Lars you got me thinking of changing my address to our camp and keeping my husbands address in Pgh for property tax purposes . I wouldn't mind jury duty in the county our camp is in. The closest town to camp is the county seat. Rush hour is 5 cars at a red light on main street and I can park at the meters for $1 for 8 hours. There are side streets I can park for free. They have the one day/one trial like my home county. PA cut off age is 75.

We also have the One Day/One Trial system here in CA. They say it's to make it more convenient, but being chosen for that one trial can be lengthy. For me the longest was 9 weeks. There are lots of people who simply could not do it, and the courts should be better with understanding that. I wouldn't call it selfish.

Hope @Lindsey_CA experience will also convince everyone to always wear a seat belt in vehicle, even if going slowly, or very short distance.

Yes, as @mdln surmised, I was not wearing my seat belt (the ONLY time I haven't worn a seatbelt!) because I was being given a short ride to my car from the first (ground) level of a parking garage to the uppermost level. The only time (a few seconds) we were out of the garage and on a public street was when we pulled out of the ground level into the street and made a U-turn onto the ramp/driveway going to the upper levels. There was no other traffic around at all. As far as speed is concerned, I understand that deaths have been recorded in accidents at only 6 mph, so lack of speed doesn't necessarily mean lack of danger.

If the court thinks that the post office delivers all mail to the correct address, then the court is not interested in facts. My brother never received his summons and he never received the second notice, since we were in Cathedral City and were having our mail forwarded. These summonses did not get forwarded. We have proof of when our mail was being forwarded, and I also have proof of what was and was not delivered in Cathedral City, using the post office's "informed delivery".

The court seems to be confusing snail mail with email. No wonder there is distrust of the court.

Personally, I do not think that people should be forced to serve against their will. These people would make poor jurors IMO, and there are plenty of people (from what I can see from other jury threads) who want to be on juries. I also think that 12 jurors is too many - why not limit it to the size of the SC? I think nine should be enough.

I do not feel a strong sense of civic duty after having to go through the army draft experience during the Vietnam War. I had to go to San Antonio for an army physical, and I very much opposed the war and had no intention of participating in it. I am opposed to guns and would never shoot anyone, even if that person wanted to shoot me. I would prefer to be shot rather than shoot someone in self defense. Therefore, I am not soldier material and never was. Fortunately, the draft board realized this and rejected me.

Not everyone is juror material either. I don't know whether I am or not, but the DA's seem to think that I am not.

Lindsey, the information you gave is incorrect. A summons is hand delivered. Something mailed is not legally a summons. Mail gets lost, delivered to wrong addresses, destroyed.

Jury duty notices are not summons even though they may state they are. They are regular mail. There is no way they would be considered a summons.

This is a simple decision. No one is required to respond to anything sent in the mail You never received it, how can it be proved it was delivered? It can't and therefore is not legal.

Throw them out. You are not responsible to respond to something you never received.

Jane

a "Proof of Service by Mail" form and the person doing the mailing simply fills it out stating what has been mailed, to whom it was mailed, and to what address it was mailed. It is then signed under penalty of perjury, and filed with the court.

this is also true in illinois although the proof of service gives options as to method of delivery, i.e., U.S. mail, hand delivery, e-mail.

also, it's correct that the initial summons is accompanied by a copy of the complaint and, at least in illinois, must be served either by the sheriff's office or a private process server. subsequent "orders" to appear in court on a particular case are done via subpoena which can be mailed or hand-delivered by nobody in particular.

Lindsey....I'm sorry that happened to you. If I'd been on the jury.....I would have given YOU the $300K. I see your point.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

My next door neighbor was riding his bicycle, In California, hit by a car....sued....got millions. The woman owned three rental houses....not any more! My neighbor made a full recovery. He's now living "large". He quit his job, retired.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Our court system seems rather messed up.

I'd never *shirk* my duty to serve. What kind of citizen is 'too inconvenienced' to do what's required of them in a democracy -- what they'd hope and pray others will do for them when they are in court! IDK why I'm surprised; how many Americans can be 'bothered' to *vote*?

DH and I have both served on juries several times. I also attended most days of a trial where the DH of a friend had been murdered by a disgruntled subordinante in his company -- where the jury 'bought' the testimony of a witness I thought was an obvious plant. 'Common sense' appeared to be sorely lacking in that jury, who just wanted the trial 'over'. The defendent's fiancee had paid a fortune for a famous defense attorney. The young Illinois prosecutor was no match for him and had no state resources to pursue an investigation of his miraculously discovered 'witness'.

