Every medical malpractice lawyer will tell you cases involving an injured or deceased infant can be extremely difficult to defend--even when the medicine is solid. Sympathy and the subsequent desire to award money--regardless of circumstance--can override many jurors' rational thought process.
We've seen jury instructions openly ignored (and jurors finding no evidence of negligence change to a plaintiff verdict) due to an intense desire to ensure the child is "taken care of."
This makes voir dire even more crucial. Because jury selection is really jury deselection, what types of jurors do defense attorneys most want to get rid of?
Parents. Especially parents with children at home.
In a recent analysis of 600 "bad baby" verdicts culled from our focus group database, we learned:
Parents were 53% more likely to find for the plaintiff than jurors who have no children.
For parents whose children live at home this figure jumps to 62%.
Obviously every juror is different (as are their tendencies to let emotions guide verdicts) but these statistics mirror a common finding we have observed in countless mock trials and focus groups across the country.
-Stephen Duffy
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment