"I'd gladly take either side of any case, so long as I can pick the issues."
- Clarence Darrow
It is important to decide which issues you are going to litigate in any given case. The strength of the issues you pick will obviously be based on the strength of your case.
STRONG CASES
If you have a strong case you will likely only want to raise the strong arguments, while abandoning the weaker arguments. Many attorneys often like to make every argument possible for two reasons: 1) They believe every argument is another chance to win their case; and 2) They are worried if they lose the case they will be blamed for not raising every possible issue. As long as you have a good tactical reason for abandoning certain arguments you should be fine to abandon those arguments.
If you start raising weak arguments, opposing counsel will likely use those weak arguments to undermine your credibility by implying you're just trying to make an argument stick. If you bring only your strong arguments the inference will be you have a solid case that is supported by the law and facts.
It should be noted politicians often use a “straw man” argument to undermine their opponents. The “straw man” argument is when someone sets up their opponent’s argument in a way they can undermine and ridicule it. "Straw man" arguments are objectionable in court, but if you bring weak arguments on your own they become fair game.
WEAK CASES
Sometimes you have a weak case, and there are no strong arguments to bring. In these situations you will have to go through you case to find what issues can be raised. If you find multiple issues that can be raised, you will want to raise the strongest issues first, and the weaker issues last. If possible it is preferable to have two separate motion dates, with the first date for your stronger arguments, and the second date for your weaker arguments. This will avoid discrediting your stronger arguments with your weaker ones.
HAVE ONE THEORY OF THE CASE
You should have one theory of the case (your theory is what happened). In your theory of the case there may be certain points where you don’t know what happened, but that is okay as long as it is consistent with you theory of the case. When you don't have a coherent theory of the case you are unlikely to be successful.
