Prestige Capital Corporation v. Shorebird Homeowners Association

Filing 125

PROPOSED VERDICT FORM. Signed by Judge Paul S. Grewal on April 30, 2014. (psglc3S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/30/2014)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

8

SAN JOSE DIVISION

11

PRESTIGE CAPITAL CORPORATION,

12
13
14

Plaintiff,
v.
SHOREBIRD HOMEOWNERS
ASSOCIATION, et al.,

15

Defendants.

16

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 5:12-cv-06072-PSG
[PROPOSED] VERDICT FORM

17
IT IS SO ORDERED.
18
19

Date: April 30, 2014

____________________________
Paul S. Grewal
United States Magistrate Judge

20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
1
Case No. 5:12-cv-06072-PSG
[PROPOSED] VERDICT FORM

SECTION 1: PROMISSORY ESTOPPEL
AGAINST SHOREBIRD HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION

1
2

We, the jury, unanimously answer the Questions submitted to us as follows:

3
1-A. Did Shorebird clearly and unambiguously make a promise?
4
5
6
7
8
9

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
11
12
13

Yes _____ No _____
If your answer to Question 1-A is “Yes,” then answer Question 1-B.
If your answer to Question 1-A is “No,” go to Section 2.
1-B. Did Prestige reasonably and foreseeably rely on Shorebird’s promise?
Yes _____ No _____
If your answer to Question 1-B is “Yes,” then answer Question 1-C.
If your answer to Question 1-B is “No,” go to Section 2.
1-C. Was Prestige harmed as a result of its reliance on Shorebird’s promise?
Yes _____ No _____

14
15

GO TO SECTION 2.

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
Case No. 5:12-cv-06072-PSG
[PROPOSED] VERDICT FORM

1
2

SECTION 2: GOODS AND SERVICES RENDERED
AGAINST SHOREBIRD HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION
We, the jury, unanimously answer the Questions submitted to us as follows:

3
4
5
6
7
8
9

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
11
12
13

2-A. Had Shorebird become indebted for services it had received from Draeger Construction,
xcxxxxxxixInc. at Shorebird’s request?
Yes _____ No _____
If your answer to Question 2-A is “Yes,” then answer Question 2-B.
If your answer to Question 2-A is “No,” go to Section 3.
2-B. Had Shorebird agreed to pay for Draeger Construction Inc.’s services at the time of sale
xcxxxxxxixand delivery of the services?
Yes _____ No _____
If your answer to Question 2-B is “Yes,” then answer Question 2-C.
If your answer to Question 2-B is “No,” go to Section 3.
2-C. Has Shorebird refused to pay for the services rendered by Draeger Construction, Inc.?
Yes _____ No _____

14
15

GO TO SECTION 3.

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3
Case No. 5:12-cv-06072-PSG
[PROPOSED] VERDICT FORM

1
2

SECTION 3: IMPLIED WARRANTY OF AUTHORITY
AGAINST ADRIANA DASILVA
We, the jury, unanimously answer the Questions submitted to us as follows:

3
3-A. We, the jury, have answered “Yes” to Question 1-C or Question 2-C.
4
5
6
7
8
9

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18

Yes _____ No _____
If your answer to Question 3-A is “Yes,” then answer Question 3-B.
If your answer to Question 3-A is “No,” go to Section 4.
3-B. Was DaSilva authorized, expressly or impliedly, to sign the letters on behalf of
cccccShorebird?
Yes _____ No _____
If your answer to Question 3-B is “No,” then answer Question 3-C.
If your answer to Question 3-B is “Yes,” go to Section 4.
3-C. Did DaSilva’s signatures on the letters create new contractual obligations for Shorebird
apart from the pre-existing obligations arising from the underlying construction
agreement?
Yes _____ No _____
If your answer to Question 3-C is “Yes,” then answer Question 3-D.
If your answer to Question 3-C is “No,” go to Section 4.
3-D. Did DaSilva’s breach of the warranty of authority cause Prestige to suffer financial
damage?
Yes _____ No _____

19
20

GO TO SECTION 4.

21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
4
Case No. 5:12-cv-06072-PSG
[PROPOSED] VERDICT FORM

SECTION 4: BREACH OF CONTRACT
AGAINST DRAEGER CONSTRUCTION

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
11
12
13
14
15

We, the jury, unanimously answer the Questions submitted to us as follows:
4-A. Was there was a valid contract between Prestige and Draeger Construction?
Yes _____ No _____
If your answer to Question 4-A is “Yes,” then answer Question 4-B.
If your answer to Question 4-A is “No,” go to Section 5.
4-B. Did Prestige either perform pursuant to the contract or was its nonperformance excused?
Yes _____ No _____
If your answer to Question 4-B is “Yes,” then answer Question 4-C.
If your answer to Question 4-B is “No,” go to Section 5.
4-C. Did Draeger Construction unjustifiably fail to perform pursuant to the contract?
Yes _____ No _____
If your answer to Question 4-C is “Yes,” then answer Question 4-D.
If your answer to Question 4-C is “No,” go to Section 5.
4-D. Was Prestige harmed by Draeger Construction’s failure to perform pursuant to the
contract?
Yes _____ No _____

16
17

GO TO SECTION 5.

18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
5
Case No. 5:12-cv-06072-PSG
[PROPOSED] VERDICT FORM

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
11
12
13

SECTION 5: BREACH OF WARRANTY
AGAINST DRAEGER CONSTRUCTION, JOHN DRAEGER, AND JEFFREY DRAEGER
We, the jury, unanimously answer the Questions submitted to us as follows:
5-A. Did Draeger warrant that it had submitted accurate and undisputed statements of
indebtedness from account debtors including Shorebird?
Yes _____ No _____
If your answer to Question 5-A is “Yes,” then answer Question 5-B.
If your answer to Question 5-A is “No,” go to Section 6.
5-B. Did Draeger breach its warranty by failing to submit accurate and undisputed statements
of indebtedness from account debtors including Shorebird?
Yes _____ No _____
If your answer to Question 5-B is “Yes,” then answer Question 5-C.
If your answer to Question 5-B is “No,” go to Section 6.
5-C. Was Prestige harmed by Draeger’s breach of warranty?
Yes _____ No _____
GO TO SECTION 6.

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
6
Case No. 5:12-cv-06072-PSG
[PROPOSED] VERDICT FORM

1
2

SECTION 6: DAMAGES
AGAINST SHOREBIRD HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION
We, the jury, unanimously answer the Questions submitted to us as follows:

3
6-A. We, the jury, have answered “Yes” to Question 1-C or Question 2-C.
4
5
6
7
8
9

Yes _____ No _____
If your answer to Question 6-A is “Yes,” then answer Question 6-B.
If your answer to Question 6-A is “No,” go to Section 7.
6-B. What amount, if any, do you award to Prestige for damages it suffered due to
Shorebird’s conduct? Do not award duplicate damages for the same harm suffered from
multiple claims.
$ __________________

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
7
Case No. 5:12-cv-06072-PSG
[PROPOSED] VERDICT FORM

SECTION 7: DAMAGES
AGAINST ADRIANA DASILVA

1
2

We, the jury, unanimously answer the Questions submitted to us as follows:

3
7-A. We, the jury, have answered “Yes” to Question 3-D:
4
5
6
7
8

Yes _____ No _____
If your answer to Question 7-A is “Yes,” then answer Question 7-B.
If your answer to Question 7-A is “No,” go to Section 8.
7-B. What amount, if any, do you award to Prestige for damages it suffered due to DaSilva’s
conduct? Do not award duplicate damages for the same harm suffered from multiple
claims.

9
$ __________________
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
8
Case No. 5:12-cv-06072-PSG
[PROPOSED] VERDICT FORM

SECTION 8: DAMAGES
AGAINST SHOREBIRD HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION

1
2

We, the jury, unanimously answer the Questions submitted to us as follows:

3
8-A. We, the jury, have answered “Yes” to Question 4-D or Question 5-C:
4
5
6
7
8
9

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10

Yes _____ No _____
If your answer to Question 8-A is “Yes,” then answer Question 8-B.
If your answer to Question 8-A is “No,” stop here, answer no further questions, and have the
foreperson sign and date this form.
8-B. What amount, if any, do you award to Prestige for damages it suffered due to Draeger
Construction’s conduct? Do not award duplicate damages for the same harm suffered
from multiple claims.
$ __________________

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23

Answer Question 8-C.
8-C. Did John Draeger enter into a written guaranty contract to be liable for Draeger
Construction’s breach of warranty?
Yes _____ No _____
If your answer to Question 8-C is “Yes,” then answer Question 8-D.
If your answer to Question 8-C is “No,” then skip to Question 8-E.
8-D. For what amount, if any, is John Draeger liable under the written guaranty due to
Draeger Construction’s breach of warranty?
$ __________________
Answer Question 8-E.
8-E. Did Jeff Draeger enter into a written guaranty contract to be liable for Draeger
Construction’s breach of warranty?
Yes _____ No _____
If your answer to Question 8-E is “Yes,” then answer Question 8-F.
If your answer to Question 8-E is “No,” go to Section 9.

24
25
26

8-F. For what amount, if any, is Jeff Draeger liable under the written guaranty due to Draeger
Construction’s breach of warranty?
$ __________________

27
28
9
Case No. 5:12-cv-06072-PSG
[PROPOSED] VERDICT FORM

1

SECTION 9: TOTAL DAMAGES

2

We, the jury, unanimously answer the Questions submitted to us as follows:

3

Fill in the table below with the answers from Questions 6-B, 7-B, and 8-B.

4
5
6
7

Amount owed by Shorebird Homeowners
Association:

$______________________

(6-B)

Amount owed by Adriana DaSilva:

$______________________

(7-B)

Amount owed by Draeger Construction:

$______________________

(8-B)

8

Add up the lines above to find the total damages.

9

Total damages owed to Prestige Capital:

$______________________

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
Have the foreperson sign and date this form.
11
12

Signed: _________________________________ Dated: _________________

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
10
Case No. 5:12-cv-06072-PSG
[PROPOSED] VERDICT FORM