Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_16-cv-01193/USCOURTS-cand-3_16-cv-01193-5/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 442
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights Employment
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Employment Discrimination

---

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

TAMMI FUQUA,

Plaintiff,

v.

UNITED PARCEL SERVICE, INC.,

Defendant.

Case No. 16-cv-01193-JSC (JCS)

FINAL JURY INSTRUCTIONS

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 24, 2018

______________________________________

JACQUELINE SCOTT CORLEY

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 3:16-cv-01193-JSC Document 148 Filed 09/24/18 Page 1 of 37
2

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

JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 1

DUTY OF JURY

Members of the Jury: Now that you have heard all of the evidence and the arguments of

the attorneys, it is my duty to instruct you on the law that applies to this case.

Each of you has received a copy of these instructions that you may take with you to consult 

during your deliberations.

It is your duty to find the facts from all the evidence in the case. To those facts you will

apply the law as I give it to you. You must follow the law as I give it to you whether you agree

with it or not. And you must not be influenced by any personal likes or dislikes, opinions,

prejudices, or sympathy. That means that you must decide the case solely on the evidence before

you. You will recall that you took an oath to do so.

Please do not read into these instructions or anything that I may say or do or have said or 

done that I have an opinion regarding the evidence or what your verdict should be.

Case 3:16-cv-01193-JSC Document 148 Filed 09/24/18 Page 2 of 37
3

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

JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 2

CLAIMS AND DEFENSES

To help you follow the evidence, I will give you a brief summary of the positions of the 

parties:

The plaintiff Tammi Fuqua asserts that UPS failed to reasonably accommodate her 

disability; that UPS failed to engage in the interactive process in good faith; that UPS terminated 

Ms. Fuqua because of her disability; that Ms. Fuqua was harassed based on her disability and that 

UPS failed to prevent discrimination and harassment. Ms. Fuqua has the burden of proving these 

claims.

UPS denies Ms. Fuqua’s claims.

Case 3:16-cv-01193-JSC Document 148 Filed 09/24/18 Page 3 of 37
4

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

JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 3

BURDEN OF PROOF—PREPONDERANCE OF THE EVIDENCE

When a party has the burden of proving any claim or affirmative defense by a 

preponderance of the evidence, it means you must be persuaded by the evidence that the claim or 

affirmative defense is more probably true than not true.

You should base your decision on all of the evidence, regardless of which party presented 

it.

Case 3:16-cv-01193-JSC Document 148 Filed 09/24/18 Page 4 of 37
5

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

JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 4

WHAT IS EVIDENCE

The evidence you are to consider in deciding what the facts are consists of:

1. the sworn testimony of any witness; and

2. the exhibits that are admitted into evidence.

Case 3:16-cv-01193-JSC Document 148 Filed 09/24/18 Page 5 of 37
6

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

JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 5

WHAT IS NOT EVIDENCE

In reaching your verdict, you may consider only the testimony and exhibits received into 

evidence. Certain things are not evidence, and you may not consider them in deciding what the 

facts are. I will list them for you:

(1) Arguments and statements by lawyers are not evidence. The lawyers are not 

witnesses. What they have said in their opening statements, closing arguments and at other times 

is intended to help you interpret the evidence, but it is not evidence. If the facts as you remember 

them differ from the way the lawyers have stated them, your memory of them controls.

(2) Questions and objections by lawyers are not evidence. Attorneys have a duty to 

their clients to object when they believe a question is improper under the rules of evidence. You 

should not be influenced by the objection or by the court’s ruling on it.

(3) Testimony that is excluded or stricken, or that you have been instructed to 

disregard, is not evidence and must not be considered. In addition some evidence may be received 

only for a limited purpose; when I instruct you to consider certain evidence only for a limited 

purpose, you must do so and you may not consider that evidence for any other purpose.

(4) Anything you may have seen or heard when the court was not in session is not 

evidence. You are to decide the case solely on the evidence received at the trial.

