Jury Trials Are Alive and Well in Dade County and Have a Promising Future
Although the trends are toward settlement of disputes, either through mediation or arbitration, there are still some situations where you have to scratch and claw for what you and your client believe is right. That is never going to change, and that is what juries are for.
June 15, 2018 at 10:04 AM
4 minute read
I would like to offer a counterpoint to Scott Silverman's June 4, 2018 article “The Ever Decreasing Jury Trial Rate: Why Is It on Life Support?” First, I have deep respect for Silverman as a former judge and a current mediator. Former Judge Silverman is always on my short list of mediators and I have used him several times; sometimes with success, sometimes not. Last year he mediated a complicated lawsuit for civil theft I had filed against a local law firm and developer over a large escrow deposit on a condominium project that the developer forfeited. That case just wasn't meant to mediate and the trial went forward against the law firm. The key part of the case was navigating jury selection, where I had three defense lawyers in the venire! Thankfully, I got two of the attorneys for cause and used a pre-emptory on the last one. The jury I ended up with consisted of five millennials and one bored baby boomer. The five millennials were fascinated with the case, paying close attention and asking questions throughout the trial, much to Judge Jorge Cueto's consternation. On day three, the law firm ran up the white flag and settled the case with my client for a very satisfactory sum that covered his deposit, interest and attorney fees. Although the trends, as former Judge Silverman correctly points out, are toward settlement of disputes, either through mediation or arbitration, there are still some situations where you have to scratch and claw for what you and your client believe is right. That is never going to change, and that is what juries are for. A couple of weeks ago, I tried another case that only had a loss value of $75,000 with possibility of interest and attorney's fees on top of that to the prevailing party. Once again, it was a millennial jury, this time across the board. The oldest juror was 34 and the foreperson was an 18-yea- old college student, who just finished her freshman year at Tufts University in Boston. It was a short two-day trial. Once again, the jurors paid extremely close attention throughout the trial and the only question came when they were deliberating and someone asked the judge if the court reporter could read back McKenna's closing argument and the amount McKenna had written on the verdict form during his closing argument. I liked that question, but the judge declined the read back or the answer. In the end, I got the verdict I was looking for and afterwards, the millennials stuck around well after 7 p.m. to ask more questions about the case. I asked one of the jurors why they paid such close attention to a pretty boring business dispute. The answer was they liked watching the lawyers, witnesses, and judge in action and seeing how the system works. They also liked trying to determine who is telling the truth. So I have to respectfully disagree with former Judge Silverman's comment that jurors may have little or no interest in serving on a jury at all. Millennials are a different breed and if you can talk to them, and not down to them, and have the better trial narrative, they're game and they'll do the right thing by you. I know we need a new courthouse with updated technology, (I was playing video depos to my jury and taping wires down all over the floor so jurors wouldn't trip on their way to the jury box), but we make do with what we have, until the powers that be get their acts together. The presiding judge over the last trial, Judge Mavel Ruiz, couldn't have been more solicitous of this jury and apologetic for the sardine box which was the jury's deliberation room, but they didn't seem to care. The last question I had for the jurors as they were departing was how they rated the experience. All agreed that it was fascinating, notwithstanding the old courthouse. Don't count these millennials out. I think our institutions are in good hands with them and for anybody who thinks they don't care and can't put their iPhones down, think again because you are going to need them on your juries. Paul A. McKenna is the owner and operator of Paul A. McKenna & Associates. He focuses his practice on personal injury, wrongful death, commercial business disputes involving fraud, real estate disputes and condominium and homeowners association law.
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllThe Canadian Influx: How Migration to Florida Is Shaping the South Florida Real Estate Market
6 minute readReflections: Parenting Lessons From Life as a Sports Attorney
Year-End Tax Planning: How Real Estate Investors Can Leverage Qualified Opportunity Funds
5 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Infant Formula Judge Sanctions Kirkland's Jim Hurst: 'Overtly Crossed the Lines'
- 2Abbott, Mead Johnson Win Defense Verdict Over Preemie Infant Formula
- 3Preparing Your Law Firm for 2025: Smart Ways to Embrace AI & Other Technologies
- 4Greenberg Traurig Initiates String of Suits Following JPMorgan Chase's 'Infinite Money Glitch'
- 5Data-Driven Legal Strategies
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250