Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-03960/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-03960-15/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 442
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights Employment
Cause of Action: 42:2000e Job Discrimination (Employment)

---

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

PAUL L. GUIDRY,

Plaintiff,

v.

MARINE ENGINEERS’ BENEFICIAL

ASSOCIATION,

Defendant.

___________________________________/

No. C-05-3960 EMC

FINAL JURY INSTRUCTIONS

(August 29, 2007)

JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 1 -- DUTY OF JURY

Ladies and gentlemen: It is my duty to instruct you on the law. 

You will be allowed to keep this set to which to refer. This set of instructions is not to be

taken home and must remain in the jury room.

You must not infer from these instructions or from anything I may say or do as indicating

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

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.

In following my instructions, you must follow all of them and not single out some and ignore

others; they are all important.

Case 3:05-cv-03960-EMC Document 162 Filed 08/29/07 Page 1 of 32
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 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 defendant Marine Engineers Beneficial Association (MEBA) is a labor union that

represents licensed engineers working aboard seagoing vessels. The plaintiff (Mr. Guidry) is a

member of the union. The plaintiff claims that the defendant (MEBA) retaliated against him for

previously suing the union by:

1. harassing him;

2. causing one of his employers (MTL/Crowley) to harass him;

3. causing one of his prospective employers (ASM) not to hire him;

4. causing another employer (MTL/Crowley) to fire him; and 

5. failing to investigate his grievances.

The defendant denies these allegations and claims that it had no role in any of the actions that

plaintiff claims were retaliatory. The defendant contends that it acted properly in these

circumstances and that it did not retaliate against plaintiff.

Case 3:05-cv-03960-EMC Document 162 Filed 08/29/07 Page 2 of 32
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

JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 3 -- BURDEN OF PROOF -- PREPONDERANCE

OF THE EVIDENCE

When a party has the burden of proof on 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 3:05-cv-03960-EMC Document 162 Filed 08/29/07 Page 3 of 32
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

JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 4 -- CLEAR AND CONVINCING EVIDENCE

When a party has the burden of proving any claim or defense by clear and convincing

evidence, it means you must be persuaded by the evidence that the claim or defense is highly

probable. This is a higher standard of proof than proof by a preponderance of the evidence.

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

Case 3:05-cv-03960-EMC Document 162 Filed 08/29/07 Page 4 of 32
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

JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 5 -- WHAT IS EVIDENCE

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

1. the sworn testimony of any witness;

2. the exhibits which are received into evidence; and

3. any facts to which the lawyers have agreed.

Case 3:05-cv-03960-EMC Document 162 Filed 08/29/07 Page 5 of 32
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

6

JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 6 -- 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, will say in their 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 has been excluded or stricken, or that you have been instructed to disregard,

is not evidence and must not be considered. In addition sometimes testimony and exhibits

are received only for a limited purpose; when I give a limiting instruction, you must follow

it.

(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 3:05-cv-03960-EMC Document 162 Filed 08/29/07 Page 6 of 32
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

7

JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 7 -- EVIDENCE FOR LIMITED PURPOSE

Some evidence may be admitted for a limited purpose only.

When I instruct you that an item of evidence has been admitted for a limited purpose, you

must consider it only for that limited purpose and for no other.

Case 3:05-cv-03960-EMC Document 162 Filed 08/29/07 Page 7 of 32
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

8

JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 8 -- 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.

By way of example, if you wake up in the morning and see that the sidewalk is wet, you may

find from that fact that it rained during the night. However, other evidence, such as a turned on

garden hose, may provide a different explanation for the presence of water on the sidewalk. 

Therefore, before you decide that a fact has been proved by circumstantial evidence, you must

consider all the evidence in the light of reason, experience, and common sense.

Case 3:05-cv-03960-EMC Document 162 Filed 08/29/07 Page 8 of 32
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

9

JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 9 -- RULING ON OBJECTIONS

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 overrule the objection, the question

may be answered or the exhibit received. If I sustain the objection, the question cannot be answered,

and the exhibit cannot be received. Whenever I sustain an objection to a question, you must ignore

the question and must not guess what the answer might have been.

Sometimes I may order that evidence be stricken from the record and that you disregard or

ignore the evidence. That means that when you are deciding the case, you must not consider the

evidence that I told you to disregard.

Case 3:05-cv-03960-EMC Document 162 Filed 08/29/07 Page 9 of 32
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

10

JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 10 -- 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. Proof of a fact does not necessarily depend on the number of witnesses who testify about 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 and any bias or prejudice;

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

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

(7) any other factors that bear on believability.

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

witnesses who testify about it.

