What is the effect of counsel's opening statements on the jury in a civil case?

The trial court had instructed jurors that counsels' opening statements did not constitute evidence, and reasonable jurors understand that prosecutors play an adversarial role. "We presume absent contrary indications that the jury was able to follow the court's instructions." (Pinholster, supra, 1 Cal.4th at p. 919.) " 'It is only in the exceptional case that "the improper subject matter is of such a character that its effect ... cannot be removed by the court's admonitions." [Citation.]' [Citation.]" (People v. Olivencia (1988) 204 Cal.App.3d 1391, 1404.) The trial court further instructed the jurors not to draw any inferences from the fact that witnesses were testifying by remote video. The court admonished jurors not to speculate about the reasons for the procedure, not to infer bias from it, and to evaluate the remote witnesses using the same standards as for in-court witnesses. The court gave the admonishments just before the witnesses testified remotely and repeated it in the closing instructions. Martinezrios does not offer any contrary

Page 17