"No one is required to respond to anything sent in the mail"

Sorry but the essence of this comment is untrue in more ways than I want to take the time to explain. Simply stated, it's incorrect.

Sure Elmer, I ignore every bill sent to me. Wondering why my credit rating is in the red and some guy came and repossessed my truck?

FWIW I've read some analysis of how our jury selection process tends to create groups of very poorly informed individuals deciding the fate of their fellow citizens.

I agree that the jury selection process could be improved, and more consideration needs to be given to prospective jurors IMO.

I've shown up for jury duty in the past, but I always got eliminated shortly after I sat down in the seat next to the judge. I don't know what it is that I say, but I always get disqualified. This is another reason why I don't want to waste my time going downtown, and yes it is a waste of everyone's time if I show up.

When the court forces people to serve on juries against their will, you will end up with juries who just want the trial over. You cannot change people by trying to lecture them about their civic duties. They either care or they don't care, and I would never want a jury of people who did not care and did not want to be on the jury.

My brother always shows up, and he also gets eliminate shortly after he sits down. Some people are simply not considered jury material by the courts, and many people get eliminated that I think should not.

I pay all my bills on line so that I do not have to depend on the post office to deliver them. The one exception is the pool service, and I keep a copy of an old invoice and know to send it in on the fourth of every month.

"If the document was said to have been mailed, it is deemed to have been received. No ifs, ands, or buts."

Maybe deemed to be received but seemingly no follow-up with non-responders. As I previously posted, people will toss a jury summons, then toss the "Notice of Failure to Appear" that comes later. Nothing happens, so I'm curious regarding the "Proof of Service by Mail." What is the point when mixups with regular mail aren't exactly uncommon?

In CA the courts say failure to respond to a jury summons could result in a fine and/or incarceration. If that's true, and I've yet to ever see it happen, a jury summons should mandate more reliable delivery than regular mail.

"a jury summons should mandate more reliable delivery than regular mail."

Too expensive, won't happen.

I know that, Elmer. I'm just not clear with the "Proof of Service by Mail" when regular mail is used. What happens when a jury summons goes to the wrong address? On two occasions I've received them for other people living in our town. I gave them back to our mailman, but some people might have just tossed them. Where's the "proof" they ever got to the right address? I don't see how any punitive action can be taken against the actual recipients due to the "Proof of Service by Mail" form. Anyway, it seems to be a moot point since I've never heard of anyone ever being fined or arrested for not responding, at least here in CA.

Years ago I had a co-worker who did respond to her jury summons. She registered for jury duty and received the date she was to report. That day came and she just decided not to go. It was a couple weeks after that when she told me. I suggested she contact the court asap and just explain she got her reporting date mixed up. She never called and nothing ever happened to her. In her case I was pretty shocked she never heard from them. It seems if she got away with that, they're not likely to do much to people who toss a jury summons and never even register.

Jury duty is an inconvenience absolutely. im sorry more of us are unable to see the benefit of having a good pool of jurors to draw upon to keep a strong functioning legal system.

perhaps a reading from alexis de towuevile will refresh a perspective. https://www.dissentmagazine.org/article/we-the-jury

Certified mail costs $3.55 - much less than what jurors get paid per day. I think that this could easily be added to the court costs for a jury trial. If someone receives a summons via certified mail, they are more likely to take it seriously. Considering the large percentage (30-40% from my experience) of people who do not show up, this seems like a good remedy.

One time I got a jury summons in San Francisco and intended to go, but I got my dates mixed up and forgot to go. I told my psychiatrist about this, and he wrote me a note saying that I was not psychologically fit for jury duty, and I never got called again after that. Normally, when the court found out that I was seeing a psychiatrist every week, they didn't want me anyway.

I used to be emotionally unstable, but with 14 years of therapy, I have worked through that. I was originally diagnosed as "borderline schizophrenic" because of the hallucinations and delusions that I was experiencing, but fortunately those symptoms are much less frequent than they used to be. Due to what I now realize as delusions (I didn't when I was having them), I don't think I would have made a good juror. I think it was my civic duty not to serve under those conditions, although I did not think that at the time.

When I take certain medications, such as Claritin or erythromycin, I become paranoid schizophrenic again, and so I know to avoid those. At least now I am able to recognize when I am having delusions, although I still always have doubts. Sugar has a bad effect on me also, and so I try to avoid that for the most part.

I've been prescribed a lot of anti-anxiety medications, but I won't take most of them, due to side effects. My doctor also told me that I should no longer take Librium, which was the most effect drug for my symptoms, but the drugs prescribed to replace it are much worse IMO. I still have a supply of it, and when it runs out, I will demand a refill.

