"Close to home" follows the trials of a Public attorney who seems to have a near perfect record. That is true for all court room drams on TV, but one aspect that i felt that could differentiate between this and others like LA Law or Boston legal is that the star does not have an ivy league education to shove in our face. No, they decided to differentiate this show by making the attorney win even when she is awful at her job.
I haven't seen all the episodes but in almost all the episodes I've watched, she does a horrible job proving her case even when she has all the evidence to back her up. Great court-room dramas have lawyers brilliantly winning their cases with little evidence. The good ones try to make us believe that with luck, what was shown could actually happen. But in this show, even when the opposing attorney was great and does a great job, the public attorney always wins.
I haven't seen all the episodes but in almost all the episodes I've watched, she does a horrible job proving her case even when she has all the evidence to back her up. Great court-room dramas have lawyers brilliantly winning their cases with little evidence. The good ones try to make us believe that with luck, what was shown could actually happen. But in this show, even when the opposing attorney was great and does a great job, the public attorney always wins.