Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_13-cv-00438/USCOURTS-cand-5_13-cv-00438-32/pdf.json

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

---

1

Case No.: 13-CV-00438 LHK

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

RICHARD KATZMAN,

 Plaintiff,

v.

LOS ANGELES COUNTY METROPOLITAN 

TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY,

a special district,

 Defendant. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No.: 13-CV-00438 LHK

VERDICT FORM

Dated: April 15, 2015 _______________________________

LUCY H. KOH

United States District Judge

Case 5:13-cv-00438-LHK Document 194 Filed 04/15/15 Page 1 of 3
2

Case No.: 13-CV-00438 LHK

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. 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.

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

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

(1) Has the plaintiff, Richard Katzman, proved by a preponderance of the evidence that 

the defendant, Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority, deprived Mr. Katzman 

of a property right without due process of law?

YES ______ NO ______

If you answered YES to Question No. 1, proceed to Question No. 2. If you answered NO to 

Question No. 1, proceed to Question No. 3. 

(2) Has Mr. Katzman proved by a preponderance of the evidence that the Los Angeles 

County Metropolitan Transportation Authority’s deprivation of a property right without due 

process of law caused damage to Mr. Katzman?

YES ______ NO ______

Proceed to Question No. 3. 

(3) Has Mr. Katzman proved by a preponderance of the evidence that the Los Angeles 

County Metropolitan Transportation Authority intentionally treated Mr. Katzman differently than 

others similarly situated to Mr. Katzman, without rational basis?

YES ______ NO ______

If you answered YES to Question No. 3, proceed to Question No. 4. If you answered NO to 

Question No. 3, proceed to Question No. 5. 

(4) Has Mr. Katzman proved by a preponderance of the evidence that the Los Angeles 

County Metropolitan Transportation Authority’s different treatment of Mr. Katzman compared to 

those similarly situated caused damage to Mr. Katzman?

YES ______ NO ______

Proceed to Question No. 5. 

Case 5:13-cv-00438-LHK Document 194 Filed 04/15/15 Page 2 of 3
3

Case No.: 13-CV-00438 LHK

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

(5) What are the damages that will reasonably and fairly compensate Mr. Katzman for 

his injury caused by the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority?

$________________________________________________

Have the presiding juror sign and date the verdict form and notify the bailiff.

Signed: ________________________________ Date: ____________________

 PRESIDING JUROR

Case 5:13-cv-00438-LHK Document 194 Filed 04/15/15 Page 3 of 3