IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF

NEBRASKA

CONAGRA FOODS, ) 8:01CV647)

Plaintiff, ))

vs. )) FINAL JURY INSTRUCTIONS

LARRY SHIPP ))

Defendant. )

INSTRUCTION NO. 1

DUTY

It will be your duty to decide from the evidence whether the plaintiff is entitled to

a verdict against the defendant. From the evidence, you will decide what the facts are.

You are entitled to consider the evidence in the light of your own observations and

experiences in life. You may use reason and common sense to draw deductions from

facts established by the evidence. You will then apply those facts to the law which I give

you in these and the other instructions. In that way, you will reach your verdict. You are

the sole judges of the facts; but you must follow the law as stated in my instructions,

whether you agree or disagree with the law stated in the instructions.

Do not allow sympathy or prejudice to influence you. The law requires that your verdict

be unaffected by anything except the evidence, your common sense, and the law stated

in these and other instructions.

Anything that I may say or do during the trial must not be taken by you as an indication

of what I think of the evidence or what I think your verdict should be.

INSTRUCTION NO. 2

EVIDENCE

The word "evidence" includes the testimony of witnesses; documents and other

things received as exhibits; any facts that have been stipulated, that is, formally agreed to

by the parties; and any facts that have been judicially noticed, that is, facts which I say

you must accept as true.

The following things are not evidence:

1. Statements, arguments, questions and comments by lawyers

are not evidence.

2. Objections are not evidence.

Lawyers have an obligation to their clients to object when they believe that the

evidence being offered is improper under the rules of evidence. You should not be

influenced by the lawyer’s objection or by my ruling on it. If I sustain an objection to a

question, ignore the question. If I overrule the objection, treat the answer like any other

answer. If so, do not attempt to draw any inference in favor of either side as the result of

any ruling I make. Finally, if I instruct you that some item of evidence is received for a

limited purpose only, you must follow that instruction. Pay particularly close attention to

this sort of limiting instruction, because it may not be available to you in writing later in

the jury room.

3. Testimony that I strike from the record or tell you to disregard is

not evidence and must not be considered.

4. Anything you see or hear about this case outside this courtroom is

not evidence and must be disregarded.

Finally, some of you may have heard the phrases or terms "direct evidence" and

"circumstantial evidence." Direct evidence is direct proof of a fact, such as testimony by

an eye witness. Circumstantial evidence is proof of facts from which you may infer or

conclude that other facts exist. The law makes no distinction between the weight to be

given to either direct or circumstantial evidence. You should give the evidence the weight

that you believe the evidence is entitled to receive.

INSTRUCTION NO. 3

BENCH CONFERENCES AND RECESSES

During the trial it may become necessary for me to talk with the lawyers outside

your hearing, either by having a bench conference while you are present in the courtroom,

or by calling a recess. Please understand that while you are waiting, the court and

counsel are working. The purpose of these conferences is to decide how certain evidence

is to be treated under the rules of evidence or to decide a particular procedure to be

followed in the case. We will, of course, do what we can to minimize the number and

length of these conferences.

INSTRUCTION NO. 4

JURY QUESTIONS

While evidence is being presented, you are not allowed to raise your hands to

ask questions about that evidence. However, if you do have questions about something

you hear during the examination of a witness, you may write your questions down on a

piece of paper. When attorneys have finished examining that witness, you may submit

your written question or questions. I will review each question with the attorneys. You

may not receive an answer to your question because I may decide that the question is

not proper under the rules of evidence. The attorneys may choose to answer your

questions by asking more questions of the witness. But even if the question is proper, you

may not get an immediate answer to your question. For instance, a witness or an exhibit

that you will see later in the trial may answer your question.

INSTRUCTION NO. 5

NOTE-TAKING

If you wish, you may take notes to help you remember what witnesses said. Notes

may be helpful to you because at the end of the trial, you must make your decision based

on what you recall of the evidence. You will not have a written transcript to consult, and it

may not be practical for the court reporter to read back lengthy testimony. Therefore, you

should pay close attention to the testimony as it is given.

