Legal Document

464 U.S. 548 104 S.Ct. 845 78 L.Ed.2d 663 McDONOUGH POWER EQUIPMENT, INC., Petitionerv.Billy G. GREENWOOD et al. No. 82-958. Argued Nov. 28, 1983. Decided Jan. 18, 1984. Syllabus Respondent parents and son sued petitioner in Federal District Court to recover damages sustained by the when his feet came contact with blades of a riding lawnmower manufactured petitioner. After trial that extended over 3-week period, entered judgment for upon jury verdict denied respondents' motion new trial. One grounds alleged was had erred denying approach after because one jurors not responded question on voir dire seeking elicit information about previous "injuries . resulted any disability or prolonged pain suffering" members juror's immediate family fact broken leg as result an exploding tire. The Appeals reversed, holding failure respond affirmatively prejudiced right peremptory challenge. Held: Respondents are entitled unless disclose them their impartial jury. Courts should exercise preference automatic reversal "error" ignore errors do affect essential fairness To invalidate mistaken, though honest, response question, is insist something closer perfection than our judicial system can be expected give. It ill serves important end finality wipe slate clean simply recreate challenge process counsel lacked item he have obtained from juror examination. Appeals' standard contrary practical necessities management reflected Rule Civil Procedure 61 harmless-error statute, 28 U.S.C. § 2111. obtain such situation, party must first demonstrate failed answer honestly material then further show correct would provided valid basis cause. Pp. 553-556. 687 F.2d 338 (CA10, 1982), reversed. Donald Patterson, Topeka, Kan., Gene E. Schroer, respondents. Justice REHNQUIST delivered opinion Court. 1 Respondents, Billy Greenwood parents, McDonough Power Equipment, Incorporated lawn mower United States Kansas On appeal, however, Tenth Circuit reversed ordered held injuries "prejudiced Greenwoods' challenge," v. Inc., 338, 342 (CA10 necessary cure this error. We granted certiorari, --- ----, 103 3109, 77 1365 (1983), now hold respondents 2 During prior empaneling six-member jury, attorney asked prospective following question: "Now, how many you yourself your severe injury, necessarily Billy, but whether it accident at home, farm work suffering, family?" App., 19. 3 Ronald Payton, who eventually became juror, did which addressed panel whole. three-week found McDonough.1 Four days petitioner, moved under local 23A permission In support asserted they were "of belief" Payton's may been injured time, revealed during dire. 68. ruled just cause 73. 4 Undeterred, next day filed second attaching affidavit respondent John Greenwood,2 course employment Navy recruiter, reviewed enlistment application son. stated explosion truck Payton regarding allegedly directed inquiry brief polite made manner convenient juror. noted "overly impressed significance particular situation." 89. No provision record Payton. 5 same trial, asserting 18 justification, including Court's error This only instance even tangentially referred ground Shortly parties placed telephone conference call finding "matter fairly thoroughly tried jury's one, well-supported evidence." 106. never informed results examination nor ever directly assert before non-disclosure warranted 6 proceeded merits claim silence challenges, rather remanding case back hearing.3 recited recollections each contained appellate briefs, stating "unrevealed information" indicated probable bias "because particularly narrow concept what constitutes serious injury." F.2d, 343. assumed answered good faith, stated: 7 "Good irrelevant inquiry. If average disclosed information, significant cogent evidence bias, required rectify it." Ibid. (citation omitted). 8 has long " '[a litigant] fair perfect one,' there no trials." Brown States, 411 223, 231-232, 93 1565, 1570-1571, 36 208 (1973), quotingBruton 391 123, 135, 88 1620, 1627, 20 476 (1968), Lutwak 344 604, 619, 73 481, 490, 97 L.Ed. 593 (1953). Trials costly, parties, also performing civic duty society pays judges personnel manage trials. seems doubtful resources provide litigants trials, possible, still keep abreast its constantly increasing load. Even straightforward products liability suit period. 9 come way time all presumed prejudicial reviewing courts considered "citadels technicality." Kotteakos 328 750, 759, 66 1239, 1245, 90 1557 (1946), quoting Kavanagh, Improvement Administration Criminal Exercise Judicial Power, 11 A.B.A.J. 217, 222 (1925). harmless rules adopted Congress embody principle See Kotteakos, U.S., 759-760, S.Ct., 1245-1246. For example, general rule governing motions district 61, provides: 10 "No defect ruling order anything done omitted court granting setting aside refusal take action appears inconsistent substantial justice. every stage proceeding disregard does rights parties." (emphasis added) While sense applies courts, see Fed.Rule Civ.Proc. 1, well-settled act accordance salutary policy embodied 61. See, e.g., Keaton Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe R. Co., 321 317, 319 (CA7 1963); Box Swindle, 306 882, 887 (CA5 1962); De Nehi Corp., 171 696, 698 (CA2 1948). reinforced enacting 2111, incorporates Tipton Socony Mobil Oil 375 34, 37, 84 3, (1963); Borden 347 514, 516 n. 5, 74 703, 705 98 903 (1954).4 assessed against background. touchstone trier fact—"a capable willing decide solely Smith Phillips, 455 209, 102 940, 946, 71 (1982). Voir protect exposing possible biases, both known unknown, part potential jurors. Demonstrated responses questions being excused cause; hints sufficient warrant assist exercising challenges. necessity truthful answers if serve purpose obvious. 