California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from Bisnett v. Hollis, 207 Cal.App.2d 142, 24 Cal.Rptr. 231 (Cal. App. 1962):
As hereinbefore set forth, the verdict found in favor of the plaintiffs. This meant, of course, that the jury found the defendant guilty of negligence and the plaintiff free from contributory negligence. But, if this is so, why no damages? Defendant's answer is that the jury thereby determined that although defendant's actions were the sole cause of the accident plaintiffs did not receive any injuries or sustain any damage as a result of the accident. Such interpretation was placed upon similar verdicts in the following cases: In Vogt v. McLaughlin (1959), 172 Cal.App.2d 498, 342 P.2d 481, the defendant admitted liability. Accordingly, only one form of verdict was submitted to the jury, in favor of the plaintiffs, bearing a blank to be filled in for the amount of the award to each plaintiff. The jury returned this form bearing the word 'none' in each blank. The court
Page 233
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.