Legal Definitions - propter affectum

Propter affectum is a Latin legal term that refers to a reason for challenging or disqualifying a potential juror based on a presumed bias or partiality. This challenge is made "on account of affection" or "on account of bias," meaning that a specific relationship or circumstance inherently suggests the juror might not be able to render an impartial verdict, even if they personally claim they can be fair and objective.

It's a type of "challenge for cause," where the law recognizes that certain connections or situations create an unacceptable risk of prejudice, making the individual unsuitable for jury service in that particular case.

• Example 1: Family Relationship

  During jury selection for a criminal trial, it is revealed that a potential juror is the sibling of a key witness for the prosecution. The defense attorney could raise a propter affectum challenge.

  This illustrates the term because, despite the potential juror's assurances of impartiality, the close family tie creates a strong presumption of bias. The law recognizes that such a relationship inherently carries a risk of emotional connection or loyalty that could sway their judgment, making them unsuitable for jury service in that specific case.

• Example 2: Employer-Employee Relationship

  In a civil lawsuit where a large manufacturing company is the defendant, a potential juror discloses that they are a manager at that very company. The plaintiff's attorney could challenge this juror based on propter affectum.

  This situation demonstrates propter affectum because the employment relationship creates a potential conflict of interest. There's a concern that the juror might feel loyalty to their employer, fear professional repercussions, or have a vested interest in the company's success, which could prevent them from objectively evaluating the evidence against the corporation.

• Example 3: Direct Financial Interest

  A lawsuit involves a dispute over a significant patent held by a technology startup. A potential juror is discovered to be a major investor in that same startup. Either party could challenge this juror using propter affectum.

  This example highlights propter affectum because the juror's substantial financial investment in one of the litigants creates a direct personal interest in the outcome of the case. This inherent financial stake makes it difficult to believe they could remain entirely neutral and unbiased, regardless of their personal assurances of fairness.