Warning

Info

Warning

Info

Warning

Info

LSDefine

Simple English definitions for legal terms

Special verdict

Read a random definition: credit facility

A quick definition of Special verdict:

A special verdict is when a jury gives answers to questions about the facts of a case, but doesn't say which side should win. The judge then decides what those answers mean in terms of the law. This can be helpful in a complicated case, especially if one side wants to appeal the decision later. It's different from a general verdict, which does say which side wins.

A more thorough explanation:

A special verdict is a type of verdict in a court case where the jury gives its findings on factual issues in the case, without necessarily stating which party should win. The judge decides what questions the jury should answer, and the judge can draw legal implications from the jury's answers. This type of verdict can provide many benefits in a complex case, especially if one party appeals the judgment.

In a personal injury case, the jury may be asked to answer specific questions about the accident, such as who was at fault and what injuries were sustained. The jury's answers to these questions would be used by the judge to determine the outcome of the case. For example, if the jury finds that the defendant was at fault and the plaintiff suffered significant injuries, the judge may award damages to the plaintiff.

Another example could be in a contract dispute case, where the jury is asked to determine whether a contract was breached and what damages were incurred as a result. The judge would then use the jury's findings to determine the appropriate remedy, such as awarding damages or requiring specific performance of the contract.

Overall, a special verdict allows the jury to focus on the factual issues of the case, while leaving the legal implications to the judge. This can help ensure a fair and just outcome in complex cases.

Special prosecutor | Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons List

Warning

Info

General

General chat about the legal profession.
main_chatroom
👍 Chat vibe: 0 👎
Help us make LSD better!
Tell us what's important to you
ParallelAgreeableOrangutan
16:11
100%, that's why I think the sub is untethered to reality. but/and I was aiming for tippy top schools, and I think it's not wild to have that goal if you have reasons :)
16:11
many people have different ideas of what a good outcome would be and have even more different ideas of what amount of work they would like to put to get there
Any acceptances today?
16:12
nop
16:12
couple yesterday
NosyBeagle
16:13
@DivergentBoundlessHuman: help i thought u meant BL as in boy love and not big law
NosyBeagle
16:13
it appears i have yaoi on the brain
16:13
Reddit in particular is so myopic about outcomes, there are large portions of the country where making 80k still gives you a comfortable life, and ~80k is often cited as the low end of the bimodal distribution of private attorney salaries
not saying reaching for a t-14 is a wild thing to do!!!! man i would go to nyu. i'm simply stating what esoterica said, people that act like not being at a t-14 means your life is over is simply not correct. but i think anyone outside of reddit would understand that.
fujos after stubbing their toe: YAOI!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
AngryMiniCar
16:16
LMAOO @badhorrormovie where did that even come from
AngryMiniCar
16:17
Also someone linked a redditpost here for RC wrong answer journals. I forgot who it was can you do it again :')
BEAGLE SAID YAOI and that popped into my brain i had to say something 💔 ,, also here you go: https://www.reddit.com/r/LSAT/comments/v7w3ay/wrong_answer_guide_for_rc/
AngryMiniCar
16:25
THANK YOU!
UR WELCOME!!!! u will master rc we believe in u
AngryMiniCar
16:28
<3
let us take a moment to think about how the lsat was 10 sections when it was first created....glad they don't do that anymore that's for sure
I got a 164, which was 3 points higher than my all-time highest PT. so I'm good
16:41
i love u bad horror movie
ParallelAgreeableOrangutan
16:45
excuse me WHAT? TEN sections?
ParallelAgreeableOrangutan
16:46
this old old old guy I work with (not a lawyer, not in a law-related field) found out I'm going to law school and started telling me stories about when he took the LSAT back in the day. said something about either inventing or interpreting a made-up language? and doing math? I was like, no way can this be real. but now you have me wondering
16:52
I think that was back when it first started, and it was mostly oral exams. The 70's and 80's were similar content to whats on it now, but you had to write the essay while taking the rest of the exam
16:52
bro tht how the lsat felt for me
NosyBeagle
16:52
@badhorrormovie: ily
NosyBeagle
16:54
yeah if the lsat was 10 sections, i'd quit so fast man screw that
NosyBeagle
16:54
4 is ENOUGH
NosyBeagle
16:54
hell i hate the experimental bs it should just be 3
@NosyBeagle: ILY2
NosyBeagle
16:55
"b-but we need to test these new que--" **loud incorrect buzzer*
@bigfatsloth: I LOVE U BIG FAT SLOTH
LSD+ is ad-free, with DMs, discounts, case briefs & more.