Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled July 7, 2021

Boyce v. Weber

Judge
Jesse Furman
Docket
1:19-cv-03825
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

In Boyce v. Weber, Judge Furman denied Defendants’ request for a written jury questionnaire, finding oral questioning sufficient.

Who this affects

The ruling affects Bruce Weber and Little Bear, Inc.’s request for a written jury questionnaire and the method of questioning potential jurors in Jason Boyce’s case. It does not resolve Boyce’s underlying claims.

What happened

Jason Boyce, a former fashion model, sued Bruce Weber and Little Bear, Inc. He alleged sexual harassment and discrimination under New York laws and sex trafficking under federal law.

The defendants asked the court to use a written questionnaire when questioning potential jurors. They pointed to publicity about the case and the “#MeToo” movement, but acknowledged that the court had broad discretion and that a questionnaire was not required.

Judge Jesse M. Furman denied the motion. He concluded that careful questioning of potential jurors in court would be enough to select a fair and impartial jury, and directed the Clerk to terminate the motion.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Boyce v. Weber · No. 1:19-cv-03825
Judge
Jesse Furman
Date
July 7, 2021

Background

Jason Boyce, a former fashion model, brought claims against Bruce Weber and Little Bear, Inc., Weber’s production company. The claims allege sexual harassment and discrimination under the New York State Human Rights Law and the New York City Human Rights Law, as well as sex trafficking under the federal Trafficking Victims Protection Act.

Motion

The defendants moved for a written jury questionnaire to be used during voir dire, the process of questioning potential jurors before trial. They cited pretrial publicity and the “#MeToo” movement. The defendants acknowledged that using a questionnaire was not legally required and that the court has broad discretion over how jury questioning is conducted.

Ruling

Judge Jesse M. Furman denied the defendants’ motion. After considering the overall circumstances, including the publicity to date and the passage of time since many of the events cited by the defendants, the court concluded that thorough oral questioning would be sufficient to select a fair and impartial jury. The court directed the Clerk of Court to terminate ECF No. 155, the docket entry for the motion.

Effect

The opinion resolves only the defendants’ request for a written jury questionnaire. It does not decide the underlying harassment, discrimination, or sex-trafficking claims.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.