|
We've done our best to
provide everything you need to know about eJury right here at your
fingertips. Nevertheless, we recognize that for all of the
convenience online operations provide, sometimes you just can't beat
the telephone. Call us toll free at 1-800-590-3542, and we'll be
glad to speak with you, guide you through the process, and answer
any questions.
eJury is much like
a traditional mock jury or focus group except that the jurors (or eJurors)
participate via the Internet. The convenience of online
participation allows for a larger panel on each case, giving the
attorney the type of feedback normally associated with large focus
group research, but without the traditionally high cost.
Step 1: The attorney
prepares the Case Submission which consists of facts from the
perspectives of each party, the jury questions which would be
used at trial, and personal questions designed to obtain
additional feedback (e.g. "What was important to you in
determining who was negligent or responsible?").
Step 2: We convert the
attorney's Case Submission into an "html format" and post
it to a secure location on our website where only eJurors in the
county of selection can access the case. The eJurors in that
county are then notified electronically that a new case has been
posted.
Step 3: The eJurors
begin reviewing the facts and answering the questions, each clicking
a "Submit Verdict" button upon completion. Once the
minimum number of verdicts have been rendered (usually 50), the case
automatically concludes. The results are then tabulated,
printed, and bound. The final product includes a summary of
the liability and damages statistics, as well as all 50 verdicts
with a corresponding demographic profile of each participating
eJuror.
| Using
Your Results
|
|
Imagine the knowledge you
gain when you ask 50 people for their opinions about your
case. What you do with your results is up to you,
but you might consider...
|
-
Determination of Value -
Your results provide a valuation from an
independent source. You're no longer
dealing with the opinion of just 1 person.
You now have the opinions of 50 people.
This gives your results an empirical basis which
can be very persuasive.
-
Convince your Client -
Whether you're representing the plaintiff or the
defense, your results will help educate your
client and help your client make smarter
settlement decisions.
-
Persuade your Opposition - Have
mediations become a waste of time? Are you
just guessing when you tell the other side what
a jury will do?
Show the opposition your results and you'll show
them what is likely to occur at trial.
-
Confirm a Realistic
Evaluation - Maybe your evaluation is
correct, but your client or adjuster needs some
more proof. Our results can add
credibility to your evaluation and
"protection" for your file.
-
Dissuade Unreasonable
Expectations - There are times when a
client's expectations are too much to reason
with. A client such as this needs to sit
down and read the opinions of 50 other
people. It can be an
"eye-opening" experience.
|
|
-
Find the Facts to Emphasize
- Let common, everyday people tell you the
facts they think are the most important to your
case.
-
Develop Case Themes - Leading
trial attorneys say that every case tried to a
jury should have a theme. Look for themes
in the eJuror's responses that are already in
the "language of laypeople."
-
Test Jury Arguments -
Try your jury arguments out ahead of time.
Find out what will sell...and what won't.
-
Discover "Public"
Attitudes - Does your case involve some
unique facts? We all know what jurors
think about car wrecks. But how do the
majority of jurors feel about "a doctor's
use of forceps"..."a customer's
allergic reaction to a food ingredient"...or
even more simply..."the photograph you plan
on using as Exhibit No. 1"?
-
Create Ideal Juror Profiles
- Study your demographics to discover what
"type" of jurors will be the best for
your case. More importantly, who do you
want to keep off the jury?
|
| Price List
|
|
| Base
Rate: |
Total Pages of Facts
(single-spaced):
Required
minimum of 2 pages
Suggested maximum of 5 pages
Included with Base Rate: |
$300
per page
|
|
-
up to 5
Jury Questions
- up to 5 Personal Questions
|
no
additional charge
no additional charge |
| Additional
Requests: |
Extra
Pages of Facts: |
$400
per page |
|
Extra
Jury Questions: |
$200
per question |
|
Extra
Personal Questions: |
$200
per question |
|
Imagery
(photos, diagrams, etc.): |
$300
per image |
|
|
|
| Miscellaneous
Items: |
Extra Result Books:
Results are
printed and spiral bound in book form.
2 books are already included with the price of each submission. |
$60
per book |
|
Extra eJuror Verdicts:
Results contain a
minimum of 50 verdicts. Additional verdicts are available
depending on time constraints and the county chosen for submission. |
call
for quote |
| County Panels
|
|
Your
Case Submission will be "venue specific." We have a
national database of registered eJurors and can put a
sufficiently large panel together in any major
metropolitan area of the country.
