Preview
Cause
Cause No.
No. DC-15-07174
DC-15-07174
John
John Doe
Doe I, Individually
I, and as
Individually and as Next
Next § In
In the District Court
the District Court
Friend
Friend of
of John
John Doe II, a Minor,
II, a Minor, §
Plaintiffs,
Plain tzfi‘s, §
§ Dallas
Dallas County,
County, Texas
Texas
V. §
§
Alexander
Alexander A.
A. Anderson,
Anderson, et
et al
a1 § 44th Judicial District
44th Judicial District
Defendants.
Defendan ts. §
Order Granting Mistrial
Order Granting Mistrial
On December
December 4,
4, 2017
2017 Plaintiffs
Plaintiffs John Doe II and
John Doe and John
John Doe
Doe IIII ("Plaintiffs")
(”Plaintiffs”) and
and
Defendants/Counter Plaintiffs William
Defendants/Counter Plaintiffs William C.
C. Anderson,
Anderson, LeVonna C. Anderson
LeVonna C. Anderson (both
(both
d/b/
d/b/aaAnderson
Anderson Private
Private School) and Alexander
School) and A. Anderson
Alexander A. Anderson appeared
appeared and announced
announced
ready
ready for
for trial. A jury
trial. A jury was duly
duly impaneled
impaneled and
and sworn
sworn and
and heard
heard the
the evidence
evidenée and
and
arguments
arguments of
0f counsel. In response
counsel. In response to
to jury
jury questions and instructions
questions and submitted by
instructions submitted by the
the
Court, the jury
Court, the jury made
made findings which were
findings which were received
received by
by the
the Court
Court and
and were
were filed
filed and
and
entered on the
entered on the record. Plaintiffshave
record. Plaintiffs havemoved
moved for
for judgment
judgment on
on the
the verdict,
verdict, and
and
Defendants
Defendants have
have moved to
to disregard
disregard some
some of the jury’s
of the jury's findings.
findings.
Before the Court
Before the Court signed
signed a
a final
final judgment
judgment in
in this
this Cause,
Cause, on
0nJanuary
January 30,
30, 2018,
2018,
Defendants
Defendants filed
filed a
a Motion for
for Mistrial. In the
Mistrial. In the Motion for
for Mistrial, Defendants assert
Mistrial, Defendants assert that
that
documents that were
documents that were not
not offered and not
offered and not admitted
admitted into
into evidence were provided
evidence were provided to
to the
the
jury as
jury as trial exhibits during
trial exhibits during deliberations.
deliberations.
After
After reviewing
reviewing the
the Defendants'
Defendants’ Motion,
Motion, Plaintiffs' Response, ifif any,
Plaintiffs’ Response, any, and
and after
after hearing
hearing
the
the evidence presented to
evidence presented to this
this Court
Court regarding
regarding the
the alleged
alleged error
error and the
the arguments
arguments of
0f
counsel, the Court
counsel, the Court finds
finds that
that the
the jury
jury received
received materials that had
materials that had not
not been
been properly
properly
Order Granting
Granting Mistrial
Mistrial Page 11
admitted
admitted into
into evidence
evidence during
during the
the trial.
trial. These
These materials
materials include:
include: the
the entire
entire Grand Prairie
Prairie
Police Department file,
Police Department which had been
file, Which been included
included among
among Plaintiffs'
Plaintiffs' exhibits
exhibits as
as Exhibit
Exhibit 47;
47; a
a
journal article
journal article entitled
entitled "Living
”Living the
the Categorical
Categorical Imperative: autistic perspectives
Imperative: autistic perspectives on lying
on lying
and truth
truth telling-between Kant and
telling—between Kant and care
care ethics,"
ethics,” which
Which had been
been included
included among
among
Plaintiffs'
Plaintiffs’ exhibits
exhibits as
as Exhibit 155; and
Exhibit 155; and aa one—page
one-page copy
copy of
of aa website
website screenshot
screenshot with
with aa post
post
called
called "Lying
”Lying in
in Autism:
Autism: A Cognitive
Cognitive Milestone," which was
Milestone,” Which was included
included among
among Plaintiffs'
Plaintiffs'
exhibits as Exhibit
exhibits as Exhibit 156.
156.The
TheCourt
Courtfinds
findsthat
that none
none of
of these
these documents
documents was
was admitted
admitted into
into
evidence during the
evidence during the trial,
trial, and the
the jury
jury should
should not
not have
have had
had access
access to
to these
these documents
documents
during
during deliberation. The Court
deliberation. The Court finds
finds that
that these
these documents
documents were
were prejudicial to the
prejudicial to the
Defendants'
Defendants’ case.
case. Any objections to the
objections to the admission
admission of
of these
these documents
documents would
would have
have been
been
sustained
sustained if
if these
these documents
documents had
had been
been offered
offered into
into evidence
evidence by
by the
the Plaintiffs.
