St. Paul's Foundation v. Ives

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• declining to consider propriety of disallowance of defendant's peremptory challenge where challenged juror did not deliberate
• jurors’ comments that they were bored by one of Commonwealth’s witnesses did not reflect impermissible deliberation on substance of case
• no possibility of prejudice where challenged juror selected as alternate and did not deliberate
• prejudice shown only \where the challenged juror actually deliberates in a case\
• introduction of third- party culprit evidence subject to ordinary considerations of relevance

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).