verdict we would have to have to justify not taking this money?
I mean, these are real discussions about what's going to happen versus, "A shoulders worth 250." That's, I don't know, it's almost malpractice. It's like, "Yes, that's a starting point, but there's so much more to it." I mean, if you find out that this person has cancer and is likely going to die, don't you think the timing of mediation is going to be a little bit more important and the value of what you're willing to settle for would look a little different than a 22-year-old going to college? And it should, right?
Sonya Palmer:
100%.
Angela Bruno:
That should matter to you. It should matter to the client.
Sonya Palmer:
You've mentioned the heart of things, and aside from technical negotiation, negotiating tactics, a lot of what you're talking about sounds like mindset or even a mental framework. How is that different? What is that approach?
Angela Bruno:
I think it's different because again, my interest and where this all started from was I wanted to build something. I want to make deals. I want people to close this chapter and move on with something bigger and better, and put them in a better position. It's not about anything more than that. It's something horrific happened to you, and I'm going to try to position you the best I can moving forward. And I've watched clients just thrive in otherwise daunting future life. You just get a lot out of that knowing that your insight, your interest, your ability to see the big picture through the weeds can completely change people's lives. And I think if you have that temperament and you have that interest, once you taste that, you can't un-taste it, right? It's like part of why we have stayed very small, because we're touching every single case so personally, and I think our clients recognize that
Sonya Palmer:
Beyond providing a dollar amount or justice, it's also closure for the client.
Angela Bruno:
Closure is so important. I mean, there's scientific studies that show that people's stress level increases their pain levels significantly, and so they can't get over... And I explain this, I hope anyone listening to this podcast will take this and use it with their clients because it's true. Clients can't recover during litigation. That is one of the biggest issues with litigation is that their pain and their injuries don't heal. And this idea that you can, even for some of these people, a 10% increase or decrease in pain or increase in their walking ability is life-changing, right? And if the stress and the drama of litigation is preventing that, I take that into consideration. There's not a client that wishes litigation went longer, right? They don't even know how happy they're going to be when it's done. So if I'm looking at a case and we're in mediation and the client's telling me over and over and over, "I won't settle unless I get $500,000 in my pocket."
And I know it's really more likely going to be 350 in mediation, not at the end. I'm talking early on. You have to have your finger on the pulse of what's happening, start explaining these things to them, probably for the 50th time. Because it's in that moment, in that pressure cooker that it will sense. So you say, "You've been telling me that you have headaches every night and your whole body's in pain, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. This money can change your life, not because of the money, but also the stress of having to sit there and listen to this. The stress of having the other side say, 'This is 50% your fault.' This does affect you. It affects your mental state, it affects your psyche, it affects every cell in your body." It is nice, some clients come back and say, "It's been three years, I just want to say hi." But for the most part they're like, "Bye." Right?
Sonya Palmer:
Yep. See ya.
Angela Bruno:
Doesn't matter how much money I get them, they have moved on and that's really what you want, right? I don't want an attachment here. It's like, "Good, your life..." They'll follow me on social media, I can see they're doing well, and that's good enough for me.
Sonya Palmer:
That works. Excellent. You mentioned bullying earlier and how maybe that's not actually a negotiation tactic. Are there other misconceptions around what negotiation is?
Angela Bruno:
Yeah, there's this really bizarre idea that you're going to announce your best and final at 30 minutes in, and everyone's just going to deal with it, and then you're going to come back seven hours later, and they're either going to have met your best and final or they're not. It's the same way I view dating. If a guy comes to my door and says, "I'm going to marry you, I have the ring." I'm just waiting for the six months to go by until you understand that this is what's going to happen. There's a 100% chance we're not getting married, we're not even getting on the date. So why do you think that's going to work when you're talking about tens of thousands of dollars, hundreds of thousands of dollars, millions of dollars, there has to be a buy-in. You can't just announce that you know this is the value of the case, or you know this is what it's going to settle for.
If the guy knows he's going to marry me, then he needs to zip it and then take the steps that a normal person would take to get to the finish line. So it's the same idea. I think people are really naive to why negotiating works, why mediation works, and until they really experience it, and I think even sometimes when they do experience it, they still... Because I don't think they understand the real delicate balance that's happening, they may still think it happens the way I said, where it's just like, "Poof, this number came out of nowhere." And that's the problem. If you don't see what we're talking about, then you'll have perceived it that we all just agreed it was eight million. And sometimes clients can do that, and I will say attorneys might be part of the problem, but clients are a bigger part of the problem because this isn't their job.
So, so much in a mediation is not just with the mediator, but it is with your client. How much they hear and don't hear becomes very important because you're trying to control their perception of the information. Like I said, if they're sitting at home and they're not watching you work, their perception is you did nothing. If they're sitting in the mediation and you are doing nothing, their perception is you did nothing, right? So you are creating an environment that will get you to the finish line, and you have to always perceive it that way. If you need to have a serious conversation with the mediator about maybe your client just announced to you that they really can't handle trial, previously made this big stink about if you don't take this number, we're going to trial. But now they announced they didn't. Is it a good idea to make that announcement to the mediator in front of your client?
