Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_12-cv-04233/USCOURTS-cand-5_12-cv-04233-38/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:1981 Civil Rights

---

1 

Case Nos.: 12-CV-04233-LHK; 13-CV-00233-LHK 

[PROPOSED] VERDICT FORM 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

United States District Court 

For the Northern District of California 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

SAN JOSE DIVISION 

SHANNON CAMPBELL, 

 Plaintiff, 

 v. 

FELD ENTERTAINMENT, INC., and 

MICHAEL STUART, 

 Defendants. 

)

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Case Nos.: 12-CV-04233-LHK

13-CV-00233-LHK 

[PROPOSED] VERDICT FORM 

MARK ENNIS, 

 Plaintiff, 

 v. 

FELD ENTERTAINMENT, INC., and 

MICHAEL STUART, 

 Defendants. 

)

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

)

The parties shall file any objections not previously lodged with the Court by February 19, 

2015, at 1:00 p.m. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: February 18, 2015 _______________________________ 

 LUCY H. KOH 

 United States District Judge 

Case 5:12-cv-04233-LHK Document 351 Filed 02/18/15 Page 1 of 6
2 

Case Nos.: 12-CV-04233-LHK; 13-CV-00233-LHK 

[PROPOSED] VERDICT FORM 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

United States District Court 

For the Northern District of California 

When answering the following questions and filling out this Verdict Form, please follow 

the directions provided throughout the form. Your answer to each question must be unanimous. 

Some of the questions contain legal terms that are defined and explained in detail in the Jury 

Instructions. Please refer to the Jury Instructions if you are unsure about the meaning or usage of 

any legal term that appears in the questions below. For each Yes or No question, please circle your 

answer. 

We, the jury, unanimously agree to the answers to the following questions and return them 

under the instructions of this Court as our verdict in this case. 

Shannon Campbell – Ralph Act Claim, Cal. Civ. Code § 51.7. 

1. Is Defendant Feld Entertainment, Inc. through the actions of its employees while acting 

within the scope of their employment liable for a Ralph Act violation(s) as to Plaintiff 

Shannon Campbell? 

Yes No 

2. Is Defendant Michael Stuart liable for a Ralph Act violation as to Plaintiff Shannon 

Campbell? 

Yes No 

Mark Ennis – Ralph Act Claim, Cal. Civ. Code § 51.7 

3. Is Defendant Feld Entertainment, Inc. through the actions of its employees while acting 

within the scope of their employment liable for a Ralph Act violation(s) as to Plaintiff Mark 

Ennis? 

Yes No 

4. Is Defendant Michael Stuart liable for a Ralph Act violation as to Plaintiff Mark Ennis? 

Yes No 

Shannon Campbell – Bane Act Claim, Cal. Civ. Code § 52.1 

5. Is Defendant Feld Entertainment, Inc. through the actions of its employees while acting 

within the scope of their employment liable for a Bane Act violation(s) as to Plaintiff 

Shannon Campbell? 

Yes No 

6. Is Defendant Michael Stuart liable for a Bane Act violation as to Plaintiff Shannon 

Campbell? 

Yes No 

 

Case 5:12-cv-04233-LHK Document 351 Filed 02/18/15 Page 2 of 6
3 

Case Nos.: 12-CV-04233-LHK; 13-CV-00233-LHK 

[PROPOSED] VERDICT FORM 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

United States District Court 

For the Northern District of California 

Mark Ennis – Bane Act Claim, Cal. Civ. Code § 52.1 

7. Is Defendant Feld Entertainment, Inc. through the actions of its employees while acting 

within the scope of their employment liable for a Bane Act violation(s) as to Plaintiff Mark 

Ennis? 

Yes No 

8. Is Defendant Michael Stuart liable for a Bane Act violation as to Plaintiff Mark Ennis? 

Yes No 

Shannon Campbell – Battery 

9. Is Defendant Feld Entertainment, Inc. through the actions of its employees while acting 

within the scope of their employment liable for a battery or batteries as to Plaintiff Shannon 

Campbell? 

