If the replacement answers in the affirmative to (3) above, the court shall inquire further as to those differing answers and counsel may make such supplemental examination as the court deems proper.
Minn. Gen. R. Prac. 6
Cross Reference: Minn. R. Civ. P. 47; Minn. Gen. R. Prac. 123.
Advisory Committee Comment-1999 Amendments
Subsections (a), (b), (d), and (f) are derived from existing Trialbook paragraphs 11-15.
Subsection (c) is derived from the analogous provision of the rules of criminal procedure, Minn. R. Crim. P. 26.02(3)(a)(4). The present provisions relating to jury selection are spread among numerous different sets of rules. The civil rules have not heretofore specified a time for exercise of peremptory challenges. Some judges ask a party conducting voir dire examination before the conclusion of the jury selection process to "pass the jury for cause." This section will make it clear that challenges for cause can be made at any time, even after voir dire by other parties.
Although the section provides for administration of oaths to jurors, an affirmation should be used as to any juror or panel member preferring it.
Section 6(f) dealing with alternates is deleted in 1999 to conform this rule to the abolition of alternates under the Rules of Civil Procedure. Minn. R. Civ. P. 47.02 was abrogated by the 1998 amendments to the Rules of Civil Procedure, effective January 1, 1999.