Want this question answered?
civil lawsuits are heard by a jury, then they make the decision. only if both parties agree to a non-jury trial does a judge make the decision.
In the US there are no other statements that the jury need make. Occasionally, after rendering a verdict the attorney for the losing side may request that the jury members be 'polled' individually so that they must individually repeat the verdict they rendered, but no other statement is required and they are not allowed to be questioned as to their verdict by anyone!
Usually, at the end of a trial a jury will render a verdict. A verdict could be guilty or innocent depending on what the jury believes. Sometimes, there is no verdict and a mistrial can be declared and the case can be retried.
verdict
Criminal court is the system that will handle a robbery case. This type of court system allows jury members to make the verdict but the judge will determine your jail time.
Criminal court is the system that will handle a robbery case. This type of court system allows jury members to make the verdict but the judge will determine your jail time.
In most states, a judge can make a "judgment notwithstanding the verdict" which sets aside the jury verdict. A judge can only set aside a jury verdict in limited circumstances, including irregularity in the proceedings, passion/prejudice, and a verdict that the evidence does not support. You should consult with an attorney if you are facing a motion to set aside a jury verdict and/or if the verdict has already been set aside.
Juries normally have a odd number of members, as in certain/most cases where juries are present, the case may be a case which the decision will be difficult to find, so that would create problems (Which it has before) of Deciding a further decision when the juries make a close tie between the innocent and guilty. So, to make it simple, Juries have odd numbers to prevent having no verdict made. So if there is let's say a jury of 7, and 3 people say innocent, and 3 say guilty, one person will end up saying either choices, which will not cause multiple jury sessions, and lengthening of the verdict.
They can if the judge has them empaneled from the beginning. Usually they are only needed for longer trials. The goal is that all the primary members of the jury make it through the whole trial. Things happen and a member may not make it so someone else, an alternate, has to take his spot. If you don't have enough members going into deliberation then that is a mistrial which then has to be restarted from scratch if the prosecution still wants a verdict.
At the end of a trial, the jury renders its verdict, guilty or innocent, liable or not liable. Sometimes a jury gets it wrong though and renders a verdict that is obviously mistaken or legally impossible, or so one party thinks. Rules of court procedure allow the guilty or liable party to make a motion for judgment notwithstanding the fact that the jury verdict went against him or her. The party making the motion has to show that the jury could not legally or logically have come to the decision it made and so it must be wrong. You can think of it as if it is a sort of a mini-appeal of the verdict as soon as it is handed down. Of course it isn't a true appeal, which goes to an appellate court and will include more issues; but the party is challenging the correctness of the verdict.
collaborate
Depending on the context, it is usually a verdict, a ruling, or a holding.