(-) General verdict. A general verdict is that by which the jury pronounces generally upon all or any of the issues in favor of either the plaintiff or defendant.
Rule 49.Verdicts
Group 6: Trials · Last amended April 28, 2015 · Last verified July 13, 2026
In one sentenceRule 49 sets out the verdict forms a Washington civil jury may use, from a plain general verdict to a special verdict or a general verdict paired with interrogatories, and tells the court how to resolve it when those answers don't line up.
Full Text of Rule 49
(a) Special verdict. The court may require a jury to return only a special verdict in the form of a special written finding upon each issue of fact. In that event the court may submit to the jury written questions susceptible of categorical or other brief answer or may submit written forms of the several special findings which might properly be made under the pleadings and evidence; or it may use such other method of submitting the issues and requiring the written findings thereon as it deems most appropriate. The court shall give to the jury such explanation and instruction concerning the matter thus submitted as may be necessary to enable the jury to make its findings upon each issue. If in so doing the court omits any issue of fact raised by the pleadings or by the evidence, each party waives the right to a trial by jury of the issue so omitted unless before the jury retires that party demands its submission to the jury. As to an issue omitted without such demand the court may make a finding; or, if it fails to do so, it shall be deemed to have made a finding in accord with the judgment on the special verdict.
(b) General verdict accompanied by answer to interrogatories. The court may submit to the jury, together with appropriate forms for a general verdict, written interrogatories upon one or more issues of fact the decision of which is necessary to a verdict. The court shall give such explanation or instruction as may be necessary to enable the jury both to make answers to the interrogatories and to render a general verdict, and the court shall direct the jury both to make written answers and to render a general verdict. When the general verdict and the answers are harmonious, the appropriate judgment upon the verdict and answers shall be entered pursuant to rule 58. When the answers are consistent with each other but one or more is inconsistent with the general verdict, judgment may be entered pursuant to rule 58 in accordance with the answers, notwithstanding the general verdict, or the court may return the jury for further consideration of its answers and verdict or may order a new trial. When the answers are inconsistent with each other and one or more is likewise inconsistent with the general verdict, judgment shall not be entered, but the court shall return the jury for further consideration of its answers and verdict or shall order a new trial.
(c) Discharge of jury.
(1) Without verdict. [Reserved. See RCW 4.44.330.]
(2) Effect of discharge. [Reserved. See RCW 4.44.340.]
(d) Court recess during deliberation. [Reserved. See RCW 4.44.350.]
(e) Proceedings when jurors have agreed. [Reserved. See RCW 4.44.360.]
(f) Manner of giving verdict. [Reserved. See RCW 4.44.370.]
(g) Ten jurors in civil cases. [Reserved. See RCW 4.44.380.]
(h) Jury may be polled. [Reserved. See RCW 4.44.390.]
(i) Correction of informal verdict. [Reserved. See RCW 4.44.400.]
(j) Jury to assess amount of recovery. [Reserved. See RCW 4.44.450.]
(k) Receiving verdict and discharging jury. [Reserved. See RCW 4.44.460.]
(l) Any juror verdict. When a jury decides a verdict, any juror may vote on any of the questions posed. It is not necessary that the same ten jurors agree on every answer, as long as each answer is agreed to by any ten or more jurors.
Amendment History
Prior: Rule 49(a) and (b), RPPP. Adopted May 5, 1967, effective July 1, 1967; amended, effective Sept. 1, 2001; amended, effective April 28, 2015.
Plain-English Summary
The plainest option is the general verdict: the jury pronounces, on all or any of the issues, in favor of the plaintiff or the defendant. Rule 49 then offers two more structured alternatives for cases where the court wants the jury's reasoning broken down further.
Under a special verdict, the court can require the jury to return written findings on each fact issue instead of a general verdict, using written questions, forms for each finding, or another method the court considers appropriate, along with whatever explanation the jury needs to complete it. If the court's questions leave out an issue that the pleadings or evidence raised, a party waives its right to a jury trial on that omitted issue unless it demands the issue be submitted before the jury retires. Absent that demand, the court may make its own finding on the omitted issue, or, if it doesn't, the issue is deemed found consistently with the judgment entered on the special verdict.
The hybrid option pairs a general verdict with written interrogatories on one or more fact issues necessary to the verdict. When the general verdict and the interrogatory answers agree, judgment is entered on them under Rule 58. When the answers are consistent with each other but one conflicts with the general verdict, the court may enter judgment according to the answers instead of the general verdict, send the jury back for further deliberation, or order a new trial. When the answers conflict with each other as well as with the general verdict, the court cannot enter judgment at all; it must return the jury for further deliberation or order a new trial.
Rule 49 also contains a distinctly Washington feature in subsection (l): on a verdict, any juror may vote on any question, and the same group of jurors doesn't have to agree on every answer. As long as each individual answer is agreed to by at least ten jurors, it doesn't matter whether it's the same ten jurors from one answer to the next. Several traditional topics, like discharging a jury without a verdict, are left to the statutes in RCW Title 4.44 rather than restated here.
Frequently Asked Questions
What's the difference between a general verdict and a special verdict?
A general verdict is the jury pronouncing generally in favor of the plaintiff or defendant. A special verdict instead requires the jury to make written findings on each individual fact issue.
What happens if the jury's interrogatory answers conflict with its general verdict?
If the answers are consistent with each other but not with the general verdict, the court may enter judgment based on the answers, send the jury back for further deliberation, or order a new trial. If the answers conflict with each other too, the court cannot enter judgment and must return the jury for more deliberation or order a new trial.
What if the special verdict questions omit an issue raised by the pleadings or evidence?
A party waives jury trial on that issue unless it demands the issue be submitted before the jury retires. If no demand is made, the court may find on the issue itself, or it is deemed found consistently with the judgment on the special verdict.
Do the same ten jurors have to agree on every answer in a Washington civil verdict?
No. Under subsection (l), any juror may vote on any question, and as long as at least ten jurors agree on each individual answer, it need not be the same ten jurors each time.
Where are the procedures for discharging a jury covered if not spelled out in Rule 49?
Several of those topics are reserved to statutes in RCW Title 4.44 rather than restated in the rule.
Under what rule is judgment entered once a verdict and any interrogatory answers agree?
Judgment is entered pursuant to Rule 58.
Source & verification. Rule text and amendment history are
reproduced verbatim from the Washington Superior Court Civil Rules, adopted by the
Supreme Court of Washington. Last verified July 13, 2026. ·
Official source
Also known as: general verdict vs special verdict washingtonCR 49jury interrogatories washington civil caseany juror verdict rule washingtonten juror verdict washington