Greenwood (P) sued McDonough (D) for injuries related to lawn mower blades when they came in contact with P's feet. A jury verdict went to D and P motioned for a new trial. P claimed jury misconduct based on the fact that the jury foreman had answered a question on voir dire falsely. The foreman answered that he nor none of his family had ever been injured seriously, but it was discovered that the foreman’s son had suffered a broken leg from the explosion of a truck tire. That was denied. The Court of Appeals ordered a new trial based on a failure of a juror to respond affirmatively to a question on voir dire seeking to elicit information about previous injuries to members of the juror's immediate family had prejudiced P's right of peremptory challenge. The Supreme Court granted certiorari.

This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.