Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Paralegals & Legal Secretaries Blogs -> Practical Paralegalism

Paralegals & Legal Secretaries

: Practical Paralegalism

Paralegal's Interview with a Juror Gives Subaru Case New Life

By Lynne DeVenny

One of the many critical duties performed by experienced litigation paralegals is the polling or interviewing of jurors after a trial. Talking to the jurors gives the trial attorneys insight into the jurors' thought processes, as well as crucial feedback on the reasons they were successful - as well as unsuccessful. In a New Mexico civil injury case against Subaru's seat belt manufacturer, where the jury found that a seat belt design defect did not cause a plaintiff's catastrophic injuries, a paralegal's post-trial work has re-opened the case for an evidentiary hearing based on whether a juror's outside influence was prejudicial to her decision. Kilgore v. Fuji Heavy Industries Ltd. et al (Op. No. 2010-NMSC-040)

In 2006, after the jury took just two hours to return a verdict in favor of Subaru's seat belt manufacturer, paralegal Gregory Scott, who worked for the plaintiffs' counsel, asked juror Marie Millie Valdivia about her decision-making process. Valdivia told Scott there was not enough evidence to prove that the seat belt buckle design was defective and could be easily opened just by contact with various body parts. In an affidavit later filed with the court, Scott said she was reluctant to say more.

But Scott later learned that Valdivia's brother worked at Mike's Garage and that she'd spoken to [Michael] Griego, the Subaru repair shop's owner. Scott never talked to Valdivia again but did get an affidavit from Griego, who said that before he saw a newspaper article about the Kilgores' case, he spoke to Valdivia. She told him she was a juror "on the Subaru trial."

"I told her that I had never heard of any incident where a Subaru seat belt buckle had come open accidentally. I told her that I had never heard of that happening," Griego's statement says.

He added: "During the conversation, she said to me, at least twice, that she was not supposed to be talking to me about the case."

After learning about Valdivia's discussion of the case with Griego during the trial, plaintiffs' counsel moved for a new trial. The trial judge and the New Mexico Court of Appeals denied plaintiffs' request, but the New Mexico Supreme Court sent the case back to the trial court for an evidentiary hearing based on the juror's conversation with Griego, who was "in a unique position to acquire information and experience regarding defects in Subaru vehicles."

This case demonstrates how invaluable a well-trained and insightful paralegal is to a trial team. The ability to hear what is said - as well as what is not said - is a people skill that is absolutely necessary to jury pool research and polling. Scott's work ultimately gave his firm another chance to pursue their quadriplegic client's claim against Subaru.

Source: ABQ Journal

Related Posts: The Paralegal Voice: "Attorneys Tap Paralegal Talent for Jury Selection"; Paralegal's Facebook Research Aids in Dismissal of Juror; How Paralegals Can Assist with Jury Selection

Full post as published by Practical Paralegalism on September 26, 2010 (boomark / email).