Also known as: finding the facts specially · finds the facts specially · found the facts specially · special findings · special verdict
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
An obligation in nonjury civil actions requiring the court to determine the facts with particularity and to state its legal conclusions separately from those findings. The findings and conclusions may be announced orally after the evidence closes or set out in a written opinion or memorandum.
Frank Fisher sued Flagship Logistics for breach after a cargo shipment arrived late. At the close of the nonjury trial the judge announced that the bill of lading showed delivery occurred two days after the contractual deadline and that no force-majeure clause applied. The court then concluded that Flagship had breached and entered judgment for Fisher.
Fumiko Fujimoto was tried without a jury on charges of assaulting a federal officer. After hearing psychiatric testimony the court found that Fujimoto suffered from a severe mental disease at the time of the act and that the government had not proved beyond a reasonable doubt that she appreciated the wrongfulness of her conduct. The court therefore entered a judgment of not guilty by reason of insanity.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Fidelity Trust sued Allied Tube after the latter blocked its product from a model code. In the bench trial the court found that Allied had packed the standards committee with its own employees and that the resulting exclusion had no legitimate safety basis. The court concluded that the conduct violated the Sherman Act and awarded damages.
Fernando Farrell sued Cipollone for injuries from smoking. After a nonjury trial the court found that the plaintiff had relied on the defendant's advertising claims and that those claims were not mere opinions. The court concluded that federal labeling law did not preempt the state tort claim and entered judgment for the plaintiff.
Finn Fletcher was tried without a jury for murdering his spouse. The court found that Fletcher had discovered the spouse in an act of infidelity moments before the killing and that this discovery had produced sudden and intense passion. The court concluded that the government had not disproved heat of passion beyond a reasonable doubt and reduced the conviction to manslaughter.
Fiona Foster was tried without a jury for murder in Oregon. The court found that Foster had presented some evidence of mental disease but concluded that she had failed to prove insanity beyond a reasonable doubt as required by state law. The court therefore entered a judgment of guilty.
The court must do so after a bench trial on the facts. The findings may be stated orally on the record or in a written opinion or memorandum.
Supporting sources
No. Rule 52(a)(3) expressly exempts rulings on motions under Rule 56 from the findings requirement.
Supporting sources
Yes. The court must state the findings and conclusions supporting its action on an interlocutory injunction even though no full trial has occurred.
Supporting sources
The omission constitutes legal error that can lead an appellate court to reverse and remand so the district court can supply the required findings and conclusions.
Supporting sources
Yes. Under Rule 52(b) a party may move within twenty-eight days after entry of judgment for the court to amend its findings or make additional findings.
Supporting sources
…and Burrage , only one court has found a but-for instructional error harmless and then only because the jury completed a special verdict form in which it expressly indicated “it relied only on a ‘but for’ theory of causation when finding liability” and “did not reach or rely on the alternative ‘mixed motive’ theory presented…