Challenging the Initial Assembling of the Jury Panel
The only method for challenging jury selection is a motion to stay under 28 U.S.C. 1867; U.S. v. Ovalle, 136 F.3d 1092, 1098-1099 [6th Cir.1998]; Morro v. City of Birmingham, 117 F.3d 508, 518-19 [11th Cir.1997]; U.S. v. Flores-Rivera, 56 F.3d 319, 326 [1st Cir.1995]; U.S. v. Young, 38 F.3d 338, 342 [7th Cir.1994]. Strict compliance with the procedural requirements of the statute is essential. U.S. v. Phillips, 239 F.3d 829, 841 [7th Cir.2001] [Failure to make a timely motion and provide the required sworn statement of evidence precluded statutory challenge]; U.S. v. Young, 38 F.3d 338, 342 [7th Cir.1994] [Statutory challenge waived by failing to timely raise objection]; U.S. v. Contreras, 108 F.3d 1255, 1266 [10th Cir.1997] [Procedural requirements are designed to give courts an opportunity to evaluate the alleged non-compliance and correct it before wasting judicial resources].
Any statutory challenges to irregularities in jury selection must be made before voir dire begins. Dawson v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 978 F.2d 205 [5th Cir. 1992] [Miss.]. When basis for challenge to juror is timely shown, failure to object constitutes waiver of right to attack composition of jury. Id.
A motion to stay the proceeding because the jury was not selected in compliance with the statute must be made before voir dire or within seven days after the party either discovered or could have discovered the noncompliance, whichever is earlier. 28 U.S.C. 1867[c]; Morro v. City of Birmingham, 117 F.3d 508, 518-19 [11th Cir.1997]. In most cases, the challenge must be made before voir dire, or else it is waived. Morro v. City of Birmingham, 117 F.3d 508, 518-19 [11th Cir.1997]; U.S. v. Young, 38 F.3d 338, 342 [7th Cir.1994]; Dawson v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 978 F.2d 205, 209 [5th Cir.1992]. Counsel's actions during voir dire are critical. If counsel was on notice of possible prejudice but failed to follow up with appropriate questions during voir dire, there will be no post-trial interview. Hampton v. Kennard, 633 So.2d 535, 536-537 [Fla. 2d DCA 1994]; Blaylock v. State, 537 So.2d 1103, 1107 [Fla. 3d DCA 1988]; Petroleum Carriers Corp. v. Summerlin, 112 So.2d 12, 14-15 [Fla. 2d DCA 1959] ].
Permitting juror interviews is within the court's broad discretion. Williams v. State, 689 So.2d 393, 397-398 [Fla. 3d DCA 1997]; Schofield v. Carnival Cruise Lines, 461 So.2d 152, 155 [Fla. 3d DCA 1984]; State v. Hamilton, 574 So.2d 124, 130-131 [Fla. 1991]; Sentinel Star Co. v. Edwards, 387 So.2d 367, 374 [Fla. 5th DCA 1980] ]. An inquiry is permissible whenever the trial court entertains ''serious doubt'' over the existence of juror misconduct. Baptist Hosp. of Miami, Inc. v. Maler, 579 So.2d 97, 100 [Fla. 1991]; State v. Hamilton, 574 So.2d 124, 130-131 [Fla. 1991]. The appellate courts, naturally, will only reverse decisions whether to hold juror interviews when it appears that the trial court abused its discretion. City of Winter Haven v. Allen, 589 So.2d 968, 969 [Fla. 2d DCA 1991]. Examples: In a personal injury action, a juror failed to disclose in voir dire that he had once been a defendant in a personal injury action. Gray v. Moss, 636 So. 2d 881, 882 [Fla. 5th DCA 1994]; Bernal v. Lipp, 562 So.2d 848, 849 [Fla. 3d DCA 1990]. Also, in a personal injury action arising from a traffic accident, a juror failed to disclose on voir dire that he had once had a policy with one of the defendants, an insurance carrier. The juror had made a claim against the carrier, who denied it, and the juror did not renew the policy. Industrial Fire & Cas. Ins. v. Wilson, 537 So.2d 1100, 1103 [Fla. 3d DCA 1989]. Also, in a personal injury action against a county bus line after a collision, a juror gave a false response when asked whether any of his family had ever been injured in an accident. In fact, his daughter had been hurt in a traffic accident. Minnis v. Jackson, 330 So. 2d 847, 848 [Fla. 3d DCA 1976].
The motion must be in writing and include a sworn statement of facts that, if true, would
constitute a substantial failure to comply with the provisions of the statute. 28 U.S.C. 1867[d]; U.S. v. Contreras, 108 F.3d 1255, 1267-1268 [10th Cir.1997]. Compare: U.S. v. Calabrese, 942 F.2d 218, 222 [3d Cir.1991] [Oral motion sufficient because defendant presented sworn testimony of clerk about exclusionary practices].