Chloebud, this is a smaller community. I was called for a trial where they had a larger than usual jury pool coming in, assuming many would be excused for a variety of reasons. Several of us had been there most of a very long second day and the jury still not completely chosen.

The door opened and a sheriff sort of handed a woman inside who I recognized as owner of a very good, very small restaurant. She also did catering. Quite popular. I should add this was first week of December, holiday happenings taking place all around. She literally had flour on her very flushed face and hands, hair all askew, chef's jacket under her coat where she almost appeared to be in scrubs. Clearly not happy. They had to have yanked her out of her establishment kitchen. She did not end up being chosen for that jury although I was.

^People should not have to endure that sort of hardship for jury duty.

During WWII, men were not drafted to go into the army if they had vital professions at home, and this included farming.

Elmer,

I live in Milwaukee County. There is no free parking.

They do include a list of parking spaces downtown near the courthouse, but the

cost is not compensated.

Over the lunch hour we were told we could go to the Milwaukee Public Museum gratis by showing our Jury ID. It was actually pretty interesting.

You have to know, depending on your community, hundreds of people may be summoned at once for a handful of trials - or maybe even just one. I'm pretty sure authorities are aware that many won't show and many will be dismissed.

"They had to have yanked her out of her establishment kitchen."

morz8, I've heard of people getting a knock on their door at home, although not anyone I know here in CA. I've lived here almost 60 years and have heard lots of people say they ignored a jury summons. I've not heard of a single fine, arrest and/or being escorted to court like the restaurant owner you mentioned. You also mentioned "a smaller community." That could definitely make a difference.

I agree with Lars regarding people taking certified mail much more seriously. I get the cost factor, but it could mean less cost and effort than searching down and dragging people in, if it came to that.

"Elmer,

I live in Milwaukee County. There is no free parking.

They do include a list of parking spaces downtown near the courthouse, but the cost is not compensated."

Is a token daily fee paid (it's usually not much) to compensate jurors for their time?

I suspect that's an outlier practice but think of your time and parking expense as your fair share contribution for the betterment of your community

I've never served on a jury because I've always had a valid reason to ask to be excused.

I was also irked by the fact that the requests were to serve in downtown Los Angeles, easily a commute of an hour in morning traffic -- more if I took a freeway flyer bus.

I used to see jurors in the West Los Angeles civic center walking during lunch hour. I don't know why I was called to go downtown when a closer alternative was available.

My late husband answered jury duty requests because his employer paid for his time off. He usually was dismissed because of his marxist-econ-professor look -- full beard, glasses, and wild hair.

Just Google it. Unless you are served in person, you are not legally responsible. Mail gets lost, sent to the wrong party, etc. It is not a legal document (even though it says it is...its not) No penalty of law.

Regular mail is not the way summons are served. They are served in person by a Marshall to the person being summoned.

Regular mail, even with signed receipt will not hold up in court. You do not need to respond to regular mail.

If they show up at your door with a summons and check your identity (license), you are served!

Just ask a lawyer. Mailed summons are not summons!

Jane

i have always wanted to serve on a jury but every time my name was drawn, i was excused immediately. it probably has something to do with the fact that i was a legal secretary and over the years, worked for both prosecutors and defense attorneys. oh yeah, and there was that thing about me being the wife of the prosecutor and eventually, that prosecutor becoming a circuit judge.

apparently, i didn't have a mind of my own. **rolls eyes**

"I don't know how they get people's addresses for jury duty..."

I think, at least in CA, addresses come from the DMV and voter registration.

ETA - I found this online but have never seen or heard of "personal service by a U.S. Marshal." Good grief, in CA that alone could keep U.S. Marshalls working overtime considering all the ignored jury summonses.

"The clerk or jury commission will first attempt mail service via registered, certified, or first-class mail addressed to the named individual at his or her usual residence or business address. If mail service is not effective, the clerk or jury commission will deliver the summons to the U.S. Marshal for personal service upon the named individual."

"If mail service is not effective, the clerk or jury commission will deliver the summons to the U.S. Marshal for personal service upon the named individual.""

In other words, if you don't respond to the mail, we'll come find you in person, but we will find you! There's no getting out of it.

I think I have a valid reason not to serve, but I will show up anyway if called. I believe it's an important civic duty.

"I believe it's an important civic duty."

Of course it is. It's very disappointing to hear the selfish attitudes and illogical rationalizations some have. I wonder what other laws and rules imposed to produce our civil societies some of these people believe apply to others but not to them.

