Jury | Definition And Overview Of Texas Personal Injury Lawsuits

In a personal injury trial in Texas, a jury aids in weighing the facts and evidence to determine whether the defendant should be held legally responsible for the injuries and harm alleged by the plaintiff. Through the trial, the defendant is given the opportunity to refute the evidence, while also presenting their own defenses. The role of the jury in Texas is extremely important. Juries are composed of ordinary citizens who help ensure legal issues are decided from a diverse community perspective. 

If you’re involved in a personal injury case that may go to trial, contact Sneed and Mitchell LLC for a free case consultation. Our lawyers can guide you on the next steps to take and ensure you understand your legal rights. To receive representation, call (866) 434-0014 or fill out our online form and we will get back to you shortly.

What Are The Phases of A Jury Trial In A Texas Personal Injury Case?

The phases of a Jury Trial in Texas involve the following six stages: 

1. Choosing a Jury

2. Opening Statements

3. Witness Testimony and Cross-Examination

4. Closing Arguments

5. Jury Instructions

6. Jury Deliberation and Verdict

If your personal injury case is filed in State Court, then the Texas Rule of Civil Procedure will guide the trial process. However, based on who the defendants are, the Federal Court might be the proper venue for your case, and the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (FRCP) would govern the claim. 

This article discusses the involvement of Juries in each step of a Texas personal injury trial, with a focus on the rules applicable to State Court. 

Choosing a Jury

Juries are usually appointed through a process known as jury selection or voir dire which chooses a randomized group of people from public records. Each individual’s eligibility is reviewed to ensure they are a U.S. citizen, a resident of the jurisdiction, at least 18 years old, and someone with a clean criminal background. The pool of jurors is then summoned to court where they are asked questions about their personal ideological dispositions, attitudes, and life experiences.

These questions are crafted to identify those who may be biased in their decision-making during the trial. The goal of most voir dires is to select 12 impartial and fair jurors, although this number differs depending on the type of case. 

Texas rules allow each side to have six peremptory strikes and an unlimited number of “for cause” strikes. A peremptory challenge allows either attorney to exclude a juror for any reason, which could be due to their race, gender, or religion.

A judge or jury is never made aware of the reasons by which an attorney chose to use their peremptory strikes. These are different from “for cause” strikes. When an attorney chooses to strike “for cause,” the attorney must inform the judge why they believe that specific juror can be truly objective in deciding the case at hand. 

Opening Statements

Opening statements are typically taken from the plaintiff’s attorney first, who establishes an overview of the stance they plan to take in the case. This overview must include the burden of proof, which is an explanation as to how the defendant had a legal duty to the plaintiff that they failed to carry out which caused direct damages to the plaintiff.

The purpose of opening statements is to give the jury an informational presentation about the case's main facts, witnesses, theories, and goals. The jury should clearly understand what each side intends to prove.

There are typically no arguments, testimonies, or physical evidence used during this time. The defendant's attorney will then present their opening statement to the jury that outlines the points they plan to counter-argue and the facts they will use to defend their stance. Affirmative defense statements are sometimes made by the defendant's attorney to introduce new evidence that can potentially release the defendant from the legal consequences of any admitted actions. 

It can be difficult to know how to handle opening statements without the assistance of an experienced attorney. If you do not have legal representation, call (866) 434-0014 to receive professional guidance and counseling about your case.

Case-In-Chief

The foundational segment of a personal injury trial is the case-in-chief, where arguments from each side are made and evidence is introduced to the jury. The plaintiff’s goal is to convince the jury that the defendant owed them a legal responsibility that they failed to adhere to and that their actions directly caused them injuries that require compensation.

The plaintiff will then attempt to prove the defendant’s liability by presenting evidence that correlates to the case such as police reports, photographs of injuries, doctor’s notes, medical records, documents, and video recordings.

Witnesses are brought forth to give their account of the accident or to explain factual aspects of the case to the jury. Witness statements are vital to a case because they provide credible support from third parties that can strengthen and help prove certain points. Expert knowledge from those who work in specific fields such as forensics or engineering is especially useful to prove more complex and technical elements of a case. 

Witness Testimony and Cross-Examination

Witness testimonies usually follow the same structure to ensure that the events are told in a seamlessly organized manner so the jury can properly assess the statements made. The testimonies are typically ordered in the below format: 

Oaths

The witness swears an oath or promise to the court that they will only provide truthful statements. An oath is a legally binding declaration that can be enforced if the witness is caught committing perjury (lying).

Direct Examination

During direct examination, the lawyer who requested the testimony of the witness standing trial asks them a series of open-ended, carefully guided questions that lead to direct answers. These questions are crafted to get the witness to provide clear and detailed statements supporting the case's points. By working together, the witness and attorney craft a story that thoroughly explains certain events from the witness’s point of view.

Cross-Examination

During cross-examination, the lawyer of the opposite side asks the witness who testified questions that are often suggestive in an attempt to identify errors or inconsistencies in their answers that may contradict their previous statements. These questions are called “leading questions,” because they are intended to lead the witness to answer in a way that aligns with the opposing side’s goals. The purpose of cross-examination is to attack the witness’s credibility. 

Redirect Examination

Redirect examination gives the lawyer who previously asked the witness to testify a chance to ask them clarifying questions to rectify any problems that arose during cross-examination. The questions must be based on the topics that were addressed by the opposing lawyer. The lawyer may ask the witness to provide more information or expand on previous statements made during cross-examination to reaffirm the central points of their argument. 

