Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_14-cv-01910/USCOURTS-cand-3_14-cv-01910-9/pdf.json

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

---

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 Californi

a

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

STEPHEN E. EBERHARD, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL, et al., 

Defendants. 

Case No. 14-cv-01910-JD 

PROPOSED FINAL JURY 

INSTRUCTIONS 

The Court proposes to use these instructions as the final instructions for jury deliberations. 

Any objections are due by 5:00 pm on February 24, 2016. The punitive damages instruction will 

only be given if the evidence presented warrants consideration of punitive damages by the jury. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: February 22, 2016 

 

JAMES DONATO 

United States District Judge 

 

Case 3:14-cv-01910-JD Document 264 Filed 02/22/16 Page 1 of 25
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 Californi

a

Duty of Jury 

Members of the Jury: Now that you have heard all of the evidence, it is my duty to instruct 

you on the law. 

A copy of these instructions will be available in the jury room to consult during your 

deliberations. 

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 3:14-cv-01910-JD Document 264 Filed 02/22/16 Page 2 of 25
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 Californi

a

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 3:14-cv-01910-JD Document 264 Filed 02/22/16 Page 3 of 25
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 Californi

a

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 have given 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 3:14-cv-01910-JD Document 264 Filed 02/22/16 Page 4 of 25
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 Californi

a

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 3:14-cv-01910-JD Document 264 Filed 02/22/16 Page 5 of 25
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 Californi

a

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 3:14-cv-01910-JD Document 264 Filed 02/22/16 Page 6 of 25
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 Californi

a

Expert Opinion 

Some witnesses, because of education or experience, are permitted to state opinions and 

the reasons for those opinions. 

Opinion testimony should be judged just like any other testimony. You may accept it or 

reject it, and give it as much weight as you think it deserves, considering the witness’s education 

and experience, the reasons given for the opinion, and all the other evidence in the case. 

 

Case 3:14-cv-01910-JD Document 264 Filed 02/22/16 Page 7 of 25
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 Californi

a

Testimony of Police Officers 

The testimony of a police officer should be considered by you just as any other evidence 

in this case, and in evaluating his or her credibility, you should use the same guidelines which 

you apply to the testimony of any witness. You should not give either greater or lesser credence 

to the testimony of a witness merely because he or she is a police officer. 

 

Case 3:14-cv-01910-JD Document 264 Filed 02/22/16 Page 8 of 25
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 Californi

a

Stipulation of Facts 

The parties have agreed to the following facts. You should treat these facts as having been 

proved. 

1. On April 12, 2013, a meeting was held at the office of The Willits News (TWN), 

attended by Willits News publisher Debbie Clark, Willits News Editor Linda Williams, Caltrans 

Public Information Officer Phil Frisbie, and plaintiff Stephen Eberhard. The purpose of the 

meeting was to discuss access to the Willits Bypass Project site. 

2. Defendant CHP Officers Christopher Dabbs and Kory Reynolds arrested Eberhard 

at the Willits Bypass Project on July 23, 2013. 

3. Eberhard was arrested for trespassing under California Penal Code Section 602(k). 

4. Trespass under Section 602 of the California Penal Code is a misdemeanor offense 

under California law. 

5. After his July 23, 2013 arrest, Dabbs and Reynolds caused Eberhard to be booked 

into Mendocino County Jail at about 8:20 a.m. 

6. Eberhard was released from jail at about noon on July 23, 2013. 

 

Case 3:14-cv-01910-JD Document 264 Filed 02/22/16 Page 9 of 25
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 Californi

a

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 3:14-cv-01910-JD Document 264 Filed 02/22/16 Page 10 of 25
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 Californi

a

Section 1983 Claim -- Introductory Instruction 

Stephen Eberhard brings claims against defendants under the federal statute, 42 U.S.C. § 

1983, which provides that any person or persons who, under color of law, deprives another of any 

rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States shall be 

liable to the injured party. 

 

Case 3:14-cv-01910-JD Document 264 Filed 02/22/16 Page 11 of 25
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 Californi

a

Section 1983 Claim Against Defendant in Individual Capacity -- Elements and Burden of 

Proof 

In order to prevail on his Section 1983 claims against the individual defendants, Officers 

Christopher Dabbs, Kory Reynolds, and Teddy Babcock, plaintiff Eberhard must prove each of 

the following elements by a preponderance of the evidence: 

1. the defendants acted under color of law; and 

2. the acts of Dabbs, Reynolds, and/or Babcock deprived Eberhard of his particular rights 

under the United States Constitution as explained in an instruction that I will provide to you in a 

moment. 

