Chris Dreyer:
Most firms treat trial as a backup plan.
Brett Turnbull:
I've lost more trials than most people have ever tried, and I'm not ashamed of it.
Chris Dreyer:
Trial is the plan for Brett Turnbull and he built a national reputation because of it.
Brett Turnbull:
A case is worth what a jury's willing to return.
Chris Dreyer:
Welcome to Personal Injury Mastermind. PIM is powered by Rankings.io, the marketing agency you call when you want more cases. Today we discuss how top trial firms make a profit on the national stage, land better cases, and train teams that don't flinch when it's time to perform.
Brett Turnbull:
I want excellent legal services for every single client we have or we shouldn't take the case.
Chris Dreyer:
I'm Chris Dreyer. Let's get into it. Hey guys, I'm really excited. I've got Brett Turnbull on the show today. Brett, welcome to the show.
Brett Turnbull:
Thanks for having me. I appreciate it, Chris.
Chris Dreyer:
Your reputation as one of the best trial lawyers in the nation precedes you. I like to kind of start off with the wins, so what's happening in your world? Start out on a good front.
Brett Turnbull:
Oh man, I appreciate you saying that, first off. Obviously dear friends, so I do appreciate it. No, working hard. We've had an interesting last year in the sense that we've had some litigations that went all the way down into the end of it and have some trials coming up that we're excited about, but most importantly, we've been doing a lot of mock trials and kind of systematically approaching how we do our cases, especially later on in the case I think has been something that we've really worked hard at and it's been a lot of fun, a lot of jury studies, a lot of focus groups, a lot of jury research, trying to continue to sharpen the tools and make sure that we're ready so that when your number's called, you got something going.
Chris Dreyer:
Yeah, that's awesome. And I think you've taken more than 70 jury trials to verdict.
Brett Turnbull:
We were talking about it the other day, things have changed somewhat, med mals and car wrecks tend to be the two things that go to trial most often in the PI world, just in terms of volume, and some states obviously have more trials than others. But I would say that early on I had my fair share of product liability cases and things that went to trial and you just see less of it now than we used to. Maybe that's because there are less of them out there. Maybe products are a little safer than they used to be, but also I feel like everyone's got a little smarter at trying to analyze what juries are going to do and potentially more cases settled.
But yeah, I've tried a lot of cases and enjoy it very much, and I just really encourage people who have the want to for that, that it's not a complete substitute. It's not exactly the same thing, but in order to sharpen the tools and be prepared, not have to basically make your client's guinea pigs, to definitely work hard on your trial skills while nobody's looking. And also a great way to do that also is focus groups and mock trials and things that get you up on your feet.
Why trial readiness is a marketing advantage for Personal Injury lawyers — and how trial readiness increases case value
Chris Dreyer:
And that's incredible. Out of the gate, one question to kind of set up the marketing side, what are the firms leaving on the table that just don't litigate, that they're just not taking it all the way to the final hour?
Brett Turnbull:
What I always say is that people act as though once you do those things, people treat you differently from the outside. Meaning, mainly insurance companies or big companies. And that's true, but what happens to you as a lawyer is you become so comfortable with the notion that if it comes to that, that you're going to be prepared, you're ready. Frankly, oftentimes you're actually kind of excited about the fact that they screwed the evaluation up and you get a chance to try the case and the only way to really get to that point is to be in a position where you've done it enough, practiced enough.
I don't think that a lot of these firms that choose not to try cases or it's not really a focal point, I don't think it's necessarily laziness. It's really just a function of maybe a little bit of fear of the unknown, a little bit of an outside the box, outside their norm. And it does take some work to kind of get prepared for that outside, again, when nobody's looking. And I think that that's the tough part. So it's not really even just the way the outside world sees you. To me, it's kind of what you know that you have in there and you're confident enough to know that. Because at the end of the day, a jury decides the case, and when I say that, I mean it's like a house or any other thing, a case is worth what a jury's willing to return ultimately. That's the truth.
Chris Dreyer:
Yeah, and that's fair. That's fair. And I like being prepared because they may not give you the number then you're prepared to take it to the end if you have to too and not scrambling.
Brett Turnbull:
Yeah, I mean the part that I realize is tough 'cause you have a lot of cases that are never going to go to trial, probably going to settle, but if you wait until you have something on deck, it's almost impossible to download all the things that you need to be able to figure out and learn and understand to be prepared for a trial. And not even just a trial, but also just the evaluation. It helps you evaluate cases, it helps you on all those things because you can actually kind of see what the movie looks like down the road to make better decisions.
