A verdict in a civil lawsuit is the formal decision made at the end of a trial that resolves disputed factual issues between the parties. In practical terms, it answers the central question of the case: who is legally responsible, and for what?
If you are a business owner or individual involved in a California civil action, understanding what a verdict means is critical. A verdict determines liability. It can expose your or your company to financial damages, contractual obligations, or injunctive relief. It also shapes what happens next, including entry of judgment, post-trial motions, or a potential appeal.
This guide explains verdict meaning in the context of California civil litigation, how verdicts are reached, the types of courtroom verdicts you may encounter, and how to protect your business before and after the verdict is announced.
What Does a Verdict Mean in Court?
A verdict is the official decision made by either a jury or a judge at the conclusion of a trial. It resolves factual disputes presented during the litigation process.
In a California civil case, a verdict typically addresses:
- Whether the defendant is liable
- Whether the plaintiff proved their claims by a preponderance of the evidence
- The amount of damages, if any
- Allocation of fault, if multiple parties are involved
Judge vs. Jury Verdict
Jury Verdict: A jury verdict is rendered after a jury trial. Jurors evaluate witness credibility, documentary evidence, expert testimony, and legal instructions provided by the trial court. They use this knowledge to determine whether a defendant should be held legally and financially responsible in terms of the dispute.
Jury verdicts are common in the following types of civil cases:
- Breach of contract claims
- Fraud and misrepresentation
- Employment disputes
- Real estate conflicts
- Personal injury claims
Under California Courts procedures, civil jury verdicts in most cases require agreement by at least three-fourths of jurors (9 out of 12), unless the parties stipulate otherwise. (See Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 618.)
Judge’s Verdict (Bench Trial): In a bench trial, the assigned judge determines the final verdict without the involvement of a jury. The judge’s verdict is based on written findings and legal conclusions issued after reviewing the evidence. Bench trials are often used in complex commercial disputes where technical contract interpretation or equitable relief is central to the legal issue.
Can Verdicts Be Appealed?
Typically, verdicts can be appealed in civil cases. A party may appeal the verdict after entry of judgment to a higher court. In California, appeals from the Superior Court typically go to the California Court of Appeal. The appellate court reviews legal errors, not factual disagreements.
In most cases, a notice of appeal must be filed within 60 days of service of notice of entry of judgment. Missing the deadline forfeits appellate rights.
Appeals may argue:
- Incorrect jury instructions
- Improper admission or exclusion of evidence
- Insufficient evidence
- Legal misinterpretation
An appeal does not automatically stay enforcement. A bond may be required to pause collection efforts.
For authoritative guidance on appellate deadlines, see the California Courts self-help appellate resources.
Verdict vs. Settlement
A verdict is imposed by the court after trial. A settlement is negotiated by the parties before a judgment is issued, even after trial has begun. Settlement often involves methods of alternative dispute resolution such as mediation and arbitration.
Key differences between verdicts and settlements:
- A settlement resolves the dispute voluntarily.
- Verdicts are public, while settlements can remain confidential.
- Verdicts may be appealed, settlements usually cannot.
From a cost-control standpoint, verdicts and settlements represent different risk profiles. Trials involve litigation expenses, expert testimony, and unpredictable jury verdicts. Settlements offer certainty but may require financial compromise.
Verdict vs. Judgment
A verdict is the decision made by a judge or jury. A judgment is the enforceable court order entered after the verdict. The prevailing party becomes the judgment creditor, while the losing party becomes the judgment debtor.
Only after entry of judgment can enforcement begin, including:
- Wage garnishment
- Bank levies
- Liens on real estate
- Writ of execution
Understanding this distinction is critical. A verdict alone does not authorize collection. The judgment does. See our full guide outlining the differences between verdicts and judgments.
Types of Verdicts
There are several different types of verdicts that arise in civil litigation. Understanding their differences can help parties anticipate possible outcomes of trial.
General Verdict
In a civil lawsuit, a general verdict is the most straightforward type of jury decision. The jury determines which party wins and, if appropriate, how much money should be awarded. The jurors do not explain how they resolved each disputed issue of fact. They simply announce the outcome. For those involved in a jury trial, this means you may not see a detailed breakdown of how the jury evaluated each contract clause, witness, or damages calculation.
Partial Verdict
In a civil lawsuit, a partial verdict occurs when the jury reaches a decision on some claims or some defendants, but not all of them. Instead of resolving the entire case at once, the jury reports decisions on the issues where agreement has been reached, while other claims remain undecided. Courts in many jurisdictions, including California, allow partial verdicts. This situation commonly arises in complex business disputes involving multiple causes of action, such as breach of contract, fraud, and unfair competition, or cases with several defendants.
If a jury cannot reach agreement on the remaining claims after reasonable deliberation, the court may declare a mistrial as to those specific issues. The unresolved claims can then be retried, settled, or otherwise resolved, although parties are generally bound by the portions of the verdict that were accepted by the court.
Compromise Verdict
A compromise verdict happens when jurors adjust their positions so they can reach a decision instead of remaining stuck in disagreement. If jurors cannot reach the required level of agreement, the result is called a hung jury. That usually leads to a mistrial, meaning the case may have to be tried again. Because a retrial takes more time and money, jurors sometimes prefer reaching a compromise.
