Background
Emy Ojekwe, who uses a wheelchair, sued Connecticut Transit District Consortium, doing business as Greater Bridgeport Transit Authority, for negligence. He alleged that, while he was exiting a bus in September 2020, its wheelchair ramp began rising before he had fully left it, causing his wheelchair to fall backward and injuring him. The defendant denied negligence and alleged that any injuries were caused by Ojekwe’s own negligence.
After a two-day trial, a jury returned a verdict for the defendant. Ojekwe moved to set aside the verdict and for a new trial, arguing in part that defense counsel had made improper opening remarks about his Nigerian origin, citizenship status, and decades-old insurance-fraud conviction. The trial court denied the motion, and Ojekwe appealed while representing himself.
The Court’s Holding
The Appellate Court affirmed. Although defense counsel’s opening remarks were improper, Ojekwe did not establish that they caused manifest injury or deprived him of a fair trial. The remarks were relatively isolated, the trial court immediately instructed the jury to disregard citizenship status and later excluded evidence of the conviction, and the jury was repeatedly told that attorneys’ statements were not evidence. Ojekwe also did not move for a mistrial or show that the jury disregarded the curative instructions.
The court also held that the trial court acted within its discretion by denying counsel’s day-of-trial motion to withdraw because the dispute primarily concerned evidentiary matters and trial strategy, not exceptional circumstances warranting last-minute withdrawal. Ojekwe’s race-based challenge to the defendant’s peremptory strikes was unreviewable because he first raised it after the verdict rather than before the jury was sworn, leaving no adequate record for review. The court declined to consider his challenge to the admission of surveillance video and an additional claim concerning defense counsel because those claims were inadequately briefed.
Key Takeaways
- Improper statements by counsel do not automatically require a new trial; the challenging party must show prejudice severe enough to deny a fair trial.
- A court may deny a last-minute motion to withdraw when the attorney-client dispute concerns evidence or trial strategy and no exceptional circumstances exist.
- A race-based challenge to peremptory strikes must be raised before the jury is sworn, and appellate claims require developed legal analysis and record citations.
Why It Matters
The decision illustrates the substantial deference appellate courts give trial judges when assessing whether improper advocacy affected a jury. Prompt curative instructions, the isolated nature of the misconduct, and the absence of a mistrial request supported leaving the verdict intact despite defense counsel’s inflammatory remarks.
It also underscores two preservation rules with significant consequences: objections to allegedly discriminatory jury strikes must be timely, and even self-represented appellants must adequately brief their claims to obtain appellate review.