What is the legal test for a juror refusing to deliberate in a civil case?

Juror misconduct is one of the statutory bases for a motion for a new trial. (See Code Civ. Proc., 657, subd. (2).) The trial court is required to admonish jurors that they must not form or express an opinion about a case before deliberations begin. (See Code Civ. Proc., 611.) A juror who disobeys this order and makes up his mind about a case prior to the close of evidence has committed misconduct by prejudging the case. (Grobeson v. City of Los Angeles (2010) 190 Cal.App.4th 778, 790-791.) This is " 'serious misconduct' " because it deprives the parties of their constitutional " ' "right to unbiased and unprejudiced jurors." ' " (Id. at p. 791, fn. 7.)

"A refusal to deliberate consists of a juror's unwillingness to engage in the deliberative process; that is, he or she will not participate in discussions with fellow jurors by listening to their views and by expressing his or her own views." (People v. Cleveland (2001) 25 Cal.4th 466, 485.) A juror who refuses to deliberate is subject to discharge from the jury. (People v. Engelman (2002) 28 Cal.4th 436, 442.) We assume without deciding that a juror's refusal to deliberate is a ground for a motion for a new trial in a civil case on the basis of juror misconduct.