ArticleTrader.com
  

 Main Menu

  Home
  Member Login
  Forum
  Submit Article
  RSS Feeds
  Contact Us
  About

 Services

  Article Distribution
  Link Building

 Tools

  ArticleMS
  Directory Tracker
  Earn with your Site

 Categories

  Automotive
  Business
  Computers
  Entertainment
  Finance
  Food
  Health
  Home and Family
  Internet
  Legal
  » Family law
  » Immigration
  » Personal Injury
  Science
  Self Improvement
  Shopping
  Society
  Sports
  Technology
  Travel
  Writing

58 users online.



 
  » Category Sponsors
  Get Your Link Here - Limited Time Bargain at only $11/month!

Home » Legal » Personal-injury » Effective Use Of The Law Of Juror Selection
0
Votes
Vote Now
Article Stats:
Total views: 41
Word Count: 636
Character Count: 4209
Options:
Get Html Code
Get PDF
Print View

Effective Use Of The Law Of Juror Selection

Submitted by schwebel

Experienced trial lawyers recognize the critical importance of attorney-conducted voir dire in assuring the fair trial of civil actions. While much has been written about the style of inquiry on voir dire, many attorneys have little concept, beyond a vague notion that each juror must agree to be “fair,” of the specific grounds which justify a challenge “for cause.” The purpose of this article is to review the statutory provisions, practice rules, and case law as they relate to qualification and disqualification of jurors.

The intelligent exercise of challenges to jurors for cause requires not only careful voir dire technique, but also clear knowledge of the provisions of the Rules of Practice and Procedure, as well as Minnesota statutory law, which provides the grounds for challenges for cause. Careful and even-handed application of the Rules by thoughtful trial judges, in combination with careful and probing voir dire conducted by skilled trial counsel will serve to greatly enhance civil justice in the State of Minnesota.

Imagine doing voir dire in a soft tissue case and then encountering the following exchange:

Attorney: Do any of you feel there are too many lawsuits today?

Juror #1: Yes, I certainly do. People are just too suit happy.

Juror #2: I agree.

Attorney: Is there anyone here that feels that chiropractors are less able to diagnose and treat injuries to the neck and back than a medical doctor?

Juror #3: My father was an orthopedic surgeon. He always called chiropractors “chiro quackers”. I really don’t think much of them.

Juror #4: I am a secretary for an orthopedic surgeon--I really have questions about chiropractors’ abilities.

Attorney: Your honor, I move to excuse Jurors #1, 2, 3, and 4 for cause.

Defense: Your Honor, may I inquire?

Court: You may.

Defense: Juror #1, notwithstanding your feeling there are too many lawsuits, can you be fair to Mr. Plaintiff in this case?

Juror #1: Yes. (Defense repeats the same questions, with the same response from each of the additional jurors)

Defense: Your Honor, we object to Plaintiff’s attempt to remove the jurors.

Court: Motion to excuse is denied.

Knowing that you have only two peremptory strikes, what do you do now?

The purpose of this article is to review the provisions of Minnesota statutes and Rules of Procedure that provide additional grounds to remove potentially biased jurors.

The Legal Framework of Juror Qualification

The basic qualifications for civil jurors are set forth in Rule 808 of the General Rules of Practice for District Courts. (Source: Rule 808(b))

The Rule goes on to note that a prospective qualified juror who is 70 years or older who requests to be excused from jury service shall be automatically excused without the necessity of submitting evidence of an inability to serve.

Persons who are eligible pursuant to Rule 808(b) are not disqualified unless they are a judge serving in the judicial branch of the government.

Rule 809 of the General Rules of Practice specifically prohibits discrimination based upon race, color, creed, religion, sex, national origin, marital status, status with regard to public assistance disability, age, occupation, physical or sensory disability, or economic status.

In Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79, 106 S.Ct. 1712 (1986), the Supreme Court held that the Equal Protection clause of the U.S. Constitution is violated when a prosecutor uses peremptory strikes to remove jurors based upon their race. When viewed in connection with Rule 809, it is apparent that Batson may bar the use of peremptory strikes based solely on race, or any of the other basis for discrimination prohibited by Rule 809.

Of course, jurors, although qualified, may nonetheless be challenged for cause.

The information you obtain from this article is not, nor is it intended to be, legal advice. You should consult an attorney for individual advice regarding your own situation.

About the Author

An attorney or lawyer in Minneapolis MN at the law firm of Schwebel Goetz and Sieben can provide you with an experienced personal injury lawyer or attorney in Minnesota.


Source: ArticleTrader.com

Comments

There are no comments for this article, you can be the first to post a comment.

You must be logged in to comment.
Login Now or
Register Free Account

 Top Authors

 1 alien82 (2145)
 2 juliet (1421)
 3 sverdlow (1175)
 4 AnthonyF (1055)
 5 limalan88 (963)
 6 IC (935)
 7 cdmohatta (767)
 8 isolvum (723)
 9 lets_j2top@ya.. (581)
 10 jkhbraveheart (562)
 11 prabakar (539)
 12 jarnold (478)
 13 goshowa (450)
 14 evander (436)
 15 reedstickets (425)
  » Member List

 Latest Forum

» Unique Article Wizard : 2000 + then 0
» No download on purchase?
» The Health Benefits Of Drinking Water
» Purchased Skin But No Download Link
» Is Link Building Really Worth It?
» How put link confirmation in welcome email

 Sponsors

Advertise Here
Boulder homes for sale
Commercial Water Removal
Green Organic Articles
Phone cards
link Directory
powerball numbers
mold remediation


  
  Affiliate Program 2Checkout.com, Inc. is an authorized retailer of ArticleTrader.com

7.76s