Case 3:16-cv-01193-JSC Document 148 Filed 09/24/18 Page 6 of 37
7

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

JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 6

DIRECT AND CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE

Evidence may be direct or circumstantial. Direct evidence is direct proof of a fact, such as 

testimony by a witness about what that witness personally saw or heard or did. Circumstantial 

evidence is proof of one or more facts from which you could find another fact. You should 

consider both kinds of evidence. The law makes no distinction between the weight to be given to 

either direct or circumstantial evidence. It is for you to decide how much weight to give to any 

evidence.

Case 3:16-cv-01193-JSC Document 148 Filed 09/24/18 Page 7 of 37
8

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

JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 7

RULING ON OBJECTIONS

As I instructed you at the outset of the case, there are rules of evidence that control what 

can be received into evidence. When a lawyer asks a question or offers an exhibit into evidence 

and a lawyer on the other side thinks that it is not permitted by the rules of evidence, that lawyer 

may object. If I overruled the objection, the question could be answered or the exhibit received. 

Whenever I sustained an objection to a question, you must ignore the question and must not guess 

what the answer might have been.

Similarly, if I ordered that evidence be stricken from the record and that you disregard or 

ignore that evidence, you must not consider the stricken evidence for any purpose.

Case 3:16-cv-01193-JSC Document 148 Filed 09/24/18 Page 8 of 37
9

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

JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 8

CREDIBILITY OF WITNESSES

In deciding the facts in this case, you may have to decide which testimony to believe and 

which testimony not to believe. You may believe everything a witness says, or part of it, or none 

of it.

In considering the testimony of any witness, you may take into account:

(1) the opportunity and ability of the witness to see or hear or know the things

testified to;

(2) the witness’s memory;

(3) the witness’s manner while testifying;

(4) the witness’s interest in the outcome of the case, if any;

(5) the witness’s bias or prejudice, if any;

(6) whether other evidence contradicted the witness’s testimony;

(7) the reasonableness of the witness’s testimony in light of all the evidence; and

(8) any other factors that bear on believability.

Sometimes a witness may say something that is not consistent with something else he or 

she said. Sometimes different witnesses will give different versions of what happened. People 

often forget things or make mistakes in what they remember. Also, two people may see the same 

event but remember it differently. You may consider these differences, but do not decide that 

testimony is untrue just because it differs from other testimony.

However, if you decide that a witness has deliberately testified untruthfully about 

something important, you may choose not to believe anything that witness said. On the other hand, 

if you think the witness testified untruthfully about some things but told the truth about others, you 

may accept the part you think is true and ignore the rest.

The weight of the evidence as to a fact does not necessarily depend on the number of 

witnesses who testify. What is important is how believable the witnesses were, and how much 

weight you think their testimony deserves.

Case 3:16-cv-01193-JSC Document 148 Filed 09/24/18 Page 9 of 37
10

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

JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 9

IMPEACHMENT EVIDENCE—WITNESS

Evidence that a witness lied under oath on a prior occasion may be considered, along with 

all other evidence, in deciding whether or not to believe the witness and how much weight to give 

to the testimony of the witness and for no other purpose.

Case 3:16-cv-01193-JSC Document 148 Filed 09/24/18 Page 10 of 37
11

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

JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 10

DEPOSITIONS IN LIEU OF LIVE TESTIMONY

A deposition is the sworn testimony of a witness taken before trial. The witness is placed 

under oath to tell the truth and lawyers for each party may ask questions. The questions and 

answers are recorded. When a person is unavailable to testify at trial, the deposition of that person 

may be used at the trial. 

The depositions of several witnesses taken before trial were read to you during the parties’ 

presentation of evidence. Insofar as possible, you should consider deposition testimony, presented 

to you in court in lieu of live testimony, in the same way as if the witness had been present to 

testify. 

Do not place any significance on the behavior or tone of voice of any person who read the 

questions and answers.

