Trial, Summary Jury Trial, Mini Trial, and Private Trial

Subject: Law
Pages: 3
Words: 696
Reading time:
3 min

A trial

A trial is a form of dispute resolution. The accused and the accuser both appear before a jury or judge as they present their testimonies in a formal setting and are guided by sets of formal rules. A trial may be held before a judge (bench trial) or before a group of people usually drawn from the community for that particular case (jury). In this formal setting, one or more defendants are expected to answer to the allegations made by the plaintiff in the formal setting. Many rules are put to guide conduct during a trial.

From the start, the basis of a trial is the complaints filed by the plaintiff against the defendant. Two types of the trial are in practice in law. One is adverse (mostly in criminal laws), which is accusatory in nature. In this, the contest between the prosecutor and the defendant is expected to precipitate the truth. This occurs with the judge as to the referee. Inquisitorial (mostly in civil law) is the other method of trial.

The judge acts as the inquisitor directing the questioning and witnessing interrogations. The lawyers here only offer legal arguments and, at times, alternative interpretations to the facts that may emerge during the process. Trials, by nature, take a long time due to many legal processes like summons, court orders, injunctions, and prolonged legal arguments in the interpretation of the law. This increases the length of time to settle a dispute. It also costs a lot of money. However, its judgments are binding, and in enforcing the verdict, the court has the power to seize any of the defendant’s assets located within his jurisdiction.

A summary jury trial

A summary jury trial, on the other hand, can be looked at as a mock trial. However, it has no judge. A six-member jury is selected by voir dire (their background and biasness are checked) without the knowledge that their verdict will be nonbinding. The clients also must attend all the hearings up to the closing arguments. Attorneys of both parties present their summarized version of their arguments, but they cannot call witnesses. After hearing the verdict, the two parties are given time to examine the verdict and the reasons for the jury has decided on it. The two parties then meet to reach a settlement. A jury trial has great advantages. One is that it might prompt a quick settlement of the controversy. Through this, they save time. They also hear the unbiased opinion of the jury, which may prompt one party to be receptive to the idea of settlement after reflecting on its chances at a real trial.

A mini trial

The parties involved in legal controversy meet under an advisor who is neutral to both parties. After hearing the allegations, each side attempts to formulate a voluntary settlement. Mini trials are always started upon request to the American Arbitration Association. This happens only when the two parties agree to pursue this as a means of conflict resolution. Mini trial mainly consists of an exchange of information and negotiation of settlement by the two parties. The role of neutral advisors is to decide on questions of procedure and may advise the representatives of each party when given a chance. The neutral advisors are selected by mutual consent of the parties. Mini trials are always confidential, and statements, oral or written, from the trial cannot be used as evidence in other proceedings or as evidence in other litigation processes.

A private trial

They closely resemble court trials in terms of procedure and practice. The difference is that the parties have agreed on the neutral person who is selected as a judge. Since both parties sign a stipulation that is filed with the court, judgments are legally binding. The endorsement by a court is held until a verdict is entered in the same court as if it were a trial in the court. This makes private trial verdicts legally binding and appealable, just like public trial verdicts.