I've been called up for jury duty three times. The first time, I was selected and served on a 3 week long civil case, winding up as jury foreperson. It was a fascinating experience and I am glad to have had it. No free parking and at that time the jury per diem was a paltry $20 per day - not enough to pay for a day's parking and barely enough to cover lunch (which was on us) and bus fare. Fortunately, my job at the time was also downtown and my employer fully supported this civic responsibility and I received full pay for my 3 week "vacation". Not many employers will do that.

The second call up was at the regional justice center, which was more than an hour and a half commute by car and who knows how long by bus (multiple busses!). I asked to be and was excused from that round.

The final call up was after I moved to a more rural area in a different county. Was not required to appear in person but was given a number to call daily unless you were called to appear in person or dismissed. I called the first two days - did not need to appear - and was dismissed on the third.

At my current age, it is unlikely I would be called again.

The fact is that many laws do not apply equally to all people. In the first place, no one under the age of 18 can be called for jury duty, and in CA people over 70 do not need a doctor's excuse for the medical condition. There is no upper age limit because (according to the govt) that would be discriminatory, but the govt has no problem with a minimum age limit.

When selective service laws were in effect, they applied only to men - no women were ever drafted into the army, even though women do serve.

There is an entire list of exclusions for jury duty, and so the law is not applied evenly. Here's a partial list

• having no reasonable transportation.
• excessive travel to attend.
• extreme financial burden.
• undue risk to physical property.
• mental or physical impairment for those over 70.
• no alternate care for another.

At the end of my career, I had morphed into private practice and had a business where I was solo - If I had been called for jury duty, I would have been in dire straits. Lucky for me that never happened. I had no employer to cover my costs. I had a friend who got seated on a grand jury in Boston. He had to go there for several months. That's ridiculous.

It's very disappointing to hear the selfish attitudes and illogical rationalizations some have. I wonder what other laws and rules imposed to produce our civil societies some of these people believe apply to others but not to them.

There's a significant financial burden involved if an empolyer does not pay for days missed for jury duty. Many cannot afford that loss of income.

^^^ that is very true. Back in 1999 I was called for jury duty and got selected for a second degree murder trial that lasted 8 days including deliberation time. At the time I was a contract programmer working on a Y2K system upgrade. I only got paid for the actual hours I worked. In those 8 days I lost $3200 in gross pay.

I think it is understandable that some people have family commitments or financial issues that make jury duty an abnormal hardship.

But if we are talking simply irritation or a couple days‘ inconvenience i get very depressed. i hope anyone who just flat rules out responding to a summons does not also display the flag or ”want to take back their country”

What would be a better system? trial by only a judge? only select the independently wealthy? if your loved ones murder trial extends for weeks or months bring in a fresh jury every two days? i dont know what i would do if i had to spend months on a jury. my business would implode. but im not gonna whine over paying for parking in order to live in a democracy with a moderately flawed legal system.

"Just Google it. Unless you are served in person, you are not legally responsible. Mail gets lost, sent to the wrong party, etc. It is not a legal document (even though it says it is...its not) No penalty of law."

I did as you suggested, and did a Google search. This is what came up:

I didn't really need to do a Google search, because I am married to an attorney and I worked as a legal secretary and paralegal in a couple different law offices. My comments are directed to what happens in California, as that is my only experience with the law, although I did work for a law firm that has offices in New York as well as California. I'm rather curious as to what @jane__ny's experience is. And documents issued by a court that say they are a legal document are - guess what - a legal document.

"Regular mail is not the way summons are served. They are served in person by a Marshall to the person being summoned."

A Summons and Complaint (lawsuit) are usually served in person, although there are exceptions allowed. And they don't have to be served by a Marshall. Per California Code of Civil Procedure §414.10, the person serving needs to be over the age of 18 and not a party to the action, but that's it as far as requirements go. They don't even need to be paid to do it. A subpoena, on the other hand, does require being served in person if the subpoena requires an appearance. And if the subpoena requires an appearance, an appearance fee and mileage must be paid to the subpoenaed person at the time the subpoena is served. A Subpoena Duces Tecum is for documents, and those do not have to be served in person.

"Regular mail, even with signed receipt will not hold up in court. You do not need to respond to regular mail."

Oh, you are so wrong.

"If they show up at your door with a summons and check your identity (license), you are served!

Just ask a lawyer. Mailed summons are not summons!"

You seem to be confusing a summons for a lawsuit, subpoenas, and a jury duty summons.

I've been called to jury duty 5 times and served 4. My experience is judges can really vary when it comes to financial hardship requests. Not everyone can afford to spend 9 weeks on a jury. The judge I mentioned who said no one would be excused for financial reasons unless they were losing their house was completely out of line IMO. People have lives and obligations, and it can take a lot less than losing your house to be a financial burden. I still get irritated remembering that judge's comment.

