I was Juror #230. There was no “compounding of the issue.” No mention was made of $10 million. I related that the wall thickness of the tubing product was TEN MILS. Everything I said was recorded and the judge was contacted to correct his order.
I was Juror #230. No instructions about online research were given. We had yet to meet any judge. The clerk foolishly told us what courtroom we’d be in, so the docket could be found online. I was just curious about who the parties were.
We have updated our privacy policy to be more clear and meet the new requirements of the GDPR. By continuing to use our site, you accept our revised Privacy Policy.
I was Juror #230. There was no “compounding of the issue.” No mention was made of $10 million. I related that the wall thickness of the tubing product was TEN MILS. Everything I said was recorded and the judge was contacted to correct his order.
I was Juror #230. No instructions about online research were given. We had yet to meet any judge. The clerk foolishly told us what courtroom we’d be in, so the docket could be found online. I was just curious about who the parties were.