California Civil Jury Instructions (CACI) (2017)

VF-2515. Limitation on Remedies- Same Decision

Download PDF
VF-2515.Limitation on Remedies—Same Decision
We answer the questions submitted to us as follows:
1. Was [name of defendant] an [employer/[other covered entity]]?
1. Yes No
1. If your answer to question 1 is yes, then answer question 2. If
you answered no, stop here, answer no further questions, and
have the presiding juror sign and date this form.
2. Was [name of plaintiff] [an employee of [name of defendant]/an
applicant to [name of defendant] for a job/[other covered
relationship to defendant]]?
2. Yes No
2. If your answer to question 2 is yes, then answer question 3. If
you answered no, stop here, answer no further questions, and
have the presiding juror sign and date this form.
3. Did [name of defendant] [discharge/refuse to hire/[other adverse
employment action]] [name of plaintiff]?
3. Yes No
3. If your answer to question 3 is yes, then answer question 4. If
you answered no, stop here, answer no further questions, and
have the presiding juror sign and date this form.
4. Was [name of plaintiff]’s [protected status or activity] a substantial
motivating reason for [name of defendant]’s [discharge of/refusal
to hire/[other adverse employment action]] [name of plaintiff]?
4. Yes No
4. If your answer to question 4 is yes, then answer question 5. If
you answered no, stop here, answer no further questions, and
have the presiding juror sign and date this form.
5. Was [specify employer’s stated legitimate reason, e.g., plaintiff’s
poor job performance] also a substantial motivating reason for
[name of defendant]’s [discharge/refusal to hire/[other adverse
employment action]]?
5. Yes No
5. If your answer to question 5 is yes, then answer question 6. If
you answered no, skip question 6 and answer question 7.
6. Would [name of defendant] have [discharged/refused to hire/[other
1597
0199
adverse employment action]] [name of plaintiff] anyway at that
time based on [e.g., plaintiff’s poor job performance] had [name of
defendant] not also been substantially motivated by
[discrimination/retaliation]?
6. Yes No
6. If your answer to question 6 is no, then answer question 7. If
you answered yes, stop here, answer no further questions, and
have the presiding juror sign and date this form.
7. Was [name of defendant]’s [discharge/refusal to hire/[other adverse
employment action]] a substantial factor in causing harm to [name
of plaintiff]?
7. Yes No
7. If your answer to question 7 is yes, then answer question 8. If
you answered no, stop here, answer no further questions, and
have the presiding juror sign and date this form.
8. What are [name of plaintiff]’s damages?
[a. Past economic loss
[lost earnings $ ]
[lost profits $ ]
[medical expenses $ ]
[other past economic loss $ ]
[a. Total Past Economic Damages: $ ]
[b. Future economic loss
[lost earnings $ ]
[lost profits $ ]
[medical expenses $ ]
[other future economic loss $ ]
[b. Total Future Economic Damages: $ ]
[c. Past noneconomic loss, including [physical
pain/mental suffering:] $ ]
[d. Future noneconomic loss, including [physical
pain/mental suffering:] $ ]
[d. TOTAL $
VF-2515 FAIR EMPLOYMENT AND HOUSING ACT
1598
0200
Signed: Presiding Juror
Dated:
After [this verdict form has/all verdict forms have] been signed, notify
the [clerk/bailiff/court attendant] that you are ready to present your
verdict in the courtroom.
New December 2013; Revised December 2015, December 2016
Directions for Use
This verdict form is based on CACI No. 2512, Limitation of Damages—Same
Decision. It incorporates questions from VF-2500, Disparate Treatment, and VF-
2504, Retaliation, to guide the jury through the evaluation of the employer’s
purported legitimate reason for the adverse employment action.
The special verdict forms in this section are intended only as models. They may
need to be modified depending on the facts of the case.
Question 5 asks the jury to determine whether the employer’s stated legitimate
reason actually was a motivating reason for the adverse action. In this way, the jury
evaluates the employer’s reason once. If it finds that it was an actual motivating
reason, it then proceeds to question 6 to consider whether the employer has proved
“same decision,” that is, that it would have taken the adverse employment action
anyway for the legitimate reason, even though it may have also had a
discriminatory or retaliatory motivation. If the jury answers “no” to question 5 it
then proceeds to consider substantial-factor causation of harm and damages in
questions 7 and 8.
Relationships other than employer/employee can be substituted in question 2, as in
element 2 in CACI No. 2500.
Modify question 4 if plaintiff was not actually a member of the protected class, but
alleges discrimination because he or she was perceived to be a member, or
associated with someone who was or was perceived to be a member, of the
protected class. (See Gov. Code, § 12926(o).)
If specificity is not required, users do not have to itemize all the damages listed in
question 8 and do not have to categorize “economic” and “noneconomic” damages,
especially if it is not a Proposition 51 case. The breakdown of damages is optional
depending on the circumstances.
If there are multiple causes of action, users may wish to combine the individual
forms into one form. If different damages are recoverable on different causes of
action, replace the damages tables in all of the verdict forms with CACI No. VF-
3920, Damages on Multiple Legal Theories.
If the jury is being given the discretion under Civil Code section 3288 to award
prejudgment interest (see Bullis v. Security Pac. Nat’l Bank (1978) 21 Cal.3d 801,
FAIR EMPLOYMENT AND HOUSING ACT VF-2515
1599
0201
814 [148 Cal.Rptr. 22, 582 P.2d 109]), give CACI No. 3935, Prejudgment Interest.
This verdict form may need to be augmented for the jury to make any factual
findings that are required in order to calculate the amount of prejudgment interest.
VF-2516–VF-2599. Reserved for Future Use
VF-2515 FAIR EMPLOYMENT AND HOUSING ACT
1600
0202