As jury trials wane, fewer lawyers – and even fewer executives – are accustomed to what it truly means to be in trial. A trial can feel like a life-or-death moment. And for the fate of a company or an individual involved on either side of a case, billions of dollars, thousands of jobs and the priceless reputation of a company or even an industry can be at stake. Every moment in court matters, just as much as the way those moments are perceived.
But there’s a rhythm to the chaos: the thrum of the war room, the flurry of the courthouse steps, the buzz that circulates in print, online and from person to person. It’s a rhythm that’s been mastered by the team at TLG Communications.
For the global strategic communications firm, high-stakes trials are where they thrive. With offerings spanning financial communications to restructuring to litigation support, the TLG team has a unique understanding of how stakeholder, legal and reputational concerns converge. They regularly bring this expertise to matters where they work at the direction of legal counsel to provide litigation communications support.
“We have really built the firm around this specialty so this is truly our expertise. We are fortunate to handle a lot of trials every year, and I think we're in a group of a relatively small number of firms who can say that,” says Senior Managing Director Kaye Verville, who joined TLG in 2017 as the second addition to its team.
They work at the direction of teams of litigators to craft a powerhouse communications strategy that supports legal and business priorities. “We see communication strategies as flowing from business objectives, including the litigation strategy, supporting and bolstering litigation arguments,” explains Verville. “That works best when the process is an integrated one. We always strive to make the jobs of the trial lawyers we work with easier.”
In addition to Verville, Managing Directors Kylie Munnelly and Sarah Mann are indispensable leaders on the litigation support team. Verville and Mann have both spent their entire careers in strategic communications for large companies and high-profile individuals. Munnelly, meanwhile, is a former television producer who is deeply familiar with how the media gathers information and crafts a narrative.
Just a few of their engagements include trial communications for major tech companies across industry-defining antitrust matters, product liability cases, and IP and competition matters. The trio regularly work with in house lawyers, communications and public affairs/government relations teams from Fortune 50 companies and outside counsel from the world’s top law firms to steer litigation communications strategy for high-profile trials on both sides of the "V."
Verville, Munnelly and Mann’s expertise is recognized in The Lawdragon 100 Global Leaders in Legal Strategy & Consulting. They spoke with Lawdragon recently about viewing communications through a multi-stakeholder lens, the necessity of on-the-ground comms in trial and their working relationship with the world’s top legal teams.
Lawdragon: How do you describe litigation communications to clients who are interested?
Kaye Verville: We encourage clients to think about trial communications as starting before trial. In an ideal world, we approach these matters from the outset, when a complaint is first filed. We’re helping them think through foundationally how we’re talking about this legal matter, and how we’re tailoring it to different stakeholders. So, when we think about trial communications, we are working closely with trial counsel who is directing communications support, and we all certainly think about it as more than day one in the courtroom.
What happens in the filings and in the courtroom can also affect a business’ operations and reputation outside the legal track. We work on large matters in consequential trials where there are potential monetary damages in the billions or injunctive relief that could be foundational to a company's market value. So, we make sure that the legal track is aligned with how the client is talking to the market, to customers, to employees, to the media and to the public.
LD: If you have longstanding clients, are you involved even before a litigation is filed?
Kylie Munnelly: Most certainly. We have a lot of experience on both sides of the "V." So, if you are supporting the plaintiff’s legal counsel and you are planning to file a complaint, there are many considerations before there's an active matter. We are helping the clients and counsel decide whether and how they're going to take a proactive stance in introducing their narrative to the world along with the filing. On the defense side, we often work with counsel to advise clients around potential litigation risk and the resulting reputational considerations, understanding the trends that are impacting the industries that we support.
LD: That’s interesting. Can you talk a bit more about what your working relationship is like with legal teams throughout the process?
Sarah Mann: Absolutely. In these circumstances, we are always engaged to work at the direction of legal counsel. One thing that we focus on is taking a step back with the legal and in-house communications teams and thinking through how the court filings really do tell a story. They serve as a tool, not just for the purpose of the legal strategy, but also for the communication strategy. A lot of the role we play is as a translator – helping take the materials that the legal team is putting together, which are very sophisticated and are geared towards a specific legal audience, and shaping them into messages and strategies that resonate for different audiences. We distill the heart of a matter in a way that is easily understandable for a company’s key stakeholders.
KM: It is also so important to set up a strong communications and legal infrastructure that is integrated from the outset – so that is very important to how we work with our law firm partners. We help quarterback the right working group, creating a cadence of collaboration and decision-making processes to be able to plot out the timeline of a litigation and anticipate key moments so the client can be front-footed. Getting that strong, integrated set of processes in place enables us to effectively support the litigation team through every stage of the litigation – and if the case ends up going to trial, we bring that same infrastructure to the war room so we can be nimble and proactive.
We distill the heart of a matter in a way that is easily understandable for a company’s key stakeholders.
LD: Speaking of high-profile matters, how do you help guide your clients through that media scrutiny, especially on that day-to-day level? How are the considerations different when you're handling that amount of press?
KV: Preparation and expectation-setting is important. Many of the clients we work with are very sophisticated organizations and have been through these types of trials many times. That said, there are many who have not. We help companies understand and plan for what the stakeholder environment around a trial will be, and how we can manage those dynamics to preserve operational and reputational stability throughout it. We also help expectation-set internally with their C-suite and Board about what the information environment and communications strategy will look like during trial, too.
