“JuryMatters revolutionizes civil and criminal trial prep by providing attorneys insights into how “local” juries in State or Federal Courts anywhere in the U.S. will view the facts and theories of their cases.
Coming into the courtroom, a good trial attorney knows the law and the facts that they must get into evidence to prove their prima facie case. They know their theory of the case, their client, and opposing counsel. They may even know the judge.
But, what even a great trial attorney never knows is how the Jury will react to their case.
Jurors aren’t attorneys — they don’t know the law and don’t receive jury instructions until they’ve heard all the evidence. Whether consciously or subconsciously during the trial, jurors use their own experiences and values to view the facts of the case.
“Attorneys know the “legal elements” needed to win their case.
Using JuryMatters, they will know the “juror elements” needed to win!
JuryMatters is a jury consulting firm serving civil and criminal trial attorneys in State and Federal courts across the U.S. We offer expert services in:
- Case Evaluation by a Virtual Jury, and
- Pretrial Jury Research and Jury Selection.
Trial teams incorporate the findings into their trial prep, case presentation and jury selection to increase their success in pretrial negotiation and at trial. JuryMatters also has extensive experience in conducting post-trial juror interviews.
A cross-section of cases in which JuryMatters has assisted includes: Xiaolei Zeng v. IKEA Virginia, Inc. (Personal Injury); Deborah Brown v. David W. Allison, P.C. and Estate of Lauren A. Wade, Deceased v. Kaiser Foundation Health Plan of the Mid-Atlantic States (Medical Malpractice); Estate of Ryan T. Puryear v. Alfred Lee Burkholder III (Wrongful Death); Orbital Sciences Corporation v. Iridium Satellite LLC and Aireon, LLC (Contracts); Commonwealth of Virginia v. Adam Torres and Commonwealth of Virginia v. Brent Logie (Criminal).
Maura Burke Weiner
President, JuryMatters
The JuryMatters Team of research experts is led by Maura Burke Weiner. During the last 35 years, Maura has worked with leading organizations to achieve their objectives by incorporating customer feedback and market research findings into their business processes. Clients have included: Andersen Windows, Blue Cross / Blue Shield, Banco Continental de Panama, Nationwide Insurance, Toyota, Marriott Corporation, Virginia Women’s Attorney Association, and The White House Office of Consumer Affairs.
Recognizing the growing demand in the legal community for understanding juror deliberation, Maura launched JuryMatters, Inc. in 2006.
“JuryMatters revolutionizes civil and criminal trial prep by providing attorneys to insights into how local juries will view the facts and theories of their cases.
Trial teams incorporate the findings into their trial prep, case presentation and jury selection to increase their success in pretrial negotiation and at trial. A cross-section of cases in which JuryMatters has assisted includes: Xiaolei Zeng v. IKEA Virginia, Inc. (Personal Injury); Deborah Brown v. David W. Allison, P.C. and Estate of Lauren A. Wade, Deceased v. Kaiser Foundation Health Plan of the Mid-Atlantic States (Medical Malpractice); Estate of Ryan T. Puryear v. Alfred Lee Burkholder III (Wrongful Death); Orbital Sciences Corporation v. Iridium Satellite LLC and Aireon, LLC (Contracts); Commonwealth of Virginia v. Adam Torres and Commonwealth of Virginia v. Brent Logie (Criminal).
In addition to her leadership at JuryMatters, Maura serves on the Board of Governors of the Virginia State Bar’s Diversity Conference, the Fifth District of the Virginia State Bar’s Disciplinary Committee, and the International Board of Directors of the Recurrent Respiratory Papillomatosis (RRP) Foundation. Maura is co-founder with her husband, Ed, of Jazz4Justice, a non-profit which collaborates with university jazz programs and local Bar Associations to raise money for Legal Aid. She previously served on the boards of the Fairfax Law Foundation, Planned Parenthood of Metropolitan Washington, Court Appointed Special Advocates (Fairfax CASA), and the Workhouse Arts Center.
Prior to founding The Service Impact Group, a market research and management consulting firm, in 1993 and JuryMatters in 2006, Maura was Vice President with TARP and the United States Chamber of Commerce in Washington, D.C. She holds a B.A. in Geography/Demographics from Mount Holyoke College and certifications in quality management and process improvement.
As our story opens, Bill, a partner with a small, but prominent personal injury law firm is speaking with Mary, a friend who owns a respected market research and consulting firm.
Bill: … So here’s a quick summary of the facts of a personal injury case we’re working on. A woman in a minivan stopped at a STOP sign on a small cross street at a big intersection. Then she started across the intersection to make a left turn onto the main road going north– – only she never made it. She went without looking. She T-boned my client on his motorcycle while he was on his way to work. My client had the right of way. He was in a “through lane” on the main road going south— there were no traffic lights going in his direction. There was nothing blocking the woman’s view up the main road as she was at the STOP sign. One witness said that my client may have been going slightly over the speed limit, but my client wasn’t late for work and the evidence isn’t going to be clear on that.
What do you think about the case? They had to medi-vac the guy – even gave him his Last Rites. We’re suing for his medical bills, lost wages, pain and suffering, and futures.
Mary: Sounds like the guy’s lucky to be alive. So, the woman said she never saw him? Was your client wearing his helmet? Does he also have a car, or just the motorcycle?
Bill (looking oddly and shaking his head): What do those things have to do with anything? Neither the helmet nor the bike was a proximate cause of the accident. She never looked –- she just went.
Mary: I don’t know what “proximate cause” means, but I do know that, if he had on his helmet, it means to me that this guy probably follows the law. If he owned a car and only rode his motorcycle to work on clear, dry days, then he’s not a “biker guy” — he’s a more reasonable person. I’d give him more of the benefit of the doubt on the speeding.
Bill (looking stunned): Is that really what you’d think about?
Will Bill overcome his disbelief? Will Mary be able to convince him that jurors don’t think like attorneys?
Yes! Because Mary started JuryMatters – a virtual jury service. A randomly-selected panel of JuryMatters online jurors did a confidential evaluation of Bill’s client’s case. They determined liability, reached a verdict, made a monetary award, and pinpointed what was important to them in reaching their decisions. Each juror identified facts that were confusing and highlighted what else they would have liked to have known about the case in reaching their verdicts. Twenty percent of the jurors said that Bill’s client was negligent simply because he was on a motorcycle.
Armed with this valuable feedback, Bill was able to adjust his client’s expectations and negotiate a sizeable settlement. Case closed!
“JuryMatters revolutionizes civil and criminal trial prep by providing attorneys insights into how “local” juries in State or Federal Courts anywhere in the U.S. will view the facts and theories of their cases.
Coming into the courtroom, a good trial attorney knows the law and the facts that they must get into evidence to prove their prima facie case. They know their theory of the case, their client, and opposing counsel. They may even know the judge.
But, what even a great trial attorney never knows is how the Jury will react to their case.
Jurors aren’t attorneys — they don’t know the law and don’t receive jury instructions until they’ve heard all the evidence. Whether consciously or subconsciously during the trial, jurors use their own experiences and values to view the facts of the case.
“Attorneys know the “legal elements” needed to win their case.
Using JuryMatters, they will know the “juror elements” needed to win!
JuryMatters is a jury consulting firm serving civil and criminal trial attorneys in State and Federal courts across the U.S. We offer expert services in:
- Case Evaluation by a Virtual Jury, and
- Pretrial Jury Research and Jury Selection.
Trial teams incorporate the findings into their trial prep, case presentation and jury selection to increase their success in pretrial negotiation and at trial. JuryMatters also has extensive experience in conducting post-trial juror interviews.
A cross-section of cases in which JuryMatters has assisted includes: Xiaolei Zeng v. IKEA Virginia, Inc. (Personal Injury); Deborah Brown v. David W. Allison, P.C. and Estate of Lauren A. Wade, Deceased v. Kaiser Foundation Health Plan of the Mid-Atlantic States (Medical Malpractice); Estate of Ryan T. Puryear v. Alfred Lee Burkholder III (Wrongful Death); Orbital Sciences Corporation v. Iridium Satellite LLC and Aireon, LLC (Contracts); Commonwealth of Virginia v. Adam Torres and Commonwealth of Virginia v. Brent Logie (Criminal).
Maura Burke Weiner
President, JuryMatters
The JuryMatters Team of research experts is led by Maura Burke Weiner. During the last 35 years, Maura has worked with leading organizations to achieve their objectives by incorporating customer feedback and market research findings into their business processes. Clients have included: Andersen Windows, Blue Cross / Blue Shield, Banco Continental de Panama, Nationwide Insurance, Toyota, Marriott Corporation, Virginia Women’s Attorney Association, and The White House Office of Consumer Affairs.
Recognizing the growing demand in the legal community for understanding juror deliberation, Maura launched JuryMatters, Inc. in 2006.
“JuryMatters revolutionizes civil and criminal trial prep by providing attorneys to insights into how local juries will view the facts and theories of their cases.
Trial teams incorporate the findings into their trial prep, case presentation and jury selection to increase their success in pretrial negotiation and at trial. A cross-section of cases in which JuryMatters has assisted includes: Xiaolei Zeng v. IKEA Virginia, Inc. (Personal Injury); Deborah Brown v. David W. Allison, P.C. and Estate of Lauren A. Wade, Deceased v. Kaiser Foundation Health Plan of the Mid-Atlantic States (Medical Malpractice); Estate of Ryan T. Puryear v. Alfred Lee Burkholder III (Wrongful Death); Orbital Sciences Corporation v. Iridium Satellite LLC and Aireon, LLC (Contracts); Commonwealth of Virginia v. Adam Torres and Commonwealth of Virginia v. Brent Logie (Criminal).
In addition to her leadership at JuryMatters, Maura serves on the Board of Governors of the Virginia State Bar’s Diversity Conference, the Fifth District of the Virginia State Bar’s Disciplinary Committee, and the International Board of Directors of the Recurrent Respiratory Papillomatosis (RRP) Foundation. Maura is co-founder with her husband, Ed, of Jazz4Justice, a non-profit which collaborates with university jazz programs and local Bar Associations to raise money for Legal Aid. She previously served on the boards of the Fairfax Law Foundation, Planned Parenthood of Metropolitan Washington, Court Appointed Special Advocates (Fairfax CASA), and the Workhouse Arts Center.
Prior to founding The Service Impact Group, a market research and management consulting firm, in 1993 and JuryMatters in 2006, Maura was Vice President with TARP and the United States Chamber of Commerce in Washington, D.C. She holds a B.A. in Geography/Demographics from Mount Holyoke College and certifications in quality management and process improvement.
As our story opens, Bill, a partner with a small, but prominent personal injury law firm is speaking with Mary, a friend who owns a respected market research and consulting firm.
Bill: … So here’s a quick summary of the facts of a personal injury case we’re working on. A woman in a minivan stopped at a STOP sign on a small cross street at a big intersection. Then she started across the intersection to make a left turn onto the main road going north– – only she never made it. She went without looking. She T-boned my client on his motorcycle while he was on his way to work. My client had the right of way. He was in a “through lane” on the main road going south— there were no traffic lights going in his direction. There was nothing blocking the woman’s view up the main road as she was at the STOP sign. One witness said that my client may have been going slightly over the speed limit, but my client wasn’t late for work and the evidence isn’t going to be clear on that.
What do you think about the case? They had to medi-vac the guy – even gave him his Last Rites. We’re suing for his medical bills, lost wages, pain and suffering, and futures.
Mary: Sounds like the guy’s lucky to be alive. So, the woman said she never saw him? Was your client wearing his helmet? Does he also have a car, or just the motorcycle?
Bill (looking oddly and shaking his head): What do those things have to do with anything? Neither the helmet nor the bike was a proximate cause of the accident. She never looked –- she just went.
Mary: I don’t know what “proximate cause” means, but I do know that, if he had on his helmet, it means to me that this guy probably follows the law. If he owned a car and only rode his motorcycle to work on clear, dry days, then he’s not a “biker guy” — he’s a more reasonable person. I’d give him more of the benefit of the doubt on the speeding.
Bill (looking stunned): Is that really what you’d think about?
Will Bill overcome his disbelief? Will Mary be able to convince him that jurors don’t think like attorneys?
Yes! Because Mary started JuryMatters – a virtual jury service. A randomly-selected panel of JuryMatters online jurors did a confidential evaluation of Bill’s client’s case. They determined liability, reached a verdict, made a monetary award, and pinpointed what was important to them in reaching their decisions. Each juror identified facts that were confusing and highlighted what else they would have liked to have known about the case in reaching their verdicts. Twenty percent of the jurors said that Bill’s client was negligent simply because he was on a motorcycle.
Armed with this valuable feedback, Bill was able to adjust his client’s expectations and negotiate a sizeable settlement. Case closed!