If you do take notes, please keep them to yourself until you and the other jurors go

to the jury room to decide this case. However, do not let note-taking distract you to the

point that you miss hearing other testimony from the witness.

During the trial, documents or other physical items may be received into evidence.

At the present, however, you will not be supplied with a list of exhibits which are

received in evidence. Therefore, you may wish to make notes about the exhibits,

especially their description and number, so that you can refer to those exhibits while you

are deliberating.

When we take our recess each day for the lunchtime break and when we take

our recess each night, please take your notes to the jury room and leave your notes

there. The courtroom deputy will take custody of your notes and secure them.

No one will read your notes but you. Your notes will be destroyed after the trial is over.

INSTRUCTION NO. 6

IMPARTIALITY

This case should be considered and decided by you as an action between

persons of equal standing in the community and of equal worth. A large corporation is

entitled to the same fair trial as a small corporation. All parties stand equal before the

law and are to be dealt with as equals in a court of justice.

INSTRUCTION NO. 7

PREPONDERANCE OF EVIDENCE

Your verdict depends on whether you find certain facts have been proven. The

burden of proving a fact is upon the party whose claim or defense depends on that fact.

The party who has the burden of proving a fact must prove it by the greater weight of the

evidence, also known as a “preponderance of the evidence.”

By a "preponderance of the evidence," I mean the greater weight of credible

evidence. This is not determined by which party has the greater number of witnesses

testifying about the facts and circumstances or by the number of exhibits. Preponderance

of the evidence is determined by the amount of evidence which on the whole, when fully,

fairly and impartially considered, makes the stronger impression on your mind and is

more convincing as to its truth when weighed against the evidence the other party has

presented.

To prove something by a preponderance of evidence is to prove that it is more

likely true than not. Each party is entitled to the benefit of any evidence tending to

establish a claim, even though the other party introduced that evidence. If the evidence is

equally balanced, a preponderance is not established.

You may have heard the term “proof beyond a reasonable doubt.” That is a stricter

standard that applies in criminal cases. It does not apply in civil cases such as this one.

You should, therefore, put the term out of your minds.

INSTRUCTION NO. 8

WITNESSES

In deciding what the facts are, you may have to decide what testimony you believe

and what testimony you do not believe. You may believe all of what a witness said, or

only part of it, or none of it.

In deciding what testimony to believe, consider the witness’s intelligence, the

opportunity the witness had to have seen or heard the things testified about, the

witness’s memory, any motives that witness may have for testifying a certain way, the

manner of the witness while testifying, whether that witness said something different at an

earlier time, the general reasonableness of the testimony, and the extent to which the

testimony is consistent with any evidence that you believe.

In deciding whether or not to believe a witness, keep in mind that people

sometimes hear or see things differently and sometimes forget things. You need to

consider therefore whether a contradiction is an innocent misrecollection or lapse of

memory or an intentional falsehood, and that may depend on whether it has to do with an

important fact or only a small detail.

The fact that one side may use a greater number of witnesses or presented a

greater quantity of evidence should not affect your decision. Rather, determine which

witness or witnesses and which evidence appears accurate and trustworthy. It is the

weight of the evidence that counts -- not the number of witnesses.

If the testimony of a single witness produces in your minds a belief in the likely truth of

any fact and would justify a verdict in accordance with the witness’s testimony, even

though a number of witnesses may have testified to the contrary, and you have

considered all of the

evidence in the case, then you hold greater belief in the accuracy and reliability of this singlewitness.

INSTRUCTION NO. 9

CONDUCT OF THE JURY

To insure fairness, jurors are asked to obey the following rules:

First, do not talk among yourselves about this case, or about anyone involved with

this case, until the end of the case when you go to the jury room to decide on your verdict.

