New York Law (NYLE) Practice Exam

If an issue arises regarding potential bias from a jury member, what can parties do?

1. Challenge the juror for cause.

2. Request a mistrial immediately.

3. Express their concerns to the judge without formal motion.

4. All of the above.

The correct answer is: Challenge the juror for cause.

The appropriate course of action when a party believes there is potential bias from a jury member is to challenge the juror for cause. This process involves formally requesting that the juror be removed from the jury pool due to a demonstrated potential for bias or an inability to be impartial. This challenge can be based on various grounds, such as a juror’s personal experiences, preconceived notions about the case, or prior knowledge that could prevent them from making an unbiased decision. Challenging for cause is a structured process defined by the rules of procedure and allows the party to present their concerns specifically to the judge. If the judge finds the challenge valid, they will dismiss the juror from the panel, maintaining the integrity of the trial. While parties could request a mistrial if they feel the bias has impacted the trial significantly, this is typically seen as a more extreme measure and would not be the first step taken unless the situation is severe. Expressing concerns to the judge without making a formal motion might seem informal and may not provide the necessary clarity or record for addressing the bias properly. Therefore, the challenge for cause is the most appropriate and effective first response to allegations of jury bias.