Reptile theory is a trial approach that asks jurors to enforce safety rules rather than merely compensate a plaintiff. Counsel establishes a broad safety principle through witness testimony, shows the defendant violated it, and argues that the verdict protects the community from future danger.
The technique typically begins in depositions, where witnesses are led to endorse general safety propositions that are later narrowed and used at trial.
Alternative Names:
Reptile Strategy, Safety Rule Strategy
Why it Matters?
Reptile framing is one of the most consistent drivers of outsized verdicts in trucking, premises, healthcare, and product cases. The defense response is largely preventive: preparing corporate witnesses to avoid endorsing abstract safety absolutes, objecting to improper safety-rule questioning, and using motions in limine to bar community-safety and send-a-message arguments.
Frequently Confused with
Related terms
Frequently asked questions
How do defense teams counter reptile questioning at deposition?
Is reptile strategy improper?