Second, do not talk with anyone else about this case, or about anyone involved

with it, until the trial has ended and you have been discharged as jurors.

Third, during this trial when you are outside this courtroom, do not listen to or let

anyone try to tell you anything about this case. Do not let anyone talk to you about

anyone involved with this case until the trial has ended and I have accepted your verdict.

If anyone tries to talk to you about this case during the trial, please promptly report the

matter to me.

Fourth, during the trial you should not talk with or speak to any of the parties,

lawyers or witnesses involved in this case, which means that you should not even pass

the time of day with any of them. If a person from one side of the lawsuit sees you talking

to a person from the other side, even if it is on a matter unconnected with this trial or

simply to pass the time of day, such contact might arouse an unwarranted suspicion about

your fairness. If a lawyer, party or witness does not speak to you when you pass in the

hall, ride the elevator, or encounter each other elsewhere while this trial is taking place,

do not think he or she is being rude. Those persons are not supposed to talk or visit with

you, either.

Fifth, you must decide this case on the basis of evidence presented in the courtroom.

Therefore, do not read any news stories or articles about the case, or about anyone

involved with this case, or listen to any radio or television reports about the case or about

INSTRUCTION NO. 9anyone involved with it. In fact, until the trial is over you should probably avoid

reading any

newspapers or news journals, and avoid listening to any TV or radio newscasts. There

might not be any news reports of this case, but, if there are, you might find yourself

inadvertently reading or listening to something before you realize what you are doing.

Sixth, do not do any research or make any investigation on your own concerning

this case. Do not use or refer to a dictionary or any law books concerning any aspect of

this case, including any evidence introduced. Do not visit the scene of any incident that

may have been mentioned in this case.

Seventh, do not form an opinion about any fact or issue in the case until you have

received the entire evidence, have heard arguments of counsel, have been instructed as

to the law of the case, and have retired to the jury room. Consequently, do not make up

your mind during the trial about what the verdict should be. Keep an open mind until after

you have gone to the jury room to decide the case and have discussed the evidence with

the other jurors.

Finally, do not be influenced by sympathy or prejudice. Do not indulge in any

speculation, guess, or conjecture. And do not make any inferences which are not

supported by the evidence.

INSTRUCTION NO. 10

OUTLINE OF TRIAL

The trial will proceed in the following manner:

First, the attorney for the plaintiff may make an opening statement. Next, the

attorney for the defendant may make an opening statement. An opening statement is not

evidence or argument. It is an outline of what the party intends to prove, a summary of

what the attorney expects the evidence to be.

The plaintiff's attorney will then present evidence through a direct examination of a

witness. The defendant’s attorney may then cross-examine that witness. After the

cross- examination, the plaintiff’s attorney may ask additional questions on re-direct.

The defendant’s attorney may also ask questions on re-cross. After the plaintiff has

presented all her witnesses, the plaintiff will rest. The defendant will then present its case.

The defendant may present evidence through direct examination of witnesses and

plaintiff’s attorney may cross-examine those witnesses. Re-direct and re-cross

examinations may also take place.

After the evidence is completely presented, the attorneys will make their closing

arguments to summarize and interpret the evidence for you. Just as with opening

statements, these closing arguments are not evidence. I will then instruct you further on

the law. After that you will retire to the jury room to deliberate on your verdict.

INSTRUCTION NO. 11

STATEMENT OF THE CASE

The plaintiff, ConAgra Foods, brought this action to recover amounts that it

claims are owed under several agreements executed by the defendant, Larry Shipp,

ConAgra’s former Vice-President of Integrated Logistics. Defendant resigned from his

employment in October 2001. ConAgra Foods alleges that the defendant is obligated to

reimburse the company in the amount of $100,000 under the terms of a Relocation

Bonus Agreement dated March 6, 2000. ConAgra Foods further claims that the

defendant is obligated to reimburse the company in the amount of $49,913.27 for

relocation benefits he received during his employment pursuant to the terms of an

Employee Reimbursement Agreement dated July 20,

2000. Finally, ConAgra is seeking to recover $77,572.72 under several Stock Option

Agreements executed by the defendant. ConAgra alleges that the defendant became

obligated to pay back the company when he resigned from his employment in October

2001.

