Copyright 1995-1999 Touch N' Go Systems, Inc. All Rights Reserved. No claim made to official government works.
Rule 49. Special Verdicts and Interrogatories.
(a) Returning a Verdict - Polling a Jury - Filing and Entering Verdict. When the jury, or such a majority of it as may be required by the law or stipulation of the parties, have agreed upon a verdict, they shall be conducted into court, their names called, and the verdict shall be given by the foreperson. The verdict shall be in writing and signed by the foreperson. The court may permit the foreperson of the jury to date, sign and seal in an envelope a verdict reached after the usual business hours. The jury may then separate, but all must be in the jury box to deliver the verdict when the court next convenes or as instructed by the court. When the court authorizes a sealed verdict, it shall admonish the jurors not to make any disclosure concerning it nor speak with other persons concerning the case until the verdict has been returned and the jury discharged. Any party may require the jury to be polled as to any verdict, which is done by asking each juror if it is the juror's verdict. If upon such polling it appears that a verdict has not been agreed upon, the jury shall be sent out for further deliberation. After a verdict has been agreed upon, the jury shall be discharged from the case. The verdict shall be filed and an entry thereof made in the minutes of the court. The word "verdict" shall include, where applicable, answers to questions or interrogatories.
(b) Special Verdicts. The court may require a jury to return only a special verdict in the form of a special written finding upon each issue of fact. In that event the court may submit to the jury written questions susceptible of categorical or other brief answer or may submit written forms of the several special findings which might properly be made under the pleadings and evidence; or it may use such other method of submitting the issues and requiring the written findings thereon as it deems most appropriate. The court shall give to the jury such explanation and instruction concerning the matter thus submitted as may be necessary to enable the jury to make its findings upon each issue. If in so doing the court omits any issue of fact raised by the pleadings or by the evidence, each party waives the right to a trial by jury of the issue so omitted unless before the jury retires the party demands its submission to the jury. As to an issue omitted without such demand the court may make a finding; or, if it fails to do so, it shall be deemed to have made a finding in accord with the judgment on the special verdict.
(c) General Verdict Accompanied by Answer to Interrogatories. The court may submit to the jury, together with appropriate forms for a general verdict, written interrogatories upon one or more issues of fact the decision of which is necessary to a verdict. The court shall give such explanation or instruction as may be necessary to enable the jury both to make answers to the interrogatories and to render a general verdict, and the court shall direct the jury both to make written answers and to render a general verdict. When the general verdict and the answers are harmonious, the appropriate judgment upon the verdict and answers shall be entered pursuant to Rule 58. When the answers are consistent with each other but one or more is inconsistent with the general verdict, judgment may be entered pursuant to Rule 58 in accordance with the answers, notwithstanding the general verdict, or the court may return the jury for further consideration of its answers and verdict or may order a new trial. When the answers are inconsistent with each other and one or more is likewise inconsistent with the general verdict, judgment shall not be entered, but the court shall return the jury for further consideration of its answers and verdict or shall order a new trial.
(Adopted by SCO 5 October 9, 1959; amended by SCO 258 effective November 15, 1976; by SCO 715 effective September 15, 1976; by SCO 1153 effective July 15, 1994; and by SCO 1281 effective August 7, 1997)
NOTE: Ch. 139, § 5, SLA 1986, provided that AS 09.17.040 and 09.17.080, enacted by ch. 139, § 1, SLA 1986, amended Civil Rule 49 by requiring the jury to answer the special interrogatories listed in AS 09.17.090 regarding the amount of damages and the percentage of fault to be allocated among the parties and to itemize the verdict regarding economic, noneconomic and punitive damages as specified in AS 09.17.040.
Sec. 09.17.040. Award of damages. (a) In every case where damages for personal injury are awarded by the court or jury, the verdict shall be itemized between economic loss and noneconomic loss, if any, as follows:
(1) past economic loss;
(2) past noneconomic loss;
(3) future economic loss;
(4) future noneconomic loss; and
(5) punitive damages.
(b) The fact finder shall reduce future economic damages to present value. In computing the portion of a lump-sum award that is attributable to future economic loss, the fact finder shall determine the present amount that, if invested at long-term future interest rates in the best and safest investments, will produce over the life expectancy of the injured party the amount necessary to compensate the injured party for
(1) the amount of wages the injured party could have been expected to earn during future years, taking into account future anticipated inflation and reasonably anticipated increases in the injured party's earnings; and
(2) the amount of money necessary during future years to provide for all additional economic losses related to the injury, taking into account future anticipated inflation.
(c) Subsection (b) of this section does not apply to future economic damages if the parties agree that the award of future damages may be computed under the rule adopted in the case of Beaulieu v. Elliott, 434 P2d 655 (Alaska 1967).
(d) In an action to recover damages, the court shall, at the request of an injured party, enter judgment ordering that amounts awarded a judgment creditor for future damages be paid to the maximum extent feasible by periodic payments rather than by a lump-sum payment.
(e) The court may require security be posted, in order to ensure that funds are available as periodic payments become due. The court may not require security to be posted if an authorized insurer, as defined in AS 21.90.900, acknowledges to the court its obligation to discharge the judgment.
(f) A judgment ordering payment of future damages by periodic payment shall specify the recipient, the dollar amount of the payments, the interval between payments, and the number of payments in the period of time over which payments shall be made. Payments may be modified only in the event of the death of the judgment creditor, in which case payments may not be reduced or terminated, but shall be paid to persons to whom the judgment creditor owed a duty of support, as provided by law, immediately before death. In the event the judgment creditor owed no duty of support to dependents at the time of the judgment creditor's death, the money remaining shall be distributed in accordance with a will of the deceased judgment creditor accepted into probate or under the intestate laws of the state if the deceased had no will.
(g) If the court finds that the judgment debtor has exhibited a continuing pattern of failing to make payments required under (c) of this section, the court shall, in addition to the required periodic payments, order the judgment debtor to pay the judgment creditor any damages caused by the failure to make periodic payments, including costs and attorney fees. (§ 1 ch. 139 SLA 1986)
Sec. 09.17.080. Apportionment of damages. (a) In all actions involving fault of more than one party to the action, including third-party defendants and persons who have been released under AS 09.17.090, the court, unless otherwise agreed by all parties, shall instruct the jury to answer special interrogatories or, if there is no jury, shall make findings, indicating
(1) the amount of damages each claimant would be entitled to recover if contributory fault is disregarded; and
(2) the percentage of the total fault of all of the parties to each claim that is allocated to each claimant, defendant, third-party defendant, and person who has been released from liability under AS 09.17.090.
(b) In determining the percentages of fault, the trier of fact shall consider both the nature of the conduct of each party at fault, and the extent of the causal relation between the conduct and the damages claimed. The trier of fact may determine that two or more persons are to be treated as a single party if their conduct was a cause of the damages claimed and the separate act or omission of each person cannot be distinguished.
(c) The court shall determine the award of damages to each claimant in accordance with the findings, subject to a reduction under AS 09.17.090, and enter judgment against each party liable. The court also shall determine and state in the judgment each party's equitable share of the obligation to each claimant in accordance with the respective percentages of fault.
(d) The court shall enter judgment against each party liable on the basis of joint and several liability, except that a party who is allocated less than 50 percent of the total fault allocated to all the parties may not be jointly liable for more than twice the percentage of fault allocated to that party. (§ 1 ch. 139 SLA 1986)
NOTE: Ch. 26, § 11, SLA 1997 amends AS 09.17.080(a) concerning allocation of fault. This provision applies to causes of action accruing on or after August 7, 1997. See ch. 26, § 55, SLA 1997. According to § 50 of the Act, the amendments to AS 09.17.080(a) have the effect of amending Civil Rule 49 by requiring the jury to answer the special interrogatory listed in AS 09.17.080(a)(2) regarding the percentages of fault to be allocated among the claimants, defendants, third-party defendants, persons who have been released from liability, or other persons who are potentially responsible for the damages.
These Court Rules were automatically converted to HTML (Hyper-Text Markup Language) format from electronic files provided by the Alaska Court System. Every effort has been made to ensure their accuracy, but neither Touch N' Go Systems, Inc., The Alaska Legal Resource Center, nor the Law Offices of James B. Gottstein are responsible for their accuracy or for any damages arising out of any possible inaccuracy. If any mistakes are found, please let us know at one of the addresses listed below.
Return to Touch N' Go Systems, Inc. Home Page.
Copyright 1995-1999 by Touch N' Go Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. No copyright claim is made to the text of the rules.
Last Modified 7/14/1999