Case 3:05-cv-03960-EMC Document 162 Filed 08/29/07 Page 10 of 32
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

11

JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 11 -- CONDUCT OF THE JURY

I will now say a few words about your conduct as jurors.

First, you are not to discuss this case with anyone, including members of your family, people

involved in the trial, or anyone else; this includes discussing the case in internet chat rooms or

through internet “blogs,” internet bulletin boards or e-mails. Nor are you allowed to permit others to

discuss the case with you. If anyone approaches you and tries to talk to you about the case, please

let me know about it immediately. You may discuss evidence during trial only with your fellow

jurors and only when all jurors are present in the jury room. Even though you may discuss the case

under the conditions I have described, do not form final opinions about any fact or about the

outcome of the case until you have heard and considered all of the evidence, the closing arguments,

and the rest of the instructions I will give you on the law. Both sides have the right to have the case

fully presented and argued before you decide any of the issues in the case. Keep an open mind

during the trial. Form your final opinions only after you have had an opportunity to discuss the case

with each other in the jury room at the end of the trial.

Second, do not read or listen to any news stories, articles, radio, television, or online reports

about the case or about anyone who has anything to do with it.

Third, do not do any research, such as consulting dictionaries, searching the Internet or using

other reference materials, and do not make any investigation about the case on your own.

Fourth, if you need to communicate with me simply give a signed note to the clerk to give to

me.

Fifth, do not make up your mind about what the verdict should be until all the evidence is in,

until you have heard my complete and final instructions on the law, and the final arguments of

counsel. Keep an open mind until you start your deliberations at the end of the case.

Case 3:05-cv-03960-EMC Document 162 Filed 08/29/07 Page 11 of 32
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

12

JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 12 -- NO TRANSCRIPT AVAILABLE TO THE JURY

During deliberations, you will have to make your decision based on what you recall of the

evidence. You will not have a transcript of the trial. I urge you to pay close attention to the

testimony as it is given.

If at any time you cannot hear or see the testimony, evidence, questions or arguments, let me

know so that I can correct the problem.

Case 3:05-cv-03960-EMC Document 162 Filed 08/29/07 Page 12 of 32
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

13

JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 13 -- TAKING NOTES

If you wish, you may take notes to help you remember the evidence. If you do take notes,

please keep them to yourself until you and your fellow jurors go to the jury room to decide the case. 

Do not let note-taking distract you. When you leave, your notes should be left in the jury room. No

one will read your notes. They will be destroyed at the conclusion of the case.

Whether or not you take notes, you should rely on your own memory of the evidence. Notes

are only to assist your memory. You should not be overly influenced by your notes or those of your

fellow jurors.

Case 3:05-cv-03960-EMC Document 162 Filed 08/29/07 Page 13 of 32
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

14

JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 14 -- BENCH CONFERENCES AND RECESSES

From time to time during the trial, it may become necessary for me to talk with the attorneys

out of the hearing of the jury, either by having a conference at the bench when the jury is present in

the courtroom, or by calling a recess. Please understand that while you are waiting, we are working. 

The purpose of these conferences is not to keep relevant information from you, but to decide how

certain evidence is to be treated under the rules of evidence and to avoid confusion and error.

Of course, we will do what we can to keep the number and length of these conferences to a

minimum. I may not always grant an attorney’s request for a conference. Do not consider my

granting or denying a request for a conference as any indication of my opinion of the case or of what

your verdict should be.

Case 3:05-cv-03960-EMC Document 162 Filed 08/29/07 Page 14 of 32
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

15

JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 15 -- OUTLINE OF TRIAL

Trials proceed in the following way: First, each side may make an opening statement. An

opening statement is not evidence. It is simply an outline to help you understand what that party

expects the evidence will show. A party is not required to make an opening statement.

The plaintiff (Mr. Guidry) will then present evidence, and counsel for the defendant may

cross-examine. Then the defendant (MEBA) may present evidence, and counsel for the plaintiff

may cross-examine.

After the evidence has been presented, I will instruct you on the law that applies to the case

and the attorneys will make closing arguments.

After that, you will go to the jury room to deliberate on your verdict.

Case 3:05-cv-03960-EMC Document 162 Filed 08/29/07 Page 15 of 32
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

16

JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 16 -- DEPOSITION 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.

You should consider deposition testimony, presented to you in court in lieu of live testimony,

insofar as possible, 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 reading the

questions or answers.

