Opinion ID: 2429561
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 7

Heading: insurance question during voir dire

Text: SLU contends that the trial court erred in allowing the plaintiff's attorney to inquire whether anyone on the panel had an interest in or was employed by Cardinal Glennon's primary and excess insurers. SLU asserts error because 1) all of the insurance companies were located outside of the metropolitan St. Louis area, 2) Cardinal Glennon's primary insurance carrier is a non-stock company with no offices outside Jefferson City, Missouri, and 3) SLU has no insurance coverage available to satisfy the judgment. In chambers prior to voir dire, the defense objected to the plaintiff asking the insurance question. The trial court overruled the objections and allowed the plaintiff to ask the following question during voir dire: Do you or any member of your family work for or have a financial interest in the Missouri Liability Insurance Association, First State Insurance Company, Lloyds of London, New England Reinsurance Company? As a rule the possibility of taint resulting from some connection between a juror and an interested insurer, even though the disclosure of the latter's interest is unlikely, outweighs the prejudice that might result from an inquiry naming the insurance company during voir dire. Skinner v. Sisters of St. Mary's, 686 S.W.2d 858 (Mo.App.1985). A trial judge has broad discretion in determining whether a party may be allowed to ask a question naming insurance companies. Id. at 860. If, however, an insurance question is asked not in good faith but for the purpose of injecting insurance coverage into the minds of the jurors, we recognize the prejudicial effect thereof deprives the defendant of his right to a fair trial. Id. In this case, the judge told the attorneys in chambers prior to voir dire that [a]s far as the insurance question, you're going to have to go to the appellate court to get relief there. Mr. Nolan you are not to highlight it, put it in one question, and you are to ask the standard question, financial interest and employed by. This is the trial judge's way of saying that counsel was following the accepted procedure for asking the insurance question in Missouri. This includes 1) first getting the judge's approval of the proposed question out of the hearing of the jury panel, 2) asking only one insurance question, and 3) not asking it first or last in a series of questions so as to avoid unduly highlighting the question to the jury panel. This procedure has generally been followed by Missouri trial courts for years. See Thomas A. Vetter, Voir Dire II Liability Insurance, 29 Mo. L.Rev. 305 (1964). The trial judge acted well within his discretion in allowing the one question which was asked. This point is denied.