There is a general consensus among most lawyers that a jury trial is advantageous to Plaintiffs over a court trial, where a single judge decides the case. Our experience suggests that this is not always true, and the choice really depends on the type of case you are pursuing. Here are a few basic guidelines that are worth keeping in mind when deciding whether to have your case tried before a jury or a judge:
Jury Trial Is Usually A Better Option For Cases Involving “Emotional” Facts
In a case that involves “dramatic” facts, including blatant racial or sexual harassment, direct evidence of discrimination or retaliation which includes written documents or credible witnesses of those violations, especially where the employer’s witnesses are unlikeable due to being too sure of themselves, a jury is a better choice for a Plaintiff. This is because a jury is usually far more generous when it comes to general damages (for emotional distress) and also punitive damages to punish the employer for their intentional violations or intentional failure to prevent discrimination or harassment at workplace.
A jury is also likely to award greater compensation against an employer who appears to be arrogant, especially where the Plaintiff comes across as far more likeable. Judges very rarely award a significant amount of compensation for emotional distress.
A Court Trial Is Usually A Better Option For Technical / Business Disputes
A case that is more like a business dispute, such as a typical breach of contract, or a lawsuit for contractor / employee misclassification, unpaid (minimum) wages, overtime, meal and rest breaks, etc… might be more efficiently tried before a judge rather than a jury from a Plaintiff’s perspective. In these types of cases, allegations of emotional distress are generally not even available, so general damages award isn’t even an option.
Further, typical jurors are much more likely to struggle with understanding the many complex California wage laws and then correctly apply them to your case. Jury instructions and vedict forms provided to the jury are extremely helpful in guiding the jurors toward reaching a correct verdict under the law. However, in many cases that isn’t nearly enough, and it can’t replace caselaw that contains so many more details and arguments that can be used to support your position when briefing a judge in a non jury trial. This is especially true in California wage and cases, where the law is more favorable to employees than a typical jury is even able to stomach.
And, of course, a court trial is way shorter, less expensive and less demanding than a jury trial. You are skipping the need for jury selection process which alone can take at least a day or two, drafting time consuming jury instructions, paying jury fees, and waiting for the jurors to finish their deliberations and reach a verdict.
Bottom Line
When you file your case, you should of course preserve your right to a jury trial by demanding it in your complaint and timely paying the jury fees deposit. However, when the time comes closer to trial, ask yourself whether your case involves the type of “sexy” facts and claims that would make a jury react emotionally and reward you with significant compensation or whether your case is more about black and white application of the law to straightforward facts, which can be resolved much quicker, more efficiently and better at a bench trial. No two cases are alike, and the facts and challenges of each case should be assessed individually in determining whether a jury or a court trial are a better option.