Poverty is a way of life for many Alabama residents. Unfortunately, the growth of those living in poverty is nurtured by an industry that continually develops new ways to tighten its hold on these Alabamians. Alabama’s poverty industry is comprised of several different industries - consumer finance companies, pawn shops, check cashing outlets, rent-to-own centers and debit insurance companies. Alabama provides a safe haven for this industry due to our lack of regulation and our neglect of public education.

Since childhood, I have often heard that Alabama lags behind other states in protecting its citizens. Low literacy rates, inadequate health care, insufficient funding for education, low household income and high teenage pregnancy rates are just a few of the categories that come to mind. Much of this has at least been understandable, considering the economic disparity between Alabama and some other states.

A toxic tort is a civil wrong arising from exposure to a toxic substance.2 Litigating such a case can be intimidating, due to the complex issues involved. Notwithstanding these highly technical issues, toxic tort cases contain legal themes that can be clear and comprehensible. Thus, a good lawyer should frame the debate in terms of these simple issues, in order to avoid overwhelming and confusing the jury. Author Allan Kanner offers an analogy. On one hand, toxic tort lawyers are builders, compiling information to construct a case. On the other hand, they are sculptors, chipping away extraneous information that clouds the argument. “The key is to find the perfect balance between information and presentability”.

We currently live in a visually oriented world. People receive most of their information about the world around them through television. Using PowerPoint in your opening statement can help to bring that vision into the courtroom. Jurors are a cross section of the local environment in the area of the trial. They are the very viewers that television intrigues and educates on a daily basis. Now, with vehicles such as PowerPoint, we as lawyers can educate and intrigue them in the courtroom. We were previously limited to the story we told the jury. Now, using the senses of sound and sight together in a viewer friendly format we can convey more of our message than before.

Whether in a products liability action or a commercial case involving trade secrets, defendants routinely seek protective orders and confidentiality agreements to prevent collaborative use of information by plaintiffs. As a group, defendants appear to believe that there is a need to keep information generated in litigation from reaching beyond the involved parties. However, collaboration between similarly situated plaintiffs can save time, money, and effort. Courts, scholars, and legislators have recognized that providing for information sharing accommodates plaintiff's compelling needs and causes manufacturers little or no harm.1 In sum, by promoting full and fair access by all parties to relevant information, collaboration advances the policies underlying modern discovery.