(a) Examination of Jurors. The court shall require the jury to be selected in a prompt manner. The court may permit the parties or their attorneys to conduct the examination of prospective jurors or may itself conduct the examination. In the latter event the court shall permit the parties or their attorneys to supplement the examination by such further inquiry as it deems proper or shall itself submit to the prospective jurors such additional questions of the parties or their attorneys as it deems proper. The court may also require the parties to question the panel as a whole rather than individually and impose reasonable time limits on the examination of prospective jurors.
Rule 47.Jurors.
Last amended April 15, 2006 · Last verified July 6, 2026
In one sentenceRule 47 governs jury selection in Alaska civil trials — how prospective jurors are questioned, the grounds for challenging a juror for cause, each side's peremptory challenges, and how alternate jurors are chosen and used.
Full Text of Rule 47
(b) Alternate Jurors.
(1) Generally. A court may impanel alternate jurors using one of the procedures set out in subparagraph (b)(2) below. If alternate jurors are called,
(A) they shall be drawn in the same manner, shall have the same qualification, shall be subject to the same examination and challenges, shall take the same oath, and shall have the same functions, powers, facilities and privileges as the principal jurors; and
(B) each party is entitled to one peremptory challenge in addition to those otherwise allowed by paragraph (d) of this rule.
(2) Procedures.
(A) The court may direct that one or two jurors in addition to the regular jury be called and impaneled to sit as alternate jurors. Alternate jurors in the order in which they are called shall replace jurors who, prior to the time the jury retires to consider its verdict, become unable or disqualified to perform their duties. An alternate juror who does not replace a principal juror shall be discharged after the jury retires to consider its verdict.
The additional peremptory challenge allowed by section (b)(1)(B) may be used only against an alternate juror, and the other peremptory challenges allowed by paragraph (d) of this rule, shall not be used against the alternates.
(B) The court may direct that one or two jurors be called and impaneled in addition to the number of jurors required by law to comprise the jury. The court may excuse jurors who, prior to the time the jury retires to consider its verdict, become unable or disqualified to perform their duties. If more than the required number are left on the jury when the jury is ready to retire, the clerk in open court shall select at random the names of a sufficient number of jurors to reduce the jury to the number required by law. The jurors selected for elimination shall be discharged after the jury retires to consider its verdict.
(c) Challenges for Cause. After the examination of prospective jurors is completed and before any juror is sworn, the parties may challenge any juror for cause. A juror challenged for cause may be directed to answer every question pertinent to the inquiry. Every challenge for cause shall be determined by the court. The following are grounds for challenge for cause:
(1) That the person is not qualified by law to be a juror.
(2) That the person is biased for or against a party or attorney.
(3) That the person shows a state of mind which will prevent the person from rendering a just verdict, or has formed a positive opinion on the facts of the case or as to what the outcome should be, and cannot disregard such opinion and try the issue impartially.
(4) That the person has opinions or conscientious scruples which would improperly influence the person’s verdict.
(5) That the person has been subpoenaed as a witness in the case.
(6) That the person has already sat upon a trial of the same issue.
(7) That the person has served as a grand or petit juror in a criminal case based on the same transaction.
(8) That the person was called as a juror and excused either for cause or peremptorily on a previous trial of the same action, or in another action by the same parties for the same cause of action.
(9) That the person is related within the fourth degree (civil law) of consanguinity or affinity to one of the parties or attorneys.
(10) That the person is the guardian, ward, landlord, tenant, employer, employee, partner, client, principal, agent, debtor, creditor, or member of the family of a party or attorney; provided, however, that challenge for cause may not be taken because of the employer-employee relationship when the State of Alaska or a municipal corporation is the employer and the person challenged is not employed by an agency, department, division, commission, or other unit of the State or municipal corporation which is directly involved in the case to be tried.
(11) That the person is or has been a party adverse to the challenging party or attorney in a civil action, or has been a complaining witness against the challenging party or attorney in a criminal prosecution.
(12) That the person has, within the previous two years, been accused by the challenging party or attorney in a criminal prosecution.
(13) That the person has a financial interest, other than that of a taxpayer or a permanent fund dividend recipient in the outcome of the case.
(14) That the person was a member of the grand jury returning an indictment in the case.