The defendant denies that he owes any money to ConAgra. He asserts that he is

not obligated to paythe company under the agreements because he was involuntarily

terminated, or “constructively discharged,” from his employment. ConAgra alleges that

defendant Shipp voluntarily resigned from his position and is therefore obligated to

reimburse the company under the Relocation Bonus Agreement and Employee

Reimbursement Agreement and is obligated to reimburse the company under the Stock

Option Agreement regardless of whether his separation from employment was voluntary or

involuntary. Defendant Shipp also claims that ConAgra owes him money under the

ConAgra Fiscal Year 2002 Corporate Incentive Plan since he worked at ConAgra for

half of that year.

ConAgra asserts that Shipp is not eligible because he voluntarily left employment. Again,

Ship alleges that he was “constructively discharged.”

INSTRUCTION NO. 12

UNCONTROVERTED FACTS

Pursuant to the order on pretrial conference, the parties have stipulated to the

following set of facts:

1. Larry Shipp was hired in 1973 as a customer service representative for Lamb- Weston, a frozen and dried foods company located in Portland, Oregon.

2. By 1986, Shipp reached the level of Vice-President of Information Systems andBusiness Analysis with Lamb-Weston.

3. By 1988, Lamb-Weston underwent a reorganization whereby Shipp’s responsibilities shifted to Director of Materials Management, a function of logistics.

4. A year later, Lamb-Weston promoted Shipp to Vice-President of Logistics.

5. Logistics can be defined as that part of the supply chain that plans, implements, and controls the flow and storage of goods, services and related information, including transportation, warehousing, inventory and management.

6. At about that time, ConAgra Foods, Inc. acquired fifty percent of Lamb-Weston, with

Golden Valley Microwave Foods acquiring the other fifty percent.

7. By 1992, ConAgra acquired Golden Valley Microwave Foods and, as a result, owned all of Lamb-Weston.

8. Shipp continued to work for Lamb-Weston and its subsidiaries in Europe andCanada until 1999.

9. In May of 1999, ConAgra offered Shipp a position as Vice-President of Integrated

Logistics at ConAgra.

10. In June 1999, Shipp moved himself and his family to Omaha, Nebraska, to assume the position of Vice-President of Integrated Logistics working at ConAgra’s corporate headquarters in Omaha.

11. On November 1, 1999, ConAgra hired Stephen J. Tibey as Senior Vice- President of Supply Chain at ConAgra responsible for logistics.

12. Tibey’s position was a newly-created one, and he was to be the senior leader of the Omaha Logistics Group.

13. As of November 1999, Shipp began reporting to Tibey.

14. ConAgra’s 1999 Annual Report listed Shipp under the Officers Section of theReport.

15. ConAgra’s 2000 Annual Report did not list Shipp under the Officer’s Section of the

Report.

16. Shipp worked in Logistics under Tibey until he resigned from his position effective

October 12, 2001.

17. In connection with his employment at ConAgra, Shipp executed severalEmployment Agreements under which he assumed financial obligations to the Company.

18. On March 6, 2000, Shipp executed a Relocation Bonus Agreement that provided him a $100,000 bonus for agreeing to relocate his employment from Omaha to Schaumburg, Illinois in September 2000.

19. Shipp received the $100,000 bonus under the Relocation Bonus Agreement.

20. On July 20, 2000, Shipp executed an Employee Reimbursement Agreement under which he was reimbursed for certain relocation expenses he incurred in connection with his move from Omaha to Schaumburg, Illinois, in September 2000.

21. Pursuant to the Employee Reimbursement Agreement, Shipp received relocation expense reimbursements in the total amount of $99,826.55.

22. Shipp relocated with the Logistics Group from Omaha to Schaumburg, Illinois, in

September 2000.

23. During his employment at ConAgra, Shipp executed the following Stock OptionAgreements:

a. September 16, 1992 Stock Option Agreement b. September 23, 1993 Stock Option Agreement c. September 22, 1994 Stock Option Agreement d. September 28, 1995 Stock Option Agreement e. September 28, 2000 Stock Option Agreement

24. In September 2001, Shipp exercised the following stock options:

a. On September 25, 2001, he exercised 1,900 shares at the option price of $12.68.

b. On September 27, 2001, he exercised 1,030 shares at the option price of $14.93.

c. On September 27, 2001, he exercised 1,300 shares at the option

price of $12.68.

d. On September 27, 2001, he exercised 3,000 shares at the option price of $15.75.

e. On September 27, 2001, he exercised 1,800 shares at the option price of $15.75.

f. On September 27, 2001, he exercised 6,000 shares at the option price of $20.00.

g. On September 27, 2001, he exercised 185 shares at the option price of$19.81.

h. On September 27, 2001, he exercised 815 shares at the option price of$19.81.

25. Pursuant to the terms of the Stock Option Agreements executed by Shipp, the total appreciation for options exercised is $77,572.72.

26. Prior to his resignation from employment, Shipp was offered and accepted a vice- president position with Smithfield Foods, a competitor of ConAgra.

27. Shipp resigned from his employment at ConAgra effective October 12, 2001

INSTRUCTION NO. 13

INTRODUCTION

Now that you have heard the evidence and the attorneys’ arguments, it is my duty

to inform you of the legal principles and considerations you are to use in arriving at a

proper verdict.

It is your duty to follow the law given you in this charge and to apply these rules of

law to the facts as you find them from the evidence. Do not single out one instruction

alone as stating the law, but consider the instructions as a whole.

Do not be concerned with the wisdom of any rule of law that the court states.

Regardless of any opinion you may have about what the law ought to be, it would violate

your sworn duty to base a verdict upon a view of the law different from the one given in

these instructions, just as it would violate your sworn duty as judges of the facts to base a

verdict upon anything but the evidence in the case and the reasonable inferences arising

from such evidence.

INSTRUCTION NO. 14

JUDGE’S OPINION

In the trial of this case and in these instructions, I have in no way attempted to

express my opinion about who should prevail upon the issues submitted to you. You must

not construe any statement, action, or ruling on my part during the trial as an indication of

my opinion about the proper outcome of your verdict. During the course of a trial, I might

have occasionally asked questions of a witness to bring out facts not fully covered in the

testimony. Do not assume that I hold any opinion on the matters to which the questions

related.

INSTRUCTION NO. 15

EVIDENCE AND OBJECTIONS

During the trial I have ruled on objections to certain evidence. You must not

concern yourselves with the reason for such rulings since they are controlled by rules of

law.

You must not speculate or form or act upon any opinion about how a witness

might have testified in answer to questions which I rejected during the trial, or upon any

subject matter to which I forbade inquiry.

In coming to any conclusion in this case, you must be governed by the evidence

before you and by the evidence alone. You may not indulge in speculation, conjecture or

inference not supported by the evidence.

The evidence from which you are to find the facts consists of the following: (1)

the testimony of the witnesses; (2) documents and other things received as exhibits; and

(3) any facts that have been stipulated -- that is, formally agreed to by the parties.

The following things are not evidence: (1) statements, comments, questions and

arguments by lawyers for the parties; (2) questions by jurors; (3) objections to questions;

(4) any testimony I told you to disregard; and (5) anything you may have seen or heard

about this case outside the courtroom.

INSTRUCTION NO. 16

REASONABLE INFERENCES

While you should consider only the evidence in the case, you are permitted to

draw such reasonable inferences from the testimony and exhibits as you feel are justified

in the light of common experience. In other words, you may make deductions and reach

conclusions which reason and common sense lead you to draw from the facts which

have been established by the testimony and evidence in the case.

INSTRUCTION NO. 17

STATEMENT OF THE CASE

In this case, ConAgra is seeking to recover under various employment

agreements executed by the defendant during his employment with the company.

On March 6, 2000, the defendant executed a Relocation Bonus Agreement which

provided him a $100,000 bonus for agreeing to relocate his employment from Omaha,

Nebraska, to Schaumburg, Illinois, in September 2000. ConAgra claims that pursuant to

the terms of that agreement, the defendant is obligated to reimburse the company the

entire

$100,000 bonus payment because the defendant voluntarily terminated his employment

prior to March 1, 2003.

On July 20, 2000, the defendant also executed an Employment Reimbursement

Agreement under which ConAgra agreed to reimburse the defendant for certain

relocation expenses he incurred in connection with his move from Omaha, Nebraska, to

Schaumburg, Illinois, in September 2000. ConAgra claims that under the terms of this

agreement, the defendant became obligated to reimburse the company one-half of the

relocation benefits when he voluntarily terminated his employment within 24 months of the

relocation. ConAgra alleges that it is entitled to recover $49,913.27 representing one-half

of the total relocation expenses provided to the defendant.

Larry Shipp alleges that ConAgra owes him certain sums under the ConAgra Fiscal

Year 2002 Corporate Incentive Agreement. Shipp maintains that as a former employee

of ConAgra, he is eligible to receive an award under the ConAgra Fiscal Year 2002

Corporate Incentive Agreement for the period from June 1, 2001 to October 12, 2001, for

an amount in excess of $30,000. ConAgra denies that Shipp is eligible to receive such

an award.

ConAgra also sought recovery under certain Stock Option Agreements. This claim

is no longer before you and will not be decided by you. You are to draw no inferences

from the fact that I have withdrawn the claim from your consideration.

INSTRUCTION NO. 18

BREACH OF RELOCATION BONUS AGREEMENT

You are instructed that it has been established that the plaintiff and the defendant

entered into the Relocation Bonus Agreement and that the defendant is obligated to

pay damages in the amount of $100,000 to plaintiff unless defendant can prove, by

the a preponderance of the evidence, that he was constructively discharged as set forth

in Instruction No. 20.

INSTRUCTION NO. 19

EMPLOYEE REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT

You are instructed that it has been that established that the plaintiff and the

defendant entered into the Employee Reimbursement Agreement and that the defendant

is obligated to pay damages in the amount of $49,913.27 to plaintiff unless defendant can

prove, by the a preponderance of the evidence, that he was constructively discharged

as set forth in Instruction No. 20.

INSTRUCTION NO. 20

CONSTRUCTIVE DISCHARGE

The defendant claims that he is not obligated to reimburse ConAgra under the

Relocation Bonus and Employee Reimbursement Agreements because he was

constructively discharged from his position.

A constructive discharge occurs when an employer deliberately renders an

employee’s working conditions intolerable, thus leaving the employee no reasonable

choice but to quit or resign and the employee does quit or resign because of those

conditions. However, a constructive discharge does not occur unless a reasonable

person would consider those working conditions to be intolerable. The defendant’s

subjective feelings about his job are not the standard in determining whether the

defendant was constructively discharged as you must decide whether a reasonable

person would have felt compelled to resign under the circumstances.