How the “Money–Marketing–Operations” model supports law firm growth and teaches you how to run a profitable Personal Injury firm
Chris Dreyer:
Let's talk about getting those cases just briefly. You have mentioned you're developing a brand, you've got a great reputation, so you're getting the referrals. Just what's your thoughts in the current state and getting the cases in?
Brett Turnbull:
So I've always categorized it in three pieces. When I think of marketing, I was thinking from a business perspective, there are three bubbles in any business in my mind, and that's money, marketing and operations. And by marketing I just mean acquisition of whatever it is that you're looking to have. That is your stock-in-trade, money, meaning the money that you need in order to get the things that you need to work on. And then of course to get it to the finish line. And then operations and in law there's legal operations, which is the professional side, similar to a doctor or a surgeon has the professional, but they also have to run their practice. So then I call that the firm operations. So money, marketing, operations.
In terms of the marketing bubble, the three things that I think of in categorical terms is lawyer referrals, non-lawyer referrals, and paid marketing. And I realize that these days a lot of firms sort of settle in on one of those categories and really ride hard on it. And there's something to be said for that. We're obviously heavy on referrals. Attorney referrals is obviously our heaviest place, but I try my best to make sure that we at least still know what's going on with the paid marketing a little bit because I think that sometimes it's good to have your finger in a little bit more and kind of keep your wits about you, if you will, in different areas of it. So those are the three categories that I think of.
And by non-lawyer referrals, I mean, I'm even talking about family, friends, it's really more an organizational approach where people are held responsible and they're required to use some of their time to try to make sure that everyone knows what we do and what we stand for so that even if it's, whether it's a person you knew from childhood, whatever the case may be, that those things come about, that you're the person that they think of. So in non-lawyer referrals, obviously, and I'm not specifically talking about Arizona or some of the things that we see out there, I now consider those to sort of fit into the referral side where there's a percentage that would be potentially paid. So non-lawyer referrals is really more of those type of things.
Chris Dreyer:
Got it, got it. Yeah. So I guess let's just, maybe we can go a little deeper on each of those. How are you intentional about developing each of those three?
Brett Turnbull:
So I'm an outline person. It's how I learn. I'm a words and outline and how it's organized in my brain, I know some people that maybe that's not how they learn or how they remember things, so I really, from an intentional perspective, that's why you hear me talk about three categories, you can picture the outline now, that's A, B, and C.
Chris Dreyer:
Yeah.
3 Proven marketing channels that show you how to get Personal Injury clients and build steady, high-quality case flow
Brett Turnbull:
So with lawyer referrals, there's a lot of subcategories of that. And there's of course, what I always say is who are we trying to get to? And I really should say these days I think of it, what type of cases and then who has them, but who are we trying to get to? How do we reach them? And then how do we close it? And so those three things fit under each of those three categories, lawyer referrals, non-lawyer referrals, and paid marketing. And so it's just my categorical way of being intentional is to, this is what I have come to after a number of years of giving it thought and implementing it.
And then from there, it's really just getting smarter and smarter and smarter, and I say smarter, but getting more and more experience on realizing what type of cases you're looking to get and who has that ability to be a person or a company or whatever it might be that has the best ability to do that, to get to them. And that's obviously, as I always say, the next thing is looking for projects that have the highest upside, hopefully the lowest risk, hopefully the shortest timeline. That's really from a business perspective, what you try to do. Those are never all three very often, but at least being intentional about each piece of those is something that I'm very passionate about.
And when it comes to who are we trying to get to, I used to just say, well, PI cases. Well, it's really more specific than that, isn't it? I mean It depends on what type of case, what state, because obviously we're in multiple states, but even if you're in one state, the different communities, there's lawyers, non-lawyers and paid marketing in those communities. So from your perspective and being a great marketing mind that you are, I might say, okay, we're trying to go to this place. How do we do it? And you'll come back and have a list of those things yourself. So it's the same thing with lawyer referrals, where all can I meet people that might have the things that we're looking for?
And I've even gotten to the point now where I even focus in and tell myself, how do I lily pad? In other words, there might even people out there or companies out there who I'm not afraid to go ask them anymore, "Hey, I'm a customer. Is there a way that I could possibly talk to some other people in your world about these cases and possibly doing something that we can collaborate on those?" And it might be that the person who I'm talking to is not the person who has the cases, but they know the people who do. So there's a whole lot of different intentional ways that we try to map who we're trying to reach and what type of cases, how we get to them and how we close it.
