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

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

VECTREN COMMUNICATIONS SERVICES,

Plaintiff,

 v.

CITY OF ALAMEDA,

Defendant. /

No. C 08-3137 SI

SPECIAL VERDICT

We the jury in the above captioned action, find as follows on the questions submitted to us:

Case 3:08-cv-03137-SI Document 204 Filed 03/03/10 Page 1 of 6
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

Part 1: Vectren’s Breach of Contract Claims against Alameda related to operation of the

Telecom System:

A – Rates

A-1: Did Vectren prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, all of the elements necessary to

establish that Alameda breached the 2004 Installment Sale Agreement with respect to

the rates it charged to customers?

Yes __________ No __________. 

If you answered “Yes” to Question A-1, please answer the next question.

Otherwise, please go to Question B-1.

A-2: Did Alameda prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, that Vectren knew, or by the

exercise of reasonable care should have known, before August 29, 2006, of all of the

elements of this claim for breach? 

Yes __________ No __________. 

If you answered “No” to Question A-2, please answer the next question.

Otherwise, please go to Question B-1.

A-3: Did Vectren prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, that it was harmed as a result

of this breach?

Yes __________ No __________. 

Please answer the next question.

B - Staffing

B-1: Did Vectren prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, all of the elements necessary to

establish that Alameda breached the 2004 Installment Sale Agreement with respect to

the staffing of its operation of the Telecom System?

Yes __________ No __________. 

If you answered “Yes” to Question B-1, please answer the next question.

Otherwise, please go to Question C-1.

B-2: Did Alameda prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, that Vectren knew, or by the

exercise of reasonable care should have known, before August 29, 2006, of all of the

Case 3:08-cv-03137-SI Document 204 Filed 03/03/10 Page 2 of 6
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

elements of this claim for breach? 

Yes __________ No __________. 

If you answered “No” to Question B-2, please answer the next question.

Otherwise, please go to Question C-1.

B-3: Did Vectren prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, that it was harmed as a result

of this breach?

Yes __________ No __________. 

Please answer the next question.

C - Voice/Telephone

C-1: Did Vectren prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, all of the elements necessary to

establish that Alameda breached the 2004 Installment Sale Agreement with respect to

the addition of, or failure to add, voice or telephone service to the Telecom System ?

Yes __________ No __________. 

If you answered “Yes” to Question C-1, please answer the next question. 

Otherwise, please go to Question D-1.

C-2: Did Alameda prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, that Vectren knew, or by the

exercise of reasonable care should have known, before August 29, 2006, of all of the

elements of this claim for breach? 

Yes __________ No __________. 

If you answered “No” to Question C-2, please answer the next question.

Otherwise, please go to Question D-1.

C-3: Did Vectren prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, that it was harmed as a result

of this breach?

Yes __________ No __________. 

D - Damages

D-1: If you answered “Yes” to any of the questions A-3, B-3 and/or C-3, please state the

amount of damages caused to Vectren by the breach or breaches you found:

$___________________ 

Case 3:08-cv-03137-SI Document 204 Filed 03/03/10 Page 3 of 6
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

Part 2: Vectren’s Breach of Contract Claims against Alameda related to allegedly

improper accounting:

A: Did Vectren prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, all of the elements necessary to

establish that Alameda breached the 2004 Installment Sale Agreement by improperly

accounting for the Net Series 2002A Revenues?

Yes __________ No __________. 

If you answered “Yes” to Question A, please answer the next question. 

Otherwise, please go to Part 3.

B: Did Alameda prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, that Vectren knew, or by the

exercise of reasonable care should have known, before August 29, 2006, of all of the

elements of this claim for breach? 

Yes __________ No __________. 

If you answered “No” to Question B, please answer the next question. 

Otherwise, please go to Part 3.

C: Did Vectren prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, that it was harmed as a result

of this breach?

Yes __________ No __________. 

D: If you answered “Yes” to question C, please state the amount of damages caused to

Vectren by this breach:

$___________________ 

Case 3:08-cv-03137-SI Document 204 Filed 03/03/10 Page 4 of 6
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

Part 3: Vectren’s Breach of Contract Claims against Alameda related to allegedly

improper sale of the Telecom System:

A: Did Vectren prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, all of the elements necessary to

establish that Alameda breached the 2004 Installment Sale Agreement by improperly

selling the Telecom System?

Yes __________ No __________. 

If you answered “Yes” to Question A, please answer the next question. 

Otherwise, please go to Part 4.

B: Did Alameda prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, that Vectren knew, or by the

exercise of reasonable care should have known, before August 29, 2006, of all of the

elements of this claim for breach? 

Yes __________ No __________. 

If you answered “No” to Question B, please answer the next question. 

Otherwise, please go to Part 4.

C: Did Vectren prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, that it was harmed as a result

of this breach?

Yes __________ No __________. 

D: If you answered “Yes” to question C, please state the amount of damages caused to

Vectren by this breach:

$___________________ 

[Note: Please state all damages you find based on this breach. If you have also found damages related

to earlier breaches, do not be concerned about duplication of damages; the Court will assess the final

damage figures after the verdict is returned.] 

Case 3:08-cv-03137-SI Document 204 Filed 03/03/10 Page 5 of 6
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

Part 4: Alameda’s affirmative defense of waiver:

Did Alameda prove, by clear and convincing evidence, all of the elements necessary to establish

that Vectren gave up or waived its right to have Alameda perform the following obligations under the

2004 Installment Sale Agreement? 

Waiver of obligations re: rate covenant? Yes __________ No __________

Waiver of obligations re: staffing provisions? Yes __________ No __________

Waiver of obligations re: voice/telephone? Yes __________ No __________

Waiver of obligations re: 

 sale of Telecom System? Yes __________ No __________

Dated: ________________

______________________________

FOREPERSON

Case 3:08-cv-03137-SI Document 204 Filed 03/03/10 Page 6 of 6