2 PJI 11.1 | CHARGE TO A HUNG JURY
This case is important to the parties. The trial has been expensive in terms of time, effort, money and emotional strain to both the plaintiff and the defense. If you fail to agree on a verdict, the case is left open and may have to be tried again. A second trial would be costly to both sides, and there is no reason to believe that the case can be tried again, by either side, better or more exhaustively than it has been tried before you.
Any future jury would be selected in the same manner and from the same source as you were chosen. There is no reason to believe that the case could ever be submitted to a jury of people more conscientious, more impartial, or more competent to decide it or that more or clearer evidence could be produced on behalf of either side.
As I stated in my previous instructions, it is your duty to consult with one another and to deliberate with a view to reaching agreement if you can do so without violence to your individual judgment. Each of you must decide the case for yourself, but you should do so only after considering the evidence with your fellow jurors.
In the course of your deliberations you should not hesitate to reexamine your own views, and to change your opinion if you are convinced that it is wrong. To reach a unanimous result you must examine the questions submitted to you openly and frankly, with proper regard to the opinions of others and with a disposition to reexamine your own views. Each of you ought to consider whether your own position is a reasonable one if it makes so little impression upon the minds of other equally honest and conscientious fellow jurors who bear the same responsibility, serve under the same oath, and have heard the same evidence. Of course, you must not surrender your honest convictions as to the weight or effect of the evidence solely because of the opinions of other jurors or for the mere purpose of returning a verdict.
You may conduct your deliberations as you choose, but I suggest that you carefully reexamine and consider all the evidence in the case bearing upon the questions before you in light of my instructions on the law.
You may be as leisurely in your deliberations as the occasion may require and you may take all the time that you feel is necessary.
I remind you that in your deliberations you are to consider the instructions I have given to you as a whole. You should not single out any part of any instruction, including this one, and ignore others.
You may now go back to the jury room and continue your deliberations.
Footnotes
The First Circuit approved the use of a civil Allen (Allen v. United States,164 U.S. 492 (1896)) charge in an unpublished decision, Scarpa v. Saggese, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 2229, at *5 (finding proper “substantially the same charge” approved in a criminal case, United States v. Nichols,820 F.2d 508, 511-12 (1st Cir. 1987)). Other circuits include civil Allen charges in their pattern instructions. see Third Circuit, General Instructions for Civil Cases § 3.4; Eighth Circuit, Model Civil Jury Instructions § 3.07; Ninth Circuit, Model Civil Jury Instructions § 3.5; Eleventh Circuit, Pattern Jury Instructions (Civil Cases) § 9. The former Fifth Circuit approved of the use of civil Allen charges in Brooks v. Bay State Abrasive Products, Inc., 516 F.2d 1003, 1004 (5th Cir. 1975), which was cited in United States v. Chigbo,38 F.3d 543, 546 (11th Cir. 1994). In Brooks, the court stated that it approved the use of an Allen charge if it makes clear to members of the jury that (1) they are duty bound to adhere to honest opinions; and (2) they are doing nothing improper by maintaining a good faith opinion even though a mistrial may result. see also Railway Exp. Agency v. Mackay,181 F.2d 257, 262-63 (8th Cir. 1950); Hill v. Wabash Ry. Co.,1 F.2d 626, 631-32 (8th Cir. 1924).
You might need to reference it during your pursuit of justice.
For instance, you might need to examine this item in order to protect yourself from organizations/judges/lawyers who break the law (see this example of a Florida judge who outright committed perjury).
Nevertheless – and as always – please get the justice you deserve.
Sincerely,
www.TextBookDiscrimination.com