Case 3:05-cv-03960-EMC Document 162 Filed 08/29/07 Page 16 of 32
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

17

JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 17 -- USE OF INTERROGATORIES OF A PARTY

Evidence will now be presented to you in the form of answers of one of the parties to written

interrogatories submitted by the other side. These answers were given in writing and under oath,

before the actual trial, in response to questions that were submitted in writing under established

court procedures. You should consider the answers, insofar as possible, in the same way as if they

were made from the witness stand.

Case 3:05-cv-03960-EMC Document 162 Filed 08/29/07 Page 17 of 32
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

18

JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 18 -- SETTLEMENT

You have heard evidence that the defendant (MEBA) settled a prior lawsuit filed by the

plaintiff (Mr. Guidry) against it. You are not to interpret that settlement as evidence that the

defendant was guilty of wrongdoing in that prior lawsuit.

Case 3:05-cv-03960-EMC Document 162 Filed 08/29/07 Page 18 of 32
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

19

JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 19 -- DUTY TO DELIBERATE

When you begin your deliberations, you should elect one member of the jury as your

presiding juror. That person will preside over the deliberations and speak for you here in court.

You will then discuss the case with your fellow jurors to reach agreement 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 the views of

your fellow jurors.

Do not hesitate to change your opinion if the discussion persuades you that you should. Do

not come to a decision simply because other jurors think it is right.

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 change an honest belief

about the weight and effect of the evidence simply to reach a verdict.

Case 3:05-cv-03960-EMC Document 162 Filed 08/29/07 Page 19 of 32
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

20

JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 20 -- COMMUNICATION WITH COURT

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

note through the clerk, signed by your presiding juror or by one or more members of the jury. No

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

communicate with any member of the jury on anything concerning the case only in writing, or here

in open court. If you send out a question, I will consult with the parties 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 me -- how the jury stands,

numerically or otherwise, until after you have reached a unanimous verdict or have been discharged. 

Do not disclose any vote count in any note to the court.

Case 3:05-cv-03960-EMC Document 162 Filed 08/29/07 Page 20 of 32
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

21

JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 21 -- RETURN OF VERDICT

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

a verdict, your presiding juror will fill in the form that has been given to you, sign and date it, and

advise the court that you are ready to return to the courtroom.

Case 3:05-cv-03960-EMC Document 162 Filed 08/29/07 Page 21 of 32
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

22

JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 22 -- RETALIATION -- ELEMENTS AND BURDEN OF PROOF

The plaintiff (Mr. Guidry) contends the defendant (MEBA) retaliated against him for

engaging in protected activity. In this case, the plaintiff contends that the defendant retaliated

against him by:

1. harassing him; 

2. causing MTL/Crowley to harass him; 

3. causing ASM not to hire him; 

4. causing MTL/Crowley to fire him; and 

5. failing to investigate his grievances.

Retaliation -- Harassment and Failure to Investigate Grievances

For the claims that the defendant (MEBA) retaliated by harassing the plaintiff and by failing

to investigate his grievances (items 1 and 5 above), the plaintiff has the burden of proving each of

the following elements by a preponderance of the evidence.

1. the plaintiff engaged in or was engaging in an activity protected under federal law, that is,

suing the defendant for discrimination;

2. the defendant subjected the plaintiff to an adverse action;

3. the plaintiff was subjected to the adverse action because of his participation in the protected

activity.

An action is an adverse action if a reasonable union member would have found the action materially

adverse, which means it might have dissuaded a reasonable union member from suing the defendant. 

Retaliation -- Causing MTL/Crowley to Harass and/or Terminate 

For the claims that the defendant (MEBA) retaliated by causing MTL/Crowley to harass

and/or terminate him (items 2 and 4 above), the plaintiff has the burden of proving each of the

following elements by a preponderance of the evidence.

1. the plaintiff engaged in or was engaging in an activity protected under federal law, that is,

suing the defendant for discrimination;

2. the defendant caused the plaintiff to be subjected to an adverse employment action by

MTL/Crowley;

Case 3:05-cv-03960-EMC Document 162 Filed 08/29/07 Page 22 of 32
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

23

3. the defendant caused the plaintiff to be subjected to the adverse employment action by

MTL/Crowley because of his participation in the protected activity against the defendant

(MEBA);

An action is an adverse employment action if a reasonable union member would have found the

action materially adverse, which means it might have dissuaded a reasonable union member from

suing the defendant.

Retaliation -- Causing ASM Not to Hire

For the claims that the defendant (MEBA) retaliated by causing ASM not to hire him (item 3

above), the plaintiff has the burden of proving each of the following elements by a preponderance of

the evidence.

