Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_13-cv-05913/USCOURTS-cand-5_13-cv-05913-8/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 790
Nature of Suit: Other Labor Litigation
Cause of Action: 29:203 Equal Pay Act

---

1

Case No.: 5:13-cv-05913-EJD

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

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN JOSE DIVISION

TERESA TRINH,

Plaintiff,

v.

SANTA CLARA VALLEY WATER 

DISTRICT,

Defendant.

Case No. 5:13-cv-05913-EJD 

VERDICT FORM

We, the jury in the above-entitled action, unanimously find the following verdict on the 

questions submitted to us:

Equal Pay Act Claim

1. Has Plaintiff Teresa Trinh proved by a preponderance of the evidence that during the 

period from December 21, 2011, to June 14, 2012, that she was paid less than Dave Drury and that 

she performed equal work as Dave Drury at Defendant Santa Clara Valley Water District 

(“Defendant”) that required equal skill, effort and responsibility, and which were performed under 

similar working conditions?

Answer: Yes _______ No ________

 If you answered “Yes” to Question Number 1, proceed to Question Number 2. If 

you answered “No” to Question Number 1, then proceed to Question Number 9.

Case 5:13-cv-05913-EJD Document 114 Filed 04/07/16 Page 1 of 6
2

Case No.: 5:13-cv-05913-EJD

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

Northern District of California

2. Has Defendant proved by a preponderance of the evidence that the difference in pay was 

the result of a bona fide seniority system or on factors other than sex, such as an employee’s 

education, an employee’s experience, or on a classification system not based on sex? 

Answer: Yes _______ No ________

 If you answered “Yes” to Question Number 2, proceed to Question Number 3. If 

you answered “No” to Question Number 2, then proceed to Question Number 4.

3. Has Plaintiff proved by a preponderance of the evidence that Defendant’s claimed 

justifications for the difference in pay were a pretext for sex-based wage discrimination?

Answer: Yes _______ No ________

 If you answered “Yes” to Question Number 3, proceed to Question Number 4. If 

you answered “No” to Question Number 3, then proceed to Question Number 9.

4. Has Plaintiff proved by a preponderance of the evidence that she was damaged by 

Defendant’s violation of the Equal Pay Act?

Answer: Yes _______ No ________

 If you answered “Yes” to Question Number 4, proceed to Question Number 6. If 

you answered “No” to Question Number 4, then proceed to Question Number 5.

5. What are Plaintiff’s nominal damages for Defendant’s violation of the Equal Pay Act, not 

exceeding $1?

$______________________

 Proceed to Question Number 9.

Case 5:13-cv-05913-EJD Document 114 Filed 04/07/16 Page 2 of 6
3

Case No.: 5:13-cv-05913-EJD

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

Northern District of California

6. Has Plaintiff proved by a preponderance of the evidence that Defendant willfully violated 

the Equal Pay Act?

Answer: Yes _______ No ________

 If you answered “Yes” to Question Number 6, proceed to Question Number 8. If 

you answered “No” to Question Number 6, then proceed to Question Number 7.

7. What are Plaintiff’s damages for Defendant’s nonwillful violation of the Equal Pay Act?

$______________________

 Proceed to Question Number 9.

8. What are Plaintiff’s damages for Defendant’s willful violation of the Equal Pay Act?

$______________________

 Proceed to Question Number 9.

Disability Discrimination Claim

9. Has Plaintiff proved by a preponderance of the evidence that Defendant discriminated 

against her based on a physical disability?

Answer: Yes _______ No ________

 Proceed to Question Number 10.

Case 5:13-cv-05913-EJD Document 114 Filed 04/07/16 Page 3 of 6
4

Case No.: 5:13-cv-05913-EJD

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

Northern District of California

Failure to Accommodate Claim

10. Has Plaintiff proved by a preponderance of the evidence that Defendant failed to provide 

Plaintiff with reasonable accommodation?

Answer: Yes _______ No ________

 If you answered “Yes” to Question Number 10, proceed to Question Number 11. If 

you answered “No” to Question Number 10, then proceed to Question Number 12. 

11. Has Defendant proved by a preponderance of the evidence that it would have been an 

undue hardship to provide Plaintiff with the accommodation Plaintiff requested?

Answer: Yes _______ No ________

 Proceed to Question Number 12. 

Failure to Engage in the Interactive Process Claim

12. Has Plaintiff proved by a preponderance of the evidence that Defendant failed to engage in 

a timely, good faith interactive process with Plaintiff on the subject of reasonable accommodation?

Answer: Yes _______ No ________

 If you answered “No” to all of Question Numbers 9, 10, and 12, then answer no 

further questions, and please sign, date and return the verdict form. 

 If you answered “Yes” to any of Question Numbers 9, 10, or 12, proceed to 

Question 13; however, if you answered “Yes” only to Question Number 10 and 

also answered “Yes” to Question Number 11, then answer no further questions, and 

please sign, date and return the verdict form. 

Case 5:13-cv-05913-EJD Document 114 Filed 04/07/16 Page 4 of 6
5

Case No.: 5:13-cv-05913-EJD

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

Northern District of California

Remedies

13. Has Plaintiff proved by a preponderance of the evidence that she was harmed by 

Defendant’s disability discrimination, failure to engage in the interactive process and/or denial of 

reasonable accommodation?

Answer: Yes _______ No ________

 If you answered “Yes” to Question Number 13, then proceed to Question Number 

14. 

 If you answered “No” to Question Number 13, then answer no further questions, 

and please sign, date and return the verdict form. 

14. Has Plaintiff proved by a preponderance of the evidence that Defendant’s disability 

discrimination, failure to engage in the interactive process and/or denial of reasonable 

accommodation was a substantial factor in causing her harm?

Answer: Yes _______ No ________

 If you answered “Yes” to Question Number 14, then please proceed to Question 

Number 15. 

 If you answered “No” to Question Number 14, then answer no further questions, 

and please sign, date and return the verdict form. 

Case 5:13-cv-05913-EJD Document 114 Filed 04/07/16 Page 5 of 6
6

Case No.: 5:13-cv-05913-EJD

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

Northern District of California

15. What are Plaintiff’s damages for disability discrimination, failure to engage in the 

interactive process and/or denial of reasonable accommodation?

$_____________________________

 Please sign, date and return the verdict form. 

DATED: _____________________ __________________________________

PRESIDING JUROR

Case 5:13-cv-05913-EJD Document 114 Filed 04/07/16 Page 6 of 6