0
Occasionally, the opposite problem occurs and a party refuses to participate in the summary jury trial process. The response of the courts has varied, depending upon the nature of the case and the reasons for the desire to avoid the summary jury trial process. Courts have been comfortable in putting judicial economy first in cases in which parties seek to avoid the "dash of cold water" afforded by the jury verdict. On the other hand, courts have also allowed parties to refuse participation in the process when it might jeopardize the parties' normal litigation. Since the aim of a summary jury trial is to promote settlement negotiations, there would seem to be little point in dragging a party into a situation in which they might withhold their best efforts and thus bias the verdict brought back.
The process of empanelling a "mock jury" has caused some controversy. In the Hume case, the court flatly denied a request by both parties for a summary jury trial on the grounds that it did not have authority to require citizens to serve on a "mock" jury. Usually, this has not been a problem.
In the eyes of the layperson, the summary jury trial proceeds much like a regular trial. The jury is selected by voir direwithout being told that its verdict is non-binding. The clients must attend from the opening statements through summary presentations of evidence and closing arguments. After the verdict, the parties begin an examination of the verdict and the reasons why the jurors reached it. When the parties believe that they understand how their evidence fared in the minds of the jury, they meet and once more attempt to hammer out their differences. Note that at this stage, the proceeding devolves to a rather traditional negotiation session!
What else can I help you with?
Pros and cons of jury selection?
what were the pros and cons for the nulification
What are some pros and cons of the jury system?
well if demarcus shot lamar then he would be jumped but if the jury wasnt cool they would just slap him and give him a haircut
Are civil cases tried by a jury in the legal system?
Yes, civil cases can be tried by a jury in the legal system.
Can the jury system be rigged?
Yes, it can be. For instance, jury members can be intimidated or bribed.
What is the meaning of pros and cons in operating system?
Pros are good things about something. Cons are bad things about something. So the pros and cons of an operating system are the good and bad things about it.
Management information system pros and cons?
There are many pros and cons about management information system. One pro is that there is organization within the system being managed.
What are the pros and cons of domestic system?
and
What are some advantages of the jury system?
The advantages of the jury system are as follows : * The jury system allows the general people of the country to take part in the administration of justice. * The jury service has necome a convention in the UK, which provides confidence to the people about the impartiality and fairness of the jury trials. * Since jurors are lay people who are not legal experts, they decide cases on the basis of fairness. This reduces the harshness of the legal system.
Why is the jury the cornerstone of the civil justice system?
The jury is the cornerstone of the civil justice system because it allows a defendant to be judged by a jury of their peers. This consist of men and women for his community, rather than by a judge.
How did the Athenian jury system differ from the US jury system?
The Athenian jury system selected jurors randomly from a pool of volunteers, while the US jury system selects jurors from voter registration or drivers license lists. In Athens, the jury size could be up to 501 citizens, while in the US, a standard jury size is 12. Additionally, in Athens, jurors voted by placing a token in one of two urns, whereas in the US, jurors deliberate and reach a consensus verdict.
What is the jury system in Australia?
A jury in Australia is made up of 12 people chosen at random from the locality.
What are some pros and cons of the judge-only system?
Pros of the judge-only system include potentially faster trials due to the absence of a jury, as well as reduced costs and risk of bias from laypersons. However, cons may include potential lack of community representation, perceived lack of transparency, and the burden of decision-making solely on the judge.
