Last week on Monday I had to report to the Fulton County Courthouse because I had a jury summons. I woke up early, took MARTA into the city, and waited in several lines.
I was 98% sure that the extent of my jury duty would be spending my Monday in a holding room at the courthouse. Then I’d be able to go to my rehearsal and forget about the waste of time.
I was mistaken.
I really began to worry when one of the authorities corralling the jurors informed us that we’d all have to report to a courtroom because there were 11 judges that needed juries. I tried not to panic though because I’d heard it’s pretty common to get sent to a courtroom for jury selection only to have the plaintiff and defendant settle. So I dutifully shuffled down to courtroom 4A (and by shuffle I mean wait in my 3rd line of the day to use the elevator because stairs are only for emergencies).
There was to be no “settling” for the plaintiff nor the defendant in this case. Instead some 45+ odd jurors were shuffled into the courtroom and seated on wooden benches. We were instructed to answer questions from the prosecuting and defending attorneys by holding up our laminated cards with coordinating numbers. After, we where shepherded out of the courtroom, only to be brought back in smaller groups of 6-8. In these smaller groups we were “interviewed” (read: questioned) about who we were, and our opinions on various topics relating to this particular case.
It was in this “interview” that I was asked intrusive questions about my current occupations and college major, I was told that I must be a “good dancer because getting into USC out of state is difficult” (thank you…?) and then asked if I wanted to sit on this jury. You guys, I was instructed to answer honestly. So I did.
To the question: “Do you want to sit on this jury?” I literally said “NO”. I thought for sure that would disqualify me and I’d be able to go home. But I must’ve dug my grave on the next question.
“If you were chosen to sit on this jury, would you be able to do so fairly, or would you be too focused on the work you’d be missing?”
See now, that question stumped me a little, because I was under the impression that that was the whole point of jury duty. Very few people I know would give up working and earning money to sit on the jury of a civil case where you make a whopping $25 a day. Nevertheless, I tried to answer honestly. And since I was under the impression that jury duty required you to be present and focused on the case, I said I would.
Don’t come for me – I know I messed up.
So now I’m sitting back in the courtroom with all 45+ other jurors waiting anxiously for the attorneys to settle on a jury selection and submit it to the judge. As the numbers start to be called I’m sitting on that wooden bench physically shaking and sending all my prayers up to G-d saying “please let me go home”.
AND YET…
I hear “25” called and my stomach sank. I collected my belongs and stumbled ungracefully, head down, up to the jury box to take my seat, where I continued to shake even more violently. When the attorneys confirmed that “this was their jury” I felt the left side of my body go numb and my breathing shorten and I thought I was going to pass out. (maybe I should’ve…)
We were told this was going to be a 5 day case…how was I going to rearrange my life for 4 more days?? I had classes to take, classes to teach, rehearsals to get to, I had a job. All of the sudden I had to put this all on hold for a lawsuit?? Just my luck.
—————————————– POST 4 DAYS IN COURT ————————————-
The case really did last 4 days. Tuesday through Friday I reported to the courthouse with a hope of starting at 9:15am. However, due to some tardiness and unforseen MARTA chaos (it was all over Twitter, if you’re curious) we rarely started on-time.
The case was a lawsuit between a woman and her husband and a compounding pharmacy. It was a case of accidental poisoning, a drug had been misfilled and the plaintiff had an extremely horrible adverse reaction. But our job as the jury wasn’t to find if the company was negligent or liable. The company had already admitted that. The plaintiff who endured the adverse reaction was suing for damages in pain and suffering for past (day of incident) to present, and present to future. And her husband (the second plaintiff) was suing for compensation for loss of consortium*. So we had to determine if there was a preponderance of evidence that the plaintiffs claims were true and should be compensated for.
Now I’m very certain if you’re still reading you’re asking, “well how much did they want?”
The plaintiffs wanted a combined $2 million. I’ll let that sink in.
For 4 days we spent the whole day at the courthouse with various short breaks and an hour long lunch. The case started with various video depositions (1 was over 2 hours long) that tested my patience and my ability to focus. Only by the end of the 2nd day did we see any witnesses actually take the witness stand in front of us. On occasion emotions would run a little bit away, but there weren’t nearly as many dramatics as you’d see on Judge Judy. Every now and then the judge would crack a joke, a few times an attorney would say “I object”, and of course there were some tears.
A personal favorite moment was when an expert witness was brought to the stand by the prosecution. He was an extremely knowledgeable man, but not specifically in the field of compounding pharmacies. He did try to assuage our doubt by telling us he’d read up on some articles on the internet so he was up to par.
In order to bolster the claim of needing compensation, the prosecution tried to convince the jury that the victim of the adverse reaction had developed PTSD due to what they emphatically called “the poisoning”. They brought in multiple counselors who had met with the plaintiff and who could attest to her having endured trauma and having developed PTSD that was interfering with her ability to care for herself, be a loving wife, and manage her diabetes.
The jury wasn’t quite convinced.
I will say that this poor woman DID suffer a traumatic experience on the day she was injected with the mislabelled compound. She went through a horrible ordeal that no doubt would leave a lasting impression. But we as a jury were not convinced, due to her testimony, some discontinuities in other witness’s testimonies, and the evidence brought forth from the defense, that this woman should be compensated for her “future pain and suffering”.
We also did not find that there was a preponderance of evidence to support her husband’s claims of a loss of consortium.
So in the end, for her pain and suffering based on the day of the accident and a calculated time period after, the jury determined the plaintiff should be awarded $200,000. Not a small chunk of change if you ask me.
My personal observations and opinions would lead me to believe that was not what the plaintiff nor her attorney were looking for. And for the defense it was hardly a win. The details of the case showed that the incident occurred in 2014, and since some of the depositions and preparations for court occurred in 2016-2017, I assume this has been a long battle.
Now of course I wonder how much the plaintiff was offered to settle for. I also wonder if the prosecution thought they had a strong enough case to win. If you ask me, clearly I think they didn’t. The entire first 2 1/2 days were built up trying to paint the defendant as negligent, unorganized, and a company with recklessly below-standard procedures. Don’t get me wrong, the defendant MESSED UP, they really didn’t have proper procedures in place. But that’s not necessarily what the case was about. The prosecution was working an emotional angle, but when asked to look at the evidence, the defense brought up spectacular points, and had better experts with more convincing evidence.
The prosecuting attorney was an orator, employing meticulously crafted speeches he would deliver in his old southern drawl. His opponent opted for a more relatable approach, employing a calmer, good-natured tone in his delivery. Obviously both parties wanted to win, but I would assume that position on the case as well as personality drove them to handle their remarks much differently.
For my “closing arguments” to this already potentially painfully long piece I’ll share with you a game I created to keep myself engaged. I’ve always been fascinated by the law, and for a while entertained the notion of becoming a lawyer myself. So while the attorneys were questioning their witnesses I tried to figure out what angle they were working. I tried to figure out the conclusion they were aiming for based on the types of questions being asked. I don’t know if I was ever correct, but it certainly kept me engaged on an often monotonous and repetitive case!
If you’re interested in hearing more about the case/my experience sitting on a jury — feel free to reach out! Let me know!
*for those of you who don’t know (like I didn’t) it is legal to file a lawsuit for loss of consortium – which is loss of companionship and society from a spouse.
Leave a Reply