McHale v. Silicon Valley Law Group
Filing
234
Final Verdict Form. Signed by Judge Joseph C. Spero on September 13, 2013. (jcslc2S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/13/2013)
1
2
3
4
UNITED STATES D
D
DISTRICT C
COURT
5
NORTHER DISTRIC OF CALI
RN
CT
IFORNIA
6
7
GERARD A MCHALE,
G
M
Case No. 1
10-cv-04864
4-JCS
Plaintiff,
8
v.
9
10
SI
ILICON VA
ALLEY LAW GROUP,
W
Defendant.
.
United States District Court
Northern District of California
11
12
13
14
15
FIN
NAL VERD
DICT FORM
M
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
ated: Septem
mber 13, 2013
3
Da
___
__________
___________
__________
________
JO
OSEPH C. SP
PERO
Un
nited States M
Magistrate Ju
udge
1
We, the jury, unanimously agree to the answers to the following questions and return them
under the instructions of this Court as our verdict in this case.
2
3
4
5
1. Do you find that Plaintiff GERARD A. McHALE, P.A., TRUSTEE OF THE 1031
DEBTORS LIQUIDATING TRUST (the “BANKRUPTCY TRUSTEE”), has proved
by the preponderance of the evidence that SILICON VALLEY LAW GROUP was
negligent?
6
7
_____ Yes
_____ No
8
9
10
United States District Court
Northern District of California
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
If your answer to Question 1 is “Yes,” please answer Question 2. If your answer to
Question 1 is “No,” do not answer any further questions. Please have the Jury Foreperson sign
and date this Verdict Form and return it to Ms. Karen Hom.
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
1
2
2. Do you find that BANKRUPTCY TRUSTEE has proved by a preponderance of the
evidence that SILICON VALLEY LAW GROUP’s negligence was a substantial
factor in causing harm to 1031 Advance?
3
4
_____ Yes
_____ No
5
6
7
8
9
10
United States District Court
Northern District of California
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
If your answer to Question 2 is “Yes,” please answer Question 3. If your answer to
18
Question 2 is “No,” do not answer any further questions. Please have the Jury Foreperson sign
19
and date this Verdict Form and return it to Ms. Karen Hom.
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3
1
2
3. What amount of money do you find to be the monetary damage sustained by 1031
Advance, Inc. which the BANKRUPTCY TRUSTEE has proved by the
preponderance of the evidence?
3
4
_________________
5
6
7
8
9
10
United States District Court
Northern District of California
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
Please answer Question 4.
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
4
1
4. Comparative fault: Do you find that SILICON VALLEY LAW GROUP has proved
by a preponderance of the evidence that 1031 Advance was negligent?
2
3
_____ Yes
_____ No
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
United States District Court
Northern District of California
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
If your answer to Question 4 is “Yes,” please answer Question 5. If your answer to
Question 4 is “No,” please go directly to Question 7.
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
5
1
2
5. Comparative Fault: Do you find that SILICON VALLEY LAW GROUP has proved
by a preponderance of the evidence that 1031 Advance’s negligence was a substantial
factor in causing harm to 1031 Advance?
3
4
_____ Yes
_____ No
5
6
7
8
9
10
United States District Court
Northern District of California
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
If your answer to Question 5 is “Yes,” please answer Question 6. If your answer to
Question 5 is “No,” please go directly to Question 7.
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
6
1
2
6. What percentage of responsibility for 1031 Advance’s harm do you assign to:
SILICON VALLEY LAW GROUP
______%
1031 ADVANCE, INC.
______%
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
United States District Court
Northern District of California
11
12
13
14
15
16
Please answer Question 7.
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
7
1
2
7. Do you find that SILICON VALLEY LAW GROUP has proved by a preponderance
of the evidence that the criminal conduct of Edward Okun was a superseding cause of
1031 Advance’s damage?
3
4
_____ Yes
_____ No
5
6
7
8
9
10
United States District Court
Northern District of California
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
DATE ___________________
SIGNATURE OF FOREPERSON ___________
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
8
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?