Preview
INUIT
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO
Document Scanning Lead Sheet
Dec-04-2017 5:05 pm
Case Number: CGC-16-555761
Filing Date: Dec-04-2017 5:03
Filed by: LINDA FONG
Image: 06129573
JURY INSTRUCTIONS
ANGELIQUE ROCHELLE ET AL VS. TREVOR DENG ET AL
001006129573
Instructions:
Please place this sheet on top of the document to be scanned.f1L Ee.
Superior Court of Cal
County of San Francisce
UEC GA Pte
OLEME ie THE COURT
we
ue
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO — UNLIMITED JURISDICTION
ANGELIQUE ROCHELLE, ) CASE: CGC-16-555761
Plaintiff,
)
vs. )
)
) JURY INSTRUCTIONS
TREVOR DENG, )
)
Defendant. )
)
)CACI No. 5000. Duties of the Judge and Jury
Members of the jury, you have now heard all the evidence. The attorneys will have one last
chance to talk to you in closing argument. But before they do, it is my duty to instruct you on the
law that applies to this case. You must follow these instructions as well as those that I previously
gave you. You will have a copy of my instructions with you when you go to the jury room to
deliberate. I have provided each of you with your own copy of the instructions.
You must decide what the facts are. You must consider all the evidence and then decide
what you think happened. You must decide that facts based on the evidence admitted in this trial.
Do not allow anything that happens outside this courtroom to affect your decision. Do not
talk about this case or the people involved in it with anyone, including family and persons living in
your household, friends and coworkers, spiritual leaders, advisors, or therapists. Do not do any
research on your own or as a group. Do not use dictionaries or other reference materials.
These prohibitions on communications and research extend to all forms of electronic
communications. Do not use any electronic devices or media, such as a cell phone or smart phone,
PDA. computer, tablet device, the Internet, any Internet service, any text or instant-messaging
service, any Internet chat room, blog, or website, including social networking websites or online
diaries, to send or receive any information to or from anyone about this case or your experiences
as a juror until after you have been discharged from your jury duty.
Do not investigate the case or conduct any experiments. Do not contact anyone to assist
you, such as a family accountant, doctor, or lawyer. Do not visit or view the scene of any event
involved in this case. If you happen to pass by the scene, do not stop or investigate. All jurors
must see or hear the same evidence at the same time. Do noftead, listen to, or watch any news “
accounts of this trial. You must not let bias, sympathy, prejudice, or public opinion influence your
decision.
1 will now tell you the law you must follow to reach your verdict. You must follow the lawexactly as I give it to you, even if you disagree with it. Regardless of whether the attorneys have
said anything different about what the law means, you must follow what I say.
In reaching your verdict, do not guess what I think your verdict should be from something
I may have said or done.
Pay careful attention to all the instructions that I give you. All the instructions are
important because together they state the law that you will use in this case. You must consider all
of the instructions together.
After you have decided what the facts are, you may find that some instructions do not
apply. In that case, follow the instructions that do apply and use them together with the facts to
reach your verdict.
If I repeat any ideas or rules of law during my instructions, that does not mean that these
ideas or rules are more important than others. In addition, the order in which the instructions are
given does not make any difference.
Most of the instructions are typed. However, some handwritten or typewritten words may
have been added, and some words may have been deleted. Do not discuss or consider why words
may have been added or deleted. Please treat all the words the same, no matter what their format.
Simply accept the instruction in its final form.CACI No. 5001. Insurance
You must not consider whether any of the parties in this case has insurance. The presence or
absence of insurance is totally irrelevant. You must decide this case based only on the law and the
evidence.CACI No. 5002. Evidence
Sworn testimony, documents, or anything else may be admitted into evidence. You must decide
what the facts are in this case from the evidence you have seen or heard during the trial, including any
exhibits that | admit into evidence. You may not consider as evidence anything that you saw or heard
when court was not in session, even something done or said by one of the parties, attorneys, or
witnesses.
What the attorneys say during the trial is not evidence. In their opening statements and closing
arguments, the attorneys talk to you about the law and the evidence. What the lawyers say may help
you understand the law and the evidence, but their statements and arguments are not evidence.
The attorneys’ questions are not evidence. Only the witnesses’ answers are evidence. You should
not think that something is true just because an attorney's question suggested that it was true.CACI No. 5003. Witnesses
A witness is a person who has knowledge related to this case. You will have to decide whether
you believe each witness and how important each witness's testimony is to the case. You may believe
all, part, or none of a witness's testimony.
In deciding whether to believe a witness's testimony, you may consider, among other factors, the
following:
(a) How well did the witness see, hear, or otherwise sense what he or she described in court?
(b) How well did the witness remember and describe what happened?
(c) How did the witness look, act, and speak while testifying?
(d) Did the witness have any reason to say something that was not true? Did the witness show
any bias or prejudice? Did the witness have a personal relationship with any of the parties involved in
the case? Does the witness have a personal stake in how this case is decided?
(c) What was the witness's attitude toward this case or about giving testimony?
Sometimes a witness may say something that is not consistent with something else he or she
said. Sometimes different witnesses will give different versions of what happened. People often forget
things or make mistakes in what they remember. Also, two people may see the same event but
remember it differently. You may consider these differences, but do not decide that testimony is untrue
just because it differs from other testimony.
However, if you decide that a witness deliberately testified untruthfully about something
important, you may choose not to believe anything that witness said. On the other hand, if you think the
witness testified untruthfully about some things but told the truth about others, you may accept the part
you think is true and ignore the rest.
Do not make any decision simply because there were more witnesses on one side than on the
other. If you believe it is true, the testimony of a single witness is enough to prove a fact.
You must not be biased against any witness because of his or her disability, gender, race,
religion, ethnicity, sexual orientation, age, national origin, or socioeconomic status.CACI No. 200. Obligation to Prove—More Likely True Than Not True
A party must persuade you, by the evidence presented in trial, that what he or she is required to
prove is more likely to be true than not true. This is referred to as “the burden of proof.”
After weighing all of the evidence, if you cannot decide that something is more likely to be true
than not true, you must conclude that the party did not prove it. You should consider all the evidence,
no matter which party produced the evidence.
In criminal trials, the prosecution must prove that the defendant is guilty beyond a reasonable
doubt. But in civil trials, such as this one, the party who is required to prove something need prove only
that it is more likely to be true than not true.CACI No. 201. Highly Probable — Clear and Convincing Proof
Certain facts must be proved by clear and convincing evidence, which is a higher burden of
proof. This means the party must persuade you that it is highly probable that the fact is true. I will tell
you specifically which facts must be proved by clear and convincing evidence.CACI No. 202. Direct and Indirect Evidence
Evidence can come in many forms. It can be testimony about what someone saw or heard or
smelled. It can be an exhibit admitted into evidence. [t can be someone’s opinion.