Case 3:16-cv-01193-JSC Document 148 Filed 09/24/18 Page 11 of 37
12

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

JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 11

USE OF REQUESTS FOR ADMISSION

Evidence was presented to you in the form of admissions to the truth of certain facts. These 

admissions were given in writing before the trial, in response to requests that were submitted 

under established court procedures. You must treat these facts as having been proved.

Case 3:16-cv-01193-JSC Document 148 Filed 09/24/18 Page 12 of 37
13

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

JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 12

FIRST CLAIM: FAILURE TO PROVIDE REASONABLE ACCOMMODATION

Tammi Fuqua claims that UPS failed to reasonably accommodate her disability. To 

establish this claim, Ms. Fuqua must prove all of the following:

1. That UPS was an employer;

2. That Ms. Fuqua was an employee of UPS;

3. That Ms. Fuqua had a disability that limited a major life activity;

4. That UPS knew of Ms. Fuqua’s disability that limited a major life activity;

5. That Ms. Fuqua was able to perform the essential functions of the job she had, or a 

UPS job she desired, with reasonable accommodation for her disability;

6. That UPS failed to provide reasonable accommodation for Ms. Fuqua’s disability;

7. That Ms. Fuqua was harmed; and

8. That UPS’s failure to provide reasonable accommodation was a substantial factor 

in causing Ms. Fuqua’s harm.

Case 3:16-cv-01193-JSC Document 148 Filed 09/24/18 Page 13 of 37
14

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

JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 13

“MAJOR LIFE ACTIVITIES” EXPLAINED

“Major life activities” shall be construed broadly and include physical, mental, and social 

activities, especially those life activities that affect employability or otherwise present a barrier to 

employment or advancement.

Major life activities include, but are not limited to, caring for oneself, performing manual 

tasks, sleeping, walking, standing, sitting, reaching, lifting, bending, learning, reading, 

concentrating, thinking, communicating, interacting with others, and working.

An impairment “limits” a major life activity if it makes the achievement of the major life 

activity difficult.

Case 3:16-cv-01193-JSC Document 148 Filed 09/24/18 Page 14 of 37
15

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

JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 14

“ESSENTIAL JOB DUTIES” EXPLAINED

In deciding whether a job duty is essential, you may consider, among other factors, the 

following:

(a) Whether the reason the job exists is to perform that duty;

(b) Whether there is a limited number of employees available who can perform that duty;

and

(c) Whether the job duty is highly specialized so that the person currently holding the 

position was hired for his or her expertise or ability to perform the particular duty.

Evidence of whether a particular duty is essential includes, but is not limited to, the 

following:

a. UPS’s judgment as to which functions are essential;

b. Written job descriptions prepared before advertising or interviewing applicants for the 

job;

c. The amount of time spent on the job performing the duty;

d. The consequences of not requiring the person currently holding the position to perform 

the duty;

e. The terms of a collective bargaining agreement;

f. The work experiences of past persons holding the job;

g. The current work experience of persons holding similar jobs; and

h. Reference to the importance of the job in prior performance reviews.

“Essential job duties” do not include the marginal duties of the position. “Marginal duties” are 

those that, if not performed would not eliminate the need for the job, or those that could be readily 

performed by another employee, or those that could be performed in another way.

Case 3:16-cv-01193-JSC Document 148 Filed 09/24/18 Page 15 of 37
16

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

JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 15

“REASONABLE ACCOMMODATION” EXPLAINED

A reasonable accommodation is a reasonable change to the workplace that allows an 

employee with a disability to perform the essential duties of the job.

Reasonable accommodations may include the following:

(a) Making the workplace readily accessible to and usable by employees with 

disabilities;

(b) Changing job responsibilities or work schedules;

(c) Reassigning the employee to a vacant position;

(d) Modifying or providing equipment or devices;

(e) Modifying tests or training materials;

(f) Providing qualified interpreters or readers; or

(g) Providing other similar accommodations for an individual with a disability.

If more than one accommodation is reasonable, an employer makes a reasonable 

accommodation if it selects one of those accommodations in good faith.