Chris Dreyer:
That's so different. It's being intentional and structuring it like that, thinking about it different. And I know we briefly talked about this on leads and I think a lot of people think it's taboo, but I think there's a place, I talked to James yesterday about it, I think there's a place for all of it. Why wouldn't you take a case that's good that someone else acquired? And I also think that because you litigate, I think it's an advantage, maybe you can pay more to acquire the case because you can generate more value from it. What's your thoughts on general on that space? Because a little taboo to talk about in general for most people.
Brett Turnbull:
Yeah. It's interesting that you say that because I guess maybe I'm sort of right of the generation, if you will, sort of on the beginning of the real internet push and internet marketing push in our practice. And so I'm 46, so I mean I just think about it changed things so much. It leveled the playing field. I mean, the biggest two or three brands in every market were so dominant. They still are and they deserve that. They've earned that. There's nothing wrong with that whatsoever. But digital did level the playing field in a lot of ways. And frankly, access to capital, which is a whole different conversation, but that also has leveled the playing field for lawyers to be able to pay for their own case costs and things. When in the past there might've only been five firms in the whole town who could afford to work on those cases, and it was sort of a barrier to entry that was created by those specific parameters.
But specifically speaking, I don't really think it's taboo personally to market on the internet. It's no different than any other business when you're really talking about cost of acquisition. The only two numbers that really I think of all the time, it's cost of acquisition and then what's the average fee? And I have to ask myself whether those things make sense. And you're right, if you're getting 100% of the fee and it's not referred to you, then obviously the numbers dynamics change. And if you're getting it referred to you, then obviously you're going to have to pay a referral fee and it's just a different math equation.
So I don't think there's any taboo about it. I think that as long as the marketing is done tastefully and ethically than online, then I think that there are plenty of ways for it to be done for all firms. And frankly, I think it just is part of the equation for PI firms. That's what I believe.
How to identify Traumatic Brain Injuries at intake to increase case value
Chris Dreyer:
And I also like that you mentioned in there that hey, these referral partners, it's part of the cost of acquisition is the percentage. Because some people are like, "Hey, I don't do marketing." But I'm like, you're kind of paying their marketing. I guess another one that I was really interested in is on the intake side, because a firm and a litigator like yourself, it's like sometimes the intake can be complex. How do you evaluate and train your team to spot maybe a TBI, a brain injury case that other people would just pass on or these different little nuances from identifying, hey, there's actually a case there where maybe a non-attorney might miss it. What's your thoughts on that?
Brett Turnbull:
Well, and I know this isn't exactly what you're asking, but I'll say this first. Intake is massively important, as we all know, because it's the first people that talk to the customer in your firm and in terms of making sure that those people have empathy and that they actually are talking to your client, putative client, prospective client, in a way that they're human beings is a massive piece of the puzzle. Every single one of those people, regardless of, and I say this all the time, every single one of those people, whether they actually turn out to have a case or not, they, their family and their world is potentially a future client.
And so there's so much that goes into this that unfortunately it's not necessarily... And conversions matter, of course, they do matter and you want to make sure that you don't miss big categorical things for sure. And those are all very important things, but it's unfortunate that things have gotten to a place where the whole world is much more transactional than it once was. It's just the way it is. But I think that if there's a way for us to go back to people being people, that would be massively, massively helpful in the intake world.
The other thing I'll say to finally really answer your question is how do we make sure that we screen for these other opportunities or for of course, enhanced injury things that might be missed. And what I say is that it's really a two-fold piece of the puzzle. One, there are certain things that we want to make sure that if it, of course I know there's the drop-downs and there's a lot of software now that helps with all this stuff, but from a brain injury perspective, that's a very specific one. There's sort of some questions that we ask, and the first ones are always typically about loss of consciousness and certain things of that nature.
Once those are answered, yes, we actually have the lawyer, and again, I realize volume has an effect on this, right? Whether it's really... I get it, everybody's got a different volume circumstance, but to me the next step for a lot of those types of things, unfortunately, I think there's less lawyer involvement early.
And I have some friends who are my colleagues, and I guess we'll call competitors who are not wrong when they say that we want lawyers to be doing... They're expensive and they're opinionated. And having lots of lawyers in your firm as opposed to other people can oftentimes be challenging. All true, that is not untrue. And that we want people who are lawyers to be doing lawyer functions.
