Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 3rd Oct 2012 13:47 UTC
Legal "Samsung has now filed an unredacted version of its motion for judgment as a matter of law, a new trial, and/or remittitur. That's the one that was originally filed with a redacted section we figured out was about the foreman, Velvin Hogan. The judge ordered it filed unsealed, and so now we get to read all about it. It's pretty shocking to see the full story. I understand now why Samsung tried to seal it. They call Mr. Hogan untruthful in voir dire (and I gather in media interviews too), accuse him of 'implied bias' and of tainting the process by introducing extraneous 'evidence' of his own during jury deliberations, all of which calls, Samsung writes, for an evidentiary hearing and a new trial with an unbiased jury as the cure." It's a treasure trove of courtroom drama, this. Like this one: Hogan got sued by his former employer Seagate in 1993, causing him to go bankrupt. The lawyer in said case is now married to one of the partners of the law firm representing Samsung in this case. Samsung seems to implicitly - and sometimes explicitly - argue that Hogan had a score to settle in this case, because - get this - Samsung has been Seagate's largest shareholder since last year. Hogan failed to disclose the Seagate lawsuit during voire dire, which is a pretty serious matter. No matter whose side you're on, this is John Grisham-worthy.
Permalink for comment 537450
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: Comment by MOS6510
by MrWeeble on Wed 3rd Oct 2012 17:03 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by MOS6510"
MrWeeble
Member since:
2007-04-18

Seems to be a problem with this particular juror in that he doesn't pay attention to questions and instructions and does his own thing.

That's fine in many areas of life - usually the only person who gets screwed is you; but jury service is something special where other people's lives are in your hands and you have to pay attention and confuse yourself

Reply Parent Score: 5