Case 3:16-cv-01193-JSC Document 148 Filed 09/24/18 Page 16 of 37
17

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

JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 16

LEAVES OF ABSENCE AS REASONABLE ACCOMMODATIONS

When the employee cannot presently perform the essential functions of the job, or 

otherwise needs time away from the job for treatment and recovery, a leave of absence may be a 

reasonable accommodation provided that the leave is likely to be effective in allowing the 

employee to return to work at the end of the leave, with or without further reasonable 

accommodation, and does not create an undue hardship for the employer. An employer, however, 

is not required to provide an indefinite leave of absence as a reasonable accommodation.

When an employee can work with a reasonable accommodation other than a leave of 

absence, an employer may not require that the employee take a leave of absence. 

Case 3:16-cv-01193-JSC Document 148 Filed 09/24/18 Page 17 of 37
18

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

JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 17

ESSENTIAL JOB FUNCTIONS AND REASONABLE ACCOMMODATIONS

An employer is not required to eliminate essential functions of a job to accommodate a 

disabled employee.

Case 3:16-cv-01193-JSC Document 148 Filed 09/24/18 Page 18 of 37
19

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

JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 18

SECOND CLAIM: FAILURE TO ENGAGE IN INTERACTIVE PROCESS

Tammi Fuqua contends that UPS failed to engage in a good-faith, interactive process with 

her to determine whether it would be possible to implement effective reasonable accommodations 

so that Ms. Fuqua could perform the essential job duties with reasonable accommodation. In 

order to establish this claim, Ms. Fuqua must prove the following:

1. That UPS was an employer;

2. That Ms. Fuqua was an employee of UPS;

3. That Ms. Fuqua had a disability that was known to UPS;

4. That Ms. Fuqua requested that UPS make reasonable accommodation for her

disability so she would be able to perform the essential job requirements, or UPS was otherwise 

aware of her need for accommodation;

5. That Ms. Fuqua was willing to participate in an interactive process to determine 

whether reasonable accommodation could be made so that she would be able to perform the 

essential job requirements;

6. That UPS failed to participate in a timely good-faith interactive process with Ms. 

Fuqua to determine whether reasonable accommodation could be made;

7. That Ms. Fuqua was harmed; and

8. That UPS’s failure to engage in a good-faith interactive process was a substantial 

factor in causing Ms. Fuqua’s harm.

Case 3:16-cv-01193-JSC Document 148 Filed 09/24/18 Page 19 of 37
20

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

JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 19

THIRD CLAIM: HARASSMENT—ESSENTIAL FACTUAL ELEMENTS

Tammi Fuqua claims that she was subjected to harassment based on her disability at UPS, 

causing a hostile or abusive work environment. To establish this claim, Ms. Fuqua must prove all 

of the following:

1. That Ms. Fuqua was an employee of UPS;

2. That Ms. Fuqua was subjected to unwanted harassing conduct because she was 

disabled;

3. That the harassing conduct was severe or pervasive;

4. That a reasonable person in Ms. Fuqua’s circumstances would have considered the 

work environment to be hostile or abusive;

5. That Ms. Fuqua considered the work environment to be hostile or abusive;

6. That a supervisor engaged in the conduct;

7. That Ms. Fuqua was harmed; and

8. That the conduct was a substantial factor in causing Ms. Fuqua’s harm.

Case 3:16-cv-01193-JSC Document 148 Filed 09/24/18 Page 20 of 37
21

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

JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 20

“HARASSING CONDUCT” EXPLAINED

Harassing conduct may include, but is not limited to, verbal harassment, such as obscene 

language, demeaning comments, slurs, or threats. 

Case 3:16-cv-01193-JSC Document 148 Filed 09/24/18 Page 21 of 37
22

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

JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 21

HARASSMENT—“SEVERE OR PERVASIVE” EXPLAINED

“Severe or pervasive” means conduct that alters the conditions of employment and creates 

a hostile or abusive work environment. 

In determining whether the conduct was severe or pervasive, you should consider all the 

circumstances. You may consider any or all of the following:

(a) The nature of the conduct;

(b) How often, and over what period of time, the conduct occurred;

(c) The circumstances under which the conduct occurred;

(d) Whether the conduct was physically threatening or humiliating; 

(e) The extent to which the conduct unreasonably interfered with an employee’s work 

performance.

Case 3:16-cv-01193-JSC Document 148 Filed 09/24/18 Page 22 of 37
23

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

JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 22

HARASSMENT—“SUPERVISOR” DEFINED

David Comer, Mario Lee, and/or Grace Mangaoang were supervisors of Tammi Fuqua if 

they had any of the following:

1. The authority to hire, transfer, promote, assign, reward, discipline, discharge, or 

suspend Ms. Fuqua, or effectively to recommend any of these actions;

2. The responsibility to act on Ms. Fuqua’s grievances, or effectively to recommend

action on grievances; or

3. The responsibility to direct Ms. Fuqua’s daily work activities.

To be considered a supervisor, David Comer’s, Mario Lee’s, and/or Grace Mangaoang’s

use of this authority or responsibility must not be merely routine or clerical, but must require the 

use of independent judgment.

Case 3:16-cv-01193-JSC Document 148 Filed 09/24/18 Page 23 of 37
24

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

JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 23

FOURTH CLAIM: FAILURE TO PREVENT HARASSMENT—ESSENTIAL FACTUAL 

ELEMENTS

Tammi Fuqua claims that UPS failed to take all reasonable steps to prevent harassment 

based on her disability. To establish this claim, Ms. Fuqua must prove all of the following:

1. That Ms. Fuqua was an employee of UPS;

2. That Ms. Fuqua was subjected to harassment in the course of employment;

3. That UPS failed to take all reasonable steps to prevent the harassment; 

4. That Ms. Fuqua was harmed; and

5. That UPS’s failure to take all reasonable steps to prevent harassment was a 

substantial factor in causing Ms. Fuqua’s harm. 

Case 3:16-cv-01193-JSC Document 148 Filed 09/24/18 Page 24 of 37
25

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

JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 24

FIFTH CLAIM: DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION—WRONGFUL TERMINATION

Tammi Fuqua claims that UPS wrongfully discriminated against her based on her 

disability. To establish this claim, Ms. Fuqua must prove all of the following:

1. That UPS was an employer;

2. That Ms. Fuqua was an employee of UPS;

3. That UPS knew that Ms. Fuqua had a disability that limited a major life activity; 

4. That Ms. Fuqua was able to perform the essential job duties with reasonable 

accommodation for her disability; 

5. That UPS discharged Ms. Fuqua;

6. That Ms. Fuqua’s disability was a substantial motivating reason for UPS’s decision 

to discharge her;

7. That Ms. Fuqua was harmed; and

8. That UPS’s conduct was a substantial factor in causing Ms. Fuqua’s harm.

Ms. Fuqua does not need to prove that UPS held any ill will or animosity toward her 

personally because she was disabled. On the other hand, if you find that UPS did hold ill will or 

animosity toward Ms. Fuqua because she was disabled, you may consider this fact, along with all 

the other evidence, in determining whether Ms. Fuqua’s disability was a substantial motivating 

reason for UPS’s decision to discharge her. 

Case 3:16-cv-01193-JSC Document 148 Filed 09/24/18 Page 25 of 37
26

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

JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 25

DAMAGES—PROOF

It is the duty of the Court to instruct you about the measure of damages. By instructing you 

on damages, the Court does not mean to suggest for which party your verdict should be rendered.

If you find for the plaintiff, Tammi Fuqua, you must determine Ms. Fuqua’s damages. The 

plaintiff has the burden of proving damages by a preponderance of the evidence. Damages means 

the amount of money that will reasonably and fairly compensate the plaintiff for any injury you 

find was caused by the defendant. You should consider the following:

1. The emotional pain and suffering experienced and that with reasonable probability will 

be experienced in the future;

2. The reasonable value of wages lost up to the present time;

3. The reasonable value of wages that with reasonable probability will be lost in the 

future.

