3. By answering the following questions you will determine the damages, if any that Elena Plana sustained as a result of the incident in question. The jury cannot be faulted for doing exactly what it was instructed to do. As the verdict form instructed, when the jury found that the subject accident was not the legal cause of Elena’s injury, it proceeded no further, except to sign the verdict form. Because counsel for the plaintiffs agreed to the wording of the verdict form, instructing the jury to go no further if it concluded that Mr. Sainz’s negligence was not the legal cause of Elena’s injury, the plaintiffs are precluded from asserting that the zero damage award entered by the jury was error. See Beverly Health & Rehab. Servs., Inc. v. Freeman, 709 So.2d 549, 551 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998) (<HOLDING>); Papcun v. Piggy Bag Disc. Souvenirs, Food &
holding that party that failed to object to instruction that jury not answer a question based on its answer to the prior question waived that partys right to have the jury make findings as to the subsequent question holding that the first amendment right to free speech is absolute and an award of nominal damages is required even if the defendant fails to object to the nominal damages instruction holding that the plaintiff waived the issue of nominal damages by agreeing to the verdict form that instructed the jury to skip the damages issue if its answer to the causation question was no  holding that the right to nominal damages was waived in a breach of duty action when plaintiff failed to raise the issue of nominal damages until after the verdict holding that plaintiff waived the right to nominal damages in an excessive force case because nominal damages were not requested until after the verdict