FAQs

    Our system of justice depends upon the participation and support of all citizens. Jury service is among our most important duties as American citizens. By willingly serving when called to jury duty, each of us helps to ensure that disputes are resolved fairly and impartially by a jury of the litigant’s peers.

    Most court cases take a long time and involve lots of evidence. In nearly all cases, most people would agree with the decisions of the juries if they had the opportunity to sit with the jury and see all the evidencefirsthand. In the rare situation in which a jury makes a mistake,  the trial judge and the appellate courts are there to correct the problem.

    It is also important to remember that jurors are required to take an oath, before qualifying as jurors, that they as individuals 1) will not make a decision about the merits of any particular case until all of the evidence has been presented; and 2) will make a decision based solely upon the evidence presented in court, under oath, and not from any other source. In spite of this unbiased system, however, the media inadvertently or otherwise encourages the general public to have an opinion on a particular jury verdict based solely upon what is printed in the paper or seen on television. The media is rarely present for an entire trial, and thus, is not in a position to create value judgments about the merits of any particular case. The television viewers and the newspaper readers, in turn, have even less information on which to base an opinion about a fair and reasonable verdict. Therefore, opinion based on limited information should not serve as the basis for an attack on a jury verdict, much less the entire system.

15.    The jury system is not worth keeping.

    Jurors have always played a key role in the United States’ legal system  and democratic traditions. For over 200 years, our country has been unique in having juries of ordinary citizens decide both civil disputes and criminal cases.  Citizen juries give legitimacy to our justice system because facts are determined and verdicts are reached by ordinary people of varying backgrounds and life experiences. Throughout our history, American juries have asserted the conscience of the community against unjust laws, arbitrary government authority and social wrongs. Juries have been responsible for verdicts which have generated public recognition of problems with products like asbestos and defective heart valves, and promoted greater product safety.

   Our founding fathers thought a jury was so important to the workings of a democracy and the protection of individual liberties that they protected the jury system in three different places in the Constitution and Bill of Rights. Thomas Jefferson said: “I consider trial by jury as the only anchor yet imagined by man by which government can be held to the principles of its constitution.”

16.     Lawyers are selfish and greedy.

    The legal profession has a long  tradition of volunteerism. All across Mississippi, thousands of lawyers give generously of their time and expertise to help our state’s low‑income residents. Annually, lawyers in Mississippi donate millions of dollars of legal services to persons who otherwise could not afford them.

    Lawyers care about their communities, and their service extends far beyond legal work. A 2001 survey found that in addition to providing pro bono (free) legal assistance to poor people, Mississippi lawyers participate in community‑services organizations, tutor or teach, and coach sports. They also work as volunteer fire fighters, serve on volunteer search‑and‑rescue teams, volunteer at hospitals, work at food banks and community shelters, and participate in many other service activities.

    In addition, lawyers care about those who have lost money or property in those rare cases when a Mississippi lawyer was dishonest or mishandled a client’s money.  The Bar’s Clients’ Security Fund makes a payment to those who have suffered a direct financial loss caused by the dishonest conduct of a lawyer in connection with the practice of law. The fund is financed entirely by lawyers and not tax dollars.

17.     Lawyers stir up litigation for their  own personal profit.

    Most legal cases are not the result of lawyers advising clients to sue, but are the result of circumstances in which the parties have no choice but to get legal help. Criminal and family law cases (including divorce) are by far the majority of cases handled by our courts. Real estate transactions, setting up small businesses, collections, tax problems – the largest part of legal work – all come from people who seek out legal advice on their own.

    People usually think of personal injury cases, or class actions, when they suspect lawyers of stirring up litigation. In a personal‑injury case, it is the victim who seeks out the lawyer for help. Even then, court rules and Mississippi Rules of Professional Conduct prohibit an attorney from starting any lawsuit until he or she has made a “reasonable inquiry” into the facts, and determined that the case is “well‑grounded in facts.” A lawyer can start and pursue class‑action cases. However, class actions are a very small percentage of all cases, and very few lawyers work on them.

18.     Huge punitive damage awards are frequent and on the rise.

    Surprisingly few Mississippi citizens understand that punitive damages are neither frequent nor on the rise, and they are allowed only to punish very reprehensible conduct. According to William Glaberson, “When the Verdict is Just a Fantasy” (Sunday, The New York Times, Section 4, p. 1, June 6, 1999), astudy of the courts in the nation’s 75 largest counties conducted by the National Center for State Courts found that only 364 out of 762,000 cases resulted in awards of punitive damages – only about 0.047 percent! Glaberson reports:   “... a study of 16 states by the same center showed that the number of liabilitysuits has declined by nine percent since 1986.”

    Each year over 22,000 lawsuits are filed in the circuit courts of Mississippi. Overwhelmingly, these are resolved reasonably and satisfactorily to all involved. Only a handful results in verdicts which attract media attention. On occasion, one of these will be sensationalized. These verdicts are the exception, not the rule.