Jackson et al v. City Of Pittsburg et al

Filing 196

FINAL JURY INSTRUCTIONS AND SPECIAL VERDICT FORM. Signed by Judge Alsup on July 22, 2010. (Attachments: # 1 Appendix Special Verdict Form)(whalc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/22/2010)

Download PDF
Jackson et al v. City Of Pittsburg et al Doc. 196 Att. 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 FREDERICK JACKSON, ASHLEY NICOLE JACKSON, and BRIANA FREDRANIQUE ANNETTE JACKSON, Plaintiffs, v. 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 (Bade # 291), and WILLIAM BLAKE HATCHER, individually and as an officer of the City of Pittsburg Police Department (Badge # 274), Defendants. / No. C 09-01016 WHA 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 SPECIAL VERDICT FORM Dockets.Justia.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1. FREDERICK JACKSON: A. With respect to the tasing, has plaintiff Frederick Jackson proven that any of the following officers used excessive force against him in violation of the Fourth Amendment? Yes Officer Lombardi Officer Smith Officer Dumpa ____________ ____________ ____________ No ___________ ___________ ___________ B. With respect to the alleged slamming against the vehicle, has United States District Court 11 For the Northern District of California plaintiff Frederick Jackson proven that any of the following officers used excessive force against him in violation of the Fourth Amendment? Yes Officer Hatcher Officer Smith ____________ ____________ No ___________ ___________ 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 C. With respect to his arrest, has plaintiff Frederick Jackson proven that Officer Smith arrested him without probable cause in violation of the Fourth Amendment? Yes ____________ No ___________ 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 D. With respect to the tasing, has plaintiff Frederick Jackson proven that any of the following officers tased him in retaliation for using speech protected by the First Amendment? Yes Officer Lombardi Officer Smith Officer Dumpa ____________ ____________ ____________ No ___________ ___________ ___________ E. With respect to the alleged slamming against the vehicle, has plaintiff Frederick Jackson proven that any of the following officers slammed him against a vehicle in retaliation for using speech protected by the First Amendment? Yes Officer Hatcher Officer Smith ____________ ____________ 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 F. With respect to his arrest, has plaintiff Frederick Jackson proven that Officer Smith arrested him in retaliation for using speech protected by the First Amendment? Yes ____________ No ___________ G. If you have answered "yes" to any of the foregoing questions, state the amount of damages proven for each category of alleged conduct for which you have answered "yes." The total damages award, if any, must be apportioned by you into the three categories shown, i.e., the three categories must add up to the total (if any). (If no damages have been proven but you nonetheless have 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 found a constitutional violation, you must award nominal damages up to one dollar.) Tasing $____________________ Slamming $____________________ Arrest $____________________ Total $____________________ 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 2. 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 (or indicate up to one dollar in nominal damages): $_______________ 3. BRIANA JACKSON: A. Has plaintiff Briana Jackson proven her claim of negligent infliction of emotional distress as to any of the following defendants? Yes Officer Lombardi ____________ 4 No ___________ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 4. Officer Smith Officer Dumpa ____________ ____________ ___________ ___________ B. If so, state the amount of any damages proven: $_______________ If you have answered "yes" to any of Questions 1 and 2, state whether plaintiffs have proven by a preponderance of the evidence that punitive damages should be awarded against any officer you find violated any Fourth Amendment rights: 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 Dated: July ___, 2010. Officer Lombardi Officer Smith Officer Dumpa Officer Hatcher Yes ____________ ____________ ____________ ____________ No ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ If you answer "yes" as to this question, 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 of any punitive damages. 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 5

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?