If you find that defendant was constructively discharged, then your verdict will be

for defendant on the claims of breach of the relocation bonus agreement and breach of

the relocation reimbursement agreement. If you find that defendant was not

constructively discharged, then your verdict will be for plaintiff ConAgra on the claims of

breach of the relocation bonus agreement and breach of the relocation reimbursement

agreement

INSTRUCTION NO. 21

COUNTERCLAIM - INCENTIVE PLAN

It is agreed that Larry Shipp was employed by ConAgra from June 1, 2001 until

October 12, 2001 and was covered by the Fiscal Year 2002 Corporate Incentive Plan

during that time. With respect to Larry Shipp’s counterclaim, before Larry Shipp can

recover against ConAgra on his counterclaim, he must prove, by a preponderance of the

evidence, each and all of the following elements:

1. That he was entitled to a bonus under the terms of the Incentive Plan;

2. That the employment relationship was terminated by an act of the employer

through no fault of Shipp, which Shipp may satisfy by proving that he was constructively

discharged;

3. The amount of the bonus to which Shipp was entitled under the Incentive Plan.

If Larry Shipp has met this burden of proof on his counterclaim, then your verdict

shall be for Larry Shipp on that counterclaim. If Larry Shipp has not met his burden of

proof on his counterclaim, then your verdict shall be for ConAgra on this counterclaim.

INSTRUCTION NO. 22

DAMAGES - INCENTIVE PLAN

If you find in favor of the defendant Larry Shipp on his claim for breach of Incentive

Plan Agreement, then you must determine the pro rata share of the bonus agreement

that Larry Shipp was entitled to under the terms of the Incentive Plan Agreement.

Remember, throughout your deliberations, you must not engage in any speculation,

guess, or conjecture, and you must not award damages under this instruction by way of

punishment or through sympathy.

INSTRUCTION NO. 23

NOTE-TAKING

Throughout the course of the trial you have been allowed to take notes of the

testimony. You may take your notes into the jury room for use in your deliberations.

Remember, however, your notes are not evidence. The courtroom deputy is charged with

the task of keeping the official record of all exhibits received into evidence during the trial.

At the close of trial, she will deliver all exhibits you are to consider in your deliberations.

Your notes should be used only as aids to your memory. You should not give your

notes precedence over your independent recollection of the evidence. You should rely on

your own independent recollection of the proceedings, and you should not be influenced

by the notes of other jurors. Your notes are not entitled to any greater weight than each

juror’s recollection or impression of the testimony given during this trial. After you have

reached a verdict, your notes will be destroyed.

INSTRUCTION NO. 24

DELIBERATIONS AND VERDICT

In conducting your deliberations and returning your verdict, there are certain rules

you must follow.

First, when you retire to the jury room, first select one of your number to be

foreperson to preside over your discussions and to speak for you here in court.

Second, it is your duty, as jurors, to discuss this case with one another in the jury

room. You should try to reach agreement because a verdict—whether liable or not liable

—must be unanimous. Each of you must make your own conscientious decision, but only

after you have considered all the evidence, discussed it fully with your fellow jurors, and

listened to the views of your fellow jurors. Do not be afraid to change your opinions if the

discussion persuades you that you should. But do not come to a decision simply because

other jurors think it is right, or simply to reach a verdict.

Third, you will take with you when you retire for your deliberations an official

verdict form on which you will indicate a verdict. Please follow the directions carefully

when filling it out. A verdict must be agreed to by all of you, that is, it must be unanimous.

Your verdict must be signed by the foreperson.

Fourth, if you need to communicate with me during your deliberations, you may send

a note to me through the courtroom deputy, signed by one or more jurors. I will respond

as soon as possible either in writing or orally in open court. Your answer may not

come immediately because I may need to assemble the attorneys and confer with them

before I respond. Remember that you should not tell anyone—including me—how your

votes stand numerically.

Finally, when you arrive at your verdict and the form of verdict has been

completed, you will have concluded your task. Notify my chambers and I will receive your

verdict promptly. If you do not agree on a verdict by 5:00 this evening, you may separate

and return for further deliberations tomorrow morning. You may separate for meals

whenever you choose. If you do separate, you are not allowed to discuss this case with

anyone, even another juror.