We
segregate our panels according to the county of residence
of each eJuror. Here is just a sampling of some of
the panels which have already been created according to
case demand:
|
State
|
County
|
|
Alabama |
Jefferson,
Mobile |
|
Arizona |
Maricopa,
Pima |
|
Arkansas |
Pulaski |
|
California |
Los Angeles,
San Bernardino, Orange, Riverside, San Francisco, Sonoma, Marin,
Alameda, San Mateo, San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara, Ventura, San
Diego |
|
Colorado |
Adams,
Arapahoe, Jefferson |
|
Connecticut |
Fairfield,
Hartford, New London, New Haven |
|
Florida |
Broward,
Miami-Dade, Pinellas, Duval, Hillsborough, Leon, Walton, Orange,
Escambia, Bay |
|
Georgia |
Fulton,
Clayton, Macon |
|
Illinois |
Cook,
Peoria, Champaign, Winnebago |
|
Indiana |
Marion,
Delaware |
|
Iowa |
Polk |
|
Kansas |
Sedgwick,
Johnson |
|
Maryland |
Montgomery |
|
Massachusetts |
Middlesex,
Worcester, Suffolk |
|
Michigan |
Wayne,
Saginaw |
|
Minnesota |
Hennepin |
|
Missouri |
St.
Louis County, St. Louis City, Jackson, Greene, Platte, Clay,
Jefferson |
|
Montana |
Missoula |
|
Nevada |
Clark |
|
New
Mexico |
Bernalillo,
Santa Fe |
|
New
York |
Kings,
New York, Queens, Albany, Tompkins, Westchester, Oswego, Cortland,
Onondaga |
|
North
Carolina |
Wake,
Durham, Raliegh, Forsyth, Guilford, Mecklenburg, Brunswick |
|
Ohio |
Cuyahoga,
Franklin, Summit, Stark, Lake, Erie, Lorain |
|
Oregon |
Multnomah |
|
Pennsylvania |
Allegheny,
Philadelphia, Luzerne, Westmoreland |
|
Tennessee |
Shelby,
Davidson, Knox |
|
Texas |
Dallas,
Tarrant, Harris, Bexar, Travis, El Paso, Denton, Collin, Rockwall,
Jefferson, Orange, Johnson, Nueces, Smith, Gregg, McLennan, Hidalgo,
Cameron |
|
Virginia |
Fairfax,
Prince William, Loudoun, Albemarle |
|
Washington |
King,
Pierce |
|
Washington,
D.C. |
District
of Columbia |
|
Wisconsin |
Dane |
|
Wyoming |
Laramie |
For cases
pending in less populated areas, please Contact
Us to discuss other panel possibilities. In many instances
we have been able to combine surrounding counties with
less population in order to create a large enough panel
with similar demographics.
| Conflicts
Policy
|
|
After
a case has been
posted, we believe it would present an obvious conflict of interest to
post the same case again for an opposing attorney. That is why
we require real names of the parties during the intake process and
check all new cases for possible conflicts of interest. If a
conflict is present, it is our policy to respond to the new inquiry
by simply stating: "eJury is unable to accept your
submission due to a conflict of interest."
Please keep in mind that due to the
ever-changing trial dockets of our customers, we are unable to
reserve spots or places for case submission. All cases are
posted on a "first come, first
served" basis.
| Confidentiality
Policy
|
|
We
understand the importance of keeping an attorney’s mental
impressions, opinions, conclusions, and legal theories privileged
and confidential. In
addition, we recognize that the attorney-client relationship is
built upon the trust of knowing that certain confidences will not be
disclosed to others.
eJury,
by and through its officers, directors, and employees, will treat
the following information as confidential, and will not,
directly or indirectly, disclose the following information, or any
part thereof, to any person or entity other than the party for whom
this Confidentiality Policy is made:
-
the
fact that the services of eJury have been requested, engaged, or
purchased on any given case;
-
the
names of the attorneys, clients, parties, witnesses, insurers,
and representatives on any given case;
-
the
facts, theories, claims, defenses, Jury Questions, and Personal
Questions on any given case;
-
the
results derived from submitting any given case to eJury,
including, but not limited to, any and all of the verdicts
rendered, answers to the Jury Questions and Personal Questions,
responses noted as Additional Comments, the statistical
breakdowns, and the E-verdicts Summary.
Based
upon the very nature of the services of eJury, certain information
that is submitted by the attorney must be disclosed to those persons
registered as “eJurors.” The
party for whom this Confidentiality Policy is made understands that
the information to be disclosed in this fashion is the Case
Submission, consisting of the facts, jury questions, and personal
questions submitted by the attorney to eJury. Each person
registered as an eJuror has completed an oath swearing and affirming
that he/she will not knowingly disclose, or permit to be disclosed,
any information learned or obtained from eJury to any attorney,
paralegal, legal assistant, law firm, insurance adjuster, insurance
company, or anyone associated with an attorney, paralegal, legal
assistant, law firm, insurance adjuster, or insurance company,
except through the answering of case questions directly on the eJury
website.
| Sample
Cases
|
|
The following case submission
provides a good example of an automobile collision
case. This submission was 5 pages long with 5 jury questions
and 5 personal questions.
The submission below, a medical
malpractice case, is slightly longer than
our suggested maximum of 5 single-spaced pages (the facts below
were 7 pages in length). The submitting attorney chose to
include an introductory section entitled "General
Background" (shorter cases usually just begin with
"Facts from the Plaintiff's Perspective" followed by
"Facts from the Defendant's Perspective"). This
submission also includes 2 images the submitting attorney used for
illustration.
Obviously, each case is different
and presentation styles will vary from attorney to attorney.
Feel free to e-mail us here if you would
like to receive a sample case in Microsoft Word format via reply
e-mail. This will allow you to simply begin cutting and
pasting with your own facts and questions. Please type
"Send Sample Case" in the subject line and include in
your email a brief description of the type of case your involved
in (e.g. "I have a wrongful death case involving multi-car
collision on a highway").
| Testimonials
|
|
“I utilized eJury recently in an alcohol-related wrongful
death case. Being able to gain insights and ask questions to
the eJurors was very helpful in evaluating certain troublesome
aspects of the case. More than anything else, being able to
ask the eJurors their opinions--for instance, to what extent they
would blame parents for the regular alcohol consumption of their
son, killed in an alcohol-related car accident--helped formulate the
trial and settlement strategy. The case ultimately settled in
mediation for 3% of the insurance potentially available.
There's no question I will use this service again.” – Vic
Anderson
@ Shannon, Gracey, Ratliff &
Miller, L.L.P.
“As a trial lawyer I
have used both live jury focus groups and eJury. In the Spring of 2000, I used eJury to pinpoint concerns
over damage issues in a personal injury case stemming from the crash
landing of American Airlines Flight 1420 in Little Rock, Arkansas.
The responses we received from the ‘cyber jurors’ helped
immensely in framing the voir dire examination and the presentation
of evidence. I was
amazed at the types and broad range of issues raised in the
responses. Considering
the cost of eJury, I feel it will be foolish to go to trial in any
case in the future without using it.” – Robert
R. Bodoin @ Bodoin, Burnside &
Burge, P.C.
"I used eJury's mock jury on
a very difficult case involving a serious injury to a minor child
resulting in life-long impairment. The results not only confirmed my
suspicions that liability would be our biggest obstacle at trial,
but they also gave my clients a new appreciation for how their case
would be viewed by others. After reviewing the verdicts and reading
the comments of the 50 mock jurors, my clients quickly realized that
settlement was in their best interests. Once settlement was
achieved, the Ad Litem relied upon the 50 verdicts to find that the
settlement was in the best interests of the minor child. Even the
Court seemed to be impressed with the added intelligence that eJury
provided to the settlement decision, and gladly admitted the 50
verdicts into evidence at the minor prove-up hearing. eJury is such
an effective method of case evaluation, that no significant
settlement decisions should be made without it." – Harold English
@ Law Offices of Harold English
“I
used eJury for the first time in a personal injury case
involving a near fatal allergic reaction suffered by my
client.
I strongly believed that this was almost a
slam-dunk liability case.
Many of the eJurors disagreed, several of them
even putting on hundred percent responsibility on my
client, for reasons that had not and probably would not
have occurred to me.
I was surprised and somewhat disappointed, but
certainly enlightened and edified by these responses.
The insights and thought processes of the eJurors
were invaluable in our analysis of the strengths, and
perhaps more importantly, the weaknesses of our case.
We reached a very good settlement at mediation, in
large part because of what we had learned about the case
from the eJury submission.
