Trial Methods collected data online from 204 jury-eligible people from 15 counties across the country between May 27 and June 5, 2020. These counties were selected because they represent a range of geographically, demographically and politically diverse subsets of the population.

One goal was to quantify the percentage of prospective jurors who express reluctance to appear for jury duty if called to serve in the near future, and what “type” of juror would tend to shun a jury summons. Another objective was to get an understanding of how the Covid-19 pandemic is affecting jurors’ fundamental attitudes of litigation.

Post Covid-19 Jury Panels

One of the questions we asked was whether participants called for jury duty in the near future, assuming they were available, would show up on the day of their summons and avail themselves to jury service. Three-quarters indicated they would appear while 25% said they would not. For those saying they would not show up we asked why. The most common responses were some variation of:
  • I am avoiding large crowds
  • Too much social contact/impossible to practice social distancing in a court setting
  • I wouldn’t feel safe/do not want to take a chance
  • I am at risk (some mentioned their age which was usually above 70)
One thing we will keep an eye on is how much of an impact the recent spate of protesting will affect the composition of juries and how a post-George Floyd environment shapes overarching litigation attitudes. Towards the end of the survey several respondents said they would not show up if called for jury duty because, as one respondent said, “I don’t want to go sit in town all by myself  while rioting is going on.” The aforementioned reasons were given for why one quarter of potential jurors would be unwilling to appear for jury duty in the near future. Who are these prospective jurors who will be skewing the makeup of future juries by being underrepresented in jury pools? Those indicating an aversion to showing up for jury duty are previewed below [1]:

 

Stay At Home Profile

  • Female
  • Hispanic
  • On polar ends of the age continuum; 18-24 and 65+
  • People in the service industry, waiter, hostess, bartender, retail, etc.
  • Student
  • Get news from social media outlets (younger) and predominantly CNN (older)
  • Not confident changes in place will improve the economy
  • Less optimistic about the future of the country
  • More likely to not vote
  • Disagree with the statement that if a case makes it to trial it is likely there is some truth to the plaintiff’s claims
  • Indicate that if they were called to jury duty during the pandemic, they would be mad at one or both or all the parties involved for making them sit as a juror
  • If serving on a jury believe they would have a tough time focusing on the case given everything that is going on in the world today

54% of jurors 18-24 say they will not show up

It is likely that many in this category of people who will shun future jury duty have historically tried to get out of serving on a jury. At this point in time, fear of the coronavirus might be used as a pretext for desired exclusion from the process. The younger, more mobile group in the “gig” economy sees jury service as an inconvenience and tends to overall be more disengaged (i.e., not voting) from civil discourse. While not significant in the formal statistical sense it is noteworthy from the results that the subset of jurors who would be unwelcoming of a jury summons are more likely to feel they do not have enough control over the direction their life is taking. I believe that a swath of jurors with this mindset would try and get excused from jury duty if they decided to respond to the notice to appear but, if ultimately falling through the cracks and making it on a jury, would not likely become a leader or notably influential during deliberations. Another common thread with these “stay at home” jurors is many of these individuals are more skeptical by nature. These people might hold the plaintiff to a higher burden, and tend to doubt “where there is smoke there is fire” since they reject the notion that just because a trial is underway there must be some merit to the claims. By the same token, generalized skepticism could fuel misgivings about a particular defendant. The claims of a case, type of litigation, venue, and party dynamics will determine how missing this subset of prospective jurors will affect the fabric of the venire.

It is also telling what factors do not differentiate between this “stay at home” group with the three-quarters majority who will be willing to show up. Having had Covid-19, knowing someone who had it, a fear of having it, length of time sheltering in place, frequency of wearing masks, overall health, living in a city, suburban or rural setting, beliefs in whether the media and government have overblown the health risks, and feelings about whether the medical community has accurate information about the virus were not predictive of whether someone will try to avoid jury duty. In a similar vein, most demographics were not predictive of reluctant jurors, nor was which presidential candidate the person intends to vote for in November.

Interestingly, one might posit that in the more metropolitan counties, where coronavirus outbreaks have been especially prominent, prospective jurors in such counties would be more reluctant to show up. Somewhat counterintuitively, size of county was not in any way predictive of whether someone says they will or will not show up for jury duty. In our study, potential jurors in Buncombe (North Carolina), Fayette (Kentucky), Dane (Wisconsin) and Davidson (Tennessee) Counties were more likely to say they would not show up for jury duty compared to people from New York, Dallas, King and Miami-Dade Counties.

Juries will be more full-time white-collar folks who go into an office setting. They tend to get their news from all the major cable news networks such as CNN, Fox and MSNBC and have more positive impressions of the federal, their state and local government

[1] Keep in mind it is easier for a respondent to say they would disregard a jury summons in a survey compared to actually flouting one.

Attitudes of Post Covid-19 Jurors

Below is a series of questions we asked panelists about Covid-19 which we will continue to track in future jury research.

Percent Agree
I will do my best to avoid large groups of people until there is a vaccine for Covid-19
85%
I will do my best to avoid large groups of people until there is an effective treatment for Covid-19
83%
I worry about a loved one getting the coronavirus 82%
It would be unfair to expect citizens to show up for jury duty during the current Covid-19 pandemic 75%
Most corporations are trying to do the right things during this pandemic 67%
Companies will use the Covid-19 pandemic as an excuse to get out of bad business decisions 64%
Companies will use the Covid-19 pandemic as an excuse to get out of unfavorable contracts 60%
Corporations are more concerned with profits than they are protecting employees from Covid-19 59%
Corporations are using Covid-19 as an excuse to get away with things they never used to get away with 57%
It is okay for tenants to get out of leases due to the Covid-19 pandemic 57%
The Covid-19 pandemic has taken a financial toll on me 55%
The Covid-19 pandemic has taken an emotional toll on me 55%
Discrimination is getting worse during the Covid-19 pandemic 54%
Corporations are using Covid-19 to take advantage of employees 53%
Corporations that have helped during the Covid-19 crisis should be given the benefit of the doubt in a legal dispute 53%
Corporations trying to help out during Covid-19 are just doing it for the good publicity 50%
If I was called to jury duty during this pandemic and ended up serving I would be mad at one or both or all of the parties involved for making me sit as a juror 46%
The media has overblown the public health risks associated with Covid-19 42%
I would have less sympathy for someone bringing a lawsuit during the Covid-19 pandemic 41%
Lockdowns in my state have gone on for way too long 36%
The government has overreacted to the public health risks associated with Covid-19 34%

In January of 2017, Trial Methods asked participants nationwide a series of litigation related questions online and has been tracking such questions every January since then. Below is a summary of how respondents answered the questions over the years with the updated June of 2020 sample in the midst of the Covid-19 pandemic. The percent change column on the right shows any shift in attitudes between January of 2020 and late May/early June of this year.

LAWSUITS VS. CORPORATIONS

2017
Percent Agree
2018
Percent Agree
2019
Percent Agree
2020
Percent Agree
June
2020 Covid-19
Percent Change
Plaintiffs often exaggerate their claims in order to increase damage awards 74% 66% 63% 66% 66% 0%
Making corporations pay big jury awards is the best way to make them follow the law 69% 66% 81% 79% 70% -9%
If a case makes it to trial it is likely there is some truth to the plaintiff’s claims 59% 58% 61% 65% 65% 0%
It would be difficult for me to deliver a jury verdict that meant an injured party would receive no money 53% 55% 56% 55% 55% 0%

If you heard about allegations of corporate misconduct which would you be most likely to believe? 2017
Percent Agree
2018
Percent Agree
2019
Percent Agree
2020
Percent Agree
June
2020 Covid-19
Percent Change
The corporation did something wrong 59% 74% 74% 76% 72% -4%
Someone is trying to get some easy money 41% 26% 26% 24% 28% +4%

Generally do you think individuals who file lawsuits are: 2017
Percent
Agree
2018
Percent
Agree
2019
Percent
Agree
2020
Percent
Agree
June
2020
Covid-19
Percent
Change
Trying to place responsibility where it belongs 64% 80% 80% 81% 69% -12%
Refusing to take responsibility for their actions 36% 20% 20% 19% 31% +12%

Do you agree or disagree with the idea of awarding punitive damages? 2017
Percent
Agree
2018
Percent
Agree
2019
Percent
Agree
2020
Percent
Agree
June
2020
Covid-19
Percent
Change
Strongly agree 29% 21% 31% 30% 27% -3%
Tend to agree 57% 69% 52% 58% 60% +2%
Tend to disagree 14% 9% 17% 14% 12% -2%
Strongly disagree 0% 1% 0% 1% 0% -1%

CORPORATION VS. CORPORATION

2017
Percent
Agree
2018
Percent
Agree
2019
Percent
Agree
2020
Percent
Agree
June
2020
Covid-19
Percent
Change
Companies frequently sue other companies for bad business deals 73% 65% 64% 64% 60% -4%
A company will break a contract if it thinks it can get away with it 72% 79% 77% 75% 75% 0%

CORPORATE ETHICS

2017
Percent Agree
2018
Percent Agree
2019
Percent Agree
2020
Percent Agree
June
2020 Covid-19
Percent Change
Corporations are more unethical today than they were 5 years ago 58% 61% 52% 57% 62% +5%
Juries should punish corporations for unethical conduct even if that conduct was legal 45% 53% 52% 55% 61% +6%

EMPLOYMENT LITIGATION

2017
Percent
Agree
2018
Percent
Agree
2019
Percent
Agree
2020
Percent
Agree
June
2020
Covid-19
Percent
Change
We need to strengthen laws against employer discrimination in this country 66% 84% 84% 80% 82% +2%

How common is race discrimination on the job in the U.S.? 2017
Percent
Agree
2018
Percent
Agree
2019
Percent
Agree
2020
Percent
Agree
June
2020
Covid-19
Percent
Change
Very common 17% 28% 24% 23% 24% +1%
Common 48% 42% 49% 49% 54% +5%
Uncommon 32% 26% 24% 23% 19% -4%
Very uncommon 3% 4% 3% 5% 2% -3%

How common is gender discrimination on the job in the U.S.? 2017
Percent
Agree
2018
Percent
Agree
2019
Percent
Agree
2020
Percent
Agree
June
2020
Covid-19
Percent
Change
Very common 21% 36% 26% 28% 28% -8%
Common 44% 45% 50% 47% 47% +3%
Uncommon 29% 16% 22% 20% 20% +5%
Very uncommon 6% 3% 2% 4% 5% +1%

POLICE

2017
Percent
Agree
2018
Percent
Agree
2019
Percent
Agree
2020
Percent
Agree
June
2020
Covid-19
Percent
Change
Police officers think they are above the law 48% 51% 58% 56% 58% +2%
It is common for a police officer to use excessive force 43% 42% 55% 54% 54% 0%
I worry about my loved ones being injured by a police officer 28% 32% 43% 43% 52% +9%