The motion must state that the district’s jury selection plan does not comply with statutory or constitutional requirements either in its substance or in its application. 28 U.S.C. 1867[c]. An objection to the selection process generally alleges a systematic exclusion of a distinctive group in the community. Groups based on race, gender, or ethnic origin are distinctive groups in the community. Lockhart v. McCree, 476 U.S. 162, 175, 106 S.Ct. 1758, 1766 . A prima facie case consists of the following elements:
**The excluded group is a distinctive group in the community. U.S. v. Hardwell, 80 F.3d 1471, 1486 [10th Cir.1996]; U.S. v. Cannady, 54 F.3d 544, 546-547 [9th Cir.1995] [African-Americans, Hispanics, and Asians are minorities recognized as distinctive groups]; U.S. v. McKinney, 53 F.3d 664, 671 [5th Cir.1995]; U.S. v. Purdy, 946 F.Supp. 1094, 1100 [U.S.D.C. Conn.1996] [While noting that African-Americans and Hispanics constitute distinctive groups, court declined to consider under representation of African-Americans and Hispanics combined into a single group].
**The group is not represented fairly in relation to its numbers in the community. U.S. v.
Hardwell, 80 F.3d 1471, 1486 [10th Cir.1996]; U.S. v. Cannady, 54 F.3d 544, 546-47 [9th
The party is entitled to a hearing on the motion. 28 U.S.C. 1867[d]. The party can present any relevant evidence, which may include the testimony of the jury commissioner or clerk and any records and papers used by the commissioner or clerk. Id.
To successfully challenge the selection process successfully, the party must show a substantial failure to comply with the U.S. Constitution or the provision of the JSS Act. Floyd, 996 F.2d at 949; Timmel v. Phillips, 799 F.2d 1083, 1085-86 [5th Cir.1986].
If the party successfully challenges the selection process, the proceedings will be stayed until a jury is selected that conforms to the statute. 28 U.S.C. 1867[d]. This is the only remedy; the statute does not contemplate a new trial. Dawson v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 978 F.2d 205, 209 [5th Cir.1992].
- General Discussions, Forum Registration, and ID Theft and Credit-Related News Stories
- General Discussion
- News Stories on Identity Theft, Personal Data Thefts and Credit Reporting Abuses
- Current Cases
- Lawyer Jokes
- FCRA Statute and Defined Terms Under the FCRA
- FCRA Statute And Amendments: 15 U.S.C. 1681, et. seq.
- What is a Consumer [Credit] Reporting Agency?
- What is a Consumer [Credit] Report?
- Resellers: Who are They? What Do They Do? Are They Liable Under the FCRA?
- Investigative Consumer [Credit] Reports
- Who is a Furnisher?
- How to Get Your Credit Reports and How and Who to Write Your Dispute Letters to
- How To Get Your Credit Reports
- Dispute Letters
- Do You Have To Pay For Your Credit Report?
- FCRA Private Rights of Action and Duties Imposed by the FCRA
- Impermissible Access: 15 U.S.C. 1681b[f] and 1681q
- Front End Duties of the Credit Reporting Agencies: 15 U.S.C. 1681e(b)
- Back End Duties of the CRAs: 1681i[a]:
- Credit Bureau's Duty to Provide Consumer Documentation to Furnisher: 1681i[a][B]
- Duty to Add a Consumer's Dispute Statement in Association with a Specific Account and In Connection with the Credit File/Report: 15 U.S.C. 1681i[c]
- Furnisher FCRA Liability: 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2
- Failing to Mark Contested Accounts As Disputed: 15 U.S.C. 1681s-2[a]
- Obsolescence: When Must the Credit Reportings Come Off of the Credit Report: 15 U.S.C. 1681c
- Duty to Notate Disputed Accounts As Such: 15 U.S.C. 1681c[f]
- Adverse Action Notice Rules: 15 U.S.C. 1681m and ECOA
- Credit Solicitations Are Required to be Clear and Conspicuous: 1681m[d]
- Potential Exposure For Sanctions Due to Filing Bad Faith FCRA Cases: 15 U.S.C. 1681n[c], 28 U.S.C. 1927, and Fed.R.Civ.Proc. 11
- Credit Repair Organizations Act [CROA]
- 1681g: Credit Bureaus' Duties to Provide Reports/Disclosures and to Add 100 Word Statements of the Consumer
- Affiliate Sharing Problems and Violations, 15 U.S.C. 1681s-3
- Common Credit Report Errors and Agency Misconduct
- Credit Errors
- Theft of Identity
- Mixed File Cases
- Re-Aging: Debt Collector's Efforts to Revive Obsolete Reportings
- Reinsertion of Previously Deleted Data: How and When Can It Happen?