But there is something to be said for the clients to have conversations early on with a lawyer where there are circumstances that are really impossible to make cookie cutter. And I think that brain injury can be somewhat that way. There are a number of other jurisdictional questions, whatever, whether something's a worker's comp case or not, which is a typical challenging analysis, whether it's comp and something else, whatever it might be, those are things that, in my opinion, it may be that's where unfortunately, the cottage industry style of firms of having a high volume and very business efficient mentality, maybe that's where there's a little bit more of a challenge because you don't have a lawyer who's touching the file as early and it's a little harder to have that judgment call made.
But be that as it may, that's the way I think it is. There are certain questions that we want to be answered and it triggers a different path that the case goes on and will be in a lawyer's lap much sooner.
How to train Trial Lawyers effectively without risking client outcomes
Chris Dreyer:
And I was interested in that question because I think that you have a unique ability to spot something. Obviously you have your certain high value activities, but you might be able to take a top trial attorney to evaluate an opportunity differently than maybe just an intake specialist. Not to their negative. It's just from your experience and being in the courtroom and those different components. So I appreciate that for sure.
Let's go to the fun part, and I know you love talking about trial and I got to witness it. You talking about TBI cases is way over my head and the different tactics in the courtroom, and also I know you're involved in Trial Structure, the National Brain Injury Lawyer Organization and a lot of these different organizations. How are you developing other trial attorneys, right, your team to be expert litigators?
Brett Turnbull:
Yeah, I mean it's a very timely question because I will say I do love to talk about trial, and I think part of that's because that was stuff that we spent a lot of time working on, and I think that it's something that maybe people talk about a lot and don't really ever... It's kind of like that people in the audience maybe oftentimes don't think that, well, when am I going to really need that, or when am I going to use that? That's kind of neat, but I don't know if that's really something that's for me. All those things are true when you're sitting in a crowd. I think you have to get on your feet, and I think that's the hardest part about teaching trial for a lot of these conferences or circumstances even within a firm. It's really not best at the Socratic. It's really not best on a whiteboard. It's a whiteboard and then breakouts and do different things.
One of the things that we do a lot of, like I just said as mock trials and focus groups, is sometimes we do those with the intention of videotaping and putting people on their feet to do presentations in cases that aren't necessarily even ready to go to trial. And people say, well, isn't that cost prohibitive? And I say, well, there's a little research center down the street and we know what it costs to do a morning and an afternoon, and we'll take three different opening statements and do them in the morning and three in the afternoon.
Now this is, if I'm trying to really test the case, this is not how we do it, But we'll put everybody on their feet and they get to know their file better. We get the opportunity to make sure that they're following, at least within the framework, sort of the guardrails of what we expect in terms of the psychology and the different things that we teach for trial. I've learned a lot more about letting people be, of course, more their natural selves, but there are certain fundamental things that doesn't matter what your personality is, these are the things that need to happen. So that's one way we do it. I mean, I almost would call it more like workshops, really. So we have workshops, mock trials, focus groups, these things, and they are distracting from your day-to-day profit making sometimes, sometimes.
That's the challenge, right? You're not dialing for dollars. It's a day you miss dialing for dollars and it's not untrue. It's a day you miss not getting business. I get it. But without that, people can't go to two conferences a year and hear something for an hour. And by the way, those have value, it's just different.
Trial stuff to me requires being on your feet and being comfortable with it. It just does. And the only way to do that, and not as many cases go to trial anymore. So how do you lather it up, as I say? How do we sort of get ourselves prepared for the possibility that that's coming down the pipe because one day it will, and then the question's going to be, what are you going to do with it? So I think it requires actually, and it's a lot of energy and effort, but it takes actually requiring people to step away from their day to day on certain intervals of time and to get on their feet and do things. And it's tough.
Chris Dreyer:
Everybody's got the zeros that nobody wants to talk about, right?
Brett Turnbull:
Oh, yeah.
Chris Dreyer:
It's not like that movie, what was it with Keanu Reeves where you never... "All I do is win."
Brett Turnbull:
A hundred percent.
Chris Dreyer:
When do you throw that associate into the fire and just you're like, hey, I'm good. I guess you grade the case and you give them a D or an E, and before they're taking one of those A or Bs?
