Blog
The Juror You Overlooked:
Hidden Risks in Corporate Litigation
By Dr. Kelly C. Anthony, Ph.D.
President & Director of Research | Litigation Research Group
A Subtle Voir Dire Moment
During voir dire in a high-stakes chemical liability case in the northeastern U.S., we observed a familiar yet revealing exchange. One prospective juror declared, “Big corporations are the backbone of the economy.” It was a confident, business-friendly statement.
Plaintiff counsel sought to strike him for cause—yet the judge denied the request. A peremptory strike followed, and the defense quietly sighed in relief. On the surface, this aligns with long-held assumptions: that pro-business attitudes often signal defense advantage.
But are we too reliant on those assumptions?
Rethinking Conventional Wisdom
For decades, jury selection doctrine taught us that one’s views on large corporations often correlate with verdict leanings. A juror skeptical of corporate power would likely lean plaintiff; one who trusts big business could be counted on to favor the defense.
However, evolving studies and field observations suggest this correlation is shifting—particularly when Millennials make up a growing share of jury pools. Among younger jurors, a favorable opinion toward corporations doesn’t always translate to support for corporate defendants. In fact, in certain high-exposure cases, it can result in more plaintiff-leaning verdicts—especially when companies fail to meet elevated expectations of accountability.
Generational Dynamics at Play
Millennials today often demonstrate nuanced judgments:
While they may respect innovation and economic contribution, they also demand integrity and social responsibility.
A juror who values corporations may still hold them to a higher standard and punish failure more severely.
If this shift persists, defense teams may be overvaluing pro-business jurors, and plaintiffs may be overlooking potential allies.
Practice Implications for Voir Dire
Don’t assume corporate favorability equals defense lean. Test it instead.
Probe juror expectations. Ask why they respect large businesses, and what actions might compromise that respect.
Watch for influence—not just bias. A quiet juror with mild corporate sentiment may be less dangerous than a vocal, charismatic one with mixed views.
Moral of the Story
The most dangerous juror isn’t always the one who dislikes your case—it’s the one everyone listens to when he turns. Corporate trust without critical examination is no longer guaranteed defense territory. Today’s juries—especially younger ones—think differently.
Stay strategic. Empathy and insight can matter more than assumptions