Shouldn't we consider

Jury discussions of forbidden topics and effects on damage awards

Dados Bibliográficos

ID12434534
AutoresEdith Greene (University of Colorado Colorado Springs, autor correspondente), Kari Hayman (University of Colorado Colorado Springs), Matt Motyl (0000-0002-7190-0802, University of Illinois Chicago)
Ano2008
Volume14
Fascículo3
Páginas194-222
Data de publicação2008-01-01
Peer ReviewedSim
Open AccessNão
TipoARTICLE
PeriódicoPsychology Public Policy and Law (JOURNAL)
Identificadores do periódicoISSN: 1076-8971 • E-ISSN: 1939-1528
EditoraAmerican Psychological Association (PUBLISHER • US)
DOI10.1037/a0013486
OpenAlexW2096358179
IdiomaEN
Citações recebidas1
Referências citadas12

The Federal Rules of Evidence prohibit disclosure to civil jurors of information that is arguably related to their decision-making (e.g., that either party is insured). The basis for so-called “blindfolding ” is that a jury might be biased by this information to alter its appraisal of the evidence to reach a desired verdict. The purpose of this study was to examine the extent to which mock juries in an automobile negligence case discuss several “silent factors ” during deliberation (viz., insurance carried by the parties, the payment of attorneys ’ fees, and previous settlements between the plaintiff and other defendants) and the effects of such discussion on their compensatory damage award. We presented sum-maries of the evidence that varied in the severity of the plaintiff’s injuries and the reprehensibility of the defendant’s conduct. These variables influenced judgments of liability and damage awards. Analysis of the content of jury deliberations regarding damages showed that, although nearly all juries talked about silent factors, the size of their damage awards was unrelated to the frequency of these discussions and that such discussion accounted for only a very small portion of the variance in awards

Actuarial science · Business · Damages · Deliberation · Jury · Liability · Payment · Plaintiff · Political science · Summary judgment · Verdict · Jury Decision Making Processes · Law · Legal Education and Practice Innovations · Medical Malpractice and Liability Issues · Psychology

Ferramentas

Abrir DOISci-HubOpen Access