Filed: Sep. 18, 2017
Latest Update: Sep. 18, 2017
Summary: JUDGMENT ON SPECIAL VERDICT JAMES V. SELNA , Judge Presiding . This action came on regularly for trial on August 22, 2017 , in Department 10C, of the above-entitled Court, the Honorable Jame V. Selna, presiding. Plaintiff, JUSTIN GOPEN appeared by his attorney, Aaron Gopen of the Law Offices of Aaron Gopen; Defendant, THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, appeared by its attorneys, Margaret M. Holm and Jemma E. Dunn of Sedgwick, LLP. A jury of 8 persons was impaneled and sworn. Aft
Summary: JUDGMENT ON SPECIAL VERDICT JAMES V. SELNA , Judge Presiding . This action came on regularly for trial on August 22, 2017 , in Department 10C, of the above-entitled Court, the Honorable Jame V. Selna, presiding. Plaintiff, JUSTIN GOPEN appeared by his attorney, Aaron Gopen of the Law Offices of Aaron Gopen; Defendant, THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, appeared by its attorneys, Margaret M. Holm and Jemma E. Dunn of Sedgwick, LLP. A jury of 8 persons was impaneled and sworn. Afte..
More
JUDGMENT ON SPECIAL VERDICT
JAMES V. SELNA, Judge Presiding.
This action came on regularly for trial on August 22, 2017, in Department 10C, of the above-entitled Court, the Honorable Jame V. Selna, presiding. Plaintiff, JUSTIN GOPEN appeared by his attorney, Aaron Gopen of the Law Offices of Aaron Gopen; Defendant, THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, appeared by its attorneys, Margaret M. Holm and Jemma E. Dunn of Sedgwick, LLP.
A jury of 8 persons was impaneled and sworn. After hearing the evidence and arguments of the parties, the jury was duly instructed by the Court and the cause was submitted to the jury with directions to return a verdict on special issues. The jury deliberated and thereafter returned into court with its verdicts consisting of the special issues submitted to it as follows:
We the jury in above entitled-case find unanimously as follows:
1. Do you find by a preponderance of the evidence that The Regents of the University of California violated Justin Gopen's rights under American's with Disabilities Act?
___ Yes X No
2. Do you find by a preponderance of the evidence that The Regents of the University of California violated Justin Gopen's rights under the Rehabilitation Act?
___ Yes X No
3. Do you find by a preponderance of the evidence that The Regents of the University of California violated Justin Gopen's rights under the Unruh Act? If your answer to Question No. 1 was "Yes," you must answer this question "Yes."
___ Yes X No
4. Do you find by a preponderance of the evidence that The Regents of the University of California violated Justin Gopen's rights under Disabled Persons Act? If your answer to Question No. 1 was "Yes," you must answer this question "Yes."
___ Yes X No
5. Do you find by a preponderance of the evidence that The Regents of the University of California violated Justin Gopen's rights under the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act?
___ Yes X No
6. Do you find by a preponderance of the evidence that The Regents of the University of California violated Justin Gopen's rights under Health and Safety Code Section 1317?
___ Yes X No
7. Do you find by a preponderance of the evidence that The Regents of the University of California committed fraud?
___ Yes X No
If you answered "Yes" to at least one question, answer the next question. Otherwise skip to the end and sign and date the verdict.
8. What damages do you find by a preponderance of the evidence of the evidence Justin Gopen sustained for:
Past non-economic loss: $ ______________
Future non-economic loss: $ ______________
Count each element of damage only once even if it applies to more than one claim.
9. If you awarded damages in answering Question No. 8, did you award damages for:
The Americans with Disability Act: ___ Yes ___No
The Rehabilitation Act: ___ Yes ___No
10. If you answered Question No. 3 concerning the Unruh Act "Yes," answer this question. In answering Question No. 8, did you include actual damages for the violation of the Unruh Act?
___ Yes ___No
If "Yes", how much: $_____________
11. If you awarded zero or less than $4,000 for each occurrence of a violation of the Unruh Act, enter the difference between the amount you awarded for each occurrence of a violation of the Unruh Act and $4,000. (This number cannot be more than $4,000 for each occurrence.)
$____________________
12. If you answered Question No. 4 concerning the Disabled Persons Act "Yes," answer this question. In answering Question No. 8, did you include actual damages for the violation of the Disabled Persons Act?
___ Yes ___No
If "Yes", how much: $_____________
12. If you awarded zero or less than $1,000 for each occurrence of a violation of the Disabled Persons Act, enter the difference between the amount you awarded for each occurrence and $1,000. (This number cannot be more than $1,000 for each occurrence.)
$____________________
Dated: September 5, 2017 Deborah Reza
Foreperson
It appearing by reason of Special Verdict that Defendant, THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, is entitled to recover costs against Plaintiff, JUSTIN GOPEN.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that:
1. Plaintiff, JUSTIN GOPEN shall take nothing from Defendant, THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA.
2. Defendant, THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, shall recover against Plaintiff, JUSTIN GOPEN its allowable costs in the amount of $___________ pursuant to a memorandum of costs which may be filed in accordance with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 54 and 28 USCS § 1920.
