What is the test for substituting a juror in a civil case?

We agree with plaintiff that the principles set forth in Collins apply to civil as well as criminal cases. The right to a jury trial in civil cases is also guaranteed by article I, section 16 of the California Constitution, ⁵ and the provisions of the statute governing the substitution of jurors in civil cases (Code Civ.Proc., 605) are the same as the ones governing criminal cases (Pen.Code, 1089). The same considerations require that each juror engage in all of the jury's deliberations in both criminal and civil cases. The requirement that at least nine persons reach a verdict is not met unless those nine reach their consensus through deliberations which are the common experience of all of them. Accordingly, we construe section 605 of the Code of Civil Procedure to require that the court [23 Cal.3d 585] instruct the jury to disregard all past deliberations and begin deliberating anew when an alternate juror is substituted after jury deliberations have begun. (See People v. Collins, supra, 17 Cal.3d at p. 694, 131 Cal.Rptr. 782, 552 P.2d 742.)