Wilcox v. Dulcom, 95-2744
Decision Date | 02 April 1997 |
Docket Number | No. 95-2744,95-2744 |
Citation | 690 So.2d 1365 |
Parties | 22 Fla. L. Weekly D833 Jimmie WILCOX and Ethel Wilcox, Appellants, v. Scott Lawrence DULCOM, Cooper Lower Distributors, Inc., and Gator Leasing, Inc., Appellees. |
Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Friedman & Friedman; Russo & Talisman and Patrice A. Talisman, Coconut Grove, for appellants.
Cooney, Mattson, Lance, Blackburn, Richards & O'Connor and Pamela R. Kittrell, Ft. Lauderdale, for appellees.
Before LEVY, GERSTEN and SHEVIN, JJ.
Jimmie and Ethel Wilcox filed the underlying negligence action which arose out of an accident between Mr. Wilcox's automobile and a commercial truck. The case proceeded to trial where the plaintiffs presented evidence of Mr. Wilcox's injuries and medical expenses. The jury returned a verdict finding Wilcox and the truck driver negligent, apportioning ten percent of the fault to Mr. Wilcox, and ninety percent of the fault to the truck operator and its owners.
After the verdict was rendered, the plaintiffs discovered that one of the jurors had misrepresented or concealed information regarding her past involvement in legal disputes. She disclosed during voir dire examination that she settled her claim arising out of an automobile accident before the case proceeded to trial. However, the juror did not reveal that she had been involved in a collections dispute and a party in a domestic action. The plaintiffs moved for a new trial based on this concealment and on the inadequacy of the damages. The trial court denied the motion and the plaintiffs filed this appeal. We agree that the issue of juror concealment raised by the Appellants warrants a reversal and a new trial.
Reversal is warranted in the context of juror concealment during voir dire if the following three part test is satisfied: De La Rosa v. Zequeira, 659 So.2d 239, 241 (Fla.1995).
The litigation history of a potential juror is relevant and material to jury service, even if that history involves a different type of case. "A person involved in prior litigation may sympathize with similarly situated litigants or develop a bias against legal proceedings in general." De La Rosa, 659 So.2d at 241 (Fla.1995)(quoting Zequeira v. De La Rosa, 627 So.2d 531, 533 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993)(Baskin, J., dissenting)). Accordingly, the materiality prong of the test was satisfied in the instant case when the juror failed to reveal the fact that she had been involved in a collections dispute and a party in a domestic...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Roberts ex rel. Estate of Roberts v. Tejada
...659 So.2d at 241(emphasis added). [Note 9] Materiality must be analyzed on a caseby-case basis, and we clarify that Wilcox [v. Dulcom, 690 So.2d 1365 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997)] does not mandate an automatic new trial whenever there has been a nondisclosure of litigation information. Based upon the......
-
Murphy v. Hurst, 5D02-3047.
...Castenholz v. Bergmann, 696 So.2d 954 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997) (juror failed to reveal five distinct actions against her); Wilcox v. Dulcom, 690 So.2d 1365 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997) (juror in auto negligence case disclosed that she had settled an auto negligence claim but did not reveal that she had be......
-
Birch ex rel. Birch v. Albert
...was not disclosed during voir dire, the trial judge held that she was constrained by this Court's decision in Wilcox v. Dulcom, 690 So.2d 1365 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997) to grant a new trial on the ground of juror misconduct.3 The trial judge explained that, but for Wilcox, she would have denied th......
-
McCauslin v. O'Conner
...that a prospective juror will truthfully answer the questions posed by the court or by the parties' counsel. See Wilcox v. Dulcom, 690 So.2d 1365, 1367 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997). Concealment or nondisclosure of a material fact during voir dire may deprive a party of the right to exercise a challen......
-
Voir dire necessities: the Florida Supreme Court clarifies when trial counsel's investigation of the venire must be undertaken.
...that a prospective juror will truthfully answer any and all questions posed by the court or by the parties' counsel. Wilcox v. Dulcom, 690 So. 2d 1365, 1367 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997) ("[I]t was reasonable for the [litigants] to expect the juror to answer the questions posed by the trial judge trut......