by Juries awarded millions of dollars to plaintiffs suing companies across 68 industries in 2025, up from 55 in 2024 and 48 in 2023. An adverse verdict for a company can quickly become a reputational and business problem, which makes litigation communications part of the crisis management and risk mitigation strategy from the first hour.
Reporters may already be calling. Employees may be asking questions, and customers, investors and business partners are watching closely. Social media can fill narrative gaps with speculation. For general counsel and communications leaders, the work splits: the legal team focuses on what the verdict means for the case, while communications must decide how to manage reputation. Those two objectives are not inherently aligned.
The companies that handle these moments best move quickly on that alignment. They establish the facts, align legal and communications objectives, give executives one credible voice and stay consistent with their message.
Speed matters because coverage could begin within minutes of the verdict, and the first interpretation of it tends to become the leading narrative. Restraint could matter just as much as being proactive when communicating: every public sentence joins a record that reporters, investors and future jury pools can read.
In the first 24 hours, the work is to understand what happened, align internally and decide how to respond. After an adverse verdict, a company should confirm the facts, decide what it needs to say, give executives one message, prepare for reporter questions and stay ready to pivot as the story develops.
Five steps should shape those hours.
1. Get the facts straight
The priority is the verdict itself. Legal, communications and executive leadership should agree on exactly what the court or jury decided, and what it didn’t. That means the findings, the damages or remedies, the next procedural steps and any potential appeal.
Separate what is known from what is still being assessed. Communications teams cannot get ahead of legal counsel, and legal strategy alone cannot determine how the company communicates with its stakeholders. The two functions need to work together from the outset. When legal and communications don’t work together, the company tends to say either too much or too little, and both mistakes are hard to walk back once reporters and investors have the story.
Before anyone speaks publicly, everyone should be working from the same set of facts.
2. Decide what your litigation communications need to say
Not every adverse verdict requires a lengthy public statement; silence can create its own narrative when a case is already attracting attention.
The company should quickly determine whether the situation calls for a holding statement (a short note saying the company is reviewing the ruling), a more substantive response, direct outreach to key stakeholders or monitoring.
The right response will depend on the circumstances of the case, the significance of the verdict and the audiences affected.
The objective is a clear, deliberate position the company can state if and when it needs to respond, without filling the news cycle with statements.
3. Give executives one clear message
An adverse verdict is not the time for executives to improvise. The CEO and other senior leaders should be trained to communicate it consistently, especially if speaking to the media.
Executives should also know what remains uncertain and what they cannot discuss because of ongoing legal proceedings.
The goal is credibility. One consistent executive voice is worth more than several competing readings of the verdict.
4. Prepare for the questions reporters will ask, not just the ones you want to answer
Once a verdict is public, reporters tend to move fast. They will likely ask whether the company agrees with the decision, whether it plans to appeal, what the financial impact could be, what the verdict means for customers and employees, and what happens next.
Prepare for those questions before the calls arrive. That means developing concise responses to the questions the company can answer, and clear language to address the questions it cannot.
The communications team should also anticipate the questions that will drive the next day’s headlines, not just the ones being asked today.
During a wave of Department of Justice insider trading investigations on Wall Street, prosecutors used the news media to shape coverage before, during and after indictments and throughout the trial cycle. Montieth & Company advised hedge funds and the companies that supplied their third-party experts, entering the news cycles the government was driving and finding new options to shape the narrative. In some cases, that work kept clients out of the news entirely. The lesson for verdict day: anticipate the coverage the other side will drive, and have the company’s answers ready before the questions arrive. Read the case study.
The first 24 hours are important, but the story may continue well beyond that period. There could be an appeal, additional proceedings, regulatory action, questions from customers or further reporting if additional newsworthy commentary or actions emerge.
Develop the initial response with the next phase in mind. Ask: What are we going to need to say if this story is still being covered next week? The answer may change how the company communicates today.
5. Be ready to adjust your litigation communications
The first 24 hours after an adverse verdict rarely unfold exactly as planned.
New information may emerge. A reporter may uncover additional details. The company may make a decision about an appeal. Another stakeholder may respond publicly.
The communications plan therefore needs to be flexible.
Monitor the news cycle and relevant conversations. Revisit the company’s messages as the narrative changes. Correct inaccuracies when appropriate. And be prepared to update or withdraw planned communications if circumstances change.
The first 24 hours won’t determine everything that happens after an adverse verdict; they can determine who gets to define what it means.
Montieth & Company is a litigation communications firm that works alongside in-house and outside counsel to keep a company’s public response aligned with its legal position, from verdict day through any appeal.
Learn more about how Montieth & Company approaches litigation communications: Litigation Communications