What was the employer's reaction during the employee's closing argument?

The employer's reaction during the employee's closing argument being that they did not anticipate the disruption signifies a lack of preparedness or awareness regarding the emotional and potentially inflammatory nature of the closing arguments presented by the employee. This choice highlights the idea that the proceedings and the presentation of arguments can take unexpected turns, particularly in a trial setting where emotions and persuasive techniques can significantly influence the atmosphere.

This unexpected disruption could have various implications on the trial proceedings, such as affecting the jury's perception or even influencing the judge's ruling on specific matters during the trial. The option captures the essence of a situation where one party is caught off guard by the other's tactics, which is critical in understanding the dynamics at play in civil procedures.

The other options indicate more proactive or specific responses, such as submitting new evidence, requesting a mistrial, or calling for a recess, which suggest a level of anticipation and procedural maneuvering that the employer did not exhibit in this scenario. This distinction reinforces the concept that an employer's reaction can also be one of surprise rather than strategic action, emphasizing the unpredictability of courtroom dynamics.