We’ve all encountered them – those cases that are completely defensible on their merits but have some extraneous element or curveball that could throw jurors for a loop.

A few examples of the types of these cases we’ve come across through the years:

• The nursing care in question meets the standard of care, but the nurse has a disciplinary history that makes her seem prone to sloppiness.
• A police brutality case that comes on the heels of a controversial police shooting that makes national news – and threatens to taint the jury pool.
• A defendant who faces criminal charges, even though the charges are unrelated to the civil case.
• A doctor or nurse whose care was fine but who has a history of mental health or substance abuse issues.
• An unusually sympathetic plaintiff you think any juror will want to give money to – even if the defendant did nothing wrong.

Maybe you think the extraneous issue is a red herring or the judge shouldn’t allow it into evidence, but as we all know, judges and juries are completely unpredictable.  You can’t control what the judge does, but you can take steps to influence or at least anticipate the jury’s reaction.

Maybe you think the extraneous issue is a red herring or the judge shouldn’t allow it into evidence, but as we all know, judges and juries are completely unpredictable.  You can’t control what the judge does, but you can take steps to influence or at least anticipate the jury’s reaction.

How these issues play with a jury varies widely, of course, depending on the facts of the case and the jurisdiction.  A jury in suburban Utah, for example, might be less influenced by the national attention to the Black Lives Matter movement than a panel in Chicago.  And a nurse’s disciplinary history might not matter as much if it happened 10 years ago – or it still might be a factor.

The reality is there’s no way to guess how these issues could influence a case, and we find ourselves constantly surprised by what does and doesn’t matter to juries.  For example, we’ve found during our focus groups that many white, conservative jurors are becoming more receptive to police brutality claims – indicating national news coverage might be more influential with this demographic than we would have anticipated.

We believe the best way to determine how an extraneous issue could influence your trial is through focus groups.  You may think a jury will be willing and able to put aside an issue you think is a red herring, but we believe that hunch is worth testing since the outcome of your case could depend on it.  This is one of the things we’re best at – helping you take a step back to see if potential jurors see your case the same way you do.

If you’ve got a case with a curveball issue that keeps you up at night, we can help you evaluate the issue and come up with solutions.  Contact Senior Vice President Claire Luna at cluna@juryimpact.net or 714.754.1010 to find out how we can help.