Tort Law

This page within Virginia Tort Case Law is a compilation of cases on jury function reported by the Virginia Supreme Court and summarized by Brien Roche dealing with the topic of Jury Function.  For more information about juries see the pages on Wikipedia.

Jury Function-Cases

2006 Bethel Inv. Co. v. City of Hampton, 272 Va. 765, 636 S.E.2d 466. 

In this property damage action, city raised limitation issue as to when did the cause of action arise. Trial court allowed city to present evidence on that issue that was disputed and based its granting of the motion on that disputed evidence. Plaintiff was entitled to a trial by jury on those disputed facts as that is jury function.

2000 Cooper Indus., Inc. v. Melendez, 260 Va. 578, 537 S.E.2d 580.

After jury returned verdict, jury was polled and one member indicated dissent. Jury was then sent back and upon being polled again, verdict was unanimous. Trial court was in better position than supreme court to evaluate jury and decision in this regard will not be overturned.

1989 Ethridge v. Medical Center Hosps., 237 Va. 87, 376 S.E.2d 525.

Sole function of jury is resolution of disputed facts.

1972 Hodge v. American Family Life Assur. Co., 213 Va. 30, 189 S.E.2d 351.

Trier of fact may not arbitrarily disregard uncontradicted evidence of unimpeached witnesses, which is not inherently incredible and not inconsistent with facts appearing in record, even though such witnesses are interested in outcome of case.

1955 Petcosky v. Bowman, 197 Va. 240, 89 S.E.2d 4.

Where jury cannot agree, it is within discretion of court to urge earnest effort to agree, and in so doing judge can refer to expense of trial, time and trouble involved in litigation, and to fact that case would have to be decided by some jury. It is all proper so long as judge makes it clear no juror must surrender his conscience. Also, juror is not disqualified because of relation to one of counsel in case.