Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-00720/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-00720-22/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MARK BURDETT,

Plaintiff,

v.

RAMON REYNOSO, ET AL.,

Defendants.

___________________________________/

Case No. C-06-00720 JCS

COURT’S PROPOSED SPECIAL VERDICT FORM

DATED: December 11, 2007

___________________________

Hon. Joseph C. Spero

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 3:06-cv-00720-JCS Document 164 Filed 12/11/07 Page 1 of 5
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

2

JURY VERDICT

We, the jury, unanimously find as follows:

I. EXCESSIVE FORCE

1. Did plaintiff prove by the preponderance of the evidence that any of the

following defendants use excessive force against plaintiff Mark Burdett, in

violation of his rights under the Fourth Amendment to the United States

Constitution?

MICHAEL CESARI ___ YES ___ NO

RAMON REYNOSO ___ YES ___ NO

MARK SHEA ___ YES ___ NO

STEPHEN SMALLEY ___ YES ___ NO

If you answered “YES” as to any defendant in Question 1, go on to Question 2. 

If you answered “NO” as to all defendants in Question 1, skip Question 2 and go to

Question 3. 

II. CONSPIRACY TO USE EXCESSIVE FORCE

2. Did any of the following defendants conspire to use excessive force against

plaintiff Mark Burdett in violation of his rights under the Fourth Amendment to

the United States Constitution?

MICHAEL CESARI ___ YES ___ NO

RAMON REYNOSO ___ YES ___ NO

MARK SHEA ___ YES ___ NO

STEPHEN SMALLEY ___ YES ___ NO

Go to Question 3.

III. WRONGFUL SEIZURE OF PLAINTIFF’S VIDEO CAMERA

3. Did plaintiff prove by the preponderance of the evidence that any of the

following defendants intentionally damaged Mr. Burdett’s video camera, in

violation of his rights under the Fourth Amendment to the United States

Constitution? 

MICHAEL CESARI ___ YES ___ NO

RAMON REYNOSO ___ YES ___ NO

MARK SHEA ___ YES ___ NO

Go to Question 4.

Case 3:06-cv-00720-JCS Document 164 Filed 12/11/07 Page 2 of 5
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

3

IV. BANE ACT

4. Did plaintiff prove by the preponderance of the evidence that any of the

following defendants interfered by threats, intimidation, or coercion with

plaintiff’s civil rights in violation of the Bane Act, that the interference harmed

plaintiff and that the defendant’s conduct was a substantial factor in causing

that harm? 

MICHAEL CESARI ___ YES ___ NO

JOHN DELFIN ___ YES ___ NO

RAMON REYNOSO ___ YES ___ NO

MARK SHEA ___ YES ___ NO

STEPHEN SMALLEY ___ YES ___ NO

Go on to Question 5.

V. NEGLIGENCE

5. Did plaintiff prove by the preponderance of the evidence that John Delfin acted

negligently toward Mr. Burdett?

___ YES ___ NO

If you answered “YES” to Question 5, go on to Question 6. 

If you answered “NO” to Question 5, go to Question 8. 

6. Did plaintiff prove by the preponderance of the evidence that Mr. Burdett was

harmed as a result of Mr. Delfin’s negligence? 

___ YES ___ NO

If your answered “YES” to Question 6, go on to Question 7. 

 If you answered “NO” to Question 6, go to Question 8.

7. Did plaintiff prove by the preponderance of the evidence that Mr. Delfin’s

negligence was a substantial factor in causing plaintiff’s harm? 

___ YES ___ NO

If you answered “YES” as to defendant John Delfin on Questions 4 or 7, go on to

Question 8.

If you answered “NO” on both Questions 4 and 7, skip Question 8 and go to Roman

Numeral VI (Damages Section).

Case 3:06-cv-00720-JCS Document 164 Filed 12/11/07 Page 3 of 5
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

4

8. Did defendants prove by a preponderance of the evidence that defendant John

Delfin was authorized to obtain plaintiff's thumbprint and that he did so in

accordance with standard professional practices?

___ YES ___ NO

Go to Roman Numeral VI (Damages Section).

VI. DAMAGES

If you answered "NO" to Questions 1, 2, 3, 4 and 7, then skip this section and turn to the last

page of this form.

 If you answered “YES” to any of those questions (that is, 1, 2, 3, 4 or 7), please answer

Questions 9-10. 

9. What do you find to be the total amount of damages suffered by plaintiff Mark

Burdett?

Amount: $_______ (You must award at least $1.00)

Go to Question 10.

10. Do you find that plaintiff proved by a preponderance of the evidence that any of

the following defendants’ conduct was malicious, oppressive or in reckless

disregard of the plaintiff’s rights? 

MICHAEL CESARI ___ YES ___ NO

RAMON REYNOSO ___ YES ___ NO

MARK SHEA ___ YES ___ NO

STEPHEN SMALLEY ___ YES ___ NO

JOHN DELFIN ___ YES ___ NO

Go to the next page of this form.

Case 3:06-cv-00720-JCS Document 164 Filed 12/11/07 Page 4 of 5
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

5

VII. SIGN AND DATE THE SPECIAL VERDICT FORM

Signed:____________________________________________________________

Foreperson of the Jury:_______________________________________________

Dated:__________________

After this verdict form has been signed and dated, please submit a Jury Note to the Court

Security Officer notifying the Court that the Jury has reached a verdict. Please return the verdict

form to the Courtroom Deputy.

Case 3:06-cv-00720-JCS Document 164 Filed 12/11/07 Page 5 of 5