Download this Paper Open PDF in Browser

Accuracy, Efficiency, and Accountability in the Litigation Process - the Case for the Fact Verdict

99 Pages Posted: 27 Jun 2005  

Mark S. Brodin

Boston College - Law School


Although the jury trial is regarded as a lynchpin of the American concept of justice, ambivalence about the institution persists, particularly in the context of civil litigation. Some question whether the civil jury is an inefficient anachronism. This article argues that many of the concerns raised about civil juries in general are really concerns about the routine use of the general verdict, an institution that merges the jury's fact finding function and its role as an applier of law. The article argues that in many instances, replacing a general verdict with a special verdict would allow the jury to play to its strength as reporter of fact. At the same time, it would free the jury from the burden of interpreting and applying elaborate instructions of complex legal doctrine. Despite criticism that the special verdict weakens the constitutional powers of the jury, the article proposes the use of the special verdict in a manner that presents the jury with questions of actual fact while leaving the task of applying law to the judge. The special verdict, if used correctly, enhances the reliability and efficiency of the litigation process.

Keywords: civil jury, general verdict, special verdict, litigation process

Suggested Citation

Brodin, Mark S., Accuracy, Efficiency, and Accountability in the Litigation Process - the Case for the Fact Verdict. University of Cincinnati Law Review, Vol. 59, pp. 15-111, 1990. Available at SSRN:

Mark S. Brodin (Contact Author)

Boston College - Law School ( email )

885 Centre Street
Newton, MA 02459-1163
United States

Paper statistics

Abstract Views