Typically, the schedule of events in a jury trial before the Judge is as follows:
Attorney conference with Judge. Typically, the Judge will want to confirm with both attorneys before starting a trial to result in last-minute motions and/or to alert the judge as to any special or unique legal issues that can be expected to arise during the trial of the case. Typically, the Judge does not want the parties present during this part of the trial.
Jury selection. Trials in Minnesota are before a jury of six to eight people. In the event that any of the jurors are unable to complete a trial and should be excused from jury service by the Judge, it can proceed to a final decision by a jury of at least six.
The jury selection process includes questioning by the judge and then the attorneys for all of the parties. This is called “Voir Dire.” During the jury selection process, jurors may be excused on the basis of a “challenge for cause,” which means that the juror has indicated that there is some legal basis that would disqualify the jury.
*The results are conditioned to the unique circumstances of each case. These results do not guarantee your case will result in the same compensation.
After the jury questioning, each party is allowed to strike to jurors without having to give any reason for doing so. The remaining jurors then will be formally “seated” on the jury panel that will listen to the evidence and decide the case.
Opening Statements. After the jury is selected, each of the attorneys is allowed to give an opening statement. The Plaintiff’s attorney goes first, followed by the defense attorneys. The attorneys are allowed, in their opening statements, to outline briefly the legal issues and the expected evidence. They are not supposed to “argue” the case.
Presentation of the Evidence. After the opening statements, the parties are allowed to present their evidence. The plaintiff proceeds first with the testimony of witnesses and the offering of exhibits such as medical records, medical bills, and other types of documentary evidence. After the plaintiff submits his/her presenting evidence and “rests,” the defendant is allowed to proceed with the presentation of evidence. After the defense “rests,” the plaintiff is then allowed to present rebuttal evidence. The rules of evidence are very strict as to what rebuttal evidence can be offered and as a consequence, rebuttal evidence is rarely offered and/or allowed by the judge.
Closing arguments. After the presentation of the evidence, each attorney is allowed to make a “closing statement,” in which the attorney is allowed to fully argue the case. In this portion of the trial, the defense attorney goes first. The plaintiff’s attorney argues last.
Jury instructions. At the conclusion of the case, the judge will instruct the jury as to the law that they are to apply to the evidence that they have heard, then arrive at a “special verdict.” (Some judges prefer to give the jury instructions before the closing arguments. The majority of judges give the jury instructions after the lawyers have completed the closing arguments.) The special verdict contains a list of questions that the jurors are required to answer. The jury’s answers to these questions on the special verdict are then used by the judge to arrive at the final judgment, or decision in the case.
Jury Deliberation. The jury is then sent to the jury room for “deliberation,” a term that simply refers to the process of making the decision and arriving at the answers that they place on the special verdict. During the first 6 hours, the verdict must be unanimous. After six hours of deliberation, the verdict can be reached by all but one dissenting juror. The special verdict form is then presented to the judge. The parties and the other attorneys are not required to remain during the jury deliberation process and typically do not. The judge or his courtroom personnel will then call the attorneys for the respective parties and advise them of the jury’s decision
Dean M. Salita
Dean Salita is a seasoned Personal Injury lawyer with over 30 years of experience, specializing in workplace injuries and occupational diseases like asbestos-related illnesses. He’s the chair of the Minnesota Association for Justice Workers’ Compensation section and has been recognized as a Super Lawyer with an AV rating by Martindale-Hubbell. Dean is dedicated to providing personal, compassionate legal support to his clients, guiding them through trials and the legal process.
I understand how overwhelming this can be. Let me handle the legal complexities while you focus on your recovery and getting back to normal.
Dean M. Salita
Client Reviews
What Our Clients Are Saying About Us
NB
Google Review
Schmidt Law Firm is so much more than the usual out for their back pocket firm they are a group of truly caring people. I was hit by a car & have memory loss. I don’t know how many times they all had to go over and over the same thing with me. They even gave me reminder calls for my doctors appointments. When things were so overwhelming I would call and all I could do is cry and they listened and never once complained or cut me short. Doug and Vanessa were all very helpful so was the rest of the staff. God Bless them all. By the way they got me a lot more than I had hoped for. You really don’t want to be on the opposing side of the table of Doug, he will rip you before you know he did it and he does it in such a nice way.
“I wanted to extend my personal thanks and appreciation, as well as that of my siblings. We are appreciative of the representation you extended to our father. He always battled for the “little guy,” and you did that for him thru this process. Please extend this thank you to Molly as well. Thank you.”
TM
“Doug Schmidt and his team were a godsend – they were compassionate and professional in helping my sister and I navigate our mother’s Wrongful Death. They were easy to communicate with, and I always felt my concerns and opinions were being heard. I would recommend Schmidt Law Firm to anyone who asks.”
KJ
“I feel very lucky to have Mr. Schmidt working for me. He took my case when my first lawyer would not and could not fight his way out of a paper bag. My case was very involved but Mr. Schmidt made it look so easy.”
DH
“Doug and his team are top notch. They are hard working and meticulous with getting the best results… I felt like I was in good hands through the entire process. I couldn’t be happier with the outcome.”
JA
“I wanted to tell you thank you for everything you have done for me I really appreciate it…I truly appreciate everything you did just taking the time to answer my questions, makes me feel good about what was going on and understanding what was happening and everything and just being patient with me. Again I truly appreciate ha...
LW
“Just wanted to take this opportunity to thank you and your staff for all your efforts to collect benefits on behalf of my husband. Your kindness and sympathy during our initial visit with you was very much appreciated.”
This page has been written, edited, and reviewed by a team of legal writers following our comprehensive editorial guidelines. This page was approved by Founding Partner, Dean M. Salita, with more than 30 years of legal experience as a personal injury attorney.