Jury verdict: punitive damages

📄 Jury verdict: punitive damages — Monday, February 10, 1997

Address:

C:\DEPT103\CIVIL\1997\FEB\10\JURY-VERDICT-PUNITIVE-DAMAGES.DOC

TRIAL

▲ Day 57 of 57

◀ Jury retires to deliberate Jury dismissal ▶

Date: Monday, February 10, 1997 • Utterances: 113

The jury returned its punitive damages verdict in the OJ Simpson civil trial, awarding $12,500,000 each to Fred Goldman and Lou Brown (Nicole's father). The clerk polled each juror individually on all four verdict questions; the awards passed 10-2 on the dollar amounts and 11-1 on the liability questions. Judge Fujisaki formally thanked and dismissed the jury, noting he could not personally speak with them due to ongoing post-trial matters.

# 1 JUROR:

No.

# 2 THE COURT:

We have a different foreperson. Who is now the foreperson?

# 3 JUROR:

Number 290.

# 4 THE COURT:

Number 290. Has the jury reached the verdict on the second phase of the trial?

# 5 JUROR:

Yes.

# 6 THE COURT:

Did you seal that verdict and give it to the bailiff?

# 7 JUROR:

Yes.

# 8 THE COURT:

Okay. Bailiff, would you return the sealed envelope to the foreperson. (Bailiff complies.)

# 9 THE COURT:

Check that, please, to see whether that is the verdict form that you had sealed. (Juror complies.)

# 10 JUROR:

Yes.

# 11 THE COURT:

If you would give it back to the bailiff, please. (Juror complies) (Bailiff hands verdict form to the Court.)

# 12 THE COURT:

Clerk will read the verdict.

# 13 THE CLERK:

Superior Court of the State of California for the County of Los Angeles, Sharon Rufo, plaintiff versus Orenthal James Simpson, et. al. defendant, Frederic Goldman et cetera et. al., plaintiffs versus Orenthal James Simpson et. al., defendants Louis H brown et cetera, plaintiff versus Orenthal James Simpson, defendant case number SC031947 consolidated with case number SC036340 and case number SC036876 special verdict. Special verdict.

We the jury of the above entitled action find the following special verdict on the question submitted to us.

Answer the following question yes or no.

Question number one, shall punitive damages be assessed against defendant Orenthal James Simpson in favor of plaintiff Frederic Goldman.

Answer yes.

If your answer is yes, answer the next question. If your answer is no, proceed to question No. 3.

Question number 2, we assess punitive damages against defendant Orenthal James Simpson in favor of plaintiffs Frederic Goldman as follows:

Amount $12,500,000.

Answer the following question yes or no.

Question No. 3, shall punitive damages be assessed against defendant Orenthal James Simpson in favor of plaintiff, Louis Brown.

Answer, yes.

If your answer is yes, answer the next question. If your answer is no, have your foreperson sign and date this verdict.

Question number 4. We assess punitive damages against defendant Orenthal James Simpson in favor of plaintiff Louis Brown as follows:

12 thousand -- Excuse me $12,500,000.

Dated February 10, 1997, Juror Number 290, foreperson.

Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, as a jury, is this your verdict?

# 14 JUROR:

Yes.

# 15 THE COURT:

Poll the jury.

# 16 THE CLERK:

I'm going to ask each of you again, individually, if each question answered on this verdict form is your personal answer to the question. Question number one: Shall punitive damages be assessed against defendant Orenthal James Simpson in favor of plaintiff Frederic Goldman? Answer is yes. Is this your verdict Juror Number 199?

# 17 JUROR:

No.

# 18 THE CLERK:

Juror No. 341?

# 19 JUROR:

Yes.

# 20 THE CLERK:

Juror number 186?

# 21 JUROR:

Yes.

# 22 THE CLERK:

Juror number 294?

# 23 JUROR:

Yes.

# 24 THE CLERK:

Number 266?

# 25 JUROR:

Yes.

# 26 THE CLERK:

Number 257?

# 27 JUROR:

Yes.

# 28 THE CLERK:

Number 369?

# 29 JUROR:

Yes.

# 30 THE CLERK:

Number 290?

# 31 JUROR:

Yes.

# 32 THE CLERK:

No. 326?

# 33 JUROR:

Yes.

# 34 THE CLERK:

Number 400?

# 35 JUROR:

Yes.

# 36 THE CLERK:

Number 88?

# 37 JUROR:

Yes.

# 38 THE CLERK:

Number 227?

# 39 JUROR:

Yes.

# 40 THE CLERK:

11 to 1. Question number 2. We assess punitive damages against defendant Orenthal James Simpson in favor of plaintiff Frederic Goldman as follows: Amount $12,500,000. Is this your verdict, juror number 199?

# 41 JUROR:

No.

# 42 THE CLERK:

No. 341?

# 43 JUROR:

Yes.

# 44 THE CLERK:

Number 186?

# 45 JUROR:

Yes.

# 46 THE CLERK:

Number 294?

# 47 JUROR:

No.

# 48 THE CLERK:

Number 266?

# 49 JUROR:

Yes.

# 50 THE CLERK:

Number 257?

# 51 JUROR:

Yes.

# 52 THE CLERK:

No. 369?

# 53 JUROR:

Yes.

# 54 THE CLERK:

Number 290?

# 55 JUROR:

Yes.

# 56 THE CLERK:

No. 326?

# 57 JUROR:

Yes.

# 58 THE CLERK:

Number 400?

# 59 JUROR:

Yes.

# 60 THE CLERK:

Number 88?

# 61 JUROR:

Yes.

# 62 THE CLERK:

Number 227?

# 63 JUROR:

Yes.

# 64 THE CLERK:

10 to 2. Question No. 3. Shall punitive damages be assessed against defendant Orenthal James Simpson in favor of plaintiff Louis Brown. Answer is yes. Is this your verdict, number 199?

# 65 JUROR:

No.

# 66 THE CLERK:

No. 341?

# 67 JUROR:

Yes.

# 68 THE CLERK:

Number 186?

# 69 JUROR:

Yes.

# 70 THE CLERK:

Number 294?

# 71 JUROR:

Yes.

# 72 THE CLERK:

Number 266?

# 73 JUROR:

Yes.

# 74 THE CLERK:

Number 257?

# 75 JUROR:

Yes.

# 76 THE CLERK:

No. 369?

# 77 JUROR:

Yes.

# 78 THE CLERK:

Number 290?

# 79 JUROR:

Yes.

# 80 THE CLERK:

No. 326?

# 81 JUROR:

Yes.

# 82 THE CLERK:

Number 400?

# 83 JUROR:

Yes.

# 84 THE CLERK:

88?

# 85 JUROR:

Yes.

# 86 THE CLERK:

And 227?

# 87 JUROR:

Yes.

# 88 THE CLERK:

That's 11 to 1. And question number 4. We assess punitive damages against defendant Orenthal James Simpson in favor of plaintiff Louis Brown as follows: Amount $12,500,000. Is this your verdict, juror number 199?

# 89 JUROR:

No.

# 90 THE CLERK:

No. 341?

# 91 JUROR:

Yes.

# 92 THE CLERK:

Number 186?

# 93 JUROR:

Yes.

# 94 THE CLERK:

Number 294?

# 95 JUROR:

No.

# 96 THE CLERK:

Number 266?

# 97 JUROR:

Yes.

# 98 THE CLERK:

Number 257?

# 99 JUROR:

Yes.

# 100 THE CLERK:

No. 369?

# 101 JUROR:

Yes.

# 102 THE CLERK:

Number 290?

# 103 JUROR:

Yes.

# 104 THE CLERK:

No. 326?

# 105 JUROR:

Yes.

# 106 THE CLERK:

Number 400?

# 107 JUROR:

Yes.

# 108 THE CLERK:

Number 88?

# 109 JUROR:

Yes.

# 110 THE CLERK:

Number 227?

# 111 JUROR:

Yes.

# 112 THE CLERK:

10 to 2.

# 113 THE COURT:

Okay. The verdict is ordered entered as read. Ladies and gentlemen, that concludes your services on this case. On behalf of the Superior Court, on behalf of the citizens of the State of California, County of Los Angeles, I would like to express to our sincere and deepest thanks and appreciation for your sacrifices in serving on this case. It's been a difficult case. It's been a long case. I'm thankful and grateful that you have abided by the Court's instructions with regards to your conduct so that we could reach this point. I would personally like to thank you, individually, but I am not able to do so because while this case is over for you, it is probably not over for me and I will, undoubtedly, have some matters that I would have to attend to in this case for some time to come. So it is more appropriate that I not have any personal contact with you in connection with this case. So please accept my sincere thanks and appreciation for all of your sacrifices and I extend this thanks and appreciation not only to the jurors who sat and rendered the verdict but those alternates who had to sit by and suffer through with the rest of us, these numerous days. And when it came down to the final part of the trial on making the decision, you were not called upon to participate in that decision making process. But the fact that you were here and you were available to us made it possible for us to continue to try this case with some ease of mind that we knew that you were there to assist us if we needed you. So thank you very much. I am going to excuse myself now. Judge Candace Cooper, who is the supervising Judge of the Santa Monica courthouse will address you at this time. Thank you.

Temperature

procedural

Key Quotes (3)

The Clerk

Question number 2, we assess punitive damages against defendant Orenthal James Simpson in favor of plaintiffs Frederic Goldman as follows: Amount $12,500,000.

The formal reading of the punitive damages award — $25 million total against Simpson across both plaintiffs.

Hiroshi Fujisaki

I'm thankful and grateful that you have abided by the Court's instructions with regards to your conduct so that we could reach this point.

Fujisaki's unusually warm dismissal acknowledges how tightly he controlled this jury throughout the trial.

Hiroshi Fujisaki

While this case is over for you, it is probably not over for me and I will, undoubtedly, have some matters that I would have to attend to in this case for some time to come.

Fujisaki's candid acknowledgment that post-trial litigation would continue, explaining why he could not personally thank jurors.

Notable Exchanges (1)

The Clerk•Jurors

Juror 199 voted no on all four punitive damages questions; Juror 294 voted yes on liability (questions 1 and 3) but no on the $12.5M amounts (questions 2 and 4), producing an 11-1 split on liability and 10-2 on the dollar figures.

procedural

Objections

None recorded

Proceeding 8935 • 113 utterances

Civil Trial

Department 103