On March 16, 2017 a
Verdict
was filed
involving a dispute between
Urban, Justin,
and
Interstate Electrical Services Corp.,
Weston, Keith,
for Torts
in the District Court of Middlesex County.
Preview
3 7
COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS
THE TRIAL COURT
MIDDLESEX, SS. : SUPERIOR COURT
' CIVIL ACTION
NO: 1781CV00814
JUSTIN URBAN,
Plaintiff
VS.
KEITH WESTON,
& .
INTERSTATE ELECTRICAL,
SERVICES CORP.
Defendants
SPECIAL VERDICT QUESTIONNAIRE
|
1. Was the Defendant, Keith Weston, negligent?!
(2 No
2. Was the negligence of the Defendant, Keith Weston, a proximate cause of the Plaintiff's
injuries? .
(2 No_|
|
| v
3. Was the Plaintiff, Justin Urban, negligent?
No
' The parties agree that any liability of Weston’s shall be imputed to Interstate Electrical Services Corp. based on
principles of respondeat superior.
14. Was such negligence a proximate cause of the plaintiff's injuries?
No
5. What percentage of fault is attributable to: °
A. mem fA thy ) G2 Bercent
B. Plaintiff Th tn 16% percent
HH
Total 100 percent gal (
: [|e to" by
ger
6. Amount of damages: by
Daca by fla Db 4 M6 1.21
Figure in numbers | Figure in words
The Aeoneges heve 5 bern redocel vel ect competi Ve nesfigence,
[hereby certify that at least 2 of 3, deliberating justices have agreed upon the above verdict.
William M. Whfte, jr., (Presiding Justice) i
Dated: Mgve 2
Document Filed Date
March 04, 2021
Case Filing Date
March 16, 2017
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
Preview
3 7 COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS THE TRIAL COURT MIDDLESEX, SS. : SUPERIOR COURT ' CIVIL ACTION NO: 1781CV00814 JUSTIN URBAN, Plaintiff VS. KEITH WESTON, & . INTERSTATE ELECTRICAL, SERVICES CORP. Defendants SPECIAL VERDICT QUESTIONNAIRE | 1. Was the Defendant, Keith Weston, negligent?! (2 No 2. Was the negligence of the Defendant, Keith Weston, a proximate cause of the Plaintiff's injuries? . (2 No_| | | v 3. Was the Plaintiff, Justin Urban, negligent? No ' The parties agree that any liability of Weston’s shall be imputed to Interstate Electrical Services Corp. based on principles of respondeat superior. 14. Was such negligence a proximate cause of the plaintiff's injuries? No 5. What percentage of fault is attributable to: ° A. mem fA thy ) G2 Bercent B. Plaintiff Th tn 16% percent HH Total 100 percent gal ( : [|e to" by ger 6. Amount of damages: by Daca by fla Db 4 M6 1.21 Figure in numbers | Figure in words The Aeoneges heve 5 bern redocel vel ect competi Ve nesfigence, [hereby certify that at least 2 of 3, deliberating justices have agreed upon the above verdict. William M. Whfte, jr., (Presiding Justice) i Dated: Mgve 2