United States: Supreme Court Jettisons Common Law Precedent In Product Liability Cases Back To 1985 In Coba V. Tricam

New decision by the Florida Supreme Court Eliminates Important Defense Protection in Cases Involving Inconsistent Verdicts

In Coba v. Tricam Indus., Inc., 40 Fla. L. Weekly S257a (Fla. May 14, 2015), the Florida Supreme Court eliminated an important common law protection for defendants in cases where defense counsel fails to contemporaneously object to an inconsistent jury verdict.

In Coba, Plaintiff sued the manufacturer of an aluminum ladder alleging strict products liability for a defective design. The complaint also alleged the manufacturer was negligent in failing to design the ladder in a reasonably safe condition. At the conclusion of the evidence, the trial court authored a verdict form for the jury to use in deliberations. The form unwisely asked the strict liability question without any reference to strict liability terminology. It then placed the design defect question in advance of the question of negligence. The following is the Coba jury's verdict form entries:

The jury returned a verdict for $1.5m and the court discharged the jury with no objection from defense counsel. The manufacturer subsequently filed a motion to set aside the verdict as inconsistent. The motion argued there could be no finding of negligent design without a finding that a design defect contributed to the accident.

The Third Florida District Court of Appeal agreed and determined the inconsistency was of a "fundamental nature" such that the failure to contemporaneously object did not result in waiver. The appellate court reasoned that, regardless of the existence of a timely objection, it could not reconcile the jury's conclusion that there was no design defect but that the manufacturer was liable on a negligence claim predicated exclusively on design defect. The Third DCA then resolved the inconsistency in favor of the defense rather than remanding the case for a new trial. The court reasoned that plaintiff had only put on evidence of a design defect as the basis for the products liability claim. Thus, the jury's failure to find a design defect meant "there was no evidence to support any other cause of action [and] no issue to be resolved on remand."

The Supreme Court overturned the Third DCA and held that any objection to an inconsistent verdict is waived if not made before the jury is discharged. The Supreme Court determined that a "fundamental nature" exception to this rule in products liability cases is "at odds with the [....] policy reasons undergirding the requirement of timely objection, including upholding the sanctity of the jury's role in trial, preventing strategic gamesmanship, and increasing judicial efficiency." In doing so, the Supreme Court jettisoned common law precedent in products liability cases dating back to 1985.

In part, the Supreme Court based the ruling on a desire to prevent the defense from "strategically sitting on the objection until after the jury is no longer available to correct its decision." The court ignored however, the strategic practice by which plaintiffs' counsel artfully draft confusing verdict forms to maximize the chance of a favorable decision despite having tried inconsistent theories. Such tactics are common in Florida products liability trials where plaintiffs' counsel wager the defense will not to recognize the problem in the harried minutes between verdict announcement and jury discharge in order to timely object.

The announcement of a civil jury verdict is the culmination of months (and sometimes years) of litigation work. Trial is a lengthy process at the end of which, the attorneys and their clients are spent. Trial is inconvenient to the personal lives of the jurors and when verdict is announced, there is a powerful momentum to terminate their service and quickly return them to their real lives. Any defense lawyer who, on the last day of trial, delays the conclusion of the significant sacrifice endured by the jury clearly risks their substantial indignation.

Prior to Coba, the case law starkly demonstrates how difficult it may be to rapidly analyze the presence of an inconsistency in a jury verdict under such circumstances. There is a strong disincentive for defense counsel to make the eleventh hour demand as trial culmination that the jury be returned to the deliberation room to sit idle while the matter of an inconsistent verdict is analyzed and debated with an annoyed judge. And, what is the reward for defense counsel being correct in this regard? The Supreme Court mandates in Coba that the jury return to deliberations apparently on new instructions. Surely the plaintiff, whose chances of final victory were vastly improved with the initial verdict announcement, will demand that the jury's damages calculation must likewise be reopened during the new deliberations.

The following are some new considerations for defense counsel in light of Coba:

  • Defense counsel must be very cautious about the Florida standard verdict forms especially where altered by plaintiff or the judge. Considering the forms are litigated at a point in the trial where counsel can be more cool and deliberative, the defense attorney must be thorough in evaluating and formulating verdict forms and liberal with record objections to any problems.  
  • Defense counsel must be mindful of the potential for inconsistences while drafting and finalizing verdict forms and jury instructions. Typically, the defense wants detailed verdict forms to guide the jury in truly considering all the elements of every claim raised by plaintiff. But, complicated verdict forms can confuse and increase the possibility of an internal inconsistency. The risks and rewards of these competing issues must be carefully considered.  
  • Once the verdict form and jury instructions are finalized with the court, defense counsel must consider all the ways in which the verdict could come back inconsistent. Defense counsel must plan ahead for the defense reaction at the announcement of the verdict. After Coba, the defense attorney must anticipate possible inconsistencies no matter how theoretical, research the applicable standard, and be prepared to interpose are argue timely objections before jurors are discharged.  
  • Efforts must be made to avoid the scenario whereby a jury enters deliberations likely to culminate at close of business or at 6:00 p.m. on Friday night. Failing such efforts, defense counsel must, at the point the verdict is announced, obtain a side bar with the judge and opposing counsel to obtain a moment to consider any verdict inconsistency before the jury is discharged.  
  • If the jury is discharged without objection, there is still the possibility of a motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict ("JNOV").   
  • Before the jury ever receives the case, it is now a standard practice in Florida for defense counsel to move for directed verdict arguing that plaintiff's evidence was insufficient for jury deliberations. 
    • Before the jury ever receives the case, it is now a standard practice in Florida for defense counsel to move for directed verdict arguing that plaintiff's evidence was insufficient for jury deliberations. 
    • If defense counsel identifies a verdict inconsistency after jury discharge, he should consider whether it demonstrates an absence of evidence to support the portion of the verdict that favored the plaintiff over the portion that favored the defense.  
    • In such a scenario, the proper procedure is a motion for JNOV pursuant to Fla.R.Civ.P. 1.480(b) and based on the earlier motion for directed verdict.1 A motion for JNOV is appropriate when "no view of the evidence could support a verdict for [plaintiff] and [thus,] no reasonable jury could render a verdict for that party. New Jerusalem Church of God, Inc. v. Sneads Cmty. Church, Inc., 147 So. 3d 25, 28 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013). Even Coba recognized that the defendant's failure to contemporaneously object to an inconsistent verdict will not permit entry of judgment pursuant to that verdict where there is no evidence to support one jury verdict finding over another.


1. Although the term "motion for a judgment notwithstanding the verdict" is still employed, pursuant to Rule 1.480(b), a motion challenging a jury verdict is more properly styled a "motion for judgment in accordance with a prior motion for directed verdict." See Fire & Casualty Ins. Co. v. Sealey, 810 So.2d 988, 991 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002).

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
In association with
Related Topics
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Related Articles
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions