Civil practice – Statement of the case – Prospective jurors

Listen to this article

Where the parties have been ordered to file a supplemental joint pretrial memorandum that includes a joint statement of the case to be read to the jury, the document they have submitted in response to that order is utterly insufficient to inform prospective jurors about the parties, the claims, and what is at stake in the case so that they might consider whether they possess any bias.

“On May 6, 2024, the parties filed a document entitled ‘Supplemental Joint Pretrial Memorandum’ (Docket #30), which contained a single line to describe the case: ‘This is a breach of fiduciary duty case between members and managers of an LLC.’ This filing, while barely satisfying the letter of the Scheduling Order’s requirement, fundamentally violates its spirit and is utterly insufficient to inform prospective jurors about the parties, the claims, and what is at stake in the case so that they might consider whether they possess any bias in connection with the case.

“A statement of the case to be read to the jury should explain to the prospective jurors who the parties are and their relationship to each other, what the LLC does, the nature of the dispute (e.g. in what ways are fiduciary duties alleged to have been breached), how is it alleged that those breaches have manifested harm, and what the claims are (and that the claims are disputed). Dates, places, addresses, and names are useful. The more robust the statement, the more likely jurors are to be able to identify points of interest or bias that they might have with the dispute.

“The parties’ supplemental filing exhibits either a misunderstanding of the purpose of a joint statement of the case to be read to the jury, contempt for the court’s order, or an utter inability of the lawyers to work together to fashion a mutually agreeable statement. If it is the former, this order should dispel any uncertainty. If it is the second, the court will not tolerate it. If it is the latter, the lawyers disserve their clients; they need to put away personal differences and work cooperatively to draft a meaningful joint statement to be read during impanelment.

“The parties shall file a robust and meaningful agreed statement to be read to the jury no later than May 21, 2024. Failure to do so may result in the court exercising full control over the impanelment process, including, but not limited to, conducting all voir dire of the prospective jurors.”

Bohlin v. Carpi, et al. (Lawyers Weekly No. 09-067-24) (2 pages) (Krupp, J.) (Suffolk Superior Court) (Civil No. 22-2891-BLS1) (May 8, 2024).

Click here to read the full text of the opinion.