Yes No 

10. If you answered yes to Question 9, was Feld Entertainment, Inc., through the actions of its 

employees while acting within the scope of their employment, acting in self-defense? 

Yes No 

11. Is Defendant Michael Stuart liable for a battery as to Plaintiff Shannon Campbell? 

Yes No 

12. If you answered yes to Question 11, was Michael Stuart acting in self-defense? 

Yes No 

 

Case 5:12-cv-04233-LHK Document 351 Filed 02/18/15 Page 3 of 6
4 

Case Nos.: 12-CV-04233-LHK; 13-CV-00233-LHK 

[PROPOSED] VERDICT FORM 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

United States District Court 

For the Northern District of California 

Mark Ennis – Battery 

13. Is Defendant Feld Entertainment, Inc. through the actions of its employees while acting 

within the scope of their employment liable for a battery or batteries as to Plaintiff Mark 

Ennis? 

Yes No 

14. If you answered yes to Question 13, was Feld Entertainment, Inc., through the actions of its 

employees while acting within the scope of their employment, acting in self-defense? 

Yes No 

15. Is Defendant Michael Stuart liable for a battery as to Plaintiff Mark Ennis? 

Yes No 

16. If you answered yes to Question 15, was Michael Stuart acting in self-defense? 

Yes No 

Shannon Campbell – Assault 

17. Is Defendant Feld Entertainment, Inc. through the actions of its employees while acting 

within the scope of their employment liable for an assault(s) as to Plaintiff Shannon 

Campbell? 

Yes No 

18. Is Defendant Michael Stuart liable for an assault as to Plaintiff Shannon Campbell? 

Yes No 

 

Case 5:12-cv-04233-LHK Document 351 Filed 02/18/15 Page 4 of 6
5 

Case Nos.: 12-CV-04233-LHK; 13-CV-00233-LHK 

[PROPOSED] VERDICT FORM 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

United States District Court 

For the Northern District of California 

Shannon Campbell – Damages 

Answer the questions below if you answered yes to any of the following: Questions 1, 2, 5, 6, 9 

(only if you also answered no to Question 10), 11 (only if you also answered no to Question 

12), 17, or 18. If you did not, proceed to Question 22. 

19. What amount, if any, do you award Shannon Campbell as actual damages? 

$______________________________ 

20. Did Feld Entertainment, Inc. through the actions of its employees while acting within the 

scope of their employment or Michael Stuart engage in conduct with malice, oppression, or 

fraud towards Shannon Campbell? 

Yes No 

21. If you answered yes to Question 20, what amount, if any, do you award Shannon Campbell 

as punitive damages? 

$______________________________ 

Mark Ennis – Damages 

Answer the questions below if you answered yes to any of the following: Questions 3, 4, 7, 8, 

13 (only if you also answered no to Question 14), or 15 (only if you also answered no to 

Question 16). If you did not, stop here and have the Presiding Juror sign and date this form. 

22. What amount, if any, do you award Mark Ennis as actual damages? 

$______________________________ 

23. Did Feld Entertainment, Inc. through the actions of its employees while acting within the 

scope of their employment or Michael Stuart engage in conduct with malice, oppression, or 

fraud towards Mark Ennis? 

Yes No 

24. If you answered yes to Question 23, what amount, if any, do you award Mark Ennis as 

punitive damages? 

$______________________________ 

 

Case 5:12-cv-04233-LHK Document 351 Filed 02/18/15 Page 5 of 6
6 

Case Nos.: 12-CV-04233-LHK; 13-CV-00233-LHK 

[PROPOSED] VERDICT FORM 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

United States District Court 

For the Northern District of California 

You have now reached the end of this Verdict Form and should review it to ensure it 

accurately reflects your unanimous determinations. The Presiding Juror should then sign and date 

the Verdict Form in the spaces below and notify the Bailiff that you have reached a verdict. The 

Presiding Juror should retain possession of the verdict form and bring it when the jury is brought 

back into the courtroom. 

DATED: ____________, 2015 By:______________________________________ 

 Presiding Juror 

Case 5:12-cv-04233-LHK Document 351 Filed 02/18/15 Page 6 of 6