Jackson et al v. City Of Pittsburg et al

Filing 192

PROPOSED SPECIAL VERDICT FORM FOR JULY 21 CHARGING CONFERENCE. Signed by Judge Alsup on July 21, 2010. (whalc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/21/2010)

Download PDF
Jackson et al v. City Of Pittsburg et al Doc. 192 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA United States District Court 11 For the Northern District of California 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 FREDERICK JACKSON, ASHLEY NICOLE JACKSON, a minor, BRIANA FREDRANIQUE ANNETTE JACKSON, a minor, and SHAWNA YVETTE MARTIN, Plaintiffs, v. CITY OF PITTSBURG, AARON L. BAKER, individually and in his official capacity as Chief of Police of the City of Pittsburg Police Department, G. LOMBARDI, individually and as an officer of the City of Pittsburg Police Department (Badge # 275), C. SMITH, individually and as an officer of the City of Pittsburg Police Department (Badge # 285), P. DUMPA, individually and as an officer of the City of Pittsburg Police Department (Badge # 291), WILLIAM BLAKE HATCHER, individually and as an officer of the City of Pittsburg Police Department (Badge # 274), and DOES 1100, inclusive, Defendants. / PROPOSED VERDICT FORM No. C 09-01016 WHA Dockets.Justia.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 YOUR ANSWERS MUST BE UNANIMOUS. 1. Frederick Jackson A. Has plaintiff Frederick Jackson proven that any of the following officers used excessive force against him on March 30, 2008, in violation of the Fourth Amendment? Yes Officer Lombardi Officer Smith Officer Dumpa ___________ ___________ ___________ No ____________ ____________ ____________ United States District Court 11 For the Northern District of California 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3. 2. B. If so, state the amount of any damages proven:_________________ Ashley Jackson A. Has plaintiff Ashley Jackson proven that Officer Lombardi used excessive force against her on March 30, 2008, in violation of the Fourth Amendment? Yes ___________ No ____________ B. If so, state the amount of any damages proven:_________________ Shawna Martin A. Has plaintiff Shawna Martin proven that Officer Spires used excessive force against her on March 30, 2008, in violation of the Fourth Amendment? Yes ___________ 2 No ____________ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Officer Lombardi Officer Smith Officer Dumpa 4. Briana Jackson A. Has plaintiff Briana Jackson proven her claim of negligent infliction of emotional distress as to any of the following defendants? Yes ___________ ___________ ___________ No ____________ ____________ ____________ B. If so, state the amount of any damages proven?________________ United States District Court 11 For the Northern District of California 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 5. B. If so, state the amount of any damages proven:_________________ If you have answered yes to any of Questions 13, state whether plaintiffs have proven by clear and convincing evidence that punitive damages should be awarded against any officer you find violated any Fourth Amendment rights: Yes Officer Lombardi Officer Smith Officer Dumpa Officer Spires ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ No ____________ ____________ ____________ ____________ If you answer "yes" as to Question 5, then there will be a short supplemental proceeding immediately after your verdict. The purpose of the short supplemental proceeding would be to allow you to fix the amount. 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Dated: July ____, 2010. CONCLUSION ONCE YOU HAVE FINISHED ANSWERING THE NECESSARY QUESTIONS UNANIMOUSLY, PLEASE HAVE THE FOREPERSON SIGN AND DATE THIS FORM. THEN CONTACT THE DEPUTY OR MARSHAL TO INFORM HIM OR HER THAT YOU HAVE COMPLETED YOUR DELIBERATIONS. Foreperson United States District Court 11 For the Northern District of California 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 4

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?