KM: Right. And it’s really important to have an understanding of what motivates of the other side. Having a communications team that’s worn both hats and studied the dynamics of how the other side is engaged in communications I think is a big value add to the legal team and adds to that partnership.
LD: Can you tell me about what your role looks like from the courtroom?
KV: It can really differ, interestingly, courtroom to courtroom and case to case. In all of these circumstances, we are working at the direction of counsel. The day to day logistical elements do make a big difference in how a case is reported on publicly. For instance, in some courts, devices are allowed and anyone (including media) can send emails and live updates from the courtroom. In others, however, you can't even bring electronics into the courthouse. Things like that change the information landscape.
KM: Just like a legal team, we have the team who is offering support in court and the team behind the scenes. Ours is monitoring to make sure that we're seeing all of the coverage and commentary that either needs to be fact-checked or is helpful to flag to the legal team. That’s why I think having a team that not only understands the legal process and arguments, but also is extremely close to the facts of the case, is so important. We can be the first eyes on any reporting or any public commentary that needs to be corrected. We're making sure that there are not differing narratives between the courtroom and the public sphere.
LD: To touch on reputational risk more specifically, what does that look like in trial, especially if you're dealing with a massive corporation from that multi-stakeholder lens?
KV: We think of reputational considerations as really being business concerns. Those can differ across stakeholder groups. We’re helping explain to the market, to shareholders, to analysts, “Here's how, as a company, we're thinking about the outcomes and what the cost and impact might be to future business.”
Similarly, there are internal concerns or internal reputational considerations. That could be employees being distracted by the attention, but also oftentimes maybe it's a particular business unit that's at issue in that trial and the employees in that business unit feel uncertain. Maybe they're looking for other jobs. So internal communications become important from an operational stability to ensure your workforce can stay focused and motivated.
Then, of course, there’s customers. It depends on the company and the case, but you have to make sure that you're communicating in a way that preserves customer trust, particularly in product liability or mass tort setting.
We think of reputational considerations as really being business concerns.
LD: And, as you mentioned with social media, the channels through which information spreads have expanded exponentially in the last 15 years or so.
SM: Trials are certainly affected by the democratization of information and reporting. In general, anyone can be a reporter. Anyone can stream something. Anyone can post. We see a lot more reporters and commentators outside of traditional media outlets who are covering blow-by-blows of legal cases and trials on niche outlets or their own Substacks. That just changes how companies communicate. Engaging with media and engaging through those mediums is still very important. But it's also more important than it's ever been that companies are able to communicate directly to stakeholder groups through owned channels as well.
LD: One trend now is the growth of mass torts and consolidated MDLs. Tell me about how that’s influencing your work.
KM: As that work expands, law firms themselves are investing in mass torts and product liabilities. We're seeing firms really ramp up capabilities in this area and being able to partner with them through these matters is something that we pride ourselves in and is important.
KV: Product liability and mass torts related to product liability really strike at the heart of customer trust and business operations. Often there are very human stories behind those cases, which are effective communications tools for the plaintiffs. So from the company’s standpoint, it's very important to be able to communicate its values, safety procedures, and commitment to customers very strongly through all of that.
And there's also just the scale of it. In a mass tort case or an MDL, the scale of that is huge. The monetary damages can be huge. It's often extremely prolonged. So that's one where it's like you're really buckling up for the long haul with counsel and making sure that the litigation communications strategy and infrastructure supports that.
LD: I was going to ask how your strategy differs between a single case and a longer mass tort process.
KV: To start, you have trial after trial after trial all focused on the same issue, which in turn creates ongoing headline after headline on that issue.
LD: Do you also have to look with a longer lens in terms of, “Okay, how is what we say now going to affect this company not just during this trial, but five years down the line?”
KV: Absolutely. And to Sarah's point earlier, we see our goal as making sure that we're supporting all possible strategies of the litigation team. And sometimes that is to settle a case. So, we have to make sure we’re talking about the litigation before we go to trial in a way that conveys confidence and willingness to make these arguments at trial while also making sure that you're not foreclosing other possibilities including options for resolution. If a case is resolved before or during a trial, businesses often want to ensure the rationale for doing so is understood by the markets and by customers if it is possible to do so.
LD: That makes sense. And finally, what do you enjoy most about working with legal teams?
KV: My favorite thing is watching litigators at trial. Maybe it’s the middle school debater in me coming out! When there is a major case going to trial, a company is going to hire the best lawyers that they possibly can. It’s really fun and motivating to see the best of the best doing that work, and I love being able to support them.
KM: There is nothing like seeing a top litigator in their element at trial. As Kaye said, it's like watching a live production of a movie – maybe a thriller, depending on the spiciness of the testimony.
I am someone who loves getting into the details and really understanding and unpacking the facts of a matter. And the legal teams that we work with are so deeply ingrained in the facts of a case. They truly become the experts and we get to become experts with them. I find that really fun. We get to learn all about niche industries, how they work, and what's important to that business. And then we get to apply our own expertise about the communications landscape on top. We are always learning something new because every case and every client and every trial is different.
SM: I really enjoy the thoughtfulness, collaboration and attention to detail that the legal teams we work with bring to every engagement. They’re just as focused on getting the facts right outside the courtroom as they are when they’re presenting evidence or examining a witness, and it plays a huge role to have partners like that when you’re trying to make sure stakeholders hear the right information about what’s happening in a case or at trial.