It is for you to determine what damages, if any, have been proved.

Your award must be based upon evidence and not upon speculation, guesswork or 

conjecture.

Case 3:16-cv-01193-JSC Document 148 Filed 09/24/18 Page 26 of 37
27

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

JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 26

ECONOMIC AND NONECONOMIC DAMAGES

The damages claimed by Ms. Fuqua for the harm caused by UPS fall into two categories 

called economic damages and noneconomic damages. You will be asked on the verdict form to 

state the two categories of damages separately.

Case 3:16-cv-01193-JSC Document 148 Filed 09/24/18 Page 27 of 37
28

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

JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 27

ITEMS OF ECONOMIC DAMAGES

The following are the specific items of economic damages claimed by Tammi Fuqua:

1. Past lost earnings; and

2. Future lost earnings.

Case 3:16-cv-01193-JSC Document 148 Filed 09/24/18 Page 28 of 37
29

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

JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 28

ECONOMIC DAMAGES—PAST AND FUTURE LOST EARNINGS

1. Past Lost Earnings: To recover damages for past lost earnings, Ms. Fuqua must prove the 

amount of income, earnings, salary, wages, and/or benefits that she has lost to date.

2. Future Lost Earnings: To recover damages for future lost earnings, Ms. Fuqua must prove 

the amount of income, earnings, salary, wages, and/or benefits she will be reasonably certain to 

lose in the future as a result of the injury.

Case 3:16-cv-01193-JSC Document 148 Filed 09/24/18 Page 29 of 37
30

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

JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 29

ITEMS OF NONECONOMIC DAMAGES

The following are the specific items of noneconomic damages claimed by Ms. Fuqua:

1. Past and future mental suffering and emotional distress.

Case 3:16-cv-01193-JSC Document 148 Filed 09/24/18 Page 30 of 37
31

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

JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 30

NONECONOMIC DAMAGES—MENTAL SUFFERING AND EMOTIONAL DISTRESS 

Tammi Fuqua seeks an amount for non-economic damages for mental suffering. No fixed 

standard exists for deciding the amount of these noneconomic damages. You must use your 

judgment to decide a reasonable amount based on the evidence and your common sense.

To recover for future mental suffering, inconvenience, anxiety, humiliation or emotional 

distress, Ms. Fuqua must prove that she is reasonably certain to suffer that harm.

For future mental suffering, inconvenience, anxiety, humiliation and emotional distress, 

determine the amount in current dollars paid at the time of judgment that will compensate Ms. 

Fuqua for future mental suffering, inconvenience, anxiety, humiliation and emotional distress. 

This amount of non-economic damages should not be further reduced to present cash value 

because that reduction should only be performed with respect to economic damages.

Case 3:16-cv-01193-JSC Document 148 Filed 09/24/18 Page 31 of 37
32

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

JURY INSTRUCTON NO. 31

JURORS NOT TO CONSIDER ATTORNEY FEES AND COURT COSTS

You must not consider, or include as part of any award, attorney fees or expenses that the 

parties incurred in bringing or defending this lawsuit. 

Case 3:16-cv-01193-JSC Document 148 Filed 09/24/18 Page 32 of 37
33

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

JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 32

DUTY TO DELIBERATE

Before you begin your deliberations, elect one member of the jury as your presiding juror. 

The presiding juror will preside over the deliberations and serve as the spokesperson for the jury 

in court.

You shall diligently strive to reach agreement with all of the other jurors if you can do so. 

Your verdict must be unanimous.

Each of you must decide the case for yourself, but you should do so only after you have 

considered all of the evidence, discussed it fully with the other jurors, and listened to their views.

It is important that you attempt to reach a unanimous verdict but, of course, only if each of 

you can do so after having made your own conscientious decision. Do not be unwilling to change 

your opinion if the discussion persuades you that you should. But do not come to a decision 

simply because other jurors think it is right, or change an honest belief about the weight and effect 

of the evidence simply to reach a verdict.

