Legal Definitions - challenge for cause

A challenge for cause is a formal request made by an attorney to a judge, asking for a prospective juror to be excused from jury service. This request is based on a specific, legally recognized reason indicating that the individual cannot be impartial or fulfill their duties fairly during the trial. The judge evaluates the stated reason and decides whether the potential juror should be removed.

• Example 1: Financial Interest

  During jury selection for a civil lawsuit where a large pharmaceutical company is the defendant, a potential juror discloses that they own a significant amount of stock in that very company. The plaintiff's attorney might then make a challenge for cause.

  This illustrates a challenge for cause because the juror's financial stake in the defendant company could reasonably be seen as creating a bias, making it difficult for them to impartially evaluate the evidence and arguments presented against that company. Their personal financial interest could conflict with their duty to be an unbiased fact-finder.

• Example 2: Strong Personal Experience

  In a criminal trial involving a charge of domestic assault, a potential juror reveals during questioning that they were a victim of severe domestic violence in the past and express strong emotional reactions when discussing the topic, stating they find it hard to believe anyone accused of such a crime could be innocent.

  This demonstrates a challenge for cause because the juror's deeply personal and traumatic experience, coupled with their expressed difficulty in considering innocence, suggests a strong pre-existing bias. This bias could prevent them from objectively weighing the evidence and applying the presumption of innocence, which is fundamental to a fair trial.

• Example 3: Inability to Follow Legal Instructions

  For a trial involving a complex intellectual property dispute, a potential juror admits during voir dire (jury selection) that they have a strong personal belief that all patents stifle innovation and should be abolished, and that they would struggle to apply patent law as instructed by the judge, regardless of the evidence.

  This is an example of a challenge for cause because the juror's stated philosophical opposition to the very legal framework central to the case indicates an inability to follow the judge's instructions on the law. A juror's duty includes applying the law as given by the court, and their refusal to do so would compromise the fairness of the proceedings.