(This case is subject to a confidentiality agreement so the names have been changed) In February 2013, Natasha Abrimov and her husband Boris came to see Stewart Casper. Natasha had slipped on a wet floor in a retail store two years earlier, slamming the back of her head on the floor and wrenching her left shoulder. She had been diagnosed with a mild traumatic brain injury and a torn labrum. She had chronic headaches. She had shoulder surgery, but it did not resolve the problem. Instead, it made it worse because she developed a chronic regional pain syndrome that made her entire left arm swell, turn shades of blue, and caused even more pain. She fell into a major depression. She was unable to return to her job. The Abrimovs had already retained a lawyer who placed the case into the suit. The retail store filed sworn responses to standard discovery and claimed the floor was not wet and there had been no prior complaints of similar problems. The store also provided a 2 ½ page floor maintenance directory as its sole written policy and procedure relating to the claim. The first lawyer recommended that the Abrimovs settle the case for $100,000. Dissatisfied with the advice they received, the Abrimovs sought Casper’s input. Casper’s assessment involved two principles: 1) People shopping in retail stores generally don’t fall and injure themselves unless there is a cause; and 2) The value of Natasha’s injuries, damages, and losses far exceeded $100,000, assuming liability could be established. Casper advised the Abrimovs that they were entitled to change lawyers and that there were ethical rules that governed the way that compensation of the first lawyer would be resolved. Once in the case, Casper assembled a discovery plan. First, the store manager was deposed and testified that the floor was not wet when Natasha fell. She reviewed the accident report that she had given to a claim service and testified that there was no problem with the nearby refrigeration equipment. She also gave ambiguous testimony about where the store’s policies and procedures were maintained, alternating between hard copy and electronically stored materials. That testimony set in motion an effort to clarify company policies by requiring the director of safety and the service manager to appear for depositions, at which they were required to produce pertinent documents including all service records for the retail store and all electronically stored policies and procedures that related to store maintenance and accident investigation. At those depositions, Casper learned that the company had been deceptive. The floor was almost certainly wet, and the store manager had not been honest. The morning that Natasha fell, the refrigeration equipment had been leaking in the area of the fall; the dairy manager notified the store manager, and the store manager had called for repairs. These complaints were documented in the company’s records. Despite this knowledge, no safety measures were taken to warn and protect customers. Because Casper is active in the American Association for Justice, he also learned through listserve activity that the company had not only been using the same deceptive discovery technique in Connecticut but also in other states where it has retail stores.