Torres v. Saba et al

Filing 257

VERDICT - COURT DRAFT (Illston, Susan) (Filed on 11/8/2023)Any non-CM/ECF Participants have been served by First Class Mail to the addresses of record listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7

MARIO TORRES,
Plaintiff,

8
9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Case No. 16-cv-06607-SI
VERDICT FORM

v.
MIKE HANSEN, et al.,
Defendants.

1

CLAIM 1 – WARRANTLESS ENTRY OF APARTMENT

2

1. As to Claim 1, has plaintiff Mario Torres proven by a preponderance of the evidence that

3

defendant Mike Hansen and/or Daniel Smith violated plaintiff’s Fourth Amendment

4

rights when the officers entered the apartment on July 4, 2012, without a warrant?

5
6

Officer Hansen

Yes ________

No ________

7

Officer Smith

Yes ________

No ________

8

If your answer to both parts of this question was “no,” please skip to Question 4. Otherwise,

9

please answer the next question.

10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12

2. As to Claim 1, has plaintiff Mario Torres proven by a preponderance of the evidence that
the defendant(s) caused him injury, damage or harm?

13

Officer Hansen

Yes ________

No ________

14

Officer Smith

Yes ________

No ________

15

If your answer to both parts of this question was “no,” you must award nominal damages of

16

$1, and then skip to Question 4. Nominal damages: $_____________

17

If either answer to this question was “yes,” please answer the next question.

18
19
20
21

3. As to Claim 1, state the amount of compensatory damages proved by plaintiff Mario
Torres.

22

Officer Hansen

$ ________

23

Officer Smith

$ ________

24

Please answer the next question.

25
26
27
28
2

1
2
3

CLAIM 2 – EXCESSIVE FORCE PRIOR TO HANDCUFFING

4

4. As to Claim 2, has plaintiff Mario Torres proven by a preponderance of the evidence that

5

defendant Mike Hansen and/or Daniel Smith used excessive force against him inside the

6

apartment prior to plaintiff being handcuffed?

7
8

Officer Hansen

Yes ________

No ________

9

Officer Smith

Yes ________

No ________

United States District Court
Northern District of California

10
11

If your answer to both questions was “no,” please skip to Question 7. Otherwise, please

12

answer the next question.

13
14
15

5. As to Claim 2, has plaintiff Mario Torres proven by a preponderance of the evidence that
the defendant(s) caused him injury, damage or harm?

16

Officer Hansen

Yes ________

No ________

17

Officer Smith

Yes ________

No ________

18

If your answer to both parts of this question was “no,” you must award nominal damages of

19

$1, and then skip to Question 7. Nominal damages: $_____________

20

If either answer to this question was “yes,” please answer the next question.

21
22
23
24

6. As to Claim 2, state the amount of compensatory damages proved by plaintiff Mario
Torres.

25

Officer Hansen

$ ________

26

Officer Smith

$ ________

27

Please answer the next question.

28
3

1
2
3
4
5

CLAIM 3 – EXCESSIVE FORCE AFTER HANDCUFFING

6

7. As to Claim 3, has plaintiff Mario Torres proven by a preponderance of the evidence that

7

defendant Michael Hansen used excessive force against him inside the apartment after

8

plaintiff was handcuffed?

9
Yes ________

10

No ________

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12

If your answer was “no,” please skip to Question 10. Otherwise, please answer the next

13

question.

14
15

8. As to Claim 3, has plaintiff Mario Torres proven by a preponderance of the evidence that

16

defendant Michael Hansen caused him injury, damage or harm?
Yes ________

17

No ________

18

If your answer to this question was “no,” you must award nominal damages of $1, and then

19

skip to Question 10. Nominal damages: $_____________

20

If your answer to this question was “yes,” please answer the next question.

21
22
23
24

9. As to Claim 3, state the amount of compensatory damages proved by plaintiff Mario
Torres.

25

Officer Hansen

26

Please go to the next question.

$ ________

27
28
4

1

PUNITIVE DAMAGES

2

If you answered “no” to all of the previous questions, do not consider any of the

3

remaining questions and go to the end of the verdict form. Please have the jury

4

foreperson sign and date the form, and return it to the courtroom deputy. If you answered

5

“yes” to any part of Question 1, 4 or 7, please answer the next question.

United States District Court
Northern District of California

6
7

10. Has plaintiff Mario Torres proven by a preponderance of the evidence that defendants’

8

conduct was malicious, oppressive or committed in reckless disregard of his

9

constitutional rights?

10

Officer Hansen

Yes ________

No ________

11

Officer Smith

Yes ________

No ________

12
13

If you answered “no” to this question, skip Question 11 and go to the end of the verdict form.

14

Please have the jury foreperson sign and date the form, and return it to the courtroom deputy.

15

If you answered “yes” to this question, please answer Question 11.

16
17

11. State the amount of punitive damages that you award.

18

Officer Hansen

$ ________

19

Officer Smith

$ ________

20
21
22

Please have the foreperson sign and date the form.

23
24

Dated: __________________

___________________________
Foreperson

25
26
27
28
5