Plaintiffs. The Court
finds
finds that
that all
all three
three of
ofthese
thesedocuments
documents contained
contained information
information that
that was
was reasonably
reasonably
calculated to influence
calculated to the jury’s
influence the jury's determination of facts
determination 0f facts related
related to
to all
all claims
claims asserted
asserted
against
against the
the Defendants.
Defendants. Considering the entirety
Considering the of the
entirety of the other
other evidence presented at
evidence presented at trial,
trial,
the
the Court
Court finds
finds that
that this
this error
error probably
probably caused
caused the
the rendition
rendition of
0f an
an improper
improper verdict.
verdict. The
The
Court
Court further
further finds
finds that
that neither
neither Defendants nor their
Defendants nor their counsel
counsel were
were aware
aware that
that these
these
documents
documents had been
been submitted
submitted among
among the
the Plaintiffs'
Plaintiffs’ trial
trial exhibits prior to
exhibits prior to the
the receipt
receipt and
filing
filing of the jury’s
of the jury's verdict.
verdict.
The Court
Court finds
finds that
that the
the error
error caused
caused by submitting these
by submitting these documents to
to the jury cannot
the jury
be
be corrected except by
corrected except by granting
granting aa mistrial
mistrial in
in this
this Cause
Cause because
because the
the jury
jury was dismissed
dismissed
after
after returning
returning their
their verdict.
verdict. Because this error
Because this error was
was not
not brought
brought to
to the
the attention
attention of
of the
the
Court
Court until
until after
after the
the jury
jury was dismissed,
dismissed, the
the trial
trial court
court cannot
cannot impose
impose any
any other
other remedy
Order Granting
Granting Mistrial
Mistrial Page 22
to
t0 correct
correct the
the error.
error. For
For all
all of
of these
these reasons, the Court
reasons, the Court finds
finds that the
the only
only remedy
remedy
available,
available, in the interest
interest of justice, is
of justice, is to
to grant a mistrial.
mistrial.
It
It is
is therefore ORDERED that
therefore ORDERED that Defendant’s
Defendant's Motion for
for Mistrial
Mistrial is GRANTED, and
is GRANTED, and it
it is
is
further
ORDERED the
ORDERED thejury's
jury'sfindings
findingswill
willbe
be disregarded.
disregarded. This
This Cause
Cause Will
will return
return to
to this
this
Court's
Court’s active
active docket
docket to
to be set for trial
set for trial at
at aa later
later date.
date.
SO ORDERED
ORDERED on
on the
the day of
of , 2018.
,
JUDGE PRESIDING
Order Granting Mistrial Page 3
Preview
Cause Cause No. No. DC-15-07174 DC-15-07174 John John Doe Doe I, Individually I, and as Individually and as Next Next § In In the District Court the District Court Friend Friend of of John John Doe II, a Minor, II, a Minor, § Plaintiffs, Plain tzfi‘s, § § Dallas Dallas County, County, Texas Texas V. § § Alexander Alexander A. A. Anderson, Anderson, et et al a1 § 44th Judicial District 44th Judicial District Defendants. Defendan ts. § Order Granting Mistrial Order Granting Mistrial On December December 4, 4, 2017 2017 Plaintiffs Plaintiffs John Doe II and John Doe and John John Doe Doe IIII ("Plaintiffs") (”Plaintiffs”) and and Defendants/Counter Plaintiffs William Defendants/Counter Plaintiffs William C. C. Anderson, Anderson, LeVonna C. Anderson LeVonna C. Anderson (both (both d/b/ d/b/aaAnderson Anderson Private Private School) and Alexander School) and A. Anderson Alexander A. Anderson appeared appeared and announced announced ready ready for for trial. A jury trial. A jury was duly duly impaneled impaneled and and sworn sworn and and heard heard the the evidence evidenée and and arguments arguments of 0f counsel. In response counsel. In response to to jury jury questions and instructions questions and submitted by instructions submitted by the the Court, the jury Court, the jury made made findings which were findings which were received received by by the the Court Court and and were were filed filed and and entered on the entered on the record. Plaintiffshave record. Plaintiffs havemoved moved for for judgment judgment on on the the verdict, verdict, and and Defendants Defendants have have moved to to disregard disregard some some of the jury’s of the jury's findings. findings. Before the Court Before the Court signed signed a a final final judgment judgment in in this this Cause, Cause, on 0nJanuary January 30, 30, 2018, 2018, Defendants Defendants filed filed a a Motion for for Mistrial. In the Mistrial. In the Motion for for Mistrial, Defendants assert Mistrial, Defendants assert that that documents that were documents that were not not offered and not offered and not admitted admitted into into evidence were provided evidence were provided to to the the jury as jury as trial exhibits during trial exhibits during deliberations. deliberations. After After reviewing reviewing the the Defendants' Defendants’ Motion, Motion, Plaintiffs' Response, ifif any, Plaintiffs’ Response, any, and and after after hearing hearing the the evidence presented to evidence presented to this this Court Court regarding regarding the the alleged alleged error error and the the arguments arguments of 0f counsel, the Court counsel, the Court finds finds that that the the jury jury received received materials that had materials that had not not been been properly properly Order Granting Granting Mistrial Mistrial Page 11 admitted admitted into into evidence evidence during during the the trial. trial. These These materials materials include: include: the the entire entire Grand Prairie Prairie Police Department file, Police Department which had been file, Which been included included among among Plaintiffs' Plaintiffs' exhibits exhibits as as Exhibit Exhibit 47; 47; a a journal article journal article entitled entitled "Living ”Living the the Categorical Categorical Imperative: autistic perspectives Imperative: autistic perspectives on lying on lying and truth truth telling-between Kant and telling—between Kant and care care ethics," ethics,” which Which had been been included included among among Plaintiffs' Plaintiffs’ exhibits exhibits as as Exhibit 155; and Exhibit 155; and aa one—page one-page copy copy of of aa website website screenshot screenshot with with aa post post called called "Lying ”Lying in in Autism: Autism: A Cognitive Cognitive Milestone," which was Milestone,” Which was included included among among Plaintiffs' Plaintiffs' exhibits as Exhibit exhibits as Exhibit 156. 156.The TheCourt Courtfinds findsthat that none none of of these these documents documents was was admitted admitted into into evidence during the evidence during the trial, trial, and the the jury jury should should not not have have had had access access to to these these documents documents during during deliberation. The Court deliberation. The Court finds finds that that these these documents documents were were prejudicial to the prejudicial to the Defendants' Defendants’ case. case. Any objections to the objections to the admission admission of of these these documents documents would would have have been been sustained sustained if if these these documents documents had had been been offered offered into into evidence evidence by by the the Plaintiffs. Plaintiffs. The Court finds finds that that all all three three of ofthese thesedocuments documents contained contained information information that that was was reasonably reasonably calculated to influence calculated to the jury’s influence the jury's determination of facts determination 0f facts related related to to all all claims claims asserted asserted against against the the Defendants. Defendants. Considering the entirety Considering the of the entirety of the other other evidence presented at evidence presented at trial, trial, the the Court Court finds finds that that this this error error probably probably caused caused the the rendition rendition of 0f an an improper improper verdict. verdict. The The Court Court further further finds finds that that neither neither Defendants nor their Defendants nor their counsel counsel were were aware aware that that these these documents documents had been been submitted submitted among among the the Plaintiffs' Plaintiffs’ trial trial exhibits prior to exhibits prior to the the receipt receipt and filing filing of the jury’s of the jury's verdict. verdict. The Court Court finds finds that that the the error error caused caused by submitting these by submitting these documents to to the jury cannot the jury be be corrected except by corrected except by granting granting aa mistrial mistrial in in this this Cause Cause because because the the jury jury was dismissed dismissed after after returning returning their their verdict. verdict. Because this error Because this error was was not not brought brought to to the the attention attention of of the the Court Court until until after after the the jury jury was dismissed, dismissed, the the trial trial court court cannot cannot impose impose any any other other remedy Order Granting Granting Mistrial Mistrial Page 22 to t0 correct correct the the error. error. For For all all of of these these reasons, the Court reasons, the Court finds finds that the the only only remedy remedy available, available, in the interest interest of justice, is of justice, is to to grant a mistrial. mistrial. It It is is therefore ORDERED that therefore ORDERED that Defendant’s Defendant's Motion for for Mistrial Mistrial is GRANTED, and is GRANTED, and it it is is further ORDERED the ORDERED thejury's jury'sfindings findingswill willbe be disregarded. disregarded. This This Cause Cause Will will return return to to this this Court's Court’s active active docket docket to to be set for trial set for trial at at aa later later date. date. SO ORDERED ORDERED on on the the day of of , 2018. , JUDGE PRESIDING Order Granting Mistrial Page 3