However, special verdict
forms introduce an additional layer of
Instruction number (2), to be given before final argument, also illustrates how the court could utilize the Special Verdict
questions in the burden of proof portion of the instruction.
Because the special verdict
disregards the distinction between probabilistic and dichotomous judgments, it hides information from judges that is necessary to understand the jury's factual findings.
Rule 49(a) grants the trial court discretion to require the jury to return a special verdict
, in which the jury answers only written interrogatories of fact but does not enter a general verdict declaring which party prevails.
LEGAL COMMENTARY: Curiously, there was a special verdict
, so-called, in which the jurors were asked to respond to specific questions.
1977), prevents a party from challenging errors in a general jury verdict form if the party failed to object to the general verdict form and propose a special verdict
But the prosecution had sought a special verdict
of not guilty of murder by reason of insanity which, if proved, would have seen him confined to a psychiatric hospital.
17 and 18"), one Special Interrogatory ("Special Interrogatory 1"), and the answer given to part of a Special Verdict
Form ("Special Verdict
The jurors' verdict may take the form of a general or a special verdict
The prosecution at Swansea Crown Court told the jury it was no longer seeking a special verdict
of not guilty by reason of insanity and that there would be no purpose in sending Thomas to a psychiatric hospital.
At Swansea Crown Court, the prosecution told the jury it was no longer seeking a special verdict
of not guilty by reason of insanity.
As a result it was seeking a special verdict
of not guilty of murder by reason of insanity.
67) In the mass torts context, a special verdict
does not limit the jury's role to determining whether or not particular events occurred but does more by linking the jury's factual findings to a particular legal conclusion, as a special verdict
gives a written finding for each issue, leaving the application of the law to the judge.
A request for a special verdict
was made asking the jury to determine whether the hospital was negligent and, if so, whether such negligence was a substantial factor in causing Sean's injuries.
In January 2001, a jury returned a special verdict
for Padilla for past and future damages.