(Please also note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this car accident case and its proceedings.)
Plaintiff’s Trial Brief on Jury Voir Dire: Personal Injury Case
California Law Provides for the Intelligent Exercise of Peremptory Challenges
Plaintiff, Hank Choo, by and through his attorney of record, hereby requests the right to have an adequate voir dire conducted by counsel. California Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter CCP) §222.5. provides that following examination by the court:
“…counsel for each party shall have the right to examine, by oral and direct questioning, any of the prospective jurors in order to enable counsel to intelligently exercise both peremptory challenges and challenges for cause.”
Since the purpose of voir dire is intended to select a fair and impartial jury in civil trials (CCP §222.5), the statute provides:
“During any examination conducted by counsel for the parties, the trial judge should permit liberal and probing examination calculated to discover bias or prejudice with regard to the circumstances of the particular case.” For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.
Because of the need for follow up questions, justice may on occasion require counsel to cover the same subject or similar questions to those posed by the court. CCP §222.5 recognizes this fact, and states: The fact that a topic has been included in the judge’s examination should not preclude additional non-repetitive or non-duplicative questioning in the same area by counsel.
The right of counsel to question prospective jurors is also provided under California Rules of Court, Rule 228 Upon request of counsel, the trial judge shall permit counsel to supplement the judge’s examination by oral and direct questioning of any of the prospective jurors. (See Part 2 of 3.)
For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.