Direct evidence can prove a fact by itself. For example, if a witness testifies she saw a jet plane
flying across the sky, that testimony is direct evidence that a plane flew across the sky. Some evidence
proves a fact indirectly. For example, a witness testifies that he saw only the white trail that jet planes
often leave. This indirect evidence is sometimes referred to as “circumstantial evidence.” In either
instance, the witness’s testimony is evidence that a jet plane flew across the sky.
As far as the law is concerned, it makes no difference whether evidence is direct or indirect. You
may choose to believe or disbelieve either kind. Whether it is direct or indirect, you should give every
piece of evidence whatever weight you think it deserves.CACI No. 203. Party Having Power to Produce Better Evidence
You may consider the ability of each party to provide evidence. If a party provided weaker
evidence when it could have provided stronger evidence, you may distrust the weaker evidence.CACI No. 205. Failure to Explain or Deny Evidence
If a party failed to explain or deny evidence against him or her when he or she could reasonably
be expected to have done so based on what he or she knew, you may consider his or her failure to
explain or deny in evaluating that evidence.
It is up to you to decide the meaning and importance of the failure to explain or deny evidence
against the party.
11CACI No. 208. Deposition as Substantive Evidence
During the trial, you received deposition testimony that was read from the deposition transcript
and shown by video. A deposition is the testimony of a person taken before trial. At a deposition the
person is sworn to tell the truth and is questioned by the attorneys. You must consider the deposition
testimony that was presented to you in the same way as you consider testimony given in court.CACI No. 209. Use of Interrogatories of a Party
Before trial, each party has the right to ask the other parties to answer written questions. These
questions are called interrogatories. The answers are also in writing and are given under oath. You must
consider the questions and answers that were read to you the same as if the questions and answers had
been given in court.Redacted Documents
Certain documents that will be shown to you may contain redacted portions. You are instructed
only to consider the unredacted portions of these documents, and may not speculate or guess as to what
the redacted portions contain.CACI No. 212. Statements of a Party Opponent
A party may offer into evidence any oral or written statement made by an opposing party
outside the courtroom.
When you evaluate evidence of such a statement, you must consider these questions:
1. Do you believe that the party actually made the statement? If you do not believe that the party
made the statement, you may not consider the statement at all.
2. If you believe that the statement was made, do you believe it was reported accurately?
You should view testimony about an oral statement made by a party outside the courtroom with
caution.CACI No. 219. Expert Witness Testimony
During the trial you heard testimony from expert witnesses. The law allows an expert to state
opinions about matters in his or her field of expertise even if he or she has not witnessed any of the
events involved in the trial.
You do not have to accept an expert’s opinion. As with any other witness, it is up to you to
decide whether you believe the expert’s testimony and choose to use it as a basis for your decision. You
may believe all, part, or none of an expert's testimony. In deciding whether to believe an expert’s
testimony, you should consider:
a. The expert’s training and experience;
b. The facts the expert relied on; and
c. The reasons for the expert’s opinion.
16CACI No. 220. Experts—Questions Containing Assumed Facts
The law allows expert witnesses to be asked questions that are based on assumed facts. These
are sometimes called “hypothetical questions.” In determining the weight to give to the expert’s
opinion that is based on the assumed facts, you should consider whether the assumed facts are true.CACI No. 221. Conflicting Expert Testimony
If the expert witnesses disagreed with one another, you should weigh each opinion against the
others. You should examine the reasons given for each opinion and the facts or other matters that each
witness relied on. You may also compare the experts’ qualifications.
18CACI No. 223. Opinion Testimony of Lay Witness
A witness who was not testifying as an expert gave an opinion during the trial. You may, but are
not required to, accept that opinion. You may give the opinion whatever weight you think is
appropriate.
Consider the extent of the witness’s opportunity to perceive the matters on which the opinion is
based, the reasons the witness gave for the opinion, and the facts or information on which the witness
relied in forming that opinion. You must decide whether information on which the witness relied was
true and accurate. You may disregard all or any part of an opinion that you find unbelievable,
unreasonable, or unsupported by the evidence.CACI No. 302. Contract Formation—Essential Factual Elements
Defendant claims that the parties entered into a contract. To prove that a contract was created.
Trevor Deng must prove all of the following:
1. That the contract terms were clear enough that the parties could understand what each was
required to do;
2. That the parties agreed to give each other something of value (a promise to do something or
not to do something may have value); and
3. That the parties agreed to the terms of the contract.
When you examine whether the parties agreed to the terms of the contract, ask yourself if, under
the circumstances, a reasonable person would conclude, from the words and conduct of each party, that
there was an agreement. You may not consider the parties” hidden intentions.
If Trevor Deng did not prove all of the above, then a contract was not created.CACTI No. 320. Interpretation—Construction Against Drafter
In determining the meaning of the words of the contract, you must first consider all of the other
instructions that I have given you. If, after considering these instructions, you still cannot agree on the
meaning of the words. then you should interpret the contract against Trevor Deng.
21CACI No. 334. Affirmative Defense—Undue Influence
Angelique Rochelle claims that no contract was created because she was unfairly pressured by
Trevor Deng into consenting to the contract.
To succeed, Angelique Rochelle must prove both of the following:
1. That Trevor Deng used a relationship of trust and confidence or Angelique Rochelle's needs
or distress to induce or pressure Angelique Rochelle into consenting to the contract; and
2. That Angelique Rochelle would not otherwise have consented to the contract.
If you decide that Angelique Rochelle has proved both of the above, then no contract was
created.CACI No. 335. No Contract Based on Fraud
Plaintiff Angelique Rochelle claims that no contract was created because her consent was
obtained by fraud. To succeed, Angelique Rochelle must prove all of the following:
1. That Trevor Deng represented to Angelique Rochelle that Trevor Deng's mother was going to
move into Angelique's unit;
2. That Trevor Deng's representation in relation to the reason for the termination of the tenancy
was false;
3. That Trevor Deng made the representation to persuade Angelique Rochelle to agree to the
contract;
4. That Angelique Rochelle reasonably relied on this representation; and
5. That Angelique Rochelle would not have entered into the contract if she had known that the
representation was not true.
If you decide that Angelique Rochelle has proved all of the above, then no contract was created.San Francisco Rent Ordinance: Relative Move In
The San Francisco Rent Ordinance (“SFRO”) provides that a landlord may not endeavor to
recover possession of a rental unit unless cause, as specified in the Ordinance, exists.
Defendant Trevor Deng pursued an eviction of Angelique Rochelle based on San Francisco
Rent Ordinance Section 37.9(a)(8)(ii), which requires that the landlord:
1. Seeks to recover possession in good faith:
2. Seeks to recover possession for the use and occupancy of his grandparents, grandchildren,
parents, children, brother or sister, or his spouse, or the spouse of his grandparent, grandchild, parent,
child, brother or sister; and
3. Intends to use the subject unit as his relative's principal place of residency for a period of at
least 36 months.
