Bille (P) and R.A. (D) were involved in a child custody dispute. On voir dire examination, the jurors were questioned as to whether the fact that P drank socially and on two occasions had drunk excessively would prejudice them against P as a fit and proper person to have custody of the children. Juror Schmidt stated that she was against drinking. But when asked if she would hold it against P, Schmidt responded “not especially.” P challenged Schmidt for cause. The court overruled that challenge after Schmidt said she would be able to decide the case on the evidence submitted. A panelist who sat next to Schmidt stated that Schmidt said she felt sorry for D and that P had run off and left D once before. On P’s motion for a new trial, the court refused to hear the other panelists testimony. P appealed.