In one comment somewhere, a writer imagined Jones Day presenting complicated and boring testimony to a jury, with their eyes glazing over. This is essentially thinking of one of the top legal firms in the world as being utterly incompetent. I rather doubt it!
That was not a criticism of Jones Day, so much as a slap against the notoriously short attention span of the american juror. A good example is: "If the glove don't fit, you must acquit", which the OJ jury focused on instead of the volumes of technical details about DNA, blood splatter patterns, etc. Same could happen here. The jury system has always been a crap shoot, even when you have the best lawyers, which is why David French gave it such high odds of being settled out of court.