- VIP Databases and Offline Status
- Deceased Reporting Cases
- Causation: The Crucial Link Between Breach of a Duty and Damages
- Causation to Damage [Proving Your Damages Are Related to and Caused by the Defendants
- Types of Damages, Remedies, and Awards Under the FCRA and Related State Law Claims
- Damages Under FCRA
- Punitive Damages: 15 U.S.C. 1681n
- Injunctive Relief: FCRA and State Law
- Attorneys' Fees, Litigation Expenses and Costs:
- Declaratory Relief Under the FCRA
- What is Your Potential Case Worth? Other Case Verdicts, etc.
- FCRA Jury and Bench Trial Verdicts
- Other Federal Laws Related to Credit Reporting, Data Privacy, Billing Errors and ID Theft
- FDCPA Statute And Amendments: 15 U.S.C. 1692, et. seq.
- Fair Credit Billing Act, 15 U.S.C. 1666, et. seq.
- Identity Theft and Assumption Deterrence Act of 1998, 18 U.S.C. §1028
- Home Affordable Modification Program (“HAMP”) and Home Affordable Foreclosure Alternatives Program (“HAFA”)
- State Law Claims Related to Credit Reporting, Billing Errors, Privacy Breaches and ID Theft
- Invasion of Privacy: State Law
- Defamation: State Law
- Interference With Prospective Credit: State Law
- Interference With Marital/Family Relations: State Law
- Infliction of Emotional Distress/Mental Anguish: State Law
- Data Breach Claims and Issues
- Unfair and Deceptive Trade Practices Claims: State Law
- Jurisdiction, Venue, Removal to Federal Court, Remand to State Court, and Other Pre-Trial Jurisdicti
- Removal of FCRA Cases From State Court To Federal Court
- Personal Jurisdiction and Venue in Credit Reporting Cases
- FCRA Litigation Strategies and Procedural Issues and Law
- Settlements, Releases, Prevailing Party Status, and Other Things You Need to Know If You Resolve Your Case Before Judgment
- Offers of Judgment In FCRA Litigation
- Secret Documents, Product Information and Testimony
- Choicepoint Secret Documents:
- Equifax/CSC and Affiliates Secret Documents:
- Experian Secret Documents
- Innovis Secret Documents:
- Trans Union Secret Documents
- Furnisher and Public Records Suppliers Secret Documents
- Respondeat Superior, Vicarious Liability, and Whether Others Are Liable
- Liability For Employee's FCRA Violations? Liability For FCRA Violations by Third Parties?
- FCRA Preemption, Immunity, and Qualified Immunity
- FCRA Preemption: 15 U.S.C. 1681t[b][F] and Related Discussions
- FCRA Qualified Immunity: 15 U.S.C. 1681h[e] and Related Discussions
- States/Govermental Immunity From FCRA Claims?
- Jury Voir Dire, Instructions, Verdict Forms, etc.
- Jury Instructions and Jury Verdict Forms
- Jury Questionnaires, Voir Dire, Jury Selection and Jury Bias
- Credit Card Issues
- Credit Card Liabilities
- Do You Have a Right to Bring Claims and How Long Do You Have?
- Statute Of Limitation: 15 U.S.C. 1681p
- Standing to Sue
- Credit Scores, Adverse Action Codes, and Other Report Codes
- Credit Scores, Adverse Action Codes, Risk Factors, Denial Codes and Other Scores and Codes Supplied by the Credit Reporting Agencies
- The Mechanics of Credit Reporting
- Public Records Reportings [Non-Bankruptcy]
- Bankruptcy Reporting
- Student Loan Credit Reporting
- Metro Tape [I and II]: Standardized Credit Reporting Formats Used by the Credit Industry
- Defenses Asserted by Credit Reporting Defendants
- What Law Applies? Problems Barring Use of the Court and Law
- Arbitration, Forum Selection, Choice of Law, Choice of Venue and Other Adhesionary Clauses
- Conflicts of Laws Issues in FCRA and Related State Law Issues
- Standing and Statutes of Limitations
- Statute Of Limitation: 15 U.S.C. 1681p
- FCRA Legal Forms [Suits, Discovery, etc.]
- Discovery: Interrogatories, Requests For Production of Documents, Requests to Inspect, Requests For Admissions, Deposition Notices, Subpoenas, Deposit
- FCRA Sample Pleadings: Complaints, Motions, Oppositions and Other Standard Lawsuit Filings
- Defenses Frequently Asserted by Defendants to Consumer's Actions
- FCRA Class Actions and Class Issues
- FCRA Class Actions
- Special Evidentiary Issues: What is Evidence?
- Evidentiary Issues in FCRA Cases
- Expert Witnesses, Special Issues and Daubert and Related Challenges
- Appellate Issues, Rules, Law, Etc.
- Defenses Asserted by Industry and Abuse Stories
- Defense Counsel Abuses and War Stories
- Law Outlines: Various Topics
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest