Schmidt, Sethi & Akmajian Blog

(520) 790-5600

ABA Allows Lawyers to Look at Juror's Social Media Presence

Posted by Dev Sethi | Apr 29, 2014 | 0 Comments

Can a Lawyer Google a Potential Juror?

It's 9:00am Tuesday morning, and I am getting ready to start a jury trial. The Court Clerk hands me a stack of slips of paper with brief biographical information on my jury pool. Can I google these names and look at the internet presence of these folks? Can I look at their blogs? Facebook? LinkedIn?

Social media is an every growing presence in our lives, and this question has been simmering for a while. The American Bar Association has now weighed in, offering guidance in Formal Opinion 466. You can read it here.

Balancing a lawyer's legitimate task of uncovering improper juror bias and prejudice and ethical rules prohibiting ex parte and improper communication with jurors, the ABA's Formal Opinion concludes that a juror's or potential juror's publicly available information on the internet may be viewed by lawyers. If the lawyer discovers evidence of misconduct that is criminal or fraudulent in the process, the lawyer must take reasonable remedial measures including, if necessary, telling the court.

This Opinion follows the lead of many individual state bar organizations that have considered the issue. Essentially the approach allows lawyers to google jurors and look at anything that is otherwise publicly available. Lawyers are not allowed to make direct contact with the potential jurors online, nor are they allowed to do anything deceptive in their research.

A stickier question was also addressed – if the internet research will alert the potential juror that the lawyer has been looking, is that allowed? For example, when you look at a Facebook profile, the owner never knows you have visited their site. On the other hand, LinkedIn, a popular social network with a business focus, does report to the owner the identity of visitors. The Opinion concludes that even though the lawyer's research may become known to the potential juror, it is allowed. This one way look does not reach the level of prohibited contact.

Of course, what a potential juror might think of lawyers reviewing their social media presence remains unknown, and may certainly be the focus of some pre-trial forethought. I can certainly see jurors being turned off, if not outright upset, to learn that one of the lawyers in the case was snooping.

About the Author

Dev Sethi

Dev Sethi litigates and tries a wide-range of complex injury and death cases throughout Arizona. He has Martindale Hubbell's highest rating, AV, and he is listed in "Best Lawyers." Dev is also recognized as an Arizona Super Lawyer in the area of plaintiff's products liability litigation.Dev has been at the forefront of auto product defect litigation. He played a key role in uncovering the Goodyear Load Range E tire scandal and worked to hold Ford Motor Company responsible for the danger posed by their now notorious 15-passenger vans. Dev is currently representing families in product liability suits against the nation's largest corporations including General Motors, Ford, Pentair Pools and Invacare.


There are no comments for this post. Be the first and Add your Comment below.

Leave a Comment

Schmidt, Sethi & Akmajian

Schmidt, Sethi & Akmajian is one of the most experienced, successful personal injury law firms in the Tucson area. Established in 1995, our firm has a long history of success, as seen in our many victories.