Case 3:16-cv-01193-JSC Document 148 Filed 09/24/18 Page 33 of 37
34

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

JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 33

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE—CONDUCT OF THE JURY

Because you must base your verdict only on the evidence received in the case and on these 

instructions, I remind you that you must not be exposed to any other information about the case or 

to the issues it involves. Except for discussing the case with your fellow jurors during your 

deliberations:

Do not communicate with anyone in any way and do not let anyone else 

communicate with you in any way about the merits of the case or anything to do 

with it. This includes discussing the case in person, in writing, by phone or 

electronic means, via email, via text messaging, or any internet chat room, blog, 

website or application, including but not limited to Facebook, YouTube, Twitter, 

Instagram, LinkedIn, Snapchat, or any other forms of social media. This applies to 

communicating with your family members, your employer, the media or press, and 

the people involved in the trial. If you are asked or approached in any way about 

your jury service or anything about this case, you must respond that you have been 

ordered not to discuss the matter and to report the contact to the court.

Do not read, watch, or listen to any news or media accounts or commentary about 

the case or anything to do with it, although I have no information that there will be 

news reports about this case; do not do any research, such as consulting 

dictionaries, searching the Internet, or using other reference materials; and do not 

make any investigation or in any other way try to learn about the case on your own. 

Do not visit or view any place discussed in this case, and do not use Internet 

programs or other devices to search for or view any place discussed during the trial. 

Also, do not do any research about this case, the law, or the people involved—

including the parties, the witnesses or the lawyers—until you have been excused as 

jurors. If you happen to read or hear anything touching on this case in the media, 

turn away and report it to me as soon as possible.

Case 3:16-cv-01193-JSC Document 148 Filed 09/24/18 Page 34 of 37
35

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

These rules protect each party’s right to have this case decided only on evidence that has 

been presented here in court. Witnesses here in court take an oath to tell the truth, and the accuracy 

of their testimony is tested through the trial process. If you do any research or investigation 

outside the courtroom, or gain any information through improper communications, then your 

verdict may be influenced by inaccurate, incomplete or misleading information that has not been 

tested by the trial process. Each of the parties is entitled to a fair trial by an impartial jury, and if 

you decide the case based on information not presented in court, you will have denied the parties a 

fair trial. Remember, you have taken an oath to follow the rules, and it is very important that you 

follow these rules.

A juror who violates these restrictions jeopardizes the fairness of these proceedings, and a 

mistrial could result that would require the entire trial process to start over. If any juror is exposed 

to any outside information, please notify the court immediately.

Case 3:16-cv-01193-JSC Document 148 Filed 09/24/18 Page 35 of 37
36

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

JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 34

COMMUNICATION WITH THE COURT

If it becomes necessary during your deliberations to communicate with me, you may send

a note through the courtroom deputy, Ms. Karen Hom, signed by any one or more of you. No 

member of the jury should ever attempt to communicate with me except by a signed writing. I will 

not communicate with any member of the jury on anything concerning the case except in writing 

or here in open court. If you send out a question, I will consult with the lawyers before answering 

it, which may take some time. You may continue your deliberations while waiting for the answer 

to any question. Remember that you are not to tell anyone—including the court—how the jury 

stands, whether in terms of vote count or otherwise, until after you have reached a unanimous 

verdict or have been discharged.

Case 3:16-cv-01193-JSC Document 148 Filed 09/24/18 Page 36 of 37
37

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

JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 35

RETURN OF VERDICT

A verdict form has been prepared for you. After you have reached unanimous agreement 

on a verdict, your presiding juror should complete the verdict form according to your 

deliberations, sign and date it, and advise the courtroom deputy, Ms. Karen Hom, that you are 

ready to return to the courtroom.

Case 3:16-cv-01193-JSC Document 148 Filed 09/24/18 Page 37 of 37