Jarod Krissman's Skillful Opening Helps Set Up $1.63M Verdict Against BNSF

Straightforward photos of an accident scene and the events surrounding the accident can often be the best way to introduce a jury to the narrative of a case. At trial against railway giant BNSF over injuries a worker suffered when a rail rack fell, Jarod Krissman skillfully wove a series of photos detailing the incident into his opening, setting the stage for a seven-figure verdict. 

David Arizaga claims he suffered head, back, and leg injuries when an 83-pound rail rack fell from a grapple truck he was operating. During opening statements, Krissman, of Krissman & Silver, walked jurors through the accident, which he said was caused by the lack of support pins to protect the rail rack from falling. 

As he outlines his theory of the accident’s cause, Krissman refers to photos of the truck and surrounding scene, detailing the truck’s parts and highlighting the fallen rail rack at the case’s center. The photos set up the narrative, allowing the jury to better understand the unusual equipment involved, as well as the events surrounding the accident itself. 

Krissman circles important elements of the photos, such as the fallen rail rack he says lacked pins to keep it from falling, and direct jurors’ attention through the scene of each photo with the help of a laser pointer. For example, Krissman highlights where Arizaga was standing, toward the back of the truck, when the rail rack fell. Then Krissman tracks the pointer along the photo, describing Arizaga as he hobbles to the vehicle’s cab to call for help. Krissman’s direction keeps jurors moving through the important parts of each photo, in time with his narrative. 

Importantly, Krissman also uses the photos to fill in memory gaps Arizaga has concerning the accident. Krissman acknowledges, for example, that Arizaga has no recollection of the actual accident and initially denied activating the grapple claw. However, Krissman used photos of the accident scene to show that the claw must have been activated, which he says set in motion the rail rack’s fall. 

“We know that that rail rack had a base portion which was bent, which caused it to become susceptible to being clipped by equipment, which was being moved out from the bed of the truck. We also know that there were no pins… in this portable rail rack. And… there were no pins in the other portable rail rack on the other side. And you’re going to see photographs essentially showing that,” Krissman said. “These safety devices were missing from this rail rack.” 

Krissman’s opening, which wove a compelling narrative with an easy-to-follow series of photos that helped the jury form a clear picture of the trial and filled in crucial elements of the case, laid the groundwork for a $1.63 million verdict, far exceeding the $50,000 the BNSF offered pre-trial.