Romano v. Stubbs, 2010 WL 5392942 (App. Div. Dec. 16, 2010). In this personal injury case, the plaintiff’s trial summation was accompanied by a Powerpoint presentation that the plaintiff did not show to the defense or the trial court before using it. Plaintiff did advise the court and the defense that a Powerpoint would be used. The court found the idea of a Powerpoint presentation no different than using an easel. But the judge assumed that the Powerpoint would parallel plaintiff’s oral summation and would be fair.
On appeal of the jury’s verdict for the plaintiff, the defense asserted that the Powerpoint presentation should not have been permitted, or that if it were proper to use Powerpoint, the presentation itself was unfairly prejudicial. The Appellate Division declined to rule that using Powerpoint was improper. But the panel did find that the combined effect of the plaintiff’s oral and Powerpoint summations was unfair and prejudicial. The court rejected an argument that defense counsel’s failure to object to particular screens of the Powerpoint presentation showed that there was no harm. “[C]ounsel’s failure to cry foul is as easily explained by the difficulty of his need to simultaneously listen, read and formulate objections as it is by his conclusion that the improprieties caused no harm.”