1. the plaintiff engaged in or was engaging in an activity protected under federal law, that is,

suing the defendant for discrimination;

2. the defendant caused to the plaintiff to be subjected to an adverse employment action by

ASM;

3. the defendant caused the plaintiff be subjected to the adverse employment action by ASM

because of his participation in the protected activity against the defendant (MEBA);

An action is an adverse employment action if a reasonable union member would have found the

action materially adverse, which means it might have dissuaded a reasonable union member from

suing the defendant.

Case 3:05-cv-03960-EMC Document 162 Filed 08/29/07 Page 23 of 32
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

24

JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 23 -- LIABILITY OF UNION

A union such as the defendant (MEBA) may be held liable for the acts of its agents when the

agent wields the union’s authority -- either actually or apparently -- to perform or cause the

retaliatory act.

An agent represents a union in dealings with third parties (i.e., others). An agent acts with

actual authority when the union has given the agent authority expressly (either orally or by writing)

or impliedly (by conduct of the union causing the agent to reasonably believe that he possesses such

authority).

An agent acts with apparent authority when the union’s conduct causes a third party to

reasonably believe that the agent possesses such authority.

Case 3:05-cv-03960-EMC Document 162 Filed 08/29/07 Page 24 of 32
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

25

JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 24 -- 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 (Mr. Guidry), you must determine the plaintiff’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 (MEBA). You should consider the following:

1. The reasonable value of wages lost; and

2. The emotional pain and suffering experienced.

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

Plaintiff stipulates that compensatory damages for any retaliatory failure to investigate his

grievances do not extend beyond August 18, 2005.

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

conjecture.

Case 3:05-cv-03960-EMC Document 162 Filed 08/29/07 Page 25 of 32
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

26

JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 25 -- BACK PAY

Back pay consists of the wages the plaintiff (Mr. Guidry) would have earned through the

time of trial if he had not been subject to unlawful retaliation by the defendant (MEBA). 

Back pay may not be awarded beyond the date the plaintiff’s employer (MTL/Crowley)

and/or prospective employer (ASM) would have terminated the plaintiff’s employment on that date

regardless of any unlawful retaliation. 

Case 3:05-cv-03960-EMC Document 162 Filed 08/29/07 Page 26 of 32
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

27

JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 26 -- DAMAGES -- MITIGATION

The plaintiff (Mr. Guidry) has a duty to use reasonable efforts to mitigate damages. To

mitigate means to avoid or reduce damages.

The defendant (MEBA) has the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence:

1. that the plaintiff failed to use reasonable efforts to mitigate damages; and

2. the amount by which damages would have been mitigated.

Case 3:05-cv-03960-EMC Document 162 Filed 08/29/07 Page 27 of 32
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

28

JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 27 -- PUNITIVE DAMAGES

Punitive damages may be awarded under federal law and under state law. Under federal law,

the plaintiff (Mr. Guidry) has the burden of proving punitive damages by a preponderance of the

evidence, whereas, under state law, the plaintiff has the burden of proving punitive damages by clear

and convincing evidence.

Punitive Damages Under Federal Law

If you find for the plaintiff, you may, but are not required to, award punitive damages under

Federal Law. The purposes of punitive damages are not to compensate a plaintiff, but to punish a

defendant and to deter a defendant and others from committing similar acts in the future.

The plaintiff has the burden of proving that punitive damages should be awarded, and the

amount, by a preponderance of the evidence. You may award punitive damages only if you find that

the defendant’s conduct was malicious, oppressive or in reckless disregard of the plaintiff’s rights. 

Conduct is malicious if it is accompanied by ill will, or spite, or if it is for the purpose of injuring

another. Conduct is in reckless disregard of the plaintiff’s rights if, under the circumstances, it

reflects complete indifference to the plaintiff’s safety or rights, or the defendant acts in the face of a

perceived risk that its actions will violate the plaintiff’s rights under federal law. An act or omission

is oppressive if the person who [performs] [fails to perform] it injures or damages or otherwise

violates the rights of the plaintiff with unnecessary harshness or severity, such as by the misuse or

abuse of authority or power or by the taking advantage of some weakness or disability or misfortune

of the plaintiff.

You may award punitive damages against the defendant for its agent’s conduct only if:

1. The defendant authorized the doing and the manner of the act of the agent; or

2. The agent was unfit and the defendant was reckless in employing him; or

3. The defendant ratified or approved the act of the agent; or

4. The agent was employed in a managerial capacity and was acting in the scope of

employment.

