The Conical Glass: Dismissed!

Wednesday, November 01, 2006

Dismissed!

I had to arise at the (for me) uncivilized hour of 7 AM yesterday to make it to the Oakland courthouse by 8:30. After spending about 90 minutes sitting around the jury room, including watching an orientation film called "Ideals Made Real," I was in the very first group of around 40-50 people called. We trooped up to the courtroom of Judge Cecilia Castellanos. The sign by the door indicated that it was going to be a civil case, not a criminal one, which was good news, as I wouldn't have to worry about being exposed to gory or disturbing evidence.

Once we settled in the courtroom, we were introduced to the lawyers and their clients. 12 names were called, mine among them. Each of us had to go through a list of questions, many of which had to do with our experiences as employees or employers. Had we ever sued an employer for any reason, or been sued by an employee? Just from the questions, I figured out that the case involved an employee, a Hispanic man who looked to be in his early 30s, was suing his former employer, the owner of an auto repair shop, for overtime pay he felt was due. There must have been a lot of money involved for the case to make it to a jury trial.

The questioning took a long time. At first, the judge did all of the questioning; then, at the end, the attorneys were allowed to ask questions. For about an hour, it was sort of interesting to learn about my fellow citizens, but after a while, it just got phenomenally boring, as the judge and lawyers tried to tease out any potential bias.

Lawyer: Do you ever feel that you were treated unfairly by an employer?
Man in his 50s: Yes.
Lawyer: Could you describe your experience?
Man: When I was 16, I worked at McDonald's. They made us punch out and then keep working, off the clock. It was 1967 and there were 50 people who would have been happy to take our jobs.

Since most of the potential jurors were in their 50s and 60s, there was a lot of history to cover.

After lunch, the attorneys were allowed to start dismissing jurors they didn't want on the jury. The first person to be dismissed was a woman who, it had emerged during the questioning, had previously served on three juries. Maybe they figured she needed to catch a break for once. Then another person from the pool was selected to take her place, and had to answer all the same questions. The plaintiff's lawyer seemed quite affable, and looked a little like an older, ruddier Jason Bateman. His questions were very concise, whereas the defense lawyer, a short, balding guy, kept asking prospective jurors about their hobbies and whether or not they were involved in any civic organizations. Maybe he had done research showing that people who enjoyed square dancing and bowling were more likely to side with the plaintiff.

This went on and on and on. I tried to figure out why the lawyers were dismissing certain people. A young Indian guy in the software industry had been involved in laying people off, so the plaintiff's lawyer sent him packing. Anyone who had been in a labor union for a long period of time tended to get bumped by the defense. I assumed that I was going to wind up staying, until suddenly, around 2:30 PM, the plaintiff's lawyer dismissed me. I have no idea why. Maybe he figured that since I was a business owner, albeit a sole proprietor, my sympathies would be with the man instead of an employee. Ironically, my first impression was that the pleasant plaintiff's attorney and good-looking ex-employee were more sympathetic than the perpetually scowling defendant and his lawyer's endless questions about people's hobbies. I'm sure I could have been fair and impartial. Now, unfortunately, I'll never know what happens. Oh well; knowing my track record, I'll probably get another summons 366 days from now.

posted by 125records @ 10:35 AM

0 Comments: