CACI No. 5014. Substitution of Alternate Juror

Judicial Council of California Civil Jury Instructions (2020 edition)

Download PDF
5014.Substitution of Alternate Juror
One of your fellow jurors has been excused and an alternate juror has
been selected to join the jury. Do not consider this substitution for any
purpose.
The alternate juror must participate fully in the deliberations that lead
to any verdict. The parties have the right to a verdict reached only after
full participation of the jurors whose votes determine that verdict. This
right will only be assured if you begin your deliberations again, from the
beginning. Therefore, you must set aside and disregard all past
deliberations and begin your deliberations all over again. Each of you
must disregard the earlier deliberations and decide this case as if those
earlier deliberations had not taken place.
Now, please return to the jury room and start your deliberations from
the beginning.
New September 2003; Revised April 2004, December 2012
Sources and Authority
• “Deliberations provide the jury with the opportunity to review the evidence in
light of the perception and memory of each member. Equally important in
shaping a member’s viewpoint are the personal reactions and interactions as any
individual juror attempts to persuade others to accept his or her viewpoint. The
result is a balance easily upset if a new juror enters the decision-making process
after the 11 others have commenced deliberations.” (People v. Collins (1976) 17
Cal.3d 687, 693 [131 Cal.Rptr. 782, 552 P.2d 742].)
• “We agree with plaintiff that the principles set forth in Collins apply to civil as
well as criminal cases. The right to a jury trial in civil cases is also guaranteed
by article I, section 16 of the California Constitution, and the provisions of the
statute governing the substitution of jurors in civil cases are the same as the ones
governing criminal cases. The same considerations require that each juror engage
in all of the jury’s deliberations in both criminal and civil cases. The requirement
that at least nine persons reach a verdict is not met unless those nine reach their
consensus through deliberations which are the common experience of all of
them. Accordingly, we construe section 605 [now 234] of the Code of Civil
Procedure to require that the court instruct the jury to disregard all past
deliberations and begin deliberating anew when an alternate juror is substituted
after jury deliberations have begun.” (Griesel v. Dart Industries, Inc. (1979) 23
Cal.3d 578, 584-585 [153 Cal.Rptr. 213, 591 P.2d 503], overruled on other
grounds in Privette v. Superior Court (1993) 5 Cal.4th 689, 702, fn. 4 [21
Cal.Rptr.2d 72, 854 P.2d 721], internal citations and footnote omitted.)
1399
Copyright Judicial Council of California
Secondary Sources
7 Witkin, California Procedure (5th ed. 2008) Trial, § 146
Wegner, et al., California Practice Guide: Civil Trials & Evidence, Ch. 15-E, Jury
Deliberations, ¶ 15:139 et seq. (The Rutter Group)
1 Matthew Bender Practice Guide: Trial and Post-Trial Civil Procedure, Ch. 17
Dealing With the Jury, 17.38
27 California Forms of Pleading and Practice, Ch. 322, Juries and Jury Selection,
§ 322.52 (Matthew Bender)
1 California Trial Guide, Unit 10, Voir Dire Examination, § 10.01 (Matthew Bender)
California Judges Benchbook: Civil Proceedings - Trial § 13.19 (Cal CJER 2019)
CACI No. 5014 CONCLUDING INSTRUCTIONS
1400
Copyright Judicial Council of California

© Judicial Council of California.