Rule 49.Special verdict; general verdict and questions
Group VI: Trials · Last amended March 1, 2017 · Last verified July 14, 2026
In one sentenceRule 49 lets the court require a special verdict answering specific factual questions instead of a general verdict, or a general verdict paired with written questions, and tells the court how to resolve any inconsistency between the jury's answers and its 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 must direct the jury to further consider its answers and verdict, or must order a new trial.
Amendment History
Added February 2, 2017, effective March 1, 2017.
Plain-English Summary
Instead of a single general verdict, a court can ask the jury for a special verdict: written findings on each disputed fact, delivered through written questions, forms describing the possible findings under the pleadings and evidence, or any other method the court thinks works. Whichever method it picks, the court has to give the jury the instructions it needs to make those findings. If a party wants a fact issue raised by the pleadings or evidence submitted to the jury and does not demand that before the jury retires, the right to a jury verdict on that issue is waived; the court can then decide it, and if the court makes no finding at all, the issue is treated as decided consistently with the judgment.
The court can also give the jury a general verdict form along with written questions on specific facts, again with the instructions needed to answer both. When the general verdict and the written answers line up, the court enters judgment on them. When the answers agree with each other but conflict with the general verdict, the court has three options: enter judgment on the answers instead of the verdict, send the jury back to reconsider both, or order a new trial. When the answers conflict with each other, and at least one also conflicts with the verdict, the court cannot enter judgment at all; it must send the jury back to deliberate further or order a new trial.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is a special verdict?
A verdict made up of written findings on each disputed fact issue, rather than one general verdict for a side.
What if I forget to ask that an issue go to the jury?
The right to a jury determination on that issue is waived unless you demand it before the jury retires. The court can then decide the issue itself, and if it makes no finding, the issue is treated as decided consistently with the judgment.
What happens if the jury's written answers contradict its general verdict?
If the answers agree with each other but not the verdict, the court can enter judgment on the answers, send the jury back to reconsider, or order a new trial.
What if the jury's answers to the written questions conflict with each other?
Then judgment cannot be entered at all. The court must send the jury back to deliberate further or order a new trial.
Who decides whether to use a special verdict or a general verdict with questions?
The court chooses the format and can use whichever method it considers appropriate.
Source & verification. Rule text and amendment history are
reproduced verbatim from the Wyoming Rules of Civil Procedure, adopted by the
Supreme Court of Wyoming. Last verified July 14, 2026. ·
Official source
Also known as:special verdict form rulegeneral verdict with interrogatoriesinconsistent jury verdict rulejury verdict answers conflict with verdict