A person acts “under color of law” when the person acts or purports to act in the 

performance of official duties under any state, county, or municipal law, ordinance, or regulation. 

The parties have stipulated that defendants Dabbs, Reynolds, and Babcock acted under 

color of law. You should treat that element as proved. 

If you find Eberhard has proved each of these elements as to a particular defendant or 

defendants, and if you find that Eberhard has proved all the elements he is required to prove under 

later instructions, your verdict should be for Eberhard against a particular defendant. If, on the 

other hand, Eberhard has failed to prove any one or more of these elements against any one of the 

defendants, your verdict should be for that defendant. 

 

Case 3:14-cv-01910-JD Document 264 Filed 02/22/16 Page 12 of 25
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 Californi

a

Particular Rights – First Amendment – “Citizen” Plaintiff 

As previously explained, plaintiff Eberhard has the burden to prove that the acts of the 

defendants, Officers Dabbs, Reynolds and/or Babcock, deprived him of particular rights under the 

United States Constitution. 

In this case, Eberhard alleges that Dabbs and Reynolds deprived him of his rights under the 

First Amendment to the Constitution when they arrested him on July 23, 2013. 

Eberhard also alleges that Babcock deprived him of his rights under the First Amendment 

to the Constitution when Babcock pushed him and yelled at him on May 21, 2013.

Under the First Amendment, a person has the right to take photographs and gather 

information about newsworthy events in places open to the public. In order to prove defendants 

deprived the plaintiff of this First Amendment right, the plaintiff must prove the following 

additional elements by a preponderance of the evidence: 

1. Eberhard engaged in conduct protected under the First Amendment; 

2. defendants Dabbs and Reynolds arrested Eberhard; and/or 

3. defendant Babcock pushed and yelled at Eberhard; and 

4. the Officer’s action would chill or silence a person of ordinary firmness from future 

First Amendment activities; and 

5. the Officer’s desire to cause the chilling effect was a substantial or motivating 

factor for the Officer’s action. 

A substantial or motivating factor is a significant factor. 

 

Case 3:14-cv-01910-JD Document 264 Filed 02/22/16 Page 13 of 25
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 Californi

a

Bane Act Claim – Essential Factual Elements 

Eberhard claims that Babcock, Dabbs, and/or Reynolds intentionally interfered with or 

attempted to interfere with his civil rights by threats, intimidation, or coercion. To establish this 

claim, Eberhard must prove all of the following by a preponderance of the evidence: 

1. That Babcock, Dabbs, and/or Reynolds made threats of violence against Eberhard, 

causing Eberhard to reasonably believe that if he exercised his civil rights, the officer(s) would 

commit violence against Eberhard or his property, and that the officer(s) had the apparent ability 

to carry out the threats; or 

That Babcock, Dabbs, and/or Reynolds acted violently against Eberhard and his property, 

to prevent him from exercising his civil rights, or to retaliate against him for having exercised 

those civil rights; 

2. That Eberhard was harmed; and 

3. That the officer’s conduct was a substantial factor in causing Eberhard’s harm. 

For the arrest incident on July 23, 2013, Eberhard must also prove that Dabbs and 

Reynolds used threats, intimidation or coercion independent and separate from the arrest itself. 

 

Case 3:14-cv-01910-JD Document 264 Filed 02/22/16 Page 14 of 25
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 Californi

a

Proof of Damages and Measures of Types of Damages 

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 Eberhard on his Section 1983 and/or state Bane Act claims, you must 

determine his actual damages. Eberhard has the burden of proving damages by a preponderance of 

the evidence. Damages means the amount of money that will reasonably and fairly compensate 

Eberhard for any injury you find was caused by the defendants. 

In determining the measure of damages, you should consider: 

1. The nature and extent of the injuries; 

2. The mental, physical, and emotional pain and suffering experienced; 

3. The damage to Eberhard’s reputation. 

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 3:14-cv-01910-JD Document 264 Filed 02/22/16 Page 15 of 25
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 Californi

a

Mitigation of Damages 

 Eberhard has a duty to use reasonable efforts to mitigate damages. To mitigate means to 

avoid or reduce damages.

Defendants Babcock, Dabbs, and Reynolds have the burden of proving by a preponderance 

of the evidence: 

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

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

 

Case 3:14-cv-01910-JD Document 264 Filed 02/22/16 Page 16 of 25
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 Californi

a

Bane Act Damages 

If you decide that Eberhard has proved his claims under the Bane Act against defendant 

Babcock, Dabbs, and/or Reynolds, and has proven damages as defined in these instructions, you 

may award Eberhard up to three times the amount of his actual damages as a penalty against the 

defendant(s). 

 

Case 3:14-cv-01910-JD Document 264 Filed 02/22/16 Page 17 of 25
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 Californi

a

Nominal Damages for Section 1983 Claims Only 

Section 1983 authorizes an award of nominal damages. If you find for Eberhard under his 

Section 1983 claims, but you find that he has failed to prove damages as defined in these 

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

 

Case 3:14-cv-01910-JD Document 264 Filed 02/22/16 Page 18 of 25
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 Californi

a

Punitive Damages 

If you find for Eberhard, you may, but are not required to, award punitive damages. The 

purposes of punitive damages are to punish a defendant and to deter similar acts in the future. 

Punitive damages may not be awarded to compensate a plaintiff. 

Eberhard has the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence that punitive 

damages should be awarded, and, if so, the amount of any such damages. 

You may award punitive damages only if you find that the defendant’s conduct that 

harmed the plaintiff 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 

the plaintiff. 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 if 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 defendant 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. 

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 the amount of any 

punitive damages, consider the degree of reprehensibility of the defendant’s conduct, including 

whether the conduct that harmed the plaintiff was particularly reprehensible because it also caused 

actual harm or posed a substantial risk of harm to people who are not parties to this case. You may 

not, however, set the amount of any punitive damages in order to punish the defendant for harm to 

anyone other than the plaintiff in this case. 

In addition, you may consider the relationship of any award of punitive damages to any 

actual harm inflicted on the plaintiff. 

Punitive damages may not be awarded against the California Highway Patrol. You may 

impose punitive damages against one or more of the defendants and not others, and may award 

different amounts against different defendants. Punitive damages may be awarded even if you 

Case 3:14-cv-01910-JD Document 264 Filed 02/22/16 Page 19 of 25
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 Californi

a

award plaintiff only nominal, and not compensatory, damages. 

 

Case 3:14-cv-01910-JD Document 264 Filed 02/22/16 Page 20 of 25
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 Californi

a

No Use of Electronic Technology to Conduct Research On or Communicate About a Case 

During your deliberations, you must not communicate with or provide any information to 

anyone by any means about this case. Most or all of you use cell phones, smartphones, computers, 

iPads and similar devices to access the internet and other electronic sources and media. You may 

not use any device to communicate with anyone any information about this case. That means you 

cannot talk to anyone on the phone, correspond with anyone, or electronically communicate with 

anyone about this case through email, texting, Facebook, Twitter or any other social media, or a 

blog or personal webpage. You can only discuss the case in the jury room with your fellow jurors 

during deliberations. I expect you will promptly inform me if you become aware that a fellow 

juror has violated this instruction. 

You also cannot use any electronic device or the internet or any other source to investigate 

the case. It is vitally important that you decide this case based solely on the evidence presented in 

this courtroom. Information on the internet or available through websites and social media might 

be wrong, incomplete, or inaccurate. If you become aware that a fellow juror has used the internet 

or done other research, you must let me know right away. 

You are permitted to discuss the case only with your fellow jurors during deliberations 

because they have seen and heard the same evidence you have. In our judicial system, it is 

important that you are not influenced by anything or anyone outside of this courtroom. Otherwise, 

your decision may be based on information known only by you and not your fellow jurors or the 

parties in the case. This would unfairly and adversely impact the judicial process. 

 

Case 3:14-cv-01910-JD Document 264 Filed 02/22/16 Page 21 of 25
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 Californi

a

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 3:14-cv-01910-JD Document 264 Filed 02/22/16 Page 22 of 25
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 Californi

a

Consideration of Evidence and Conduct of the Jury 

I have specifically cautioned you not to use any electronic device or service to 

communicate about or research this case. Outside of your deliberations, you should also 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 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; do not do any research or make any investigation or in any other way try 

to learn about the case on your own. 

The law requires these restrictions to ensure the parties have a fair trial based on the same 

evidence that each party has had an opportunity to address. 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 

me immediately. 

 

Case 3:14-cv-01910-JD Document 264 Filed 02/22/16 Page 23 of 25
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 Californi

a

Communication with Court 

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

a note to me through my courtroom deputy, Ms. Clark, 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 3:14-cv-01910-JD Document 264 Filed 02/22/16 Page 24 of 25
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 Californi

a

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 3:14-cv-01910-JD Document 264 Filed 02/22/16 Page 25 of 25