decision by the court. The former verdict, report, or decision shall be vacated, and a new trial granted, on the application of the party aggrieved, for any of the following causes, affecting materially the substantial rights of the party: * * * 8. Error of law occurring at the trial and objected to by the party making the application.” * * * 35 . For the terms of § 651 see note 34. 36 . Oklahoma's jurisprudence gives ample indication that an exception to the blank verdict form should be made before submission to the juiy. "Plaintiff did not object to the instructions or to the form of the verdict submitted. If she desired the verdict form to be more explicit, her request should have been made prior to its submission to they jury.” Holden v. Coussens, 1978 OK 30, ¶ 8, 576 P.2d 758, 761 (<HOLDING>); "In the absence of timely objection, this
recognizing that upon request the trial court may provide a limiting instruction to the jury holding that the trial court erred by denying plaintiffs request to instruct the jury on all its claims and to submit a special verdict form and by instead requiring the plaintiff to elect between its statutory antitrust claim and its common law tort claims to be submitted to the jury holding that plaintiffs request that inquiry be made of the jury about its intent behind the verdict was not a request to poll the jury holding that it is a partys duty to request a jury instruction submitting its defensive theory to the jury holding that the plaintiffs request for nominal damages did not defeat mootness as it appeared that the request was made solely to obtain a ruling on a moot issue