Michael L. Bell

Biography

Lightfoot DNA.

In 1990, I was just another fresh-faced lawyer at a large firm eager to learn the litigation craft. Little did I (or anyone) know of the convergence of events that would start over 30 years ago that would form Lightfoot and create a Lightfoot DNA that exists today.

On Tuesday, January 9, 1990, these two message slips were on my desk.

messages-image The return of these calls would lead to an invitation to join 11 other lawyers in the creation of something called a litigation boutique in Birmingham, Alabama. A dozen young lawyers led by three southern litigation giants — Warren Lightfoot, Sam Franklin and Jere White — started a litigation boutique at the beginning of the time where Alabama later would be deemed number one on the list of “Tort Hell.”

For the next several years, the Lightfoot DNA was formed in an atmosphere of high-stakes litigation in the worst venues with the worst legal underpinnings that civil litigation defendants could possibly find themselves. This meant that young Lightfoot lawyers were honing their craft with mentoring from giants, with unmatched opportunities and breath taking legal battles that would shape the legal landscape in Alabama, form a Lightfoot DNA that still exists, today, and lead to a demand for the Lightfoot approach well beyond Alabama.

As a result of the events starting in 1990, Lightfoot lawyers were recognized as lawyers who could morph and shape shift into the forces necessary to attack problems described by the common litigaton phrase "bad cases, bad places." I’ve handled wrongful death cases of all types, class actions, commercial disputes, general products liability, consumer fraud cases, automotive litigation, professional negligence cases and just about everything in between. I have faced scores of juries in my 20s, 30s, 40s and 50s fighting for Lightfoot clients in the litigation arena. I’ve had juries come back in minutes. I’ve had juries deadlocked for days. I’ve won cases and lost them (by the way, my jury win rate exceeds 90%).

I and the other Lightfoot lawyers with whom I work have the battle scars that come from being a Lightfoot lawyer where we are ready for the litigation knowns, unknowns and the inevitable unknowables. This is what we call the Lightfoot DNA.

Lightfoot handles cases all around the country. Most of my work is in the southern United States, what we call the “y’all” states. We handle bad cases in bad places. It’s in our DNA. It’s what we do.

By the way, in addition to serving on Lightfoot's Marketing & Business Development Committee, I am a Fellow of the American College of Trial Lawyers, a Fellow of the American Bar Foundation, received the Thomson Reuters' Super Lawyers designation from 2008-2022, was named the 2018 “Birmingham Lawyer of the Year” for personal injury litigation by BL Rankings' The Best Lawyers in America©, and received Benchmark Litigation's “Local Litigation Star” award for commercial litigation, insurance, medical malpractice and product liability.

Representative Matters

Representing an automotive manufacturer in a claim for a defective latch involving the ejection of a child that resulted in quadriplegia. The latch was the subject of a widespread, well-known recall campaign. After eight days of trial, the jury returned a unanimous defense verdict.

Representing an automotive manufacturer for claims involving an allegedly defective transmission system that allowed the vehicle to shift from “park” to “reverse” resulting in the death of an elderly woman. After seven days of trial, the jury returned a unanimous defense verdict.

Representing a crane manufacturer in a death-by-electrocution case where the allegation was that the overhead crane was defective for having an uninsulated power source to the crane trolley. After a one-week trial, the jury returned a unanimous defense verdict.

Representing a saw manufacturer regarding an imputation injury allegedly resulting from a defective guarding system on the saw. Following a week-long trial, the jury returned a unanimous defense verdict.

Representing an OB-GYN physician where it was alleged that he violated the standard of care in monitoring the labor and delivery process. The child was delivered, after a period of fetal distress, with profound brain damage. He lived for 9 years. After nine days of trial, the jury returned a unanimous defense verdict after fifteen minutes of deliberation.

Representing a physician in two trials where it was claimed that she violated the standard of care in the delivery process of a patient based on fetal heart rate strips. The damages claimed were in excess of $20 million. After 10 days of evidence and 3.5 days of deliberation in the first trial, a mistrial was declared because of a hung jury. The second trial lasted 10 days, but deliberations were two hours. The jury returned a unanimous defense verdict.

