 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Saxon v. Stokes2/22/2005
Submitted February 1, 2005
AFFIRMED
In this medical malpractice action, we must decide whether the trial court erred in seating two jurors, one of whom identified herself as a current patient of the Respondent physician and the other who identified himself as a former patient of another physician in the Respondent's medical practice. Over Appellant's objection, the trial judge impaneled these jurors. We find no abuse of discretion and affirm the trial judge's ruling.
FACTS/PROCEDURAL HISTORY
Appellant James Bruce Saxon, Jr., brought this medical malpractice action against Respondent Curtis Stokes, M.D. At the time this case was brought to trial, Dr. Stokes was one of six doctors practicing general medicine at Walterboro Family Practice, P.A., in Colleton County. Walterboro Family Practice, however, was not a party to this action.
During jury venire, the trial judge asked the pool of potential jurors whether they had any connection with Dr. Stokes or the other physicians or employees of Walterboro Family Practice. Twenty-nine jurors responded affirmatively. When individually questioned by the trial judge, some jurors indicated they were current or longstanding patients of Dr. Stokes or the other physicians in his practice, while others responded they were treated only once or twice by these doctors--in some cases, years ago.
Saxon requested that all jurors who were being treated by Dr. Stokes and his associates be stricken for cause, arguing this doctor-patient relationship would unavoidably hinder these jurors' ability to view the case impartially. The trial judge disagreed, finding all but one of the twenty-nine affected jurors--based on their responses--could serve fairly and impartially.
As the jury was being drawn, Saxon used all four of his peremptory strikes to excuse jurors who had identified themselves as having a connection to Dr. Stokes or his medical practice associates. However, two of the affected jurors were drawn after all of the peremptory strikes had been exhausted. These two jurors--juror number 125 and juror number 158--were both impaneled on the jury despite Saxon's general objection that any juror who had been treated by Dr. Stokes or his associates be struck from the jury.
During the initial jury venire, both juror 125 and juror 158 were individually questioned by the trial judge. Juror 125 identified herself as a current patient of Dr. Stokes:
JUROR: My name is Robertson, 125.
THE COURT: Thank you. Ms. Robertson, whom is it that you recognize?
JUROR: Dr. Stokes and also Dr. Hyatt.
THE COURT: And are they your family physicians?
JUROR: Yes, sir.
THE COURT: And are you -- have you seen them in the last six months?
JUROR: Yes, sir.
THE COURT: And as a result of that type of relationship you have with those doctors, can you be fair and impartial to both the Plaintiff and Defendant in connection with this case?
JUROR: Yes, I can.
Juror 158 identified himself as a former patient of another physician practicing with Dr. Stokes:
THE COURT: Yes, sir?
JUROR: James Walker, Number 158.
THE COURT: Yes, sir, Mr. Walker. Whom do you recognize?
JUROR: Dr. Johnson used to be my doctor many years ago.
THE COURT: And as a result of that type of relationship, can you be fair and impartial to the Plaintiff and to the Defendant?
JUROR: Yes.
Both of these jurors were impaneled on the twelve-member jury that decided the case--finding in favor of Dr. St
Page 1 2 3 South Carolina Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|