k:\bataillo\jfb\wppub\cases\civil\conagra v. shipp\final ... · web viewlarry shipp was hired in...
TRANSCRIPT
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF
NEBRASKA
CONAGRA FOODS, ) 8:01CV647)
Plaintiff, ))
vs. )) FINAL JURY INSTRUCTIONS
LARRY SHIPP ))
Defendant. )
INSTRUCTION NO. 1
DUTY
It will be your duty to decide from the evidence whether the plaintiff is entitled to
a verdict against the defendant. From the evidence, you will decide what the facts are.
You are entitled to consider the evidence in the light of your own observations and
experiences in life. You may use reason and common sense to draw deductions from
facts established by the evidence. You will then apply those facts to the law which I give
you in these and the other instructions. In that way, you will reach your verdict. You are
the sole judges of the facts; but you must follow the law as stated in my instructions,
whether you agree or disagree with the law stated in the instructions.
Do not allow sympathy or prejudice to influence you. The law requires that your verdict
be unaffected by anything except the evidence, your common sense, and the law stated
in these and other instructions.
Anything that I may say or do during the trial must not be taken by you as an indication
of what I think of the evidence or what I think your verdict should be.
INSTRUCTION NO. 2
EVIDENCE
The word "evidence" includes the testimony of witnesses; documents and other
things received as exhibits; any facts that have been stipulated, that is, formally agreed to
by the parties; and any facts that have been judicially noticed, that is, facts which I say
you must accept as true.
The following things are not evidence:
1. Statements, arguments, questions and comments by lawyers
are not evidence.
2. Objections are not evidence.
Lawyers have an obligation to their clients to object when they believe that the
evidence being offered is improper under the rules of evidence. You should not be
influenced by the lawyer’s objection or by my ruling on it. If I sustain an objection to a
question, ignore the question. If I overrule the objection, treat the answer like any other
answer. If so, do not attempt to draw any inference in favor of either side as the result of
any ruling I make. Finally, if I instruct you that some item of evidence is received for a
limited purpose only, you must follow that instruction. Pay particularly close attention to
this sort of limiting instruction, because it may not be available to you in writing later in
the jury room.
3. Testimony that I strike from the record or tell you to disregard is
not evidence and must not be considered.
4. Anything you see or hear about this case outside this courtroom is
not evidence and must be disregarded.
Finally, some of you may have heard the phrases or terms "direct evidence" and
"circumstantial evidence." Direct evidence is direct proof of a fact, such as testimony by
an eye witness. Circumstantial evidence is proof of facts from which you may infer or
conclude that other facts exist. The law makes no distinction between the weight to be
given to either direct or circumstantial evidence. You should give the evidence the weight
that you believe the evidence is entitled to receive.
INSTRUCTION NO. 3
BENCH CONFERENCES AND RECESSES
During the trial it may become necessary for me to talk with the lawyers outside
your hearing, either by having a bench conference while you are present in the courtroom,
or by calling a recess. Please understand that while you are waiting, the court and
counsel are working. The purpose of these conferences is to decide how certain evidence
is to be treated under the rules of evidence or to decide a particular procedure to be
followed in the case. We will, of course, do what we can to minimize the number and
length of these conferences.
INSTRUCTION NO. 4
JURY QUESTIONS
While evidence is being presented, you are not allowed to raise your hands to
ask questions about that evidence. However, if you do have questions about something
you hear during the examination of a witness, you may write your questions down on a
piece of paper. When attorneys have finished examining that witness, you may submit
your written question or questions. I will review each question with the attorneys. You
may not receive an answer to your question because I may decide that the question is
not proper under the rules of evidence. The attorneys may choose to answer your
questions by asking more questions of the witness. But even if the question is proper, you
may not get an immediate answer to your question. For instance, a witness or an exhibit
that you will see later in the trial may answer your question.
