How to Research Opposing Counsel's Litigation Patterns

When a new case lands, one of the first things to establish is who you're up against. An attorney's litigation history isn't just background — it's a record of how they build cases, what they emphasize, and how they tend to resolve disputes. This article walks through how to use Trellis to research opposing counsel and anticipate their approach before the case develops.

💡 Good to know: This article builds on Researching Law Firms and/or Opposing Counsel on Smart Search and How to Generate an Attorney Analysis Report. For a deeper strategic discussion, see The Opposition's Playbook: How to Assess Opposing Counsel Using Legal Data on the Trellis blog.

Step 1: Establish scope of practice

Start by understanding the breadth and focus of opposing counsel's caseload. Attorneys who consistently represent the same clients or handle the same case types tend to follow standardized approaches — which means their past cases become a reliable guide for how they'll handle yours.

In Smart Search, search the attorney's name and review the returned cases. Look at who they represent, what types of claims appear most often, and how frequently they appear in similar matters.
Filter by case type to isolate the most relevant sample — cases with similar facts, claims, or parties to your own.
Run an Attorney Analysis report on Trellis to get a structured view of the attorney's case history, typical clients, practice areas, and outcomes in one place.

💡 Pro-tip: Pay close attention to repeat representation of the same client or agency. Concentrated client relationships often produce standardized litigation behavior — the same facts developed, the same defenses raised, case after case.

Step 2: Review verdict history

Most cases settle, but verdicts show what happens when they don't — and a small number of trial outcomes is enough to tell you whether opposing counsel can make a case hold up in front of a jury.

From your case sample, isolate matters that reached a verdict. Note how those cases resolved and which party prevailed.
In Trellis Verdicts, search for comparable cases by case type and jurisdiction to establish a baseline. Then compare opposing counsel's trial outcomes against that benchmark.
Look for deviations in either direction. An attorney who consistently outperforms or underperforms the baseline tells you something important about how they build and present a factual record.

💡 Good to know: Deviation from the norm — not the average itself — is what shapes your settlement posture and trial risk assessment. If opposing counsel's outcomes consistently differ from the jurisdictional baseline, that should factor into how you value the case.

Step 3: Examine discovery and motion patterns

Verdicts show where cases end. Discovery and motion practice show how the record was built along the way — and that record often follows a consistent pattern across an attorney's cases.

In Smart Search, pull filings and documents from prior cases in your sample. Look at how depositions are structured: are questions narrow and controlled, or open-ended and repetitive?
Narrow, controlled questioning tends to support a summary judgment strategy. Repetitive, open-ended questioning that revisits the same facts usually signals a trial-oriented approach — building a record for comparison and impeachment before a jury.
Search the attorney's name alongside "motion for summary judgment" or "discovery" in Smart Search to examine their motion history. An attorney who rarely files dispositive motions in similar cases is likely preparing every matter for trial.
Review any recurring discovery practices that appear across multiple cases — repeated interrogatories, deposition structures, or document requests that show up consistently.

💡 Pro-tip: Once you identify a pattern in how opposing counsel develops facts, use it to prepare your witnesses. If they tend to revisit the same topics across multiple sessions, focus your witness prep on consistency across repeated lines of questioning.

Putting it all together

Opposing counsel's playbook is already written — it's in their filing history, their verdicts, and their deposition transcripts. After completing your research, we recommend:

Identifying the case types in your sample most similar to your matter and focusing your analysis there.
Comparing their trial outcomes to jurisdictional benchmarks in Trellis Verdicts to anchor your settlement and trial risk assessment.
Reviewing discovery filings from at least one or two prior similar cases to identify patterns in how they build and develop the factual record.
Setting a Counsel/Attorney Alert to stay updated as new cases involving opposing counsel are filed.

💡 Pro-tip: Save your Attorney Analysis report and Smart Search results to a Trellis folder so your full team has access to the research throughout the case.