I was scheduled to start a civil trial last year in a busy courthouse. We showed up on Day 1, and were told the criminal trials had taken all the jurors and we should come back on Day 2, as they were calling more in. On Day 2, they didn’t have enough jurors in the morning, but might in the afternoon. You guessed it, they didn’t.
By Day 3 we had the “rejects” from all the other cases (which is sometimes fine) but it didn’t work out. They were dismissed and we were told to come back the following Monday for a “fresh panel.”
So, trial started a week late. As you can imagine, it played havoc with our witnesses, many of whom were from out of state. The worst (for us) was an expert from another state who charged us $10,000 to change his plans (he was a neurosurgeon who had to cancel some surgeries to get there on the new date.)
An extra week in the hotel for me and my team. Huge costs to my client. And a judge sitting around ready to hear a trial but no jurors.
Thankfully, this is rare. But it certainly is a major pain when it does happen.
I remember the old days, where you had to show up and might have to sit in the juror room for 5 days and might never see the inside of the courtroom. Kinda like being in detention. They have a ways to go, but they have gotten better.
No, I’m quite interested in hearing it. If my estimates (and personal experience) are inaccurate then it’s good news, not bad.
I do. I’ve been on the other side (as victim) though not nearly as bad as what you described.
As I said to Asimovian, if I’m wrong about the numbers, it’s good news. That means my day wasn’t wasted, and the officials weren’t being intellectually lazy. In my defense, the 3 times I’ve been called, it seemed the number of unnecessary extras were too high.
Thanks to both of you for the info. Ignorance successfully fought (and I will be in a much better mood next time).
