Tennessee Supreme Court hears arguments on burden for juror-misconduct claims under Rule 606(b)

The Tennessee Supreme Court heard oral argument in Knoxville on whether the party challenging a jury verdict must prove juror misconduct affected the verdict by clear and convincing evidence or by a preponderance, and how courts should apply the Adams factors and Rule 606(b).

The question arose in an appeal from a second jury trial over patient treatment decisions in which a juror reported seeing a medication warning label during deliberations. Defense counsel Grant Lewellen told the court that “the proper burden is clear and convincing evidence,” and urged the court to adopt an objective framework using factors from Adams and Patton to assess whether extraneous information was prejudicial and impactful. Plaintiff counsel Rachel Hurt said that, under the facts here, “the validity of the verdict is unquestioned” if the court applies a preponderance standard and that the juror-disclosed material was repeated during trial by multiple experts.

Why it matters: The court’s choice of standard and framework governs when trial courts should order new trials for juror misconduct statewide. Lawyers and judges said a higher burden narrows new-trial relief and protects jury finality; challengers said the Adams approach with a rebuttable presumption better protects a litigant’s right to a fair trial where extraneous prejudicial information reaches the jury.

Arguments and record details

Grant Lewellen, who said he…