Defective Verdict
A defective verdict is a jury decision that contains errors serious enough that the court cannot enter a valid judgment based on it. In other words, something about the verdict is legally or procedurally flawed.
A verdict may be considered defective for several reasons. For example:
- Procedural irregularities during jury deliberations, such as improper completion of the verdict form.
- Internal inconsistencies, where the jury’s answers to specific questions contradict each other.
- Substantive conflicts, such as finding a defendant not liable but still awarding damages.
In these situations, the trial judge has authority to address the issue before judgment is entered. The court may send the jury back for further deliberations to correct the problem. If the defect cannot be resolved, the judge may declare a mistrial.
Directed Verdict
In civil lawsuits, a directed verdict is a decision made by the trial judge when the evidence is legally insufficient for a reasonable jury to rule in favor of one side. Instead of allowing the jury to deliberate, the judge removes the issue from the jury and decides it as a matter of law.
In practical terms, this means the court has determined that even if the jury believed all of one party’s evidence, it would still not meet the legal standard required to win. A directed verdict can be issued on the judge’s own initiative or in response to a formal motion by either party. It typically occurs after the plaintiff has presented their case, or after both sides have been fully heard.
Courts generally recognize two common scenarios:
- Failure of proof – The party with the burden of proof has not presented enough evidence to support a required element of the claim.
- Overwhelming evidence – The evidence so strongly favors one side that no reasonable jury could reach a different conclusion.
A judge cannot grant a directed verdict if there are genuine disputes of material fact that reasonable jurors could interpret differently. There must be a complete absence of proof on a key issue or no legally meaningful factual dispute.
Judgment Notwithstanding the Verdict (JNOV)
A judgment notwithstanding the verdict (JNOV) occurs when the trial judge sets aside the jury’s verdict and enters judgment in favor of the losing party without ordering a new trial. In practical terms, the judge concludes that the jury’s decision cannot legally stand.
A JNOV is similar to a directed verdict, but the timing is different. A directed verdict happens before the case is submitted to the jury. A JNOV happens after the jury has already returned its verdict.
A judge may grant a JNOV if:
- No reasonable jury could have reached that verdict based on the evidence presented at trial; or
- The jury misapplied the law in reaching its decision.
In California civil litigation, a party typically must first move for a directed verdict during trial in order to preserve the right to seek JNOV later. After the verdict is announced, the losing party may file a formal post-trial motion requesting judgment notwithstanding the verdict. In some instances, courts have authority to act on their own initiative.
Special Verdict
A special verdict is a decision in which the jury answers specific factual questions rather than simply declaring which party wins. The jury makes detailed findings on key issues, but it does not necessarily state a general conclusion.
In practice, the trial court provides the jury with written questions addressing disputed factual issues, such as:
- Did the defendant breach the contract?
- Did the plaintiff perform their obligations?
- Was the breach a substantial factor in causing harm?
- What amount of damages, if any, resulted?
After the jury answers each question, the court applies the law to those findings and enters judgment accordingly.
Compared to a general verdict, a special verdict offers greater clarity, particularly in complex business litigation. It creates a clear record of how the jury resolved each contested issue. This transparency can be critical for post-trial motions and appeals.
How Should Businesses Prepare for a Verdict in a Civil Lawsuit?
By the time a verdict is announced, most strategic decisions have already been made. The real protection begins months earlier.
Business owners and individuals involved in a lawsuit should:
- Evaluate litigation risks and settlement leverage
- Develop a trial-ready litigation strategy before the trial date
- Assess insurance coverage and financial exposure
Work With a Civil Litigation Law Firm That Prepares for the Verdict From Day One
At Law Advocate Group, LLP, we represent plaintiffs and defendants in complex business disputes throughout Los Angeles County and Southern California. Whether your company is facing a breach of contract claim, employment litigation, real estate dispute, or high-exposure civil action, we build strategy with the verdict in mind.
Our litigation team evaluates:
- Trial positioning
- Risk exposure
- Settlement opportunities
- Post-trial motion strategy
If your business is preparing for trial or evaluating post-verdict options, contact Law Advocate Group, LLP for a confidential consultation. The right litigation strategy can shape the verdict long before trial begins.
FAQ
Yes, a judge may overturn a jury verdict through a motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict or grant a new trial if legal errors occurred. However, courts give significant deference to jury findings.
No, not all jurors have to agree on a verdict. In most California civil jury trials, at least 9 out of 12 jurors must agree. Unanimity is not required unless the parties agree otherwise.
You cannot appeal the verdict alone, but you can appeal the final judgment entered after the verdict. The appeal must raise legal errors, not simply dissatisfaction with the outcome.
If jurors cannot reach the required agreement, the court declares a mistrial due to a hung jury. The case may be retried unless the parties settle.
After the verdict, the court enters judgment. Post-trial motions may be filed within a reasonable time. The prevailing party may begin enforcement after judgment is entered, unless an appeal or bond stays enforcement.