12 critical posed suffering." Juror apparently believed son's tire injury. similar petitioner's counsel, another related minor incident six-year-old once caught finger bike chain. 52. Yet subsequent questioning brought out her husband machinery accident. 19, 53-54. 13 varied testify experts English usage. Called walks life, uncertain meaning terms relatively easily understood lawyers judges. Moreover, statutory qualifications require minimal competency language. 1865. Thus, we cannot say, doubt could these three "average juror" evident difficult apply productive uncertainties. 14 honest A represents investment private social resources, objectively Whatever world redo reconstruct gone abstract imperfection, think dire, motives concealing vary, those reasons impartiality truly said 15 Generally, committed discretion court. Montgomery Ward Co. Duncan, 311 243, 251, 189, 194, 85 147 (1940). mistaken deciding event issue remains relevant disposed other contentions hearing determine principles state here. 16 Reversed. 17 BLACKMUN, whom STEVENS O'CONNOR join, concurring. I agree proper defendant benefit fact. that, most cases, honesty dishonesty best initial indicator impartial. therefore join opinion, write separately understand foreclose normal avenue relief available regardless dishonest, within court's option, determining biased, post-trial movant opportunity actual or, exceptional circumstances, facts inferred. 215-216, 944-945, (1982); id., 221-224, 948-949 (O'CONNOR, J., concurring). 19 BRENNAN, MARSHALL joins, concurring judgment. employed erroneous legal case, compounded failing remand decision instance. concur judgment, difficulty understanding import 21 later chosen foreman, incorrectly Specifically, although "sustained suffering," injury incurred truck-tire explosion. concluded erroneous, challenge." 1982). granted, motion. 22 less-than-complete conducting itself opinion. my view, focus situation resulting prejudice litigant. More specifically, awarded litigant circumstances surrounding biased moving McCoy Goldston, 652 654, 659-660 (CA6 1981). 23 When applying standard, recognize "[t]he implied; is, conclusively [a] matter law." Wood, 299 133, 57 177, 179, 81 (1936). 948-949, (1982) Because will rarely admitted himself, "partly interest own partly unaware it," 221-222, inferred circumstances. Therefore, properly exists, consider least two questions: suggesting presumed; and, not, more actually Whether dishonestly, inaccurate inadvertent intentional, factors latter determination bias.* asserts whenever provides posed. Cf. ante, 556. imagine cases subjectively believes answer, yet incorrect suggests individual case. 24 Given nature given raised presumed, clearly Motions left sound court, lightly disturbed especially true turns, here, involved. 551-552, reach point notified informal Accordingly, remanded consistent outlined above. Although McDonough, law, applied diversity action, permitted relative fault non-defendants: Jeff Morris, next-door neighbor operating involved accident, Jeff's father, Billy's mother. amount $375,000, Morris 20% fault, father 45% mother 35% fault. determined McDonough's percentage zero. clear Greenwood's were, course, barred challenging composition interrogate receiving thought factually incorrect. Johnson Hill, 274 110, 115-116 (CA8 1960). neither challenges propriety having merits, believe resolution infra, p. 556 Nevertheless, address remand. Both conversation received Counsel recalled saying "it make difference seriously injured," "that accidents life," "all children accidents." Brief appellants 80-1698 (CA10), 7. petitioners recall "did regard [his leg] 'severe' [the injury] 'disability suffering.' As far Mr. concerned counsel's honestly, correctly, remaining silent." appellee 18. presented highly unorthodox. considerations economy might motivated proceed effect non-disclosure, procedure issues resolution. dispute version foreseeable present continuing, factual dispute. Appellate tribunals poor substitutes developing resolving controversies. text 2111 reads full: "On appeal writ certiorari shall give without defects traces lineage 269 former Code, enacted 1919. Act February 26, 1919, c. 48, 40 Stat. 1181; 758-762, 1244-1247, (1946); C. Wright A. Miller, Practice 2881 (1973). * recognized several completely acknowledged suggest Greenwoods. claiming "having displayed insufficient sensitivity claims product action. exacerbated served foreman initially returned assessing $0.00 despite lost lawn-mower accident; reconvening admonished judge assess totaling $375,000. These along

Classification Label: 0