Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 48 sets the jury size and unanimity rules for every civil trial in federal court: the jury begins with at least six and no more than twelve members, at least six must participate in the verdict, and the verdict must be unanimous unless the parties agree otherwise.1Legal Information Institute. Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 48 – Number of Jurors; Verdict; Polling The rule also gives either side the right to have each juror polled before the verdict is recorded.
How Many Jurors a Federal Civil Trial Starts With
Rule 48(a) fixes a floor of six and a ceiling of twelve. Within that window, the judge decides how many to seat based on how long and how complicated the trial is expected to be.1Legal Information Institute. Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 48 – Number of Jurors; Verdict; Polling A short contract dispute might begin with six or seven. A product-liability case expected to run weeks might begin with ten or twelve.
Judges routinely seat more than the minimum because jurors drop out. Illness, family emergencies, and misconduct all thin the panel as a trial goes on, and federal courts no longer use alternate jurors who can be swapped in. Starting with a larger panel is the hedge. Both sides can weigh in during voir dire on how many to seat, but the final call is the judge’s.
Every juror who is seated participates in the verdict unless the judge excuses that juror for cause. There is no option for a seated juror to stay on the panel while sitting out deliberations.1Legal Information Institute. Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 48 – Number of Jurors; Verdict; Polling
The Six-Juror Floor for a Valid Verdict
Rule 48(b) is strict about the minimum: at least six jurors must take part in the verdict.1Legal Information Institute. Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 48 – Number of Jurors; Verdict; Polling A trial that began with twelve can still produce a valid verdict with six. Drop below six, and the court cannot accept the verdict at all without additional agreement from the parties.
The advisory committee describes juries smaller than six as problematic and cautions courts not to plan around the possibility that parties will waive the floor.1Legal Information Institute. Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 48 – Number of Jurors; Verdict; Polling If exceptional circumstances arise, both sides can stipulate to accept a verdict from fewer than six, but the committee frames that as a last resort in situations like multiple lost jurors during a long trial where restarting would be enormously costly. The intended safeguard is on the front end: seat more jurors from the start.
Unanimity Is the Default
Every juror who takes part in deliberations must agree on the outcome. Rule 48(b) makes unanimity the default for all federal civil verdicts.1Legal Information Institute. Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 48 – Number of Jurors; Verdict; Polling If seven jurors are deliberating, all seven must concur. If ten remain, all ten must agree. A simple majority is not enough, and neither is a supermajority, unless the parties have opted out.
That is a higher bar than many state courts apply in civil cases, where majority and supermajority verdicts are common. Under the federal rule, a single holdout can prevent a verdict, so each juror carries real weight in the outcome.
Stipulating to a Non-Unanimous Verdict
The phrase “unless the parties stipulate otherwise” in Rule 48(b) is the opt-out. Both sides can agree, before or during trial, to accept a verdict that is not unanimous. A stipulation might permit a ten-out-of-twelve verdict, or five-out-of-six.1Legal Information Institute. Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 48 – Number of Jurors; Verdict; Polling It has to come from all parties. One side cannot force the other into a non-unanimous rule.
The decision is strategic. A plaintiff who reads the panel as broadly sympathetic may want a supermajority rule that insulates the verdict against a lone skeptic. The defense in the same trial may resist for the same reason. Counsel weigh the panel’s apparent leanings and the risk of a hung jury before proposing anything.
Excusing a Juror During Trial
Rule 47(c) lets the court excuse a juror “for good cause” at any point during trial or deliberations.2Legal Information Institute. Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 47 – Selecting Jurors The advisory committee gives sickness, family emergencies, and misconduct as typical examples. A juror caught researching the case online or contacting a party can be removed without a mistrial.
One thing that is not good cause: refusing to go along with the majority. The advisory committee is explicit that a holdout on the merits cannot be excused for holding out.2Legal Information Institute. Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 47 – Selecting Jurors Removing that juror would gut the unanimity requirement. Disagreement is the whole point of deliberating.
Polling the Jury
After the jury announces its verdict but before the court discharges the panel, either party can ask the judge to poll the jurors one by one. The judge can also poll on the court’s own motion.1Legal Information Institute. Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 48 – Number of Jurors; Verdict; Polling Timing matters. Once the jury is discharged, the chance is gone.
During the poll, the judge asks each juror on the record whether the announced verdict is that juror’s own. The process exists to surface situations where someone was pressured into agreeing in the jury room but does not actually support the result. A verdict that looked unanimous behind closed doors can come apart when each person has to confirm it in open court.
If the poll shows that unanimity is missing, or that the level of agreement the parties stipulated to is not there, the judge has two choices: send the jury back for more deliberation, or declare a mistrial.1Legal Information Institute. Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 48 – Number of Jurors; Verdict; Polling Further deliberation is usually the first move, because a mistrial means starting over with a new panel.
When the Jury Cannot Agree
A jury that deliberates at length without reaching unanimity is considered deadlocked, or hung. If no stipulation for a non-unanimous verdict is in place, the judge’s options are limited. The judge can urge the jury to keep working, sometimes with an instruction that asks holdouts to reconsider with an open mind while making clear that no one should abandon an honest conviction just to reach a verdict. These are sometimes called Allen charges, or dynamite charges.
If more deliberation goes nowhere, the judge declares a mistrial. The case is not dismissed. It returns to the pre-trial stage, and the plaintiff can try again before a new jury; unlike in criminal cases, there is no double-jeopardy bar to a retrial. In practice, a hung jury often nudges both sides toward settlement, because the cost of trying the whole case again with no guarantee of a different result tends to make compromise look better than it did the first time around.