The process of hearing and examining a witness’s testimony is important because it allows the jury to get an outsider’s perspective on the case. The witness’s reliability is tested during the examinations, which can help the jury decide how trustworthy they are. Testimonies are powerful enough to sway the opinions of jurors depending on their accuracy and persuasiveness. 

Rebuttal and Directed Verdict Motions

Rebuttals typically occur after the defendant has finished their case-in-chief, giving the plaintiff a chance to present evidence against them that discredits or challenges their arguments. The purpose of a rebuttal is to address any points of contention, introduce counter-evidence, and highlight flaws in the defendant’s arguments to strengthen the validity of the plaintiff’s claim. Rebuttals typically have a limited time frame of 1 to 5 minutes, but exceptions can be made for more extensive cases. If new evidence is presented during a rebuttal, the defendant may reply with a surrebuttal that allows them to address any new issues that arose and clarify misunderstandings. 

If a party believes that the other failed to present a convincing and grounded case, they can request the judge to rule a directed verdict. These are only granted if the judge finds a party insufficient in evidence and determines that a sensible jury would not rule any differently. Once a directed verdict is reached, the case is ruled in favor of the party who won the directed verdict and immediately closed without the opinion of the jury. If the directed verdict motion is rejected, the case continues to the closing arguments stage.

Closing Arguments

During closing arguments, both sides get the opportunity to wrap up their case by summarizing its most important aspects. The defendant and plaintiff will review all of the evidence presented throughout the trial and frame it in a way that is in their favor. Both parties must solely rely on evidence that was introduced during the trial, and may not bring up any new information. Closing arguments are important because it is the last chance to sway the jury to a particular conclusion. Both parties should focus on how the law applies to their case while still showing the jury how they were affected personally and emotionally. 

Jury Instruction

After closing arguments are made, the attorneys who represent each party will draft proposals for the judge that list the desired instructions they wish the judge to give to the jury. These instructions are carefully worded with precise and clear language to help the jury understand how to determine the party at fault. The attorneys’ goal is to write instructions that will be beneficial to their clients while the jury deliberates their decision. The instructions must align with the legal standards of the law and avoid speculation and misleading information. Before reaching a verdict, the judge will explain the rules and applications of the law to the jury so they understand how it applies to the case. The principles and topics that judges explain during this time include: 

• Injury Damages: The jury is instructed on damages that are non-economic and economic that can be awarded to the plaintiff. 

• Preponderance of Evidence: Plaintiffs must have presented a substantial amount of burden of proof that demonstrated the defendant’s responsibility. 

• Negligence: The defendant must have owed the plaintiff a legal obligation that they disregarded or intentionally did not fulfill. 

• Causation: The defendant’s negligent behavior must have caused direct damages to the plaintiff that otherwise would not have occurred.

• Impartiality: The jury must not be influenced by any personal convictions and remain impartial when making a decision.

Jury Deliberation and Verdict

After instructions are given, the jury is guided to a deliberation room where they review the evidence presented by both parties, discuss the law’s correlation to the case, express their opinions, and vote on a unanimous decision. The deliberation is usually led by a foreperson who ensures that the process runs smoothly and efficiently and every person has a voice during the discussion. The majority of states in the U.S. mandate that a unanimous decision is reached by all 12 people on the jury, however certain states rule based on a majority vote. If the jury can not come to an agreement it is considered a standstill or a hung jury, and the judge will pronounce the case as a mistrial and either close it or completely restart the process. 

Alternatives to a Trial

Jury trials serve as the most formal and complex form of legal resolution, governed by detailed procedures and rules. However, most legal disputes are resolved through alternative methods that are often cheaper and more time-efficient than jury trials. Alternatives to jury trials usually consist of:

1. Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR): A process in which a third party intervenes in a dispute to help both parties reach an agreement. These methods include arbitration, neutral evaluation, and mediation.

   
   

2. Negotiated Settlement: Both parties present their ideas for compensation to one another and negotiate to decide on a final settlement amount. 

   
   

3. Bench Trial: A singular judge reviews both sides of a case and issues a verdict without the help of a jury. This is often less time-consuming than juries because only one person deliberates the case’s details instead of a group of people.

   
   

4. Summary Judgment: Summary judgment is when a judge makes a verdict without a jury or full trial based on a submitted written document that lists the legal disputes being made. The request can be made for the entire case or a portion of it. 

Each trial alternative consists of unique rules and procedures that apply to both parties pursuing a claim. The pros and cons of these methods of resolution should be thoroughly examined before making a choice, as they may affect the outcome of the case differently than imagined. 

Don't Go to Trial Alone: Contact a Personal Injury Lawyer

Trials can be lengthy, confusing, and physically and emotionally draining. A lawyer can help carry the weight of your case and ease your mind by providing you with legal stability. Attorneys are aware of the tactics your opponents may use on you and can create strategies to combat them.

Contact Sneed and Mitchell at (866) 434-0014 to speak with an experienced personal injury lawyer about the details of your case. Our attorneys will review your case and determine the best course of action for you. If we get the honor of representing you, we will help you collect evidence, negotiate, come up with action plans, and speak on your behalf in court. Our firm is open 24/7 to discuss your legal options.