§ 8.01-379.3.General verdict accompanied by answer to interrogatories.

A general verdict tells you who won and how much, but not always why. Section 8.01-379.3 lets a Virginia court ask the jury to show its work. When the court decides a civil case is complex enough to warrant it, the judge can submit written interrogatories on one or more factual issues alongside the standard general verdict forms, so the jury answers specific questions in addition to reaching an overall verdict.

Negligence cases involving personal injury or death by wrongful act get special treatment. There, the default is a general verdict form only — no interrogatories — unless another statute specifically authorizes them, the case involves comparative negligence under the governing substantive law, or every party agrees to let interrogatories go to the jury. That carve-out reflects a legislative choice to keep those cases simpler for the jury unless there is a specific reason to do otherwise.

Whenever interrogatories do go out, the court has to instruct the jury well enough that it can both answer the specific questions and still reach a general verdict, and the court directs the jury to do both in writing. If the general verdict and the interrogatory answers line up, the court enters judgment on them. But if the answers conflict with each other, or one or more answers conflicts with the general verdict, the court cannot pick a winner on its own — it has to send the jury back to reconcile its own findings, or order a new trial altogether.