My name is George M. Miner and I was considered for jury selection on 11/10/15. The judge was Paul M. Haakenson. Overall, Judge Haakenson was very polite and respectful with the exception of his lack of oversight and poor judgment to allow the attorneys to ask the potential jurors about their medical impairments which included concussions, back injuries and pain and migraine headaches. A potential juror asked if she would get in trouble if she did not volunteer information about herself when the attorneys were asking questions. The attorney representing the woman initiating the lawsuit asked if anyone has had a concussion, back injury or migraine headaches. Based on Judge Haakenson's direction to answer the questions , I relunctantly stated I had received a concussion from a combat injury. Subsequently, the defending attorney raised the issue again by noting I had received a serious combat related injury of a concussion. Other potential jurors talked about back injuries, and pain and migraine headaches. I think Judge Haakenson used very poor judgment to allow the attorneys to ask potential jurors these medical related questions and the attorneys were out of line to ask potential jurors if they had any of these medical impairments. A person's medical history is supposed to be private and I was very uncomfortable feeling obligated to share information about my past injury with 75 or 80 strangers. Some of my good friends don't know about my past injury I received in combat. Although I am proud of my military service, this information about me is private. It was also my perception the other people that shared their medical impairment information felt obligated and were uncomfortable disclosing their medical histories. During the course of the questioning, I stated I was not biased towards the lawsuit issue and I would only make a judgment after I heard the facts. I said as a juror, I would make a judgment based on the preponderance of the evidence. Prior to the attorneys' questioning, I and all of the other potential jurors took an oath he/she would tell the truth and not perjure himself/herself. Taking this oath and being forthright should be good enough and there should not be any obligations to disclose or answer any information about personal medical impairment histories. Again, I think Mr. Haakenson used very poor judgment to allow medical impairment questions to be directed to the potential jurors and I was frustrated, bothered and disappointed in the lack of professionalism of the attorneys and Mr. . Haakenson. If Mr. Haakenson would like to talk to me about this issue or (try to) explain why he allowed this inappropriate questioning I can be reached at 415-455-9803 or at email@example.com.
I have appeared before Judge Haakenson on numerous occasions. He has always been respectful, polite and in control of his courtroom. He has always had a grasp of the issues presented and has shown a knowledge of the filed papers. Most important, he listens to arguments and is open to reconsidering his rulings. If I were a party I would be confident that Judge Haakenson would give me a fiar trial.
He ordered Lowes to pay 1.6 million for calling a 2x4 a 2x4 and not a 1.5x3.5 piece of wood. Did you know that 16 penny nails aren't actually made out of 16 Lincoln pennies? Or that they don't cost 16 cents each?