Brett Turnbull:
It's challenging. It's a great question and it's challenging, and I'll tell you that I've lost more trials than most people have ever tried, and I'm not ashamed of it. And the reason is because I do cases sometimes that there are people out there who are more worried about their record than they are about the client or about the... I always say we have to be committed to the mission and we have to be committed to the work. And so those two things matter to me as much as anything. Now, does that mean that I want to take things and just... I used to jokingly say if I hadn't lost one in a while, maybe I'm not trying hard enough. I don't know if I still believe that. Okay? I'm here to tell you. But I think that with that said, it used to be that you'd send people down with the old drag the little briefcase and try the tough case, but that client deserves excellent legal representation as well.
The size of the case will dictate sometimes how tough the competition is, how complicated the subject matters are. But in my opinion, there's ways to have people go down there and be prepared to the extent that they're capable of being prepared. And I mean, young people are given quarters sometimes by juries, okay, young lawyers. And it's not like they feel sorry for them. Well, I guess they could, but that's not what we're shooting for. What we hope is that they're the best version of themselves and the best version that they can be at that time. But it is tough to get experience that way, there's no question. But that's why if you do the things we were describing earlier and you at least have some comfort, you know where to start, you know what you're doing, you know what your objectives are with each piece of the trial because you've been doing these things on your feet before you were sent down there for a period of time when no one else was looking, nobody else was paying attention. While it was quiet on the western front, we were getting ready. Then that's correct.
The car wreck case pops up that maybe has less implications for the person that we're representing his life than the most serious of all, then yeah, it gives them the ability to do that. But that's been my philosophy with it is we don't treat anything with, and I know this isn't what you meant when you asked the question, but I find that instead some firms just treat it sort of like they're lacking, I don't know, it's like they sort of mail it in, I think is the way to put it.
Chris Dreyer:
Yeah.
Brett Turnbull:
I want excellent legal services for every single client we have, or we shouldn't take the case. Once we take it and we've made that commitment, then that's what we require.
Chris Dreyer:
That's the ultimate client first and not customer. I can't stand when I hear customer, I think of the widget, like you're a thing versus the individual. I guess this is a fun one. Is there a bad habit when you get one of these litigators in that you're trying to get them to unlearn? Is there something that you're just set and watching, you're like, oh, that's not going to go well. I've been there. Is there any of those identifiers?
Brett Turnbull:
I had to have been intolerable at some point a little bit early on, but sometimes unfortunately, some of the people with the highest upside believe in themselves very much. And they are a little hard to teach and they're a little hard to train. And I have to remind myself of that from time to time because I'm pretty sure that was maybe me. And so there are people that I recognize are a little harder to get... You're explaining things and they're just kind of not doing them. So that's one thing that drives me a little nuts.
And I would also say that it's challenging for people to realize that it's a people process. It's all a people based process. And so figuring out what really matters, I always say the four keys to a trial lawyer, being able to tell the great story that moves the jury into the story. And there's various things that we do to try to make sure that that happens, of course.
Second thing is you have to understand the rules evidence and get in the evidence, all the things that you need to do in order to be sure that the puzzle pieces are there for the picture to be made.
And then the third thing is that you have to understand what a headshot looks like. And what I say is you have to understand, you have to be prepared and be able to analyze things in a way where you understand what you really can't have happen.
And you can't be afraid to lose. That's the fourth one. I know that seems like such a... The other three are years of learning, and the fourth one is just a mantra, but it's not a mantra. The other three can be perfect, and if the fourth one's there, my opinion, it creates serious issues.
So from a teaching perspective, people who move around a lot and don't focus at all and how distracting that is, their words seem to not matter nearly as much. And then trying to read the room and the four principles, those are the things for me. And read the room, I mean, you can't watch Harvey Specter and try to be him. It doesn't work.
Proven protocols for brain injury cases — how to win Traumatic Brain Injury cases from intake to verdict
Chris Dreyer:
Right. Incredible, incredible. And I kind of just wanted to give you the mic just a little bit for brain injury. You're a leader in the space. Maybe you can just give some of the other litigators, some of the other attorneys that maybe have a case that a look into to send to you as an expert just about that space in general.
Brett Turnbull:
That space is dear to me for many reasons. Honestly, it's not always the easiest one. I mean, because let's face it, the bad brain injury cases, meaning the moderate or severe, don't get me wrong, they're still practitioner points that need to be taken there by all means. But usually the treating doctors will do a lot for you, and then it's just you get kind of an idea of what the prospective injury looks like. What I would say is that the comfort associated with med legal, meaning the lawyer and understanding how to basically get the client diagnosed, properly treated, in other areas of practice and personal injury, I don't think it's nearly as important as it is in brain injury. And I come from a conservative state, Alabama, originally of course, and even Georgia and the other states we're practicing in, I mean, we've never really wanted to have our hands in how the client treated medically and those kind of things.
