Juror Background Research in Tennessee: What Is Allowed and What a Summary Includes

Is it legal to research prospective jurors in Tennessee?

Researching prospective jurors through public sources is a common part of trial preparation, and it is generally permitted. The questions that matter are how the research is done and whether anything in it amounts to contact with the juror.

Tennessee's Rules of Professional Conduct, found in Tennessee Supreme Court Rule 8, set the core limits. RPC 3.5 (Impartiality and Decorum of the Tribunal) generally prohibits a lawyer from communicating ex parte with a juror or prospective juror during the proceeding unless authorized by law or court order, and RPC 3.5(d) prohibits a vexatious or harassing investigation of a juror or prospective juror.

Courts can add their own limits. Some judges address juror research in pretrial orders or at the bench, and practices can differ between courts. Before research begins, check for any order in the case and ask about local practice if you are unsure.

What does ABA Formal Opinion 466 say about juror social media?

ABA Formal Opinion 466, issued April 24, 2014 by the ABA Standing Committee on Ethics and Professional Responsibility, addresses lawyers reviewing jurors' internet presence under the ABA Model Rules. Its conclusion is that, unless limited by law or court order, a lawyer may passively review a juror's public presence on the internet but may not communicate with a juror.

The opinion draws three practical lines. Viewing public content, where the juror does not know of the review and no request is made, is passive review and is permitted. Sending an access request, such as a friend or follow request to see private content, is a communication and is not permitted, whether the lawyer sends it or someone else does on the lawyer's behalf. When a platform automatically notifies a user that someone viewed their profile, the opinion treats that notice as coming from the platform rather than the lawyer, but it advises lawyers to understand those features before using a platform.

ABA opinions are not binding in Tennessee courts. They are persuasive guidance that interprets Model Rules similar to Tennessee's. Treat Opinion 466 as a sound baseline and follow any stricter limit a Tennessee court or rule imposes.

What sources can lawful juror research use?

Lawful research stays within information the juror or the public record has made available to anyone. Sources commonly reviewed include the following, subject to any court limits:

• The juror questionnaire or information the court provides to counsel.
• Publicly viewable social media profiles and posts, reviewed without logging in as a connection or sending any request.
• Public court records, such as prior civil cases where the person was a party.
• Public property records and business filings, such as entity registrations listing the person as an officer.
• News articles, public statements, published letters and public organizational roles.
• Public professional licensing lookups maintained by state boards.

What is off-limits in juror research?

The limits come from the ethics rules, privacy law and the court. Breaking them can lead to sanctions, a mistrial or discipline, and the team member who crosses the line creates the problem for the lawyer.

• Any communication with a juror or prospective juror during the case, direct or indirect, unless law or court order allows it.
• Friend, follow or connection requests, messages, likes or comments on a juror's accounts.
• Creating fake profiles, using pretext or asking someone else to gain access to private content.
• Contacting or investigating a juror's spouse, child, parent or sibling, which RPC 3.5's commentary treats the same as contacting or investigating the juror.
• Surveillance, following or watching a juror's home, which can become harassing investigation.
• Accessing sealed records, restricted databases without a permissible purpose, or any account that requires credentials you are not entitled to use.

Who is responsible when an investigator does the research?

The lawyer is. Tennessee RPC 5.3 (Responsibilities Regarding Nonlawyer Assistants) generally requires lawyers to make reasonable efforts to ensure that nonlawyers working on a matter, including outside providers, act in a way compatible with the lawyer's professional obligations. ABA Formal Opinion 466 also makes clear that a lawyer cannot do through another person what the lawyer may not do directly.

In practice, the attorney should give researchers written instructions that set the boundaries: public sources only, no requests or interactions, no contact with jurors or their families, and immediate reporting of anything that looks like juror misconduct. Researchers should log what they reviewed and where.

What if research turns up juror misconduct?

Research sometimes reveals a juror posting about the case, discussing it in public, or doing their own investigation against the court's instructions. ABA Formal Opinion 466 notes that if a lawyer learns of criminal or fraudulent conduct by a juror related to the proceeding, the lawyer must take reasonable remedial measures, including, if necessary, disclosure to the tribunal. For conduct that violates court instructions but is not criminal or fraudulent, the opinion observes that the duty depends on applicable law and the lawyer's judgment.

For researchers, the rule is simple: do not engage, preserve what was seen (a dated screenshot and URL), and report to the attorney immediately. What to do with it is the attorney's decision.

What should a juror research summary include?

A useful summary helps counsel prepare voir dire questions and exercise challenges. It should be factual, sourced and short enough to use in the courtroom. It should not include speculation about protected characteristics or anything obtained outside public sources.

How long does juror research take, and when should it start?

Timing depends on when the court releases juror information, which varies by court and case. Some courts provide lists or questionnaires shortly before trial, and some only on the morning of jury selection. Ask the clerk or check the court's practice early so research can be scheduled around what will actually be available.

When time is short, prioritize: identity confirmation and any connection to the parties or witnesses first, then litigation history, then public statements. A brief accurate summary is more useful at the bench than a long one that arrives after selection begins.

Agree in advance on the format counsel wants at the bench, such as one page per juror in seat order, so the researcher does not spend scarce time reformatting. Decide who on the trial team will receive updates if new information surfaces during selection, and make sure that person knows the same no-contact limits apply until the jury is discharged.

How DFS supports juror research and trial preparation

Delator Field Services provides lawful, public-source juror background research for voir dire preparation, along with trial preparation logistics support and coordination with jury consultants the firm retains. DFS researchers make no contact with jurors or their families, send no access requests, and use no proprietary database or sealed or restricted information.

This guide is general information, not legal advice. Delator Field Services does not provide legal advice. Ethical obligations belong to the attorney, and the court's orders in each case control what research is permitted.