Chapter 5 Challenges for Cause

CHAPTER 5 - CHALLENGES FOR CAUSE

"A fox should not be on the jury at a goose's trial."
-Thomas Fuller

A party has a right to challenge prospective jurors "for cause."¹ A challenge for cause is based upon either: (1) a fact that makes the juror unqualified under state statute; or (2) some aspect of the juror's background, experiences, beliefs, or opinions that prevents the juror from being fair and unbiased. In making a challenge for cause, you must specify the reason(s) for the challenge.² Unlike with peremptory challenges, you have an unlimited number of challenges for cause. When you make the challenge, you have the burden of demonstrating that the venire person is subject to disqualification.³

Your challenge for cause will be successful if you can demonstrate that the juror does not satisfy the statutory requirements for jury ser-vice.⁴ In Illinois, a juror must be: (1) of "fair character [and] approved integrity;" (2) a citizen of the United States; (3) an inhabitant of the county; (4) at least 18 years of age; and (5) able to speak, read, and write the English language. In addition, a juror will be excused for cause if she is not one of the regular panel, is a party to a pending lawsuit, or has served as a juror in the county within the past year.⁵ Also, a juror should be excused for cause if he or she is so biased or prejudiced that he or she cannot render a fair and impartial verdict based on the law and the evidence presented.⁶

Again, you are not limited in the number of challenges for cause. Therefore, if you do not favor a particular prospective juror, you should first consider potential challenges for cause to excuse him or her. Since a prospective juror is presumed to be qualified, you will bear the burden of showing bias by a preponderance of the evidence. A mere suspicion is not sufficient.⁷ Your challenge can only be sustained with the presentation of evidence. Thus, some refer to the presentation of evidence and argument on the challenge as "trying the challenge."

Here are some examples of successful challenges for cause:

• The Juror has a set opinion on the merits of the case or a determinative fact in the case.⁸
• The prospective juror has a prejudice against a class of people to which the plaintiff or defendant is a member.⁹
• In a medical malpractice case against a football team's physician, a juror who worked with the defendant-physician in his role as a doctor for the juror's dance team.¹⁰
• A juror who was the wife of a police captain who had assigned officers to investigate the case and she knew 8 of 14 of the witnesses.¹¹
• A juror who was represented by the attorney for defendant-physician in medical malpractice case.¹²
• A juror who could not say her background would not cloud her judgment and expressed no confidence in her claim that she would try to be fair.¹³
• A juror who has potential for a substantial emotional involvement adversely affecting impartiality.¹⁴ The