Online Jury Case

The below cited case is an actual pending case. The names have been changed to protect the parties. To participate in the online jury, carefully read the facts and arguments. Then render your verdict and answer the questions at the end of the case. We purposely did not indicate the identity of the party that we represent in order to reduce the possibility that your verdict might be affected by that information. Thank you for participating.

General Background

This case involves a civil action brought by the Smiths against Construction Corp. and John Doe for injuries sustained when Mr. Smith was severely injured on a construction site when he was placed in a choke-hold by Mr. Doe. It is not disputed that Mr. Smith is now severely disabled and will be forever confined to a wheelchair. The plaintiffs contend that the defendants used excessive force and therefore are liable to the plaintiffs for the injuries to Mr. Smith, his medical expenses and Mrs. Smith’s loss of the society and companionship of her husband. The defendants contend that reasonable force was used and that they are not liable to the plaintiffs.

The Smiths' Position

John Smith is married to Mary Smith. Mr. Smith, at the time of this incident was 44 years of age. He was a self-employed framing contractor performing work at a construction site. Mr. Smith got into an altercation with one of his employees, Mr. Jones, concerning work performed by Mr. Jones the previous day. The altercation finished and Mr. Jones left. A short while later Mr. Smith became involved in a verbal confrontation with the defendant John Doe. Mr. Doe, who previously boasted of having expertice in martial arts and of having been in the United States Marines (not true), put Mr. Smith in a choke-hold causing Mr. Smith to sustain a carotid artery dissection. Mr. Doe is reported to have said “See how quick that was” as Mr. Smith collapsed to the ground. Mr. Smith has undergone multiple surgeries including the removal of part of his skull and part of his brain, has suffered brain damage and is paralyzed on one side of his body. Mr. Smith is now confined to a wheelchair and must wear a helmet at all times due to a large portion of the skull having been removed. The medical bills to date exceed $1,000,000.00. Future medical expenses can be expected to be the same. Mr. Smith requires around- the-clock care which is being provided by his wife Mary Smith. The Smiths contend that the force used by Mr. Doe was excessive and Mr. Doe was negligent in attempting to restrain Mr. Smith in such a manner. The Smiths contend that Mr. Doe’s employer, Construction Corp. is liable for the negligence of Mr. Doe. The plaintiffs, John Smith and Mary Smith, seek damages for medical expenses, loss of earning capacity, pain and suffering, disfigurement, emotional distress and loss of consortium.

One of the plaintiff’s experts is an instructor and an expert in martial arts, the use of force and restraining holds. He will testify as to the known dangers in the use of choke-holds including to the carotid artery and the known risks of brain damage and death with improperly applied holds and will testify as to the reasons that such holds are not taught to or permitted by police officers in Massachusetts. He will testify that John Doe used excessive, and in fact deadly force in applying a choke hold upon John Smith. He will demonstrate the application of restraining holds including the holds used by the defendant John Doe.

Statement of Construction Corp.

The plaintiff, John Smith, aggressively provoked a confrontation with several other workers on the jobsite, including John Doe and his co-workers on the morning of the accident. Prior to that confrontation he had been involved in a fight with one of his own employees. Immediately prior to the incident, Smith had repeatedly verbally threatened Doe and co-workers, at times shouting that he would “kill” them. Smith verbally and physically threatened Doe’s co-workers, prompting Doe to take reasonable steps to defend the co-worker and himself from threatened violence and serious physical harm. Doe took steps to subdue Smith. Smith continued to verbally threaten those around him, including Doe, even while Doe subdued him.

Defense Argument

Mr. Smith caused this incident by his own aggressive behavior. He was out of control with anger and rage on the morning of this incident. Mr. Smith was in the process of assaulting Mr. Doe, at which point Mr. Doe responded by acting in self-defense and applied a non-lethal maneuver in an effort to restrain Mr. Smith.

Plaintiffs’ Argument

The Smiths contend that even if all of the defense allegations were found to be true, which they deny, the force applied was excessive, and less dangerous forms of quelling the disturbance should have been utilized. Mr. Smith’s treating physician will testify that it was the choke-hold, and not a blow to the head, that damaged the carotid artery and stopped the flow of blood to the brain and caused the brain damage. However bad the defendants contend Mr. Smith’s behavior was in the weeks before this incident, he did not deserve to have such devestating, permanent injuries inflicted.

Render your verdict