@LoneJack Zn 6a, KC, your $3,200 is a good example. I remember a guy pleading with the judge when they were selecting jurors for that 9-week trial I mentioned. He was self-employed and very specific (and credible) regarding the cost of losing 9 weeks of work. Everyone felt bad for him but the judge wouldn't excuse him. Then, on the first day of the trial, they let him go and called in an alternate. I was glad for him but irritated with how the judge handled it. Seriously, 9 freaking weeks can make a difference to LOTS of people!

"My comments are directed to what happens in California, as that is my only experience with the law..."

Lindsey, do you happen to know why there doesn't seem to be much follow-up with the no-shows here in CA? Just too many of them? I ask because I know of people who have ignored multiple jury summons over the years with no repercussions. Some have even ignored the "Notice of Failure to Appear" with no consequences.

Writing after reading 2/3 down. i want to return to thread, but for now want to say that for some reason, I have never been called for jury duty. i pay taxes, vote, have driver’s license, var car, etc* .. .

* But my name is not on our mailbox.

I have no idea why I have never been asked. In a just world, i would (I think) be a good juror. i can pay attention to detail, and i have good analytic skills. I have not yet added this to my CV/resume. I suspect many trial lawyers prefer a juror who is more swayed by emotion. I am warm, compassionate and logical. i suspect I’d not be selected. But I would have welcomed the opportunity to serve my community. That being said, it would probably cause me much tossing and turning if I was a juror on a very serious case.

ETA— my device is boggy, so please excuse perceived typos.

I think (although this is conjecture) that people who move fairly often do not get called.\

Facts are such persnickety things.

Maybe (Lars).

But I lived in places 2-3 years,

Three years,

38 years!

DH got called up on e in a tort case, but was put as an alternate. He would not have agreed w the verdict.

I have no idea why I would not have been summoned. our residentia and physical addresses are tricky because of history and rural mail delivery. But the taxman finds us.

ETA— I view jury duty as a necessary and honorable civic responsibility. If certain court officers are cynical, or the system impervect, all the more reason for decent thinking citizens to do their duty.

Lindsay's post made me think about when I worked for a 3rd party administrator for worker's comp not long after I got out of the Air Force. They worked with a company that watched people and videotaped them for fraud. One guy was supposedly hurt at work, "injuring" his back on one of those rubber mats in the kitchen of a casino. He was taped getting out of his truck, strolling across the street and just before he got to the doctor's office door, he would start limping and using his cane. They also taped him strolling across the street and helping a neighbor by lifting their new washing machine off the dolly by himself and pushing it in place in their garage. Then strolling back across the street. They checked him out because he was one of those people who called up constantly whining about his back and needing his check "right now". I only worked there about a year but found out that was a common red flag.

In response to what Kathsgrdn just wrote, I would have to say that if there were any "red flags" in my case it would have to have been the fact that I worked in a law office and was living with an attorney (the man to whom I am now married). I suppose the Defendant's insurance company thought it was a scam. But, as I said earlier, tailing me - even around Disneyland! - gave them nothing they could use against me and even supported my allegations.

The way I found out I was being tailed was that when we were at Disneyland with some friends, I noticed that it seemed that no matter where we went, no matter what "Land" (e.g., Tomorrowland, Fantasyland, etc.) we were in, I saw the same man nearby. I realize that there are thousands of people in Disneyland at any given point in time and people move around the entire place so it would not be unusual for two people unknown to each other to wind up in the same place more than once, but it just seemed odd. The guy was by himself, and had a camera (on a strap around his neck). But, we never ever saw him take a picture of anything. Obviously, he wasn't going to take a picture of me when I was looking right at him, but if he were truly on an I-want-to-take-pictures-of-Disneyland expedition, we would have seen him take at least one photo, but we never did. We had been there for several hours by the time we noticed this guy, and were there for several more hours after we spotted him. At one point we deliberately went from place to place just to see if he would be in the new location, too, and he always was.

Then there came the point in time when we served the Defendant with Interrogatories. One of the questions was about surveillance of me, and because the Interrogatories have to be answered under penalty of perjury, he responded that, yes, he knew his insurance company had me under surveillance. This was also brought up in testimony during the trial. I was under surveillance every day for many months.

Wow

A subpoena, on the other hand, does require being served in person if the subpoena requires an appearance.

it's interesting how these laws vary from state to state. in illinois, subpoenas are regularly mailed and except for a subpoena duces tecum, always include a court date with a specific time. oftentimes, defense witnesses who are more than willing to testify without being subpoenaed, will ask for one as proof to an employer that they have to appear in court.