Over the years, mock jurors and courtroom jurors have been asked what they generally think of contemporary damage awards by juries. Sometimes they are given forced-choice options, which typically include “too high,” “too low” or “about right.” Given some nuclear verdicts in the past, along with renowned cases ending up with a high damage award for say a really hot cup of coffee, people have become fed up with the

Trial Methods set out to take the pulse of the public by collecting data online from 206 jury-eligible people from 15 counties across the country. These counties were selected because they represent a range of geographically, demographically and politically diverse subsets of the population. This annual survey has been conducted since 2017.    Direction of the Country; Economic Outlook 49% of respondents are pessimistic about the future of the country

Since I started monitoring jury deliberations 25 years ago, I must confess that when the discussion centers on damage awards it is usually a fascinating one. Do jurors go around the room and take an average as a starting point? Do they seek consensus based on guidance from the lawyers? Do they arrive at a final amount based on how entrenched the jurors are in their individual amounts? Does the

Do juries act differently depending on the racial makeup of those comprising it? Observationally, yes. I was also interested in looking into the literature to see what studies have been done to add some scientific might to my experience-based perspectives on the topic. About a decade ago, the social psychologist Samuel Sommers conducted a series of mock trials in which a jury evaluated and debated evidence from a sexual assault

Juries in the midst of election season After reading an article by my esteemed colleague Clint Townson (Litigation, Volume 50, Number 4, Summer 2024), and seeing his conclusions play out in mock jury deliberations as well as hearing about what has gone on in actual juries recently, it seems that it is a unique time to be trying cases in front of juries. Tensions are running high in scores of

Jury Trials In 2024 As courthouses across the country continue to face backlogs of cases, Trial Methods set out to take the pulse of the public by collecting data online from 430 jury-eligible people from 15 counties across the country. These counties were selected because they represent a range of geographically, demographically and politically diverse subsets of the population. This annual survey has been conducted since 2017.    Jurors were

With Michael Cohen, Donald Trump’s former fixer taking the stand as a prosecution witness, many factors come in to play for the jury assessing his credibility. Mr. Cohen is not in any way a typical lawyer and this case is entirely unprecedented. A unique characteristic of Mr. Cohen is he has lied a lot in the past, under oath, so the jury will hear about his prior credibility problems. What

“What bumper stickers are on your car?”  It has long been a favorite question asked by lawyers to prospective jurors during voir dire and on jury questionnaires in hopes of determining which political party they embrace. In a civil case, conventional thinking has been that Democrats tend to harbor more anti-corporate sentiment than their Republican counterparts. Up until very recently, knowing a potential juror’s political affiliation offered insights into a

Jurors typically employ one of several perceptual lenses to help them examine the evidence in a case. Their perspective might be legal-based, moralistic, or anti-corporate, to name a few. One perspective that often gets overlooked is when jurors are guided by a cynicism lens.  Cynical jurors regularly and thoroughly question the motives of corporations, which leads to fundamental mistrust. The cynic has a negative outlook and it does not take a lot