(d) Peremptory Challenges. A party who waives peremptory challenge as to the jurors in the box does not thereby lose the challenge but may exercise it as to new jurors who may be called. A juror peremptorily challenged is excused without cause. Each party may challenge peremptorily three jurors. Two or more parties on the same side are considered a single party for purposes of peremptory challenge, but where multiple parties having adverse interests are aligned on the same side, three peremptory challenges shall be allowed to each such party represented by a different attorney.
(e) Procedure for Using Challenges. The court has discretion to set procedures for the exercise of challenges and for the replacement of challenged jurors, except that the entire trial panel will be asked general questions concerning the for cause challenges listed in Civil Rule 47(c)(5)–(13) before proceeding to other questioning.
(f) Juries of Less Than Twelve—Majority Verdict. The parties may stipulate that the jury shall consist of any number less than twelve or that a verdict or a finding of a stated majority of the jurors shall be taken as the verdict or finding of the jury.
(g) Oath of Jurors. The jury shall be sworn by the clerk substantially as follows:
“Do each of you solemnly swear or affirm that you will well and truly try the issues in the matter now before the court solely on the evidence introduced and in accordance with the instructions of the court?”
Amendment History
(Adopted by SCO 5 October 9, 1959; amended by SCO 49 effective January 1, 1963; by SCO 277 effective June 30, 1977; by SCO 465 effective June 1, 1981; by SCO 808 effective August 1, 1987; by SCO 969 effective July 15, 1989; by SCO 1013 effective January 15, 1990; by SCO 1095 effective January 15, 1993; by SCO 1153 effective July 15, 1994; by SCO 1448 effective October 15, 2001; by SCO 1447 effective October 15, 2002; and by SCO 1593 effective April 15, 2006)
Plain-English Summary
The court must see that a jury is picked without delay, and may let the parties question prospective jurors directly, question them itself, or run a hybrid where the court supplements its own questioning with the parties' follow-up questions. The court can require the panel to be questioned as a group rather than one juror at a time and can put reasonable time limits on the process. A court that wants alternate jurors can use one of two methods: naming one or two people as alternates from the start, who are drawn, examined, and sworn exactly like the principal jurors and who step in only if a principal juror becomes unable to serve before the jury retires (with each side getting one extra peremptory challenge usable only against an alternate); or seating one or two extra jurors beyond the number required, excusing any who become unable to serve, and having the clerk randomly cut the panel back down to size by lot if more than the required number remain once the jury is ready to deliberate.
Once questioning ends and before any juror is sworn, either side can challenge a juror for cause, and the court decides every such challenge under one of fourteen listed grounds — among them bias, a closed mind about the case, a relationship to a party or lawyer, a financial stake in the outcome, or having already sat on the same issue or a related criminal case. Beyond cause challenges, each party gets three peremptory challenges usable without giving any reason, and parties on the same side who don't share the same interests but have separate attorneys each get their own three; waiving a peremptory challenge against the jurors currently in the box doesn't forfeit it against jurors called later. The full panel must be asked about several of the specific cause grounds before any other questioning begins. Parties may stipulate to a jury of fewer than twelve or to accepting a stated majority's verdict, and the clerk swears the jury in with the oath the rule sets out.
Frequently Asked Questions
Who questions prospective jurors in an Alaska civil trial?
Either the parties or their attorneys, the court itself, or some combination — the judge decides, and can require the panel to be questioned as a group and set reasonable time limits.
How many peremptory challenges does each side get?
Three, though parties on the same side with adverse interests and separate attorneys each get three of their own.
How are alternate jurors chosen and used?
Either as separately designated alternates who replace a principal juror who becomes unable to serve, or as extra jurors seated alongside the panel with the clerk randomly cutting the group back to size before deliberations if more than needed remain.
Source & verification. The rule text, Amendment History, and Notes are reproduced verbatim from the
official Alaska Rules of Civil Procedure (Alaska R. Civ. P. 47). Prescribed by the Supreme Court of Alaska (Alaska Const. art. IV, § 15). The plain-English summary is original and written by us. Last verified July 6, 2026. ·
Official source
Also known as: jury selection Alaska civil caseperemptory challenge Alaska rulechallenge for cause juror Alaskaalternate jurors Alaska trialAlaska R. Civ. P. 47