Not
all plaintiffs are on a level playing field when it comes to juror
perceptions. Certain plaintiffs –
babies, children, the elderly – are just more likely to garner sympathy and
potentially high damages. During a
recent nationwide survey of 864 potential jurors, we learned nearly 40 percent
would award a larger amount to a poor plaintiff than a rich one.
As
we know from interviewing thousands of jurors around the country, this is
something jurors notice. We still
remember the jurors we talked to after a defense verdict in a birth-injury
case, all of whom noted the plaintiff’s father owned an expansive wardrobe of
Ralph Lauren shirts – enough to last him through a four-week trial without a
single repeat. “I was tallying those
little horses every day,” one juror told us.
“Pink, blue, white, yellow, he had it all, and it’s clear these people
didn’t really need more money.”
Plaintiff
poverty can work the opposite way, potentially producing higher awards because
the jurors want to help this person or family.
That statistic we cited above shows between one-third and one-half of
your jury pool might see bigger dollar signs when considering a financially
deprived plaintiff.
Looking
more closely at those more likely to say yes revealed some interesting
consistencies – and people to look out for during jury selection. Those most likely to give a larger award to a
poor plaintiff than a rich one shared the following characteristics:
- Asian (1.7 times more likely)
- Student (1.6 times more likely)
- Registered Democrat (1.5 times more likely)
- Currently serve in military (1.4 times more likely)
- From 18 to 29 years old (1.3 times more likely)
- Part-time occupation (1.3 times more likely)
- Single (1.3 times more likely)
- Annual household income less than $25,000 (1.2 times more likely)
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment