382, 407-08 (1982) (endorsing use of special verdicts in RICO cases in order to enable reviewing court to determine predicates upon which conviction was based); Harvey, supra note 63, at 307-13 (recommending special verdicts to enforce "substantial majority" requirement as to CCE predicate acts).
The first is the special verdict, a procedure that requires the jury to answer questions about particular facts at issue rather than simply to render a general verdict as to guilt or innocence.
Instruction number (2), to be given before final argument, also illustrates how the court could utilize the Special Verdict questions in the burden of proof portion of the instruction.
1] In deciding this case, it is your duty as jurors to decide the issues, and only those issues, that I submit for your determination at the end of the case and to answer certain questions I will ask you to answer on a special form, called a special verdict.
You will be given a Special Verdict to use in this case.
If, however, your answer to question 1 is "NO," your verdict is for the Defendant, and you should not proceed further, except to date and sign the Special Verdict and return it to the courtroom.
In connection with that defense, the second question in the Special Verdict is:
If, however, your answer to that question is "NO" and the greater weight of the evidence supports John Doe's claim, then your verdict should be for John Doe in the total amount of his damages and you will skip the third question in the Special Verdict and proceed directly to the questions concerning damages.
In that connection, the third question in the Special Verdict is: