Newport Beach
Newport Beach
Los Angeles
Las Vegas
San Diego
Walnut Creek
North San Diego
(949)221-1000 (949)221-1001 20320 S.W. Birch Street Second Floor, Newport Beach CA 92660
(818)712-9800 (818)712-9900 21215 Burbank Blvd. Suite 500, Woodland Hills CA 91367
(702)258-6665 (702)258-6662 1160 N Town Center Dr Suite 250, Las Vegas NV 89144
(619)236-0048 (619)236-0047 501 West Broadway Suite 1700, San Diego CA 92101
(510)540-4881 (510)540-4889 2033 N. Main St. Suite 600, Walnut Creek, Ca 94596
(602)274-1204 (602)274-1205 8950 South 52nd St Suite 201, Tempe AZ 85284
(775)440-2389 (775) 440-2390 50 West Liberty Suite 1090, Reno NV 89501
(720) 779-2500 (303)256-6205 1999 Broadway, Suite 3250, Denver, Colorado 80202
(760)557-2940 (619)389-2993 760 Garden View Ct. Unit #220 Encinitas, CA 92024
(949) 221-1000 (949) 221-1001 1910 Pacific Avenue, Suite 2000 Dallas, Texas 75201

Congratulations to Rachel Mihai, with credit to Sarah Vega, for being Featured on

Newport Beach Partner Rachel Mihai was recently referenced in a publication in titled “Are Defendants Tipping the Scales on Reptile Theory?” The article discusses Reptile Theory used by plaintiff attorneys and how defense attorneys are defending against this theory or preventing the use of this strategy in trial.  Ms. Mihai and Newport Beach Associate Sarah Vega utilized a pre-trial motion in a recent Federal Court Trial in which they asked the Court to preclude plaintiffs’ anticipated use of the “Golden Rule” and “Reptile Theory,” which was granted before presentation of the case to the jury.

“Reptile Theory” is a strategy in which the plaintiff persuades jurors by appealing to their “reptile brain” which is the part of their brain responsible for primitive survival instincts such as safety and survival.

“There has been a big effort by the defense bar to try to preclude those type of arguments because what they end up doing is presenting a jury that is scared by the time they get to the verdict stage, and they want to award more damages to punish the defendant, which is not proper,” said Rachel Mihai, a partner in the Newport Beach, California, office of defense firm Bremer Whyte Brown & O’Meara. ” And the plaintiffs attorneys might put fear in the jury that, if they don’t make a decision, that we as a society will see this condition come up again and again, and they have to be responsible as jury members.”

In granting the motion, the Court referenced arguments asking the jury to do unto others as they would have other do unto themselves as improper.  A jury that puts itself in the shoes of one of the parties is no longer an impartial jury.

Read the full article here: