CACI No. VF-3301. Locality Discrimination Claim - Affirmative Defense - Cost Justification
Judicial Council of California Civil Jury Instructions (2023 edition)
Download PDF
VF-3301.Locality Discrimination Claim - Affirmative
Defense - Cost Justification
We answer the questions submitted to us as follows:
1. Did [name of defendant] [offer to sell/sell/furnish] [product/service]
at a lower price in one [location/section/community/city] in
California than in another [location/section/ community/city] in
California?
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 the locality discrimination within the law?
2. Yes No
2. If your answer to question 2 is no, then answer question 3. If you
answered yes, stop here, answer no further questions, and have
the presiding juror sign and date this form.
3. Did [name of defendant] intend to destroy competition from an
established dealer [or to prevent competition from any person
who in good faith intended and attempted to become such a
dealer]?
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 defendant]’s conduct a substantial factor in causing
harm to [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. What are [name of plaintiff]’s damages? $
Signed: Presiding Juror
Dated:
After [this verdict form has/all verdict forms have] been signed, notify
570
the [clerk/bailiff/court attendant] that you are ready to present your
verdict in the courtroom.
New September 2003; Revised December 2010, December 2016
Directions for Use
This verdict form is based on CACI No. 3300, Locality Discrimination - Essential
Factual Elements, and CACI No. 3330, Affırmative Defense to Locality
Discrimination Claim - Cost Justification.
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.
If other affirmative defenses are asserted, this form can be modified accordingly. See
other Unfair Practices Act verdict forms for examples.
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,
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.
UNFAIR PRACTICES ACT VF-3301
571
© Judicial Council of California.