24San Francisco Rent Ordinance: Definition of Dominant Motive
SFRO 37.9(c) states that a “landlord shall not endeavor to recover possession of a rental unit
unless at least one of the grounds enumerated in Sections 37.9(a) or (b) above is the landlord's
dominant motive for recovering possession and unless the landlord informs the tenant in writing on
or before the date upon which notice to vacate is given of the grounds under which possession is
sought and that advice regarding the notice to vacate is available from the Residential Rent
Stabilization and Arbitration Board, before endeavoring to recover possession” and also serves the
Rent Board with a copy of the notice.
A landlord violates this section if he does not provide proper notice or if the reasons stated in
the notice are not the landlord's dominant motive.San Francisco Rent Ordinance: Tenant Harassment
Section 37.10B of the San Francisco Rent Ordinance provides that:
No landlord, and no agent, contractor, subcontractor or employee of the landlord shall do any of
the following in bad faith:
(a) Interrupt, terminate or fail to provide housing services required by contract or by state,
county or local housing health or safety laws;
(b) Influence or attempt to influence a tenant to vacate a rental housing unit through fraud,
intimidation or coercion;
(c) Interfere with a tenant's right to quiet use and enjoyment of a rental housing unit as that right
is defined by California law; or
(d) Engage in other repeated acts or omissions of such significance as to substantially interfere
with or disturb the comfort, repose, peace or quiet of any person lawfully entitled to occupancy of such
dwelling unit and that cause, or are intended to cause any personal lawfully entitled to occupancy of a
dwelling unit to vacate such dwelling unit or to surrender or waive any rights in relation to such
occupancy.
26Covenant of Quiet Enjoyment
Plaintiff Angelique Rochelle claims that Defendant Trevor Deng interfered with her use and
enjoyment of the apartment by unlawfully terminating her tenancy. To prove this claim, Angelique
Rochelle must prove:
1) That Trevor Deng unlawfully interfered with Angelique Rochelle’s use and enjoyment of her
apartment for the purposes for which it was leased; and
2) That Angelique Rochelle was harmed by that interference.
27CACL. No. 1900 Intentional Misrepresentation
Angelique Roc!
elle claims that Trevor Deng made a false representation that harmed her. To
establish this claim, Angelique Rochelle must prove all of the following:
1. That Trevor Deng represented to Angelique Rochelle that a fact was true;
2. That Trevor Deng's representation was false;
3. That Trevor Deng knew that the representation was false when he made it, or that he made
the representation recklessly and without regard for its truth;
4. That Trevor Deng intended that Angelique Rochelle rely on the representation;
5. That Angeliq
6. That Angeliq’
7. That Angeliq
ue Rochelle reasonably relied on Trevor Deng's representation;
ue Rochelle was harmed; and
ue Rochelle's reliance on Trevor Deng’s representation was a substantial factor
in causing her harm.
28CACI No. 1907 Reliance
Angelique Rochelle relied on Trevor Deng’s misrepresentation if:
1. The misrepresentation substantially influenced her to sign the document which provided she
would move out on July 8, 2014; and
2. She would probably not have signed the document without the misrepresentation.
It is not necessary for a misrepresentation to be the only reason for Angelique Rochelle’s
conduct.
29CACI No. 1908 Reasonable Reliance
In determining whether Angelique Rochelle’s reliance on the misrepresentation was
reasonable, she must first prove that the matter was material. A matter is material if a reasonable
person would find it important in determining his or her choice of action.
If you decide that the matter is material, you must then decide whether it was reasonable for
Angelique Rochelle to rely on the misrepresentation. In making this decision, take into consideration
Angelique’s intelligence, knowledge, education, and experience.
However, it is not reasonable for anyone to rely on a misrepresentation that is preposterous. It
also is not reasonable for anyone to rely on a misrepresentation if facts that are within her observation
show that it is obviously false.
30CACI No. 3900. Introduction to Tort Damages—Liability Contested
If you decide that Plaintiff Angelique Rochelle has proven her claims against Defendant Trevor
Deng, you also must decide how much money will reasonably compensate Plaintiff for the harm. This
compensation is called "damages."
The amount of damages must include an award for each item of harm that was caused by
Defendant's wrongful conduct, even if the particular harm could not have been anticipated.
Plaintiff Angelique Rochelle does not have to prove the exact amount of damages that will
provide reasonable compensation for the harm. However, you must not speculate or guess in awarding
damages.
31CACTI No. 3902. Economic and Noneconomic Damages
The damages claimed by Plaintiff Angelique Rochelle for the harm caused by Defendant
Trevor Deng fall into two categories called economic damages and noneconomic damages. You will
be asked on the verdict form to state the two categories of damages separately.CACI No. 3903. Items of Economic Damage
The following are the specific items of economic damages claimed by Angelique Rochelle:
1.
w
Moving expenses;
Loss of personal property;
Losses related to moving from the rent controlled apartment at 778 25" Avenue;
Other economic damages.
33CACI No. 3903K Loss of Personal Property
The loss of Angelique Rochelle’s personal property.
To recover damages for be loss, Angelique Rochelle must prove the fair market value of the
personal property just before the harm occurred.
“Fair market value” is the highest price that a willing buyer would have paid to a willing seller,
assuming:
1, That there is no pressure on either one to buy or sell; and
2. That the buyer and seller are fully informed of the condition and quality of ofite personal
property.
These are economic damages.
34CACI No. 3904. Present Cash Value
If you decide that the harm of Angelique Rochelle includes future economic damages, then the
amount of those future damages must be reduced to their present cash value. This is necessary because
money received now will, through investment, grow to a larger amount in the future.
To find present cash value, you must determine the amount of money that, if reasonably
invested today, will provide Plaintiff Angelique Rochelle with the amount of her future damages.
You may consider expert testimony in determining the present cash value of future economic
damages.CACI No. 3905. Items of Noneconomic Damage
The following are the specific items of noneconomic damages claimed by Angelique Rochelle:
Past Emotional Distress.
Future Emotional Distress.
36CACI No. 3905A. Mental Suffering and Emotional Distress (Noneconomic Damage)
Angelique Rochelle is seeking past and future mental suffering, loss of enjoyment of life,
inconvenience, grief, anxiety, and emotional distress.
Emotional distress includes suffering, anguish, fright, horror, nervousness, grief, anxiety, worry,
shock, humiliation, and shame.
You may not include any amount for stress incurred for going through depositions or trial.
To recover for future mental suffering and emotional distress, Angelique Rochelle must prove
that she is reasonably certain to suffer that harm.
No fixed standard exists for deciding the amount of these damages. You must use your
judgment to decide a reasonable amount based on the evidence and your common sense.
Your award for noneconomic damages should not be reduced to present cash value.
37CACI No. 3925, Arguments of Counsel Not Evidence of Damages
The arguments of the attorneys are not evidence of damages. Your award must be based on your
reasoned judgment applied to the testimony of the witnesses and the other evidence that has been
admitted during trial.
383931 Mitigation of Damages (Property Damage)
If you decide Trevor Deng is responsible for the original harm, Angelique Rochelle is not
entitled to recover damages for the loss of personal property that Trevor Deng proves Angelique
Rochelle could have avoided with reasonable efforts or expenditures.
You should consider the reasonableness of Angelique Rochelle's efforts in light of the
circumstances facing her at the time, including her ability to make the efforts or expenditures without
undue risk or hardship.
If Angelique Rochelle made reasonable efforts to avoid harm, then your award should include
reasonable amounts that she spent for this purpose.
39CACI No. 3934. Damages on Multiple Legal Theories
Plaintiff Angelique Rochelle seeks damages from Defendant Trevor Deng under more than
one legal theory. However, each item of damages may be awarded only once, regardless of the
number of legal theories alleged.
40CACI No. 3941. Punitive Damages — Individual Defendant
If you decide that Trevor Deng’s conduct caused Angelique Rochelle harm, you must decide
whether that conduct justifies an award of punitive damages against Trevor Deng for his conduct. At
this time, you must decide whether Angelique Rochelle has proved by clear and convincing evidence
that Trevor Deng engaged in that conduct with malice, oppression, or fraud. The amount of punitive
damages, if any, will be decided later.
"Malice" means that Trevor Deng acted with intent to cause injury or that Trevor Deng’s
conduct was despicable and was done with a willful and knowing disregard of the rights or safety of
another. A person acts with knowing disregard when he or she is aware of the probable dangerous
consequences of his or her conduct and deliberately fails to avoid those consequences.
"Oppression" means that Trevor Deng’s conduct was despicable and subjected Angelique
Rochelle to cruel and unjust hardship in knowing disregard of fronts.
"Despicable conduct" is conduct that is so vile, base, or contemptible that it would be looked
down on and despised by reasonable people.
"Fraud" means that Trevor Dene intentionally misrepresented or concealed a material fact
and did so intending to harm Angelique Rochelle.
41CACTI No. 5009. Pre-deliberation Instructions
When you go to the jury room, the first thing you should do is choose a presiding juror.
The presiding juror should see to it that your discussions are orderly and that everyone has a fair
chance to be heard.
It is your duty to talk with one another in the jury room and to consider the views of all
the jurors. Each of you must decide the case for yourself, but only after you have considered
the evidence with the other members of the jury. Feel free to change your mind if you are
convinced that your position should be different. You should all try to agree. But do not give up
your honest beliefs just because others think differently.
Please do not state your opinions too strongly at the beginning of your deliberations or
immediately announce how you plan to vote as it may interfere with an open discussion. Keep
an open mind so that you and your fellow jurors can easily share ideas about the case.
You should use your common sense and experience in deciding whether testimony is true
and accurate. However, during your deliberations, do not make any statements or provide any
information to other jurors based on any special training or unique personal experiences that
you may have had related to matters involved in this case. What you may know or have learned
through your training or experience is not a part of the evidence received in this case.
Sometimes jurors disagree or have questions about the evidence or about what the
witnesses said in their testimony. If that happens, you may ask to have testimony read back to
you or ask to see any exhibits admitted into evidence that have not already been provided to
you. Also, jurors may need further explanation about the laws that apply to the case. If this
happens during your discussions, write down your questions and give them to the court
attendant. I will talk with the attorneys before | answer so it may take some time. You should
continue your deliberations while you wait for my answer. I will do my best to answer them.
When you write me a note, do not tell me how you voted on an issue until I ask for this
information in open court.
42At least nine jurors must agree on a verdict. When you have finished filling out the
form, your presiding juror must write the date and sign it at the bottom and then notify the
clerk/court attendant that you are ready to present your verdict in the courtroom.
Your decision must be based on your personal evaluation of the evidence presented in
the case. Each of you may be asked in open court how you voted on each question.
While I know you would not do this, I am required to advise you that you must not base
your decision on chance, such as a flip of a coin. If you decide to award damages, you may not
agree in advance to simply add up the amounts each juror thinks is right and then, without
further deliberations, make the average your verdict.
You may take breaks, but do not discuss this case with anyone, including each other, until
all of you are back in the jury room.
43CACI No. 5010. Taking Notes During the Trial
If you have taken notes during the trial, you may take your notebooks with you into the jury
room. You may use your notes only to help you remember what happened during the trial. Your
independent recollection of the evidence should govern your verdict. You should not allow yourself to
be influenced by the notes of other jurors if those notes differ from what you remember.
At the end of the trial, your notes will be collected and destroyed or cotleeted-and-retained-by—
the court,-but notas-apartof the vase Tecord.
44CACI No. 5011. Reading Back of Trial Testimony in Jury Room
You may request in writing that trial testimony be read to you. I will have the court reporter read
the testimony to you. You may request that all or a part of a witness’s testimony be read.
Your request should be as specific as possible. It will be helpful if you can state:
1. The name of the witness;
2. The subject of the testimony you would like to have read; and
3. The name of the attorney or attorneys asking the questions when the testimony was __ given.
The court reporter is not permitted to talk with you when she or he is reading the testimony you
have requested.
While the court reporter is reading the testimony, you may not deliberate or discuss the case.
You may not ask the court reporter to read testimony that was not specifically mentioned in a
written request. If your notes differ from the testimony, you must accept the court reporter’s record as
accurate.
45CACI No. 5012. Introduction to Special Verdict Form
I will give you verdict forms with questions you must answer. I have already instructed
you on the law that you are to use in answering these questions. You must follow my instructions
and the forms carefully. You must consider each question separately. Although you may discuss
the evidence and the issues to be decided in any order, you must answer the questions on the
verdict forms in the order they appear. After you answer a question, the form tells you what to
do next.
Vy
use
All pin€ of you must deliberate on and answer each question. At least nine of you must
agree on an answer before all of you can move on to the next question. However, the same nine
or more people do not have to agree on each answer.
When you have finished filling out the forms, your presiding juror must write the date
and sign it at the bottom of the last page and then notify the court attendant that you are ready to
present your verdict in the courtroom.
46CACI No. 5017. Polling the Jury
After your verdict is read in open court, you may be asked individually to indicate whether the
verdict expresses your personal vote. This is referred to as “polling” the jury and is done to ensure that
at least nine jurors have agreed to each decision.
The verdict forms that you will receive asks you to answer several questions. You must vote
separately on each question. Although nine or more jurors must agree on each answer, it does not have
to be the same nine for each answer. Therefore, it is important for each of you to remember how you
have voted on each question so that if the jury is polled, each of you will be able to answer accurately
about how you voted.
Each of you will be provided a draft copy of the verdict forms for your use in keeping track of
your votes.
47CACI No. 5020. Demonstrative Evidence
During the trial, materials have been shown to you to help explain testimony or other
evidence in the case. Some of these materials have been admitted into evidence, and you will
be able to review them during your deliberations.
Other materials have also been shown to you during the trial, but they have not been
admitted into evidence. You will not be able to review them during your deliberations because
they are not themselves evidence or proof of any facts. You may, however, consider the
testimony given in connection with those materials.
48
Preview
INUIT SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO Document Scanning Lead Sheet Dec-04-2017 5:05 pm Case Number: CGC-16-555761 Filing Date: Dec-04-2017 5:03 Filed by: LINDA FONG Image: 06129573 JURY INSTRUCTIONS ANGELIQUE ROCHELLE ET AL VS. TREVOR DENG ET AL 001006129573 Instructions: Please place this sheet on top of the document to be scanned.f1L Ee. Superior Court of Cal County of San Francisce UEC GA Pte OLEME ie THE COURT we ue SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO — UNLIMITED JURISDICTION ANGELIQUE ROCHELLE, ) CASE: CGC-16-555761 Plaintiff, ) vs. ) ) ) JURY INSTRUCTIONS TREVOR DENG, ) ) Defendant. ) ) )CACI No. 5000. Duties of the Judge and Jury Members of the jury, you have now heard all the evidence. The attorneys will have one last chance to talk to you in closing argument. But before they do, it is my duty to instruct you on the law that applies to this case. You must follow these instructions as well as those that I previously gave you. You will have a copy of my instructions with you when you go to the jury room to deliberate. I have provided each of you with your own copy of the instructions. You must decide what the facts are. You must consider all the evidence and then decide what you think happened. You must decide that facts based on the evidence admitted in this trial. Do not allow anything that happens outside this courtroom to affect your decision. Do not talk about this case or the people involved in it with anyone, including family and persons living in your household, friends and coworkers, spiritual leaders, advisors, or therapists. Do not do any research on your own or as a group. Do not use dictionaries or other reference materials. These prohibitions on communications and research extend to all forms of electronic communications. Do not use any electronic devices or media, such as a cell phone or smart phone, PDA. computer, tablet device, the Internet, any Internet service, any text or instant-messaging service, any Internet chat room, blog, or website, including social networking websites or online diaries, to send or receive any information to or from anyone about this case or your experiences as a juror until after you have been discharged from your jury duty. Do not investigate the case or conduct any experiments. Do not contact anyone to assist you, such as a family accountant, doctor, or lawyer. Do not visit or view the scene of any event involved in this case. If you happen to pass by the scene, do not stop or investigate. All jurors must see or hear the same evidence at the same time. Do noftead, listen to, or watch any news “ accounts of this trial. You must not let bias, sympathy, prejudice, or public opinion influence your decision. 1 will now tell you the law you must follow to reach your verdict. You must follow the lawexactly as I give it to you, even if you disagree with it. Regardless of whether the attorneys have said anything different about what the law means, you must follow what I say. In reaching your verdict, do not guess what I think your verdict should be from something I may have said or done. Pay careful attention to all the instructions that I give you. All the instructions are important because together they state the law that you will use in this case. You must consider all of the instructions together. After you have decided what the facts are, you may find that some instructions do not apply. In that case, follow the instructions that do apply and use them together with the facts to reach your verdict. If I repeat any ideas or rules of law during my instructions, that does not mean that these ideas or rules are more important than others. In addition, the order in which the instructions are given does not make any difference. Most of the instructions are typed. However, some handwritten or typewritten words may have been added, and some words may have been deleted. Do not discuss or consider why words may have been added or deleted. Please treat all the words the same, no matter what their format. Simply accept the instruction in its final form.CACI No. 5001. Insurance You must not consider whether any of the parties in this case has insurance. The presence or absence of insurance is totally irrelevant. You must decide this case based only on the law and the evidence.CACI No. 5002. Evidence Sworn testimony, documents, or anything else may be admitted into evidence. You must decide what the facts are in this case from the evidence you have seen or heard during the trial, including any exhibits that | admit into evidence. You may not consider as evidence anything that you saw or heard when court was not in session, even something done or said by one of the parties, attorneys, or witnesses. What the attorneys say during the trial is not evidence. In their opening statements and closing arguments, the attorneys talk to you about the law and the evidence. What the lawyers say may help you understand the law and the evidence, but their statements and arguments are not evidence. The attorneys’ questions are not evidence. Only the witnesses’ answers are evidence. You should not think that something is true just because an attorney's question suggested that it was true.CACI No. 5003. Witnesses A witness is a person who has knowledge related to this case. You will have to decide whether you believe each witness and how important each witness's testimony is to the case. You may believe all, part, or none of a witness's testimony. In deciding whether to believe a witness's testimony, you may consider, among other factors, the following: (a) How well did the witness see, hear, or otherwise sense what he or she described in court? (b) How well did the witness remember and describe what happened? (c) How did the witness look, act, and speak while testifying? (d) Did the witness have any reason to say something that was not true? Did the witness show any bias or prejudice? Did the witness have a personal relationship with any of the parties involved in the case? Does the witness have a personal stake in how this case is decided? (c) What was the witness's attitude toward this case or about giving testimony? Sometimes a witness may say something that is not consistent with something else he or she said. Sometimes different witnesses will give different versions of what happened. People often forget things or make mistakes in what they remember. Also, two people may see the same event but remember it differently. You may consider these differences, but do not decide that testimony is untrue just because it differs from other testimony. However, if you decide that a witness deliberately testified untruthfully about something important, you may choose not to believe anything that witness said. On the other hand, if you think the witness testified untruthfully about some things but told the truth about others, you may accept the part you think is true and ignore the rest. Do not make any decision simply because there were more witnesses on one side than on the other. If you believe it is true, the testimony of a single witness is enough to prove a fact. You must not be biased against any witness because of his or her disability, gender, race, religion, ethnicity, sexual orientation, age, national origin, or socioeconomic status.CACI No. 200. Obligation to Prove—More Likely True Than Not True A party must persuade you, by the evidence presented in trial, that what he or she is required to prove is more likely to be true than not true. This is referred to as “the burden of proof.” After weighing all of the evidence, if you cannot decide that something is more likely to be true than not true, you must conclude that the party did not prove it. You should consider all the evidence, no matter which party produced the evidence. In criminal trials, the prosecution must prove that the defendant is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. But in civil trials, such as this one, the party who is required to prove something need prove only that it is more likely to be true than not true.CACI No. 201. Highly Probable — Clear and Convincing Proof Certain facts must be proved by clear and convincing evidence, which is a higher burden of proof. This means the party must persuade you that it is highly probable that the fact is true. I will tell you specifically which facts must be proved by clear and convincing evidence.CACI No. 202. Direct and Indirect Evidence Evidence can come in many forms. It can be testimony about what someone saw or heard or smelled. It can be an exhibit admitted into evidence. [t can be someone’s opinion. Direct evidence can prove a fact by itself. For example, if a witness testifies she saw a jet plane flying across the sky, that testimony is direct evidence that a plane flew across the sky. Some evidence proves a fact indirectly. For example, a witness testifies that he saw only the white trail that jet planes often leave. This indirect evidence is sometimes referred to as “circumstantial evidence.” In either instance, the witness’s testimony is evidence that a jet plane flew across the sky. As far as the law is concerned, it makes no difference whether evidence is direct or indirect. You may choose to believe or disbelieve either kind. Whether it is direct or indirect, you should give every piece of evidence whatever weight you think it deserves.CACI No. 203. Party Having Power to Produce Better Evidence You may consider the ability of each party to provide evidence. If a party provided weaker evidence when it could have provided stronger evidence, you may distrust the weaker evidence.CACI No. 205. Failure to Explain or Deny Evidence If a party failed to explain or deny evidence against him or her when he or she could reasonably be expected to have done so based on what he or she knew, you may consider his or her failure to explain or deny in evaluating that evidence. It is up to you to decide the meaning and importance of the failure to explain or deny evidence against the party. 11CACI No. 208. Deposition as Substantive Evidence During the trial, you received deposition testimony that was read from the deposition transcript and shown by video. A deposition is the testimony of a person taken before trial. At a deposition the person is sworn to tell the truth and is questioned by the attorneys. You must consider the deposition testimony that was presented to you in the same way as you consider testimony given in court.CACI No. 209. Use of Interrogatories of a Party Before trial, each party has the right to ask the other parties to answer written questions. These questions are called interrogatories. The answers are also in writing and are given under oath. You must consider the questions and answers that were read to you the same as if the questions and answers had been given in court.Redacted Documents Certain documents that will be shown to you may contain redacted portions. You are instructed only to consider the unredacted portions of these documents, and may not speculate or guess as to what the redacted portions contain.CACI No. 212. Statements of a Party Opponent A party may offer into evidence any oral or written statement made by an opposing party outside the courtroom. When you evaluate evidence of such a statement, you must consider these questions: 1. Do you believe that the party actually made the statement? If you do not believe that the party made the statement, you may not consider the statement at all. 2. If you believe that the statement was made, do you believe it was reported accurately? You should view testimony about an oral statement made by a party outside the courtroom with caution.CACI No. 219. Expert Witness Testimony During the trial you heard testimony from expert witnesses. The law allows an expert to state opinions about matters in his or her field of expertise even if he or she has not witnessed any of the events involved in the trial. You do not have to accept an expert’s opinion. As with any other witness, it is up to you to decide whether you believe the expert’s testimony and choose to use it as a basis for your decision. You may believe all, part, or none of an expert's testimony. In deciding whether to believe an expert’s testimony, you should consider: a. The expert’s training and experience; b. The facts the expert relied on; and c. The reasons for the expert’s opinion. 16CACI No. 220. Experts—Questions Containing Assumed Facts The law allows expert witnesses to be asked questions that are based on assumed facts. These are sometimes called “hypothetical questions.” In determining the weight to give to the expert’s opinion that is based on the assumed facts, you should consider whether the assumed facts are true.CACI No. 221. Conflicting Expert Testimony If the expert witnesses disagreed with one another, you should weigh each opinion against the others. You should examine the reasons given for each opinion and the facts or other matters that each witness relied on. You may also compare the experts’ qualifications. 18CACI No. 223. Opinion Testimony of Lay Witness A witness who was not testifying as an expert gave an opinion during the trial. You may, but are not required to, accept that opinion. You may give the opinion whatever weight you think is appropriate. Consider the extent of the witness’s opportunity to perceive the matters on which the opinion is based, the reasons the witness gave for the opinion, and the facts or information on which the witness relied in forming that opinion. You must decide whether information on which the witness relied was true and accurate. You may disregard all or any part of an opinion that you find unbelievable, unreasonable, or unsupported by the evidence.CACI No. 302. Contract Formation—Essential Factual Elements Defendant claims that the parties entered into a contract. To prove that a contract was created. Trevor Deng must prove all of the following: 1. That the contract terms were clear enough that the parties could understand what each was required to do; 2. That the parties agreed to give each other something of value (a promise to do something or not to do something may have value); and 3. That the parties agreed to the terms of the contract. When you examine whether the parties agreed to the terms of the contract, ask yourself if, under the circumstances, a reasonable person would conclude, from the words and conduct of each party, that there was an agreement. You may not consider the parties” hidden intentions. If Trevor Deng did not prove all of the above, then a contract was not created.CACTI No. 320. Interpretation—Construction Against Drafter In determining the meaning of the words of the contract, you must first consider all of the other instructions that I have given you. If, after considering these instructions, you still cannot agree on the meaning of the words. then you should interpret the contract against Trevor Deng. 21CACI No. 334. Affirmative Defense—Undue Influence Angelique Rochelle claims that no contract was created because she was unfairly pressured by Trevor Deng into consenting to the contract. To succeed, Angelique Rochelle must prove both of the following: 1. That Trevor Deng used a relationship of trust and confidence or Angelique Rochelle's needs or distress to induce or pressure Angelique Rochelle into consenting to the contract; and 2. That Angelique Rochelle would not otherwise have consented to the contract. If you decide that Angelique Rochelle has proved both of the above, then no contract was created.CACI No. 335. No Contract Based on Fraud Plaintiff Angelique Rochelle claims that no contract was created because her consent was obtained by fraud. To succeed, Angelique Rochelle must prove all of the following: 1. That Trevor Deng represented to Angelique Rochelle that Trevor Deng's mother was going to move into Angelique's unit; 2. That Trevor Deng's representation in relation to the reason for the termination of the tenancy was false; 3. That Trevor Deng made the representation to persuade Angelique Rochelle to agree to the contract; 4. That Angelique Rochelle reasonably relied on this representation; and 5. That Angelique Rochelle would not have entered into the contract if she had known that the representation was not true. If you decide that Angelique Rochelle has proved all of the above, then no contract was created.San Francisco Rent Ordinance: Relative Move In The San Francisco Rent Ordinance (“SFRO”) provides that a landlord may not endeavor to recover possession of a rental unit unless cause, as specified in the Ordinance, exists. Defendant Trevor Deng pursued an eviction of Angelique Rochelle based on San Francisco Rent Ordinance Section 37.9(a)(8)(ii), which requires that the landlord: 1. Seeks to recover possession in good faith: 2. Seeks to recover possession for the use and occupancy of his grandparents, grandchildren, parents, children, brother or sister, or his spouse, or the spouse of his grandparent, grandchild, parent, child, brother or sister; and 3. Intends to use the subject unit as his relative's principal place of residency for a period of at least 36 months. 24San Francisco Rent Ordinance: Definition of Dominant Motive SFRO 37.9(c) states that a “landlord shall not endeavor to recover possession of a rental unit unless at least one of the grounds enumerated in Sections 37.9(a) or (b) above is the landlord's dominant motive for recovering possession and unless the landlord informs the tenant in writing on or before the date upon which notice to vacate is given of the grounds under which possession is sought and that advice regarding the notice to vacate is available from the Residential Rent Stabilization and Arbitration Board, before endeavoring to recover possession” and also serves the Rent Board with a copy of the notice. A landlord violates this section if he does not provide proper notice or if the reasons stated in the notice are not the landlord's dominant motive.San Francisco Rent Ordinance: Tenant Harassment Section 37.10B of the San Francisco Rent Ordinance provides that: No landlord, and no agent, contractor, subcontractor or employee of the landlord shall do any of the following in bad faith: (a) Interrupt, terminate or fail to provide housing services required by contract or by state, county or local housing health or safety laws; (b) Influence or attempt to influence a tenant to vacate a rental housing unit through fraud, intimidation or coercion; (c) Interfere with a tenant's right to quiet use and enjoyment of a rental housing unit as that right is defined by California law; or (d) Engage in other repeated acts or omissions of such significance as to substantially interfere with or disturb the comfort, repose, peace or quiet of any person lawfully entitled to occupancy of such dwelling unit and that cause, or are intended to cause any personal lawfully entitled to occupancy of a dwelling unit to vacate such dwelling unit or to surrender or waive any rights in relation to such occupancy. 26Covenant of Quiet Enjoyment Plaintiff Angelique Rochelle claims that Defendant Trevor Deng interfered with her use and enjoyment of the apartment by unlawfully terminating her tenancy. To prove this claim, Angelique Rochelle must prove: 1) That Trevor Deng unlawfully interfered with Angelique Rochelle’s use and enjoyment of her apartment for the purposes for which it was leased; and 2) That Angelique Rochelle was harmed by that interference. 27CACL. No. 1900 Intentional Misrepresentation Angelique Roc! elle claims that Trevor Deng made a false representation that harmed her. To establish this claim, Angelique Rochelle must prove all of the following: 1. That Trevor Deng represented to Angelique Rochelle that a fact was true; 2. That Trevor Deng's representation was false; 3. That Trevor Deng knew that the representation was false when he made it, or that he made the representation recklessly and without regard for its truth; 4. That Trevor Deng intended that Angelique Rochelle rely on the representation; 5. That Angeliq 6. That Angeliq’ 7. That Angeliq ue Rochelle reasonably relied on Trevor Deng's representation; ue Rochelle was harmed; and ue Rochelle's reliance on Trevor Deng’s representation was a substantial factor in causing her harm. 28CACI No. 1907 Reliance Angelique Rochelle relied on Trevor Deng’s misrepresentation if: 1. The misrepresentation substantially influenced her to sign the document which provided she would move out on July 8, 2014; and 2. She would probably not have signed the document without the misrepresentation. It is not necessary for a misrepresentation to be the only reason for Angelique Rochelle’s conduct. 29CACI No. 1908 Reasonable Reliance In determining whether Angelique Rochelle’s reliance on the misrepresentation was reasonable, she must first prove that the matter was material. A matter is material if a reasonable person would find it important in determining his or her choice of action. If you decide that the matter is material, you must then decide whether it was reasonable for Angelique Rochelle to rely on the misrepresentation. In making this decision, take into consideration Angelique’s intelligence, knowledge, education, and experience. However, it is not reasonable for anyone to rely on a misrepresentation that is preposterous. It also is not reasonable for anyone to rely on a misrepresentation if facts that are within her observation show that it is obviously false. 30CACI No. 3900. Introduction to Tort Damages—Liability Contested If you decide that Plaintiff Angelique Rochelle has proven her claims against Defendant Trevor Deng, you also must decide how much money will reasonably compensate Plaintiff for the harm. This compensation is called "damages." The amount of damages must include an award for each item of harm that was caused by Defendant's wrongful conduct, even if the particular harm could not have been anticipated. Plaintiff Angelique Rochelle does not have to prove the exact amount of damages that will provide reasonable compensation for the harm. However, you must not speculate or guess in awarding damages. 31CACTI No. 3902. Economic and Noneconomic Damages The damages claimed by Plaintiff Angelique Rochelle for the harm caused by Defendant Trevor Deng fall into two categories called economic damages and noneconomic damages. You will be asked on the verdict form to state the two categories of damages separately.CACI No. 3903. Items of Economic Damage The following are the specific items of economic damages claimed by Angelique Rochelle: 1. w Moving expenses; Loss of personal property; Losses related to moving from the rent controlled apartment at 778 25" Avenue; Other economic damages. 33CACI No. 3903K Loss of Personal Property The loss of Angelique Rochelle’s personal property. To recover damages for be loss, Angelique Rochelle must prove the fair market value of the personal property just before the harm occurred. “Fair market value” is the highest price that a willing buyer would have paid to a willing seller, assuming: 1, That there is no pressure on either one to buy or sell; and 2. That the buyer and seller are fully informed of the condition and quality of ofite personal property. These are economic damages. 34CACI No. 3904. Present Cash Value If you decide that the harm of Angelique Rochelle includes future economic damages, then the amount of those future damages must be reduced to their present cash value. This is necessary because money received now will, through investment, grow to a larger amount in the future. To find present cash value, you must determine the amount of money that, if reasonably invested today, will provide Plaintiff Angelique Rochelle with the amount of her future damages. You may consider expert testimony in determining the present cash value of future economic damages.CACI No. 3905. Items of Noneconomic Damage The following are the specific items of noneconomic damages claimed by Angelique Rochelle: Past Emotional Distress. Future Emotional Distress. 36CACI No. 3905A. Mental Suffering and Emotional Distress (Noneconomic Damage) Angelique Rochelle is seeking past and future mental suffering, loss of enjoyment of life, inconvenience, grief, anxiety, and emotional distress. Emotional distress includes suffering, anguish, fright, horror, nervousness, grief, anxiety, worry, shock, humiliation, and shame. You may not include any amount for stress incurred for going through depositions or trial. To recover for future mental suffering and emotional distress, Angelique Rochelle must prove that she is reasonably certain to suffer that harm. No fixed standard exists for deciding the amount of these damages. You must use your judgment to decide a reasonable amount based on the evidence and your common sense. Your award for noneconomic damages should not be reduced to present cash value. 37CACI No. 3925, Arguments of Counsel Not Evidence of Damages The arguments of the attorneys are not evidence of damages. Your award must be based on your reasoned judgment applied to the testimony of the witnesses and the other evidence that has been admitted during trial. 383931 Mitigation of Damages (Property Damage) If you decide Trevor Deng is responsible for the original harm, Angelique Rochelle is not entitled to recover damages for the loss of personal property that Trevor Deng proves Angelique Rochelle could have avoided with reasonable efforts or expenditures. You should consider the reasonableness of Angelique Rochelle's efforts in light of the circumstances facing her at the time, including her ability to make the efforts or expenditures without undue risk or hardship. If Angelique Rochelle made reasonable efforts to avoid harm, then your award should include reasonable amounts that she spent for this purpose. 39CACI No. 3934. Damages on Multiple Legal Theories Plaintiff Angelique Rochelle seeks damages from Defendant Trevor Deng under more than one legal theory. However, each item of damages may be awarded only once, regardless of the number of legal theories alleged. 40CACI No. 3941. Punitive Damages — Individual Defendant If you decide that Trevor Deng’s conduct caused Angelique Rochelle harm, you must decide whether that conduct justifies an award of punitive damages against Trevor Deng for his conduct. At this time, you must decide whether Angelique Rochelle has proved by clear and convincing evidence that Trevor Deng engaged in that conduct with malice, oppression, or fraud. The amount of punitive damages, if any, will be decided later. "Malice" means that Trevor Deng acted with intent to cause injury or that Trevor Deng’s conduct was despicable and was done with a willful and knowing disregard of the rights or safety of another. A person acts with knowing disregard when he or she is aware of the probable dangerous consequences of his or her conduct and deliberately fails to avoid those consequences. "Oppression" means that Trevor Deng’s conduct was despicable and subjected Angelique Rochelle to cruel and unjust hardship in knowing disregard of fronts. "Despicable conduct" is conduct that is so vile, base, or contemptible that it would be looked down on and despised by reasonable people. "Fraud" means that Trevor Dene intentionally misrepresented or concealed a material fact and did so intending to harm Angelique Rochelle. 41CACTI No. 5009. Pre-deliberation Instructions When you go to the jury room, the first thing you should do is choose a presiding juror. The presiding juror should see to it that your discussions are orderly and that everyone has a fair chance to be heard. It is your duty to talk with one another in the jury room and to consider the views of all the jurors. Each of you must decide the case for yourself, but only after you have considered the evidence with the other members of the jury. Feel free to change your mind if you are convinced that your position should be different. You should all try to agree. But do not give up your honest beliefs just because others think differently. Please do not state your opinions too strongly at the beginning of your deliberations or immediately announce how you plan to vote as it may interfere with an open discussion. Keep an open mind so that you and your fellow jurors can easily share ideas about the case. You should use your common sense and experience in deciding whether testimony is true and accurate. However, during your deliberations, do not make any statements or provide any information to other jurors based on any special training or unique personal experiences that you may have had related to matters involved in this case. What you may know or have learned through your training or experience is not a part of the evidence received in this case. Sometimes jurors disagree or have questions about the evidence or about what the witnesses said in their testimony. If that happens, you may ask to have testimony read back to you or ask to see any exhibits admitted into evidence that have not already been provided to you. Also, jurors may need further explanation about the laws that apply to the case. If this happens during your discussions, write down your questions and give them to the court attendant. I will talk with the attorneys before | answer so it may take some time. You should continue your deliberations while you wait for my answer. I will do my best to answer them. When you write me a note, do not tell me how you voted on an issue until I ask for this information in open court. 42At least nine jurors must agree on a verdict. When you have finished filling out the form, your presiding juror must write the date and sign it at the bottom and then notify the clerk/court attendant that you are ready to present your verdict in the courtroom. Your decision must be based on your personal evaluation of the evidence presented in the case. Each of you may be asked in open court how you voted on each question. While I know you would not do this, I am required to advise you that you must not base your decision on chance, such as a flip of a coin. If you decide to award damages, you may not agree in advance to simply add up the amounts each juror thinks is right and then, without further deliberations, make the average your verdict. You may take breaks, but do not discuss this case with anyone, including each other, until all of you are back in the jury room. 43CACI No. 5010. Taking Notes During the Trial If you have taken notes during the trial, you may take your notebooks with you into the jury room. You may use your notes only to help you remember what happened during the trial. Your independent recollection of the evidence should govern your verdict. You should not allow yourself to be influenced by the notes of other jurors if those notes differ from what you remember. At the end of the trial, your notes will be collected and destroyed or cotleeted-and-retained-by— the court,-but notas-apartof the vase Tecord. 44CACI No. 5011. Reading Back of Trial Testimony in Jury Room You may request in writing that trial testimony be read to you. I will have the court reporter read the testimony to you. You may request that all or a part of a witness’s testimony be read. Your request should be as specific as possible. It will be helpful if you can state: 1. The name of the witness; 2. The subject of the testimony you would like to have read; and 3. The name of the attorney or attorneys asking the questions when the testimony was __ given. The court reporter is not permitted to talk with you when she or he is reading the testimony you have requested. While the court reporter is reading the testimony, you may not deliberate or discuss the case. You may not ask the court reporter to read testimony that was not specifically mentioned in a written request. If your notes differ from the testimony, you must accept the court reporter’s record as accurate. 45CACI No. 5012. Introduction to Special Verdict Form I will give you verdict forms with questions you must answer. I have already instructed you on the law that you are to use in answering these questions. You must follow my instructions and the forms carefully. You must consider each question separately. Although you may discuss the evidence and the issues to be decided in any order, you must answer the questions on the verdict forms in the order they appear. After you answer a question, the form tells you what to do next. Vy use All pin€ of you must deliberate on and answer each question. At least nine of you must agree on an answer before all of you can move on to the next question. However, the same nine or more people do not have to agree on each answer. When you have finished filling out the forms, your presiding juror must write the date and sign it at the bottom of the last page and then notify the court attendant that you are ready to present your verdict in the courtroom. 46CACI No. 5017. Polling the Jury After your verdict is read in open court, you may be asked individually to indicate whether the verdict expresses your personal vote. This is referred to as “polling” the jury and is done to ensure that at least nine jurors have agreed to each decision. The verdict forms that you will receive asks you to answer several questions. You must vote separately on each question. Although nine or more jurors must agree on each answer, it does not have to be the same nine for each answer. Therefore, it is important for each of you to remember how you have voted on each question so that if the jury is polled, each of you will be able to answer accurately about how you voted. Each of you will be provided a draft copy of the verdict forms for your use in keeping track of your votes. 47CACI No. 5020. Demonstrative Evidence During the trial, materials have been shown to you to help explain testimony or other evidence in the case. Some of these materials have been admitted into evidence, and you will be able to review them during your deliberations. Other materials have also been shown to you during the trial, but they have not been admitted into evidence. You will not be able to review them during your deliberations because they are not themselves evidence or proof of any facts. You may, however, consider the testimony given in connection with those materials. 48