Rule 49.Special verdict; general verdict and questions
Group VI: Trials · Last amended March 1, 2019 · Last verified July 14, 2026
In one sentenceRule 49 gives a trial court two tools for structuring a jury's decision, a special verdict made up of written findings on each fact question or a general verdict paired with written answers to specific questions, and it spells out what the court must do when a jury's answers do not line up with each other or with the general verdict.
(1)In General. The court may require a jury to return only a special verdict in the form of a special written finding on each issue of fact. The court may do so by:
(A)submitting written questions susceptible of a categorical or other brief answer;
(B)submitting written forms of the special findings that might properly be made under the pleadings and evidence; or
(C)using any other method that the court considers appropriate.
(2)Instructions. The court must give the instructions and explanations necessary to enable the jury to make its findings on each submitted issue.
(3)Issues Not Submitted. A party waives the right to a jury trial on any issue of fact raised by the pleadings or evidence but not submitted to the jury unless, before the jury retires, the party demands its submission to the jury. If the party does not demand submission, the court may make a finding on the issue. If the court makes no finding, it is considered to have made a finding consistent with its judgment on the special verdict.
(b)General Verdict With Answers to Written Questions.
(1)In General. The court may submit to the jury forms for a general verdict, together with written questions on one or more issues of fact that the jury must decide. The court must give the instructions and explanations necessary to enable the jury to render a general verdict and answer the questions in writing, and must direct the jury to do both.
(2)Verdict and Answers Consistent. When the general verdict and the answers are consistent, the court must approve, for entry under Rule 58, an appropriate judgment on the verdict and answers.
(3)Answers Inconsistent With the Verdict. When the answers are consistent with each other but one or more is inconsistent with the general verdict, the court may:
(A)approve, for entry under Rule 58, an appropriate judgment according to the answers, notwithstanding the general verdict;
(B)direct the jury to further consider its answers and verdict; or
(C)order a new trial.
(4)Answers Inconsistent With Each Other and the Verdict. When the answers are inconsistent with each other and one or more is also inconsistent with the general verdict, judgment must not be entered; instead, the court may:
(A)direct the jury to further consider its answers and verdict; or
(B)order a new trial.
Notes
Drafter’s Note, Amendment Effective January 1, 2005: The amendments to subdivision (a) are technical. Subdivision (b) is amended to include a reference to entry of judgment under Rule 58 consistent with the federal rule. But unlike the federal rule, the Nevada rule retains permissive language in the last sentence of subdivision (b), regarding returning the jury for further consideration of its answers and verdict or ordering a new trial where the jury’s answers to written interrogatories are “inconsistent with each other and one or more is likewise inconsistent with the general verdict. ”
Amendment History
Amended eff. 1-1-05; Amended eff. 3-1-19.
Plain-English Summary
Under a special verdict, the jury does not return an ordinary verdict at all. Instead, the court has it answer written questions on each disputed fact, and the court can choose the format, categorical questions, prepared forms of possible findings, or any other method it considers workable, and must instruct the jury on how to make those findings. If a factual issue raised by the pleadings or the evidence never gets submitted to the jury, a party who wants a jury to decide it has to say so before the jury retires; without that demand, the right to a jury finding on that issue is given up, the court may make its own finding, and if the court makes none, the missing finding is treated as consistent with whatever judgment the court enters.
A general verdict with written questions works differently. The jury returns its ordinary verdict and also answers specific written questions the court has posed. When the verdict and the answers agree, the court enters judgment on both. When the answers agree with each other but conflict with the general verdict, the court has three options, enter judgment based on the answers instead of the verdict, send the jury back to reconsider, or order a new trial. When the answers conflict with each other, and at least one of them also conflicts with the general verdict, judgment cannot be entered at all; the court's only choices are to send the jury back for further deliberation or order a new trial.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the difference between a special verdict and a general verdict with written questions?
A special verdict replaces the general verdict entirely, the jury only answers the court's written questions on each fact issue. A general verdict with written questions has the jury return its ordinary verdict and also answer specific questions alongside it.
What happens if I don't ask the court to submit a factual issue to the jury?
You give up the right to a jury finding on that issue unless you demand its submission before the jury retires. The court may then make its own finding, and if it makes none, the missing finding is treated as consistent with the court's judgment.
What can the court do if the jury's written answers conflict with its general verdict?
If the answers agree with each other but conflict with the verdict, the court may enter judgment based on the answers, send the jury back to reconsider, or order a new trial.
What if the jury's written answers conflict with each other, not just with the verdict?
Then judgment cannot be entered on any of it. The court must either send the jury back for further deliberation or order a new trial.
Who decides the format of the special verdict questions given to the jury?
The court does. It may submit categorical questions, prewritten forms of the findings that could properly be made, or any other method it considers appropriate.
Source & verification. Rule text, official Advisory Committee
Notes, and amendment history are reproduced verbatim from the Nevada Rules of Civil
Procedure, adopted by the Supreme Court of Nevada. Last verified July 14, 2026.
· Official source
Also known as:special verdict nevadajury interrogatories civil trialinconsistent jury verdict nevadageneral verdict with written questionsspecial interrogatories to jury