Representing one of the largest pest control operators in a month-long trial involving allegations of consumer fraud where the plaintiff sought hundreds of millions of dollars in both compensatory and punitive damages. The jury found in our client’s favor on the fraud claims and gave the plaintiff $150,000 on the breach of contract claim — about $50,000 less than the offer of judgment made three months before trial.

Representing a natural gas utility in a trial involving claims that a reported and ignored gas leak caused a residential explosion. Following opening statements — in which the jury was shown basic scientific principles that refuted virtually every allegation — and the recanting of pretrial testimony by the plaintiff’s first witness, the lawsuit was settled at a nominal sum to avoid the remaining days of trial.

Representing a manufacturer of paper plates that received a complaint for injunction under the Lanham Act to stop airing national television commercials comparing its paper plate to a competing manufacturer. Following a preliminary injunction hearing with live witnesses, the injunction was denied and the commercials were aired repeatedly.

Representing an emergency medicine physician accused in a wrongful death action of missing an aortic dissection diagnosis. After 10 days of trial and five hours of deliberation, the jury returned a unanimous defense verdict.

News

Chambers and Partners USA Ranks Lightfoot Practices and Attorneys in 2022 Guide

31 Lightfoot Attorneys Named 2021 Mid-South Super Lawyers and Rising Stars

Three Lightfoot Attorneys Named Birmingham ‘Lawyers of the Year’ and 44 Recognized Overall in 2022 Edition of Best Lawyers®

Chambers and Partners USA Ranks Lightfoot Practices and Attorneys in 2021 Guide

32 Lightfoot Attorneys Named 2020 'Mid-South Super Lawyers' and 'Rising Stars' by Super Lawyers (Thomson Reuters)

Benchmark Litigation Names 17 Lightfoot Lawyers to 2021 Guide

Lightfoot Wins Summary Judgment for Fiat Chrysler in Product Liability Case

Lightfoot Attorneys Named 2019 Mid-South Super Lawyers and Rising Stars

Benchmark Litigation Recognizes 15 Lightfoot Attorneys in its 2020 Edition

Lightfoot Secures Defense Verdict for Alabama OB-GYN in Medical Malpractice Case

13 Lightfoot Attorneys Selected as ‘Litigation Stars’ in 2019 Edition of Benchmark Litigation

Lightfoot Secures Medical Malpractice Defense Verdict After Two-Week Trial in Talladega County

Lightfoot Secures Medical Malpractice Defense Verdict on Behalf of Alabama Physician

Two Lightfoot, Franklin & White Attorneys Recognized as Birmingham ‘Lawyers of the Year’ and 20 Listed Overall in The Best Lawyers in America 2019

Lightfoot Secures Defense Win for Obstetrician/Gynecologist in Medical Malpractice Case

Lightfoot Obtains Favorable Defense Verdict in Wrongful Death Case

13 Lightfoot Attorneys Recognized as ‘Litigation Stars’ in 2018 Edition of Benchmark Litigation

Jury Returns a Defense Verdict for Lightfoot’s Client in a Medical Malpractice Case

Lessons Learned

On Mildred's Manners

I’d been practicing law for a little more than two years. It was 1991. I was trying a case with Sam Franklin. A star witness for our side of the case was an older beautician from a small town outside of Birmingham.

I called her to the stand. Mildred was her first name. Such a sweet, compelling witness. She smiled at me, the judge and the jury as she told her story. I asked her the key questions and smiled to myself as we put an end to the other side’s case. My opposition stood to start his cross examination. As he started his questions, this sweet, compelling witness morphed from blue hair sweetness to blue steel anger. She really gave the opposition a piece of her mind. As this played out, I smiled to myself.

My smile got turned upside down when the jury knocked on the door and returned a verdict against our side. After talking to the jury about how in the world they could rule against the facts shared by Mildred, multiple jurors said something like this, “We just didn’t like that lady. She was so nice to you when you asked your questions, but she was so mean to that other lawyer.”

The lesson from 1991: Witnesses need to be neutral, treating every lawyer with equal respect. I’ve been telling witnesses, since this case, about Mildred. It wasn’t Mildred’s fault. It was that young lawyer who prepared her for courtroom testimony. By the way, we tried this case a second time. Mildred smiled at everyone, which left our client smiling at the end.