I highly recommend eJury as a valuable tool in any
significant litigation.” – Shane
Goetz @ Rossetti & Goetz
“Every
trial attorney knows the difficulty of accurately predicting the
jury’s verdict. I
have found that eJury not only provides a realistic appraisal of
case value, but it also gives me great insight on all the factors
leading up to the jury’s verdict.
Knowing what 50 eJurors think about the liability facts and
the damage facts before I have to try the case to the actual jury is
a great advantage.” – Jeff Hansen @ Hasten & Hansen,
P.C.
“eJury
was very beneficial assisting with future questions of witnesses and
theme concepts, what to emphasize and what not to emphasize. I
look forward to using it in the future.” – Robert Haslam @ The Haslam Firm, P.C.
“eJury gave me a great advantage
going into trial. The feedback provided by the eJurors let me
know how a ‘real’ jury might react to a very complicated factual
situation. Their answers to the personal questions and their
additional comments were invaluable. I was able to see what
aspects of my client's case needed the most emphasis, and where more
information was needed to make the case understandable.
It was also helpful to see that some of the comments mirrored
my opinions regarding the issues, which gave credibility to my
evaluation when discussing this case with the client.
This is a great concept which I will be using again and
again.” – Jeff
Kinsel
@ Cantey & Hanger, L.L.P.
“I recently used eJury for the
first time. I was both pleased and impressed with the format, and
the results, of my fact submission. eJury allowed me to present a
balanced perspective of my case easily and effectively. The results
of the e-jurors' answers to the issues presented were clear and
concise. Best of all, the format allowed me to get the eJurors'
feedback as to how they viewed the facts and the damages in the
case, which I was then able to put to excellent use in the voir dire
of the case when it actually went to trial. I have conducted a
number of mock trials/jury focus groups, and in my opinion, eJury
gave me almost everything the more formal programs do at a fraction
of the cost. I intend to make eJury a part of every case I have
that goes into litigation." –
Stephen
C. Maxwell @ Hill Gilstrap, P.C.
“My partner and I just settled a medical negligence case
for $465,000.00 prior to taking a single deposition!! We were
able to achieve this result for two adult-children clients that had
lost their mother, thanks to eJury!! One of the eJurors on
the case commented that to him, the doctor had the attitude of ‘take
two aspirin and don't call me in the morning.’ If you have fairly
represented the defense position to the eJurors and they make
comments like this, it can really help you obtain the doctor's
consent to settlement and can really help convince the insurance
carrier and defense attorney to offer significantly more. Not
only does eJury help in these areas, but the eJurors' responses
provide invaluable insight as to facts and themes to emphasize at
trial, as well as insight as to what facts or arguments that may
turn a jury against your case. The eJurors can even provide
you with information that you may have overlooked or ideas for
additional discovery. Since eJury is so economical, I believe
that it should be considered a routine step in every personal injury
case just the same as sending out interrogatories. As a matter
of fact, if I had to choose between interrogatories and eJury as a
tool in prosecuting my cases, I would choose eJury every
time!" – Jim Orr
@ Heygood, Orr & Reyes, L.L.P.
“Every litigator struggles to determine the value of his or
her cases. I recently
used eJury for the first time on a small case to see if the service
could provide this information. The results were outstanding.
I was able to use a database of jury questions to help with the
unique set of issues in the case, and the format for submitting the
case was simple and even helped me prepare it for trial. The eJury
verdict was received in less then a week along with an extensive
analysis of the results. I even received demographic profiles of
those jurors who were predisposed for and against my case for use in
voir dire. The local eJurors comments were extensive, thought
provoking, hit the issues hard and even gave me a few of those ‘off
the wall’ issues you normally hear from the jury after it’s too
late. Now I have a
comfort level about the value of this case that I wish I had in
every case. The low
cost and the invaluable information make eJury a ‘must’ for
virtually every case in my file cabinet.” – Jim Zadeh @ Law Office of Jim
Zadeh, P.C.
"I found eJury to be very beneficial in our trial
preparation. We were able to focus in on the demographic
of the type of juror we were looking for along with the
concerns the eJurors were having. We had a case with only
$4,400 in medical bills and we used the eJury result to
help maximize the value of the case which had a punitive
damages component. The jury at trial awarded over $2.3M,
and I believe the knowledge gained from eJury was money
well spent. I recommend this service and will use it
again.” – David A. McLaughlin @ The Cochran Firm
|