INSTRUCTION NO. 5
NOTE-TAKING
If you wish, you may take notes to help you remember what witnesses said. Notes
may be helpful to you because at the end of the trial, you must make your decision based
on what you recall of the evidence. You will not have a written transcript to consult, and it
may not be practical for the court reporter to read back lengthy testimony. Therefore, you
should pay close attention to the testimony as it is given.
If you do take notes, please keep them to yourself until you and the other jurors go
to the jury room to decide this case. However, do not let note-taking distract you to the
point that you miss hearing other testimony from the witness.
During the trial, documents or other physical items may be received into evidence.
At the present, however, you will not be supplied with a list of exhibits which are
received in evidence. Therefore, you may wish to make notes about the exhibits,
especially their description and number, so that you can refer to those exhibits while you
are deliberating.
When we take our recess each day for the lunchtime break and when we take
our recess each night, please take your notes to the jury room and leave your notes
there. The courtroom deputy will take custody of your notes and secure them.
No one will read your notes but you. Your notes will be destroyed after the trial is over.
INSTRUCTION NO. 6
IMPARTIALITY
This case should be considered and decided by you as an action between
persons of equal standing in the community and of equal worth. A large corporation is
entitled to the same fair trial as a small corporation. All parties stand equal before the
law and are to be dealt with as equals in a court of justice.
INSTRUCTION NO. 7
PREPONDERANCE OF EVIDENCE
Your verdict depends on whether you find certain facts have been proven. The
burden of proving a fact is upon the party whose claim or defense depends on that fact.
The party who has the burden of proving a fact must prove it by the greater weight of the
evidence, also known as a “preponderance of the evidence.”
By a "preponderance of the evidence," I mean the greater weight of credible
evidence. This is not determined by which party has the greater number of witnesses
testifying about the facts and circumstances or by the number of exhibits. Preponderance
of the evidence is determined by the amount of evidence which on the whole, when fully,
fairly and impartially considered, makes the stronger impression on your mind and is
more convincing as to its truth when weighed against the evidence the other party has
presented.
To prove something by a preponderance of evidence is to prove that it is more
likely true than not. Each party is entitled to the benefit of any evidence tending to
establish a claim, even though the other party introduced that evidence. If the evidence is
equally balanced, a preponderance is not established.
You may have heard the term “proof beyond a reasonable doubt.” That is a stricter
standard that applies in criminal cases. It does not apply in civil cases such as this one.
You should, therefore, put the term out of your minds.
INSTRUCTION NO. 8
WITNESSES
In deciding what the facts are, you may have to decide what testimony you believe
and what testimony you do not believe. You may believe all of what a witness said, or
only part of it, or none of it.
In deciding what testimony to believe, consider the witness’s intelligence, the
opportunity the witness had to have seen or heard the things testified about, the
witness’s memory, any motives that witness may have for testifying a certain way, the
manner of the witness while testifying, whether that witness said something different at an
earlier time, the general reasonableness of the testimony, and the extent to which the
testimony is consistent with any evidence that you believe.
In deciding whether or not to believe a witness, keep in mind that people
sometimes hear or see things differently and sometimes forget things. You need to
consider therefore whether a contradiction is an innocent misrecollection or lapse of
memory or an intentional falsehood, and that may depend on whether it has to do with an
important fact or only a small detail.
The fact that one side may use a greater number of witnesses or presented a
greater quantity of evidence should not affect your decision. Rather, determine which
witness or witnesses and which evidence appears accurate and trustworthy. It is the
weight of the evidence that counts -- not the number of witnesses.
If the testimony of a single witness produces in your minds a belief in the likely truth of
any fact and would justify a verdict in accordance with the witness’s testimony, even
though a number of witnesses may have testified to the contrary, and you have
considered all of the
evidence in the case, then you hold greater belief in the accuracy and reliability of this singlewitness.
INSTRUCTION NO. 9
CONDUCT OF THE JURY
To insure fairness, jurors are asked to obey the following rules:
First, do not talk among yourselves about this case, or about anyone involved with
this case, until the end of the case when you go to the jury room to decide on your verdict.
Second, do not talk with anyone else about this case, or about anyone involved
with it, until the trial has ended and you have been discharged as jurors.
Third, during this trial when you are outside this courtroom, do not listen to or let
anyone try to tell you anything about this case. Do not let anyone talk to you about
anyone involved with this case until the trial has ended and I have accepted your verdict.
If anyone tries to talk to you about this case during the trial, please promptly report the
matter to me.
Fourth, during the trial you should not talk with or speak to any of the parties,
lawyers or witnesses involved in this case, which means that you should not even pass
the time of day with any of them. If a person from one side of the lawsuit sees you talking
to a person from the other side, even if it is on a matter unconnected with this trial or
simply to pass the time of day, such contact might arouse an unwarranted suspicion about
your fairness. If a lawyer, party or witness does not speak to you when you pass in the
hall, ride the elevator, or encounter each other elsewhere while this trial is taking place,
do not think he or she is being rude. Those persons are not supposed to talk or visit with
you, either.
Fifth, you must decide this case on the basis of evidence presented in the courtroom.
Therefore, do not read any news stories or articles about the case, or about anyone
involved with this case, or listen to any radio or television reports about the case or about
INSTRUCTION NO. 9anyone involved with it. In fact, until the trial is over you should probably avoid
reading any
newspapers or news journals, and avoid listening to any TV or radio newscasts. There
might not be any news reports of this case, but, if there are, you might find yourself
inadvertently reading or listening to something before you realize what you are doing.
Sixth, do not do any research or make any investigation on your own concerning
this case. Do not use or refer to a dictionary or any law books concerning any aspect of
this case, including any evidence introduced. Do not visit the scene of any incident that
may have been mentioned in this case.
Seventh, do not form an opinion about any fact or issue in the case until you have
received the entire evidence, have heard arguments of counsel, have been instructed as
to the law of the case, and have retired to the jury room. Consequently, do not make up
your mind during the trial about what the verdict should be. Keep an open mind until after
you have gone to the jury room to decide the case and have discussed the evidence with
the other jurors.
Finally, do not be influenced by sympathy or prejudice. Do not indulge in any
speculation, guess, or conjecture. And do not make any inferences which are not
supported by the evidence.
INSTRUCTION NO. 10
OUTLINE OF TRIAL
The trial will proceed in the following manner:
First, the attorney for the plaintiff may make an opening statement. Next, the
attorney for the defendant may make an opening statement. An opening statement is not
evidence or argument. It is an outline of what the party intends to prove, a summary of
what the attorney expects the evidence to be.
The plaintiff's attorney will then present evidence through a direct examination of a
witness. The defendant’s attorney may then cross-examine that witness. After the
cross- examination, the plaintiff’s attorney may ask additional questions on re-direct.
The defendant’s attorney may also ask questions on re-cross. After the plaintiff has
presented all her witnesses, the plaintiff will rest. The defendant will then present its case.
The defendant may present evidence through direct examination of witnesses and
plaintiff’s attorney may cross-examine those witnesses. Re-direct and re-cross
examinations may also take place.
After the evidence is completely presented, the attorneys will make their closing
arguments to summarize and interpret the evidence for you. Just as with opening
statements, these closing arguments are not evidence. I will then instruct you further on
the law. After that you will retire to the jury room to deliberate on your verdict.
INSTRUCTION NO. 11
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
The plaintiff, ConAgra Foods, brought this action to recover amounts that it
claims are owed under several agreements executed by the defendant, Larry Shipp,
ConAgra’s former Vice-President of Integrated Logistics. Defendant resigned from his
employment in October 2001. ConAgra Foods alleges that the defendant is obligated to
reimburse the company in the amount of $100,000 under the terms of a Relocation
Bonus Agreement dated March 6, 2000. ConAgra Foods further claims that the
defendant is obligated to reimburse the company in the amount of $49,913.27 for
relocation benefits he received during his employment pursuant to the terms of an
Employee Reimbursement Agreement dated July 20,
2000. Finally, ConAgra is seeking to recover $77,572.72 under several Stock Option
Agreements executed by the defendant. ConAgra alleges that the defendant became
obligated to pay back the company when he resigned from his employment in October
2001.
The defendant denies that he owes any money to ConAgra. He asserts that he is
not obligated to paythe company under the agreements because he was involuntarily
terminated, or “constructively discharged,” from his employment. ConAgra alleges that
defendant Shipp voluntarily resigned from his position and is therefore obligated to
reimburse the company under the Relocation Bonus Agreement and Employee
Reimbursement Agreement and is obligated to reimburse the company under the Stock
Option Agreement regardless of whether his separation from employment was voluntary or
involuntary. Defendant Shipp also claims that ConAgra owes him money under the
ConAgra Fiscal Year 2002 Corporate Incentive Plan since he worked at ConAgra for
half of that year.
ConAgra asserts that Shipp is not eligible because he voluntarily left employment. Again,
Ship alleges that he was “constructively discharged.”
INSTRUCTION NO. 12
UNCONTROVERTED FACTS
Pursuant to the order on pretrial conference, the parties have stipulated to the
following set of facts:
1. Larry Shipp was hired in 1973 as a customer service representative for Lamb- Weston, a frozen and dried foods company located in Portland, Oregon.
2. By 1986, Shipp reached the level of Vice-President of Information Systems andBusiness Analysis with Lamb-Weston.
3. By 1988, Lamb-Weston underwent a reorganization whereby Shipp’s responsibilities shifted to Director of Materials Management, a function of logistics.
4. A year later, Lamb-Weston promoted Shipp to Vice-President of Logistics.
5. Logistics can be defined as that part of the supply chain that plans, implements, and controls the flow and storage of goods, services and related information, including transportation, warehousing, inventory and management.
6. At about that time, ConAgra Foods, Inc. acquired fifty percent of Lamb-Weston, with
Golden Valley Microwave Foods acquiring the other fifty percent.
7. By 1992, ConAgra acquired Golden Valley Microwave Foods and, as a result, owned all of Lamb-Weston.
8. Shipp continued to work for Lamb-Weston and its subsidiaries in Europe andCanada until 1999.
9. In May of 1999, ConAgra offered Shipp a position as Vice-President of Integrated
Logistics at ConAgra.
10. In June 1999, Shipp moved himself and his family to Omaha, Nebraska, to assume the position of Vice-President of Integrated Logistics working at ConAgra’s corporate headquarters in Omaha.
11. On November 1, 1999, ConAgra hired Stephen J. Tibey as Senior Vice- President of Supply Chain at ConAgra responsible for logistics.
12. Tibey’s position was a newly-created one, and he was to be the senior leader of the Omaha Logistics Group.
13. As of November 1999, Shipp began reporting to Tibey.
14. ConAgra’s 1999 Annual Report listed Shipp under the Officers Section of theReport.
15. ConAgra’s 2000 Annual Report did not list Shipp under the Officer’s Section of the
Report.
16. Shipp worked in Logistics under Tibey until he resigned from his position effective
October 12, 2001.
17. In connection with his employment at ConAgra, Shipp executed severalEmployment Agreements under which he assumed financial obligations to the Company.
18. On March 6, 2000, Shipp executed a Relocation Bonus Agreement that provided him a $100,000 bonus for agreeing to relocate his employment from Omaha to Schaumburg, Illinois in September 2000.
19. Shipp received the $100,000 bonus under the Relocation Bonus Agreement.
20. On July 20, 2000, Shipp executed an Employee Reimbursement Agreement under which he was reimbursed for certain relocation expenses he incurred in connection with his move from Omaha to Schaumburg, Illinois, in September 2000.
21. Pursuant to the Employee Reimbursement Agreement, Shipp received relocation expense reimbursements in the total amount of $99,826.55.
22. Shipp relocated with the Logistics Group from Omaha to Schaumburg, Illinois, in
September 2000.
23. During his employment at ConAgra, Shipp executed the following Stock OptionAgreements:
a. September 16, 1992 Stock Option Agreement b. September 23, 1993 Stock Option Agreement c. September 22, 1994 Stock Option Agreement d. September 28, 1995 Stock Option Agreement e. September 28, 2000 Stock Option Agreement
24. In September 2001, Shipp exercised the following stock options:
a. On September 25, 2001, he exercised 1,900 shares at the option price of $12.68.
b. On September 27, 2001, he exercised 1,030 shares at the option price of $14.93.
c. On September 27, 2001, he exercised 1,300 shares at the option
price of $12.68.
d. On September 27, 2001, he exercised 3,000 shares at the option price of $15.75.
e. On September 27, 2001, he exercised 1,800 shares at the option price of $15.75.
f. On September 27, 2001, he exercised 6,000 shares at the option price of $20.00.
g. On September 27, 2001, he exercised 185 shares at the option price of$19.81.
h. On September 27, 2001, he exercised 815 shares at the option price of$19.81.
25. Pursuant to the terms of the Stock Option Agreements executed by Shipp, the total appreciation for options exercised is $77,572.72.
26. Prior to his resignation from employment, Shipp was offered and accepted a vice- president position with Smithfield Foods, a competitor of ConAgra.
27. Shipp resigned from his employment at ConAgra effective October 12, 2001
INSTRUCTION NO. 13
INTRODUCTION
Now that you have heard the evidence and the attorneys’ arguments, it is my duty
to inform you of the legal principles and considerations you are to use in arriving at a
proper verdict.
It is your duty to follow the law given you in this charge and to apply these rules of
law to the facts as you find them from the evidence. Do not single out one instruction
alone as stating the law, but consider the instructions as a whole.
Do not be concerned with the wisdom of any rule of law that the court states.
Regardless of any opinion you may have about what the law ought to be, it would violate
your sworn duty to base a verdict upon a view of the law different from the one given in
these instructions, just as it would violate your sworn duty as judges of the facts to base a
verdict upon anything but the evidence in the case and the reasonable inferences arising
from such evidence.
INSTRUCTION NO. 14
JUDGE’S OPINION
In the trial of this case and in these instructions, I have in no way attempted to
express my opinion about who should prevail upon the issues submitted to you. You must
not construe any statement, action, or ruling on my part during the trial as an indication of
my opinion about the proper outcome of your verdict. During the course of a trial, I might
have occasionally asked questions of a witness to bring out facts not fully covered in the
testimony. Do not assume that I hold any opinion on the matters to which the questions
related.
INSTRUCTION NO. 15
EVIDENCE AND OBJECTIONS
During the trial I have ruled on objections to certain evidence. You must not
concern yourselves with the reason for such rulings since they are controlled by rules of
law.
You must not speculate or form or act upon any opinion about how a witness
might have testified in answer to questions which I rejected during the trial, or upon any
subject matter to which I forbade inquiry.
In coming to any conclusion in this case, you must be governed by the evidence
before you and by the evidence alone. You may not indulge in speculation, conjecture or
inference not supported by the evidence.
The evidence from which you are to find the facts consists of the following: (1)
the testimony of the witnesses; (2) documents and other things received as exhibits; and
(3) any facts that have been stipulated -- that is, formally agreed to by the parties.
The following things are not evidence: (1) statements, comments, questions and
arguments by lawyers for the parties; (2) questions by jurors; (3) objections to questions;
(4) any testimony I told you to disregard; and (5) anything you may have seen or heard
about this case outside the courtroom.
INSTRUCTION NO. 16
REASONABLE INFERENCES
While you should consider only the evidence in the case, you are permitted to
draw such reasonable inferences from the testimony and exhibits as you feel are justified
in the light of common experience. In other words, you may make deductions and reach
conclusions which reason and common sense lead you to draw from the facts which
have been established by the testimony and evidence in the case.
INSTRUCTION NO. 17
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
In this case, ConAgra is seeking to recover under various employment
agreements executed by the defendant during his employment with the company.
On March 6, 2000, the defendant executed a Relocation Bonus Agreement which
provided him a $100,000 bonus for agreeing to relocate his employment from Omaha,
Nebraska, to Schaumburg, Illinois, in September 2000. ConAgra claims that pursuant to
the terms of that agreement, the defendant is obligated to reimburse the company the
entire
$100,000 bonus payment because the defendant voluntarily terminated his employment
prior to March 1, 2003.
On July 20, 2000, the defendant also executed an Employment Reimbursement
Agreement under which ConAgra agreed to reimburse the defendant for certain
relocation expenses he incurred in connection with his move from Omaha, Nebraska, to
Schaumburg, Illinois, in September 2000. ConAgra claims that under the terms of this
agreement, the defendant became obligated to reimburse the company one-half of the
relocation benefits when he voluntarily terminated his employment within 24 months of the
relocation. ConAgra alleges that it is entitled to recover $49,913.27 representing one-half
of the total relocation expenses provided to the defendant.
Larry Shipp alleges that ConAgra owes him certain sums under the ConAgra Fiscal
Year 2002 Corporate Incentive Agreement. Shipp maintains that as a former employee
of ConAgra, he is eligible to receive an award under the ConAgra Fiscal Year 2002
Corporate Incentive Agreement for the period from June 1, 2001 to October 12, 2001, for
an amount in excess of $30,000. ConAgra denies that Shipp is eligible to receive such
an award.
ConAgra also sought recovery under certain Stock Option Agreements. This claim
is no longer before you and will not be decided by you. You are to draw no inferences
from the fact that I have withdrawn the claim from your consideration.
INSTRUCTION NO. 18
BREACH OF RELOCATION BONUS AGREEMENT
You are instructed that it has been established that the plaintiff and the defendant
entered into the Relocation Bonus Agreement and that the defendant is obligated to
pay damages in the amount of $100,000 to plaintiff unless defendant can prove, by
the a preponderance of the evidence, that he was constructively discharged as set forth
in Instruction No. 20.
INSTRUCTION NO. 19
EMPLOYEE REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT
You are instructed that it has been that established that the plaintiff and the
defendant entered into the Employee Reimbursement Agreement and that the defendant
is obligated to pay damages in the amount of $49,913.27 to plaintiff unless defendant can
prove, by the a preponderance of the evidence, that he was constructively discharged
as set forth in Instruction No. 20.
INSTRUCTION NO. 20
CONSTRUCTIVE DISCHARGE
The defendant claims that he is not obligated to reimburse ConAgra under the
Relocation Bonus and Employee Reimbursement Agreements because he was
constructively discharged from his position.
A constructive discharge occurs when an employer deliberately renders an
employee’s working conditions intolerable, thus leaving the employee no reasonable
choice but to quit or resign and the employee does quit or resign because of those
conditions. However, a constructive discharge does not occur unless a reasonable
person would consider those working conditions to be intolerable. The defendant’s
subjective feelings about his job are not the standard in determining whether the
defendant was constructively discharged as you must decide whether a reasonable
person would have felt compelled to resign under the circumstances.
If you find that defendant was constructively discharged, then your verdict will be
for defendant on the claims of breach of the relocation bonus agreement and breach of
the relocation reimbursement agreement. If you find that defendant was not
constructively discharged, then your verdict will be for plaintiff ConAgra on the claims of
breach of the relocation bonus agreement and breach of the relocation reimbursement
agreement
INSTRUCTION NO. 21
COUNTERCLAIM - INCENTIVE PLAN
It is agreed that Larry Shipp was employed by ConAgra from June 1, 2001 until
October 12, 2001 and was covered by the Fiscal Year 2002 Corporate Incentive Plan
during that time. With respect to Larry Shipp’s counterclaim, before Larry Shipp can
recover against ConAgra on his counterclaim, he must prove, by a preponderance of the
evidence, each and all of the following elements:
1. That he was entitled to a bonus under the terms of the Incentive Plan;
2. That the employment relationship was terminated by an act of the employer
through no fault of Shipp, which Shipp may satisfy by proving that he was constructively
discharged;
3. The amount of the bonus to which Shipp was entitled under the Incentive Plan.
If Larry Shipp has met this burden of proof on his counterclaim, then your verdict
shall be for Larry Shipp on that counterclaim. If Larry Shipp has not met his burden of
proof on his counterclaim, then your verdict shall be for ConAgra on this counterclaim.
INSTRUCTION NO. 22
DAMAGES - INCENTIVE PLAN
If you find in favor of the defendant Larry Shipp on his claim for breach of Incentive
Plan Agreement, then you must determine the pro rata share of the bonus agreement
that Larry Shipp was entitled to under the terms of the Incentive Plan Agreement.
Remember, throughout your deliberations, you must not engage in any speculation,
guess, or conjecture, and you must not award damages under this instruction by way of
punishment or through sympathy.
INSTRUCTION NO. 23
NOTE-TAKING
Throughout the course of the trial you have been allowed to take notes of the
testimony. You may take your notes into the jury room for use in your deliberations.
Remember, however, your notes are not evidence. The courtroom deputy is charged with
the task of keeping the official record of all exhibits received into evidence during the trial.
At the close of trial, she will deliver all exhibits you are to consider in your deliberations.
Your notes should be used only as aids to your memory. You should not give your
notes precedence over your independent recollection of the evidence. You should rely on
your own independent recollection of the proceedings, and you should not be influenced
by the notes of other jurors. Your notes are not entitled to any greater weight than each
juror’s recollection or impression of the testimony given during this trial. After you have
reached a verdict, your notes will be destroyed.
INSTRUCTION NO. 24
DELIBERATIONS AND VERDICT
In conducting your deliberations and returning your verdict, there are certain rules
you must follow.
First, when you retire to the jury room, first select one of your number to be
foreperson to preside over your discussions and to speak for you here in court.
Second, it is your duty, as jurors, to discuss this case with one another in the jury
room. You should try to reach agreement because a verdict—whether liable or not liable
—must be unanimous. Each of you must make your own conscientious decision, but only
after you have considered all the evidence, discussed it fully with your fellow jurors, and
listened to the views of your fellow jurors. Do not be afraid to change your opinions if the
discussion persuades you that you should. But do not come to a decision simply because
other jurors think it is right, or simply to reach a verdict.
Third, you will take with you when you retire for your deliberations an official
verdict form on which you will indicate a verdict. Please follow the directions carefully
when filling it out. A verdict must be agreed to by all of you, that is, it must be unanimous.
Your verdict must be signed by the foreperson.
Fourth, if you need to communicate with me during your deliberations, you may send
a note to me through the courtroom deputy, signed by one or more jurors. I will respond
as soon as possible either in writing or orally in open court. Your answer may not
come immediately because I may need to assemble the attorneys and confer with them
before I respond. Remember that you should not tell anyone—including me—how your
votes stand numerically.
Finally, when you arrive at your verdict and the form of verdict has been
completed, you will have concluded your task. Notify my chambers and I will receive your
verdict promptly. If you do not agree on a verdict by 5:00 this evening, you may separate
and return for further deliberations tomorrow morning. You may separate for meals
whenever you choose. If you do separate, you are not allowed to discuss this case with
anyone, even another juror.