Describe what occurs in a summary jury trial.

Question

What will be an ideal response?

Answer 1

Answers may vary.The summary jury trial is an interesting variation on arbitration. The concept was created by Federal District Court Judge Thomas Lambros in the early 1980s as a result of his difficulty resolving two personal injury cases using other forms of ADR. The parties in these cases refused to settle, each assuming that it would get a more favorable verdict from a jury. Judge Lambros reasoned that chances for settlement would increase if the parties had a sense of what a jury would do. He instituted an abbreviated and expedited form of a jury trial that he suspected would be especially helpful in resolving relatively simple, lower-value cases.A summary jury trial is much like a conventional jury trial, though shorter. A jury is empanelled, and the lawyers tell the jurors what the witnesses would say if they were present. The lawyers argue the case and try to answer the jurors' questions about the facts. The judge tells the jury what the law is and tries to answer jurors' questions about the law. The jurors then deliberate and decide the case. In the original conception of a summary jury trial, the "verdict" did not bind the parties, it was merely advisory. In recent years, verdicts have become binding and enforceable. Regardless of these variations, the intent is the same: the process educates the lawyers and clients on how a conventional jury might view the facts and the law. Once educated, the lawyers and their clients are more amenable to settling the case