Brain injury, especially 10, 15 years ago when I really started pounding away on it hard, I mean it's changed a lot, a lot, lot, lot. Drastically every three years has changed a lot during that time period. And so what I learned was that unfortunately the medical world wasn't ready for our clients in a lot of ways. Mild TBIs, mild complicated TBIs, meaning people who had a bleed or some sort of vascular compromise from the trauma were people who were diagnosed, if they were diagnosed, actually. Unfortunately, it was an epidemic issue that I was seeing where in ERs, it was a Glasgow Coma Scale who was a CT. They were normal, nothing to see here. Or they had 10 other injuries and their brain's injured. It's not catastrophic, but it's a mild TBI. I always say mild TBI's are no big deal unless it's your brain. That's what I always say. So they weren't really focused on that 'cause the person was unconscious and sedated, and then they come out and then they have these issues with brain injury.
So what I would say is that as a practitioner, I had to become more comfortable with the notion that there were things that we had to do to make sure that people got diagnosed correctly. We have a whole protocol for that. And then obviously that they have the ability to be treated because... And sometimes that isn't easy. Sometimes geographically, that's a real headache. I mean, depending on where your client lives, it can be a real problem. So I think that maybe having more focus and having more hands-on approach with your clients in brain injury cases is very valuable.
The other thing I'll say is that gaps in treatment are less, much less, of an issue for you as a plaintiff's personal injury lawyer than it would be with an orthopedic case. It's just different because people who have brain injuries sometimes it's not a completely clear path on how they get diagnosed, treated. The juries are more understanding.
And so there are nuances to it that exist to me, have existed the entire time I've been doing brain injury, and there've been observations that way. Specific things that have changed in terms of how people are diagnosed and how they're treated and all that has changed numerous times since the last 10 or 15 years. Nowadays, I believe that it's the best it's ever been by so much. I mean the ability to have people go in and do clinical testing, diagnostic testing, and then also have now software that can read a lot of the different human, we use a lot of the wearable technologies now for these folks, it'll tell us about their nervous system, but it also tells us a lot about their endocrine system, which both of those things in an overlay are very important.
So there are just some things that we do that get all those things covered. And man, it's come a long way. I mean, 15 years ago was like a hundred years ago and everything else, it was like 15 years ago feels like the dark ages for how brain injuries were med-legal and how they were handled in our world.
Chris Dreyer:
And I think the wearable technology, the whoops style, I think there's probably some specific brands that you'd use, obviously, clearly for the brain injury side. Do you think that, and I didn't watch this movie, right, the Will Smith, the football, the concussion stuff, do you think that played into this awareness more? Was that a pivotal moment for this to bring more attention to these types of cases?
Brett Turnbull:
Yeah, I think, and I think that the war, the Iraq and Afghanistan timeframe that wrote the bombs, I think both of those things, the military, the US government and the NFL simultaneously began looking very hard at how these brain injuries were affecting people over time, of course. A lot of it obviously was really predicated on how people aged who had had brain injuries, and then also dramatically. I mean, yes, I think the answer to that question is unequivocally yes, and those two things happened simultaneously, that's a big deal.
Chris Dreyer:
Brett, this has been amazing. One final question for our audience. Where can they go if they had questions, they want to get in touch with you, where can they go to connect?
Brett Turnbull:
Yeah, so obviously our website, turnbulllawfirm, and we're in Birmingham, Atlanta, and Houston, but we have other office locations. We're getting ready to open across the country. It's exciting times and we work all over the country. We really do. We're licensed in probably 30 states total. Obviously not necessarily we live or have offices full time. We still use local council in those places, but we do that because our mantra is we go where the cases are. And so for us, that's really the most important thing.
Chris Dreyer:
Amazing. Brett, thanks for coming on the show.
Brett Turnbull:
Thanks for having me, Chris. As always, you're the man. Appreciate you.
Chris Dreyer:
Thank you. If you're building a trial-first firm or want to sharpen your courtroom edge, hit rewind. Brett Turnbull just gave you the gold. Get comfortable in the courtroom, train before anyone's watching, and don't flinch when it's your turn to go.
If you didn't hate this episode, drop me a follow and rate the show five stars. I'm Chris Dreyer, and this is Personal Injury Mastermind.
