Key Takeaways
- John Quinn's core principle is that the side that figures out first what will ultimately matter in a lawsuit usually wins.
- Knowing the decisive issues early can produce deposition answers, documents, and third-party evidence that may be much harder to get once the other side sees their importance.
- The same head start helps in settlement, because understanding your own weaknesses before your opponent does can secure terms that may not be available months later.
In a complex lawsuit, both sides usually have capable lawyers, the same procedural rules, and months of discovery ahead. So what gives one side the edge?
In this TalksOnLaw Brief, John B. Quinn, founding partner and chairman of Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, explains the principle his firm sees as the key to winning: the side that figures out first what will ultimately matter in a litigation wins.
Why Getting There First Pays Off
If you know what matters before your opponent does, Quinn explains, you often get evidence you otherwise might not. When a witness knows that a truthful answer in a deposition will materially hurt their case, a clear, unqualified answer can be very hard to get. Documents may come with fewer objections and without motions to compel, and evidence from third parties may be easier to obtain.
He offers an example. In most jurisdictions, the statute of limitations begins to run when a claimant is on notice of a claim. In one recent case, his team took discovery and obtained admissions that the other side had been aware of facts putting it on notice outside the limitations period. Those admissions became the basis for a successful motion for summary judgment, and Quinn doubts the evidence would have come in had the other side seen where it led. The principle also works defensively, helping you prepare your own witnesses to avoid minefields.
Breaking From the Usual Choreography
Quinn acknowledges this is not how litigation is usually run. Cautious lawyers tend to cover the waterfront and turn over every stone. That has value, he says, but it is expensive and usually gives up the chance to catch the other side off guard.
Discovery is often highly choreographed: interrogatories, then document requests, and months later depositions, followed eventually by summary judgment. Quinn suggests clients are not always well served by that sequence. Sometimes an early deposition, even without documents, can lock the other side into its positions. Moving first means taking depositions first, bringing motions to compel first, and lining up the best experts as early as possible, with the goal of keeping the other side in reactive mode.
Winning Settlements, Too
The advantage is not limited to trial. If you understand the weaknesses in your own case before the other side does, Quinn explains, that knowledge should shape settlement strategy, and it may produce a deal that would be out of reach six months later. He adds that there is no single key that fits every case, but most cases at trial turn on just two or three issues, and the side that has identified them has a huge advantage.
What to Know Now
Quinn's principle remains widely shared, and the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure still set the pace at which it can be applied. Under Rule 26(d), formal discovery generally waits until the parties confer under Rule 26(f), though early document requests can be delivered and treated as served at that conference. Rule 30 requires agreement or court leave to depose a witness before then, or to depose the same person twice, and Rule 26(b)(1) keeps discovery proportional to the needs of the case. Amendments effective December 1, 2025 also ask parties to plan privilege logs at the outset. Many litigators share Quinn's emphasis on early focus; others caution that moving before the record is developed can commit a team to a theory too soon. Both views point to the same practice: decide early what matters, and revisit that judgment as the evidence comes in.