No, it is not. And a lot of attorneys don't get that. It's a fact, they don't want to go trial. So I'm just going to say it. Well, you shouldn't do that. You should always have a mediator cell phone number or have a private Zoom room in another room and explain some of those delicate things because your client's going to freak out and shut down and not like you. And then you're supposed to be the same person that convinces them to take the deal. So much is just you have to go into these mediations playing the long game, and I often will only agree to full day mediations because of that. I'm not saying I've never done a four-hour mediation. I have, it's so rare. The issues need to be very narrow. The difference in what they've offered and what I'm demanding needs to be small because most of the time you need that time. You need that time.
Challenges women lawyers face in negotiation — and opportunities to lead in mediation and dispute resolution.
Sonya Palmer:
As we've explored the intricacies of negotiations within legal practice, it's important to consider its broader applications. Negotiation skills extend beyond the courtroom, and can significantly impact various aspects of a lawyer's career. Angela's insights provide valuable strategies for navigating challenges unique to women in law.
Angela Bruno:
We're still women working in a male dominated environment. I mean, we've come a long way, but I think our guard is still very much up towards men and towards women, and obviously it's something we're all still working on and we want to get better at. But I have noticed the men in this industry still have a much more transparent and collegial relationship than women do. I am trying to change that, and one of the ways that personally I do it, I'm not saying I'm doing everything I can or there aren't better ideas out there, but genuinely being happy for other women's success, whether it's reposting a verdict they got, or I've specifically and recently had someone say, "Oh, I heard you were speaking at that women's conference. I mean, is it all like woo woo and just like nonsense?" And I said, "No." And I give very specific examples of topics of discussion, what lawyer address those topics, their insights, and really giving validation to our women's groups because I was a little stunned that that was the interpretation, like we're all just day spying and hanging out and talking about health and fitness.
But that was really what these guys thought. Everyone knows I'm talking about negotiation, which they're like, "That's cool, but were you the only one?" So I could have said, "Oh yeah, someone talked about health and fitness." Because someone did. But I specifically chose to not even talk about that and really talk about the people that were doing things on the evidence code, discovery, deposition skills, voir dire. Because that's what they don't know about, and I have to change the narrative around it. And that's again, another example of me negotiating in my everyday life. I'm negotiating in my mind for women. I don't want people even talking like that. I'm not going to say, "Yeah, we all went to the pool for four hours," even if we did, because you're just going to water down the point. And I've talked about this in negotiation or mediation before.
If a bad fact comes out, everyone's natural inclination is to explain it away and talk about it. And one of my main points when negotiating is do not breathe air into it. If someone announces this massively bad fact, I literally act like the building's on fire before I address it. I will find a way to just curve away. And I think in life you have to do that too. Someone's confronting you about something that you know is stigmatized, but you want to change that narrative, then you need to deflect and grow what you know is really more the truth. And I do try to do that with women in the law because I think it's massively important. I think we have equal skillset, so I don't feel like I'm lying.
Sonya Palmer:
No, 100%, and I don't know if I'm doing enough or the right thing, but I think that course correcting in the day to day when those situations pop up is extremely important. Because there are big ideas on social media and these things get said, but I actually think that those, I guess, smaller interactions are as important, if not more. Excellent. What gives you the greatest hope and optimism for the future of women in the legal industry?
Career growth insights for women in law from Angela Bruno’s journey in win-win outcomes in mediation.
Angela Bruno:
Oh, I think these conferences that are women based are just, "Round of applause, ladies." I mean, it makes me beam. It's unbelievable. It's truly unbelievable. And I have noticed men have started coming to them as guests and I don't like that. And I wish that would stop because there's something much better happening when it's truly all women. I get, we all have partners or spouses or, I don't know, your little brother. But being women, being able to be ourselves when we're normally in an environment we really can't be. You can't when you're in these mixed or primarily male events. And so seeing women come out in force has been so awesome.
I'm now part of a texting chat group with all trial attorneys, and that wouldn't have happened, I mean, why did that not happen? I've been doing this for over a decade, what took so long? But I'll tell you, it's because all my chats were with men. And now it's like we're finally leaning on each other, which is awesome. And even on social media, I feel like it's so much better where women are really appreciating what we're doing for each other. We're supporting each other, we're going to each other's events. And it's just been totally amazing for me especially because I'm married to and partners with a male trial lawyer, I became very much just part of the men's group.
Sonya Palmer:
Thank you so much to Angela for her insights today. Let's recap a few of the takeaways. Negotiation is an art that extends far beyond the courtroom. It's a skill we can and should apply in all aspects of our legal careers and personal lives. As Angela showed us, the way we frame our experiences, like how we discuss women's conferences, can help shift public perception and ultimately negotiate better outcomes for women in law. Success relies on preparation. Before you step into any negotiation, make sure you've done your homework. Know your bottom line, research those case values, and get your client ready for what's ahead, and give all that workplace to shine. Set the stage, the environment you choose holds power. As Angela pointed out, creating the right setting for negotiation can make all the difference.
Whether it's insisting on in-person meetings or managing your client's perceptions, those details matter. And finally, always play the long game. Resist the urge to force a quick settlement. Sometimes the best outcomes come from patience and strategic thinking. If you've found this content insightful, inspiring, or just made you smile, please share this episode with a trailblazer in your life. For more about Angela, check out our show notes. And while you're there, please leave us a review or a five star rating. It really helps others discover the show. And I will see you next week on LawHer where we'll shed light on how another of the brightest and boldest women in the legal industry climb to the top of her field. Until next time, stay inspired, stay empowered, and keep making waves in the legal industry. You've got this.
