From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Torres v. Hansen

United States District Court, Northern District of California
Nov 13, 2023
16-cv-06607-SI (N.D. Cal. Nov. 13, 2023)

Opinion

16-cv-06607-SI

11-13-2023

MARIO TORRES, Plaintiff, v. MIKE HANSEN and DANIEL SMITH, Defendants.


VERDICT FORM

CLAIM 1 - WARRANTLESS ENTRY OF APARTMENT

1. As to Claim 1, has plaintiff Mario Torres proven by a preponderance of the evidence that defendant Mike Hansen and/or Daniel Smith violated plaintiff's Fourth Amendment rights when the officers entered the apartment on July 4, 2012, without a warrant?

Officer Hansen Yes___ No ___
Officer Smith Yes___ No ___

If your answer to both parts of this question was “no,” please skip to Question 5. Otherwise, please answer the next question.

2. As to Claim 1, has plaintiff Mario Torres proven by a preponderance of the evidence that the defendant(s) caused him injury, damage or harm?

Officer Hansen Yes___ No ___
Officer Smith Yes___ No ___

If your answer to both parts of this question was “no,” you must award nominal damages of $1, and then skip to Question 4. Nominal damages: $_____

If either answer to this question was “yes,” please answer the next question.

3. As to Claim 1, state the amount of compensatory damages proved by plaintiff Mario Torres.

$ _____

Please answer the next question.

4. As to Claim 1, has plaintiff Mario Torres proven by a preponderance of the evidence that defendants' conduct was malicious, oppressive or committed in reckless disregard of his constitutional rights?

Officer Hansen Yes___ No ___

Officer Smith Yes___ No ___

Please answer the next question.

CLAIM 2 - EXCESSIVE FORCE PRIOR TO HANDCUFFING

5. As to Claim 2, has plaintiff Mario Torres proven by a preponderance of the evidence that defendant Mike Hansen and/or Daniel Smith used excessive force against him inside the apartment prior to plaintiff being handcuffed?

Officer Hansen Yes___ No ___
Officer Smith Yes___ No ___

If your answer to both questions was “no,” please skip to Question 9. Otherwise, please answer the next question.

6. As to Claim 2, has plaintiff Mario Torres proven by a preponderance of the evidence that the defendant(s) caused him injury, damage or harm?

Officer Hansen Yes___ No ___
Officer Smith Yes___ No ___

If your answer to both parts of this question was “no,” you must award nominal damages of $1, and then skip to Question 8. Nominal damages: $

If either answer to this question was “yes,” please answer the next question.

7. As to Claim 2, state the amount of compensatory damages proved by plaintiff Mario Torres.

$ ___

Please answer the next question.

8. As to Claim 2, has plaintiff Mario Torres proven by a preponderance of the evidence that defendants' conduct was malicious, oppressive or committed in reckless disregard of his constitutional rights?

Officer Hansen Yes___ No ___
Officer Smith Yes___ No ___

Please answer the next question.

CLAIM 3 - EXCESSIVE FORCE AFTER HANDCUFFING

9. As to Claim 3, has plaintiff Mario Torres proven by a preponderance of the evidence that defendant Michael Hansen used excessive force against him inside the apartment after plaintiff was handcuffed?

Yes___ No ___

If your answer was “no,” please skip to Question 13. Otherwise, please answer the next question.

10. As to Claim 3, has plaintiff Mario Torres proven by a preponderance of the evidence that defendant Michael Hansen caused him injury, damage or harm?

Yes___ No ___
If your answer to this question was “no,” you must award nominal damages of $1, and then skip to Question 12. Nominal damages: $_____
If your answer to this question was “yes,” please answer the next question.

11. As to Claim 3, state the amount of compensatory damages proved by plaintiff Mario Torres.

$ _____

Please go to the next question.

11. As to Claim 3, has plaintiff Mario Torres proven by a preponderance of the evidence that defendants Mike Hansen's conduct was malicious, oppressive or committed in reckless disregard of his constitutional rights?

Yes___ No ___

PUNITIVE DAMAGES

12. If you answered “no” to all parts of Questions 4, 8 and 12, do not consider any of the remaining questions and go to the end of the verdict form. Please have the jury foreperson sign and date the form, and return it to the courtroom deputy. If you answered “yes” to any part of Questions 4, 8 or 12, please answer the next question.

13. State the amount of punitive damages that you award.

Officer Hansen $ _____

Officer Smith $ _______

Please have the foreperson sign and date the form.

Dated:

Foreperson


Summaries of

Torres v. Hansen

United States District Court, Northern District of California
Nov 13, 2023
16-cv-06607-SI (N.D. Cal. Nov. 13, 2023)
Case details for

Torres v. Hansen

Case Details

Full title:MARIO TORRES, Plaintiff, v. MIKE HANSEN and DANIEL SMITH, Defendants.

Court:United States District Court, Northern District of California

Date published: Nov 13, 2023

Citations

16-cv-06607-SI (N.D. Cal. Nov. 13, 2023)