Freedom is Preserved! Jury Duty Completed!

Image via Wikipedia

OK. now that I am released from the confidentiality charge…

In a nutshell, the plaintiff opened the door on a transformer energized with 14,400 volts of electricity. he did not have on his protective rubber gloves and had not placed a protective rubber blanket over the “hot” portions of the transformer. Because he had broken these safety requirements he almost electrocuted himself.

He claimed that the company who trenched and bored to install the underground conduit for the transformer, three and a half months earlier, had left a hole that he slipped into, causing his fall into the transformer.

No one saw him slip. No one else saw a hole. His own company found him solely at fault and terminated him for safety violations. The company he sued had never had a complaint about their work, before or since, the accident, and continues to do work for the prime contractor.

The jury is charged with finding the “proximate” cause. Basically what happened, that if it hadn’t happened, there would be no injury. It is the plaintiff’s responsibility to prove negligence or fault.

The last day had us see one witness, a doctor who testified she saw no evidence of continued disability that would affect the plaintiff’s ability to work. And two witnesses who “appeared” by counsel reading selections from their depositions.

Plaintiff’s closing arguments consisted of reminding us (again) of how injured the plaintiff was, and of how bad the defendant was for not properly tamping the dirt back into the hole that his client allegedly slipped into. He also stressed there were no pictures. Why were there no pictures he asked?

The defendant’s counsel reminded us that there was no question the plaintiff did not use his gloves or protective gear. That was a proven fact. Nothing else was proven by the plaintiff.

Counting eating our pizza, it took us two hours to find for the defense. We placed plaintiff at 100% liability. Most of our time was spent assigning dollar amounts to injuries, which we had to do, even though defendant would not have to pay anything based on our finding.

We unanimously found that the proximate cause of the accident was the plaintiff not wearing safety equipment, that the reason for these safety requirements was for when things do go wrong, like slipping. That if plaintiff had had his equipment on, there would have been no injury. That plaintiff had never proven there was a hole that caused his accident. And even if there had been a hole, if he had had his safety equipment on, there would have been no electrocution type injury.

Afterwards we found that plaintiff’s medical bills had all been paid, and future bills will be paid, by Worker’s Compensation Insurance. And that there were dozens of pictures taken, but pisplaced in the three years it took to get to trial, and when they were found three days before the trial – it was plaintiff’s attorney who disallowed them… hmmmmm

So what’s funny about all of this?

There were some moments that were humorous in the course of the trial. But what struck me, is that the observations and the searching for an edge, a particle of truth, an inconsistency, a mis-statement, the very things that help create humor, also helped me as a juror.

This attention to detail can go way beyond pointing out the funny, it can also help identify the phony.

Last chance to leave your adventures in court comments below. And tomorrow we get back to Using Humor. If you don’t want to miss a thrilling episode, subscribe for free!

Be Sociable, Share!

•