In determining whether an agent was employed in a managerial capacity (see 4 above), you should

consider the type of authority that the defendant has given to the person and the amount of discretion

Case 3:05-cv-03960-EMC Document 162 Filed 08/29/07 Page 28 of 32
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

29

that the person has in what is done and how it is accomplished. Even if the agent was employed in a

managerial capacity and was acting in the scope of employment, you should not award punitive

damages if the defendant proves by a preponderance of the evidence that agent’s act was contrary to

the defendant’s good-faith efforts to comply with the law. 

If you find that punitive damages are appropriate, you must use reason in setting the amount.

Punitive damages, if any, should be in an amount sufficient to fulfill their purposes but should not

reflect bias, prejudice or sympathy toward any party. In considering punitive damages, you may

consider the degree of reprehensibility of the defendant’s conduct and the relationship of any award

of punitive damages to any actual harm inflicted on the plaintiff.

Punitive Damages Under State Law

If you decide that the conduct by an agent of the defendant caused the plaintiff harm, you

must decide whether that conduct justifies an award of punitive damages against the defendant for

the agent’s conduct under State Law. The purposes of punitive damages are to punish a wrongdoer

for the conduct that harmed the plaintiff and to discourage similar conduct in the future.

You may award punitive damages against the defendant for the agent’s conduct only if the

plaintiff proves by clear and convincing evidence that the agent engaged in that conduct with malice

or oppression. 

“Malice” means that the agent acted with intent to cause injury, or that the agent’s conduct

was despicable and was done with a willful and knowing disregard of the rights or safety of another. 

A person acts with knowing disregard when he or she is aware of the probable dangerous

consequences of his or her conduct and deliberately fails to avoid those consequences.

“Oppression” means that the agent’s conduct was despicable and subjected the plaintiff to

cruel and unjust hardship in knowing disregard of his rights.

“Despicable conduct” is conduct that is so vile, base, or contemptible that it would be looked

down on and despised by reasonable people.

The plaintiff must also prove one of the following by clear and convincing evidence: 

1. That the agent was an officer, a director, or a managing agent of the defendant, who was

acting on behalf of the defendant; or

Case 3:05-cv-03960-EMC Document 162 Filed 08/29/07 Page 29 of 32
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

30

2. That an officer, a director, or a managing agent of the defendant had advance knowledge of

the unfitness of the agent and employed him with a knowing disregard of the rights or safety

of others; or

3. That an officer, a director, or a managing agent of the defendant authorized the agent’s

conduct; or

4. That an officer, a director, or a managing agent of the defendant knew of the agent’s

wrongful conduct and adopted or approved the conduct after it occurred.

An employee is a “managing agent” if he or she exercises substantial independent authority

and judgment in his or her union decision making such that his or her decisions ultimately determine

union policy.

There is no fixed standard for determining the amount of punitive damages, and you are not

required to award any punitive damages. If you decide to award punitive damages, you should

consider all of the following in determining the amount: 

(a) How reprehensible was the defendant’s conduct? In deciding how reprehensible the

defendant’s conduct was, you may consider, among other factors: 

1. Whether the conduct caused physical harm;

2. Whether the defendant disregarded the health or safety of others;

3. Whether the plaintiff was financially weak or vulnerable and the defendant knew the

plaintiff was financially weak or vulnerable and took advantage of him;

4. Whether the defendant’s conduct involved a pattern or practice; and

5. Whether the defendant acted with trickery or deceit.

(b) Is there a reasonable relationship between the amount of punitive damages and the plaintiff’s

harm or between the amount of punitive damages and potential harm that the defendant knew

was likely to occur because of its conduct?

(c) In view of the defendant’s financial condition, what amount is necessary to punish it and

discourage future wrongful conduct? You may not increase the punitive award above an

amount that is otherwise appropriate merely because the defendant has substantial financial

resources. Any award you impose may not exceed the defendant’s ability to pay.

Case 3:05-cv-03960-EMC Document 162 Filed 08/29/07 Page 30 of 32
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

31

JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 28 -- NOMINAL DAMAGES

The law which applies to this case authorizes an award of nominal damages. If you find for

the plaintiff but you find that the plaintiff has failed to prove damages as defined in these

instructions, you must award nominal damages. Nominal damages may not exceed one dollar.

Case 3:05-cv-03960-EMC Document 162 Filed 08/29/07 Page 31 of 32
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

32

JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 29 -- VERDICT FORM -- NO SIGNIFICANCE

Nothing said in these instructions and nothing in any form of verdict prepared for your

convenience is meant to suggest or convey in any way or manner any intimation as to what verdict I

think you should find. What the verdict shall be is the sole and exclusive duty and responsibility of

the jury.

Case 3:05-cv-03960-EMC Document 162 Filed 08/29/07 Page 32 of 32