Right to a Jury Trial

April 13, 2006

	Visited: 161
	Not rated
	Rate:

When navigating the court system, a small business owner encounters certain risk factors inherent in litigation.

In practice, most people are aware of remarkable cases wherein juries have awarded millions of dollars to plaintiffs who appeared to have injured themselves or, perhaps, suffered only relatively minor injuries. The media is quick to report such cases, precisely because the results are so astounding.

In theory, frivolous cases should be dismissed before the trial ever begins. For example, parties can make motions for "judgment on the pleadings" and for "summary judgment" before a jury is even convened. However, in practice, there is an extremely strong presumption that a plaintiff should be allowed to present a case to the jury, as the jurors are the triers of fact. In other words, usually such motions will fail, and the case will reach the jury.

This can present a problem for a defendant. Many times, juries decide cases based on their emotional response to the situation presented, irrespective of the legal issues involved. A defendant may have a solid defense that proves he did not cause the plaintiff's injuries, but a plaintiff who nonetheless suffered serious injuries may invoke sympathy from the jury. This sympathy can easily result in a substantial judgment for the plaintiff. This is why the jury selection process is of the utmost importance in preparing for a trial.

These days, it is generally understood by trial attorneys that the make-up of the jurors represents the most important factor in the outcome of many cases. In fact, an entirely new profession has recently developed: the jury consultant. Prior to the trial, jury consultants, who usually are psychologists or sociologists, will stage mock jury trials, conduct surveys, etc., and then prepare a profile of the "ideal" juror. This profile will be based on factors such as age, race, ethnicity, gender, religion, political party affiliation, etc. Studies have shown that such profiles play a very important role in the outcome of a case.

Specifically, based on this profile, attorneys can use peremptory challenges to eliminate potential jurors who do not fit the profile during voir dire, or the choosing of the jury. While limited in number, the peremptory challenges offer an important advantage--the attorney needn't offer any explanation to justify the elimination of a potential juror.

Once a case reaches the jury, any result is possible. When it comes to juries, the sympathy factor cannot be overlooked, especially because the jury may be intentionally skewed by a party to respond to this factor (see our case study on jury trial judgments).

In short, a case that is not voluntarily settled usually will reach a jury. The jury may be configured to favor a particular outcome and may decide the case on an emotional basis. These facts do not bode well for the defendant. The result may be exacerbated by the fact that the judge may, in effect, not allow significant evidence to be heard by the jury.