The testimonials or endorsements listed below do not reflect all of the feedback the firm has received. Each case is unique and must be evaluated on its individual merits. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.
“Mr. Brocker assisted me via a phone consultation regarding a summons to appear before an informal hearing panel of the NCBLE. I just wanted to let him know that I appreciated his advice, and the hearing went exceedingly well. I received confirmation that I have been approved in regards to all matters referred to at the hearing and received my bar exam admission ticket. Thank you for likely some of the best (or at least most timely) [money for consultation] I have spent in law school thus far.”
Bar Candidate in Board of Law Examiners Matter
You did a tremendous job putting on a difficult case. Further, you did it with a professionalism and grace that should give heart and comfort to all of us. Your ordering of the evidence, direct examinations, dynamic examination of Lt. [L], knowledge of the law and presentation was better than most lawyers twice your age and one of the best I’ve encountered in years. . . . You did a wonderful job. You are a terrific lawyer and a true professional. It was a joy to appear with you.”
Joseph B. Cheshire, V, opposing counsel in a State Bar disciplinary proceeding
You are a tremendous asset to the State Bar and you will be difficult to replace.”
Past State Bar President
“Dear Doug, We can never properly thank you for all that you did! Please know that we will never forget and will be grateful forever. With much respect.”
Family of Reade Seligman, one of the exonerated Duke lacrosse players
“Brocker’s cross-examination of Mike Nifong was a masterpiece. At the end of his direct testimony [the] disgraced DA had just delivered a tearful resignation, seeming to use his son as a prop designed to increase sympathy. Brocker responded with a precise series of questions to which Nifong unpersuasively responded with increasing evasiveness. In effect, the cross-examination exposed the ‘factual’ Nifong to all, setting the stage for Brocker’s brilliant description of Nifong — Durham County’s “minister of injustice” — in his closing statement.”
“Brocker’s closing was a masterful performance — a highly organized summary of the case complete with visuals outlining Nifong’s mutually contradictory excuses on why he didn’t turn over the exculpatory DNA evidence. Brocker’s PowerPoint slide with head shots of Nifong’s various media appearances was particularly effective. He also delivered one of the best lines of the entire case, describing Nifong as a ‘minister of injustice.’”
“The State Bar’s prosecutors, Doug Brocker and Katherine Jean, did a remarkably effective job. They mastered the intricate details of the case that by now is extremely complex. Both asked questions in a straightforward, dispassionate manner — despite the outrages of the case — thereby allowing the ‘facts’ that [Chair] Williamson deemed so critical to dominate the proceedings.”
KC Johnson, co-author of “Until Proven Innocent: Political Correctness and the Shameful Injustices of the Duke Lacrosse Rape Case” (excerpts from Durham-in-Wonderland).