The defense wants to interview the runaway jury:
Since the trial, Womble has filed a flurry of motions, attacking the verdict in a variety of ways. Some are conventional: He is asking Circuit Judge Debra S. Nelson to order a new trial, alleging, among other things, that Davis gave misleading testimony and that her attorney made an improper closing argument.He is also asking Nelson to reduce the judgment to $290,000.
But his most dramatic request is to interview jurors.
“It’s very rarely granted because I think the court, understandably, doesn’t want to interfere or impose upon the province of the jury,” said Scott Noecker, one of Davis’ attorneys.
Womble alleges that three jurors lied during jury selection: Two failed to disclose that they had been involved in lawsuits; the third told them about one suit but failed to mention at least nine others, according to defense pleadings.
Most of those suits were about unpaid debt.
Related posts:
- Letters to the jury: Look at what your ridiculous award has caused
- The Hurwitz jury: "I went into this blind and came out wishing I was"
- A single juror brings down a malpractice award
- Hospital takes a shot at a malpractice jury
- A jury of "uneducated casino workers" beat the hell out of Merck
- The overzealous jury, for the defense
- "You were involved in a malpractice suit last year, weren’t you?"
KevinMD.com on Facebook
{ 1 comment }
“But things went wrong, and now she cannot urinate naturally. She says she must catheterize herself twice a day, something that will last the rest of her life.”
Kevin, what amount would you consider appropriate and would not constitute a “runaway” verdict for that injury? What would it be worth if it were you?
And why should the defense be rewarded for not doing their homework?
Comments on this entry are closed.