In Bate v. Marsteller (1965) 232 Cal. App. 2d 605, there was a general verdict submitted to the jury. The judge decided to ask the jury some interrogatories, which were later explained by the judge. "'The interrogatories were only to assist the Court in determining the basis of the verdict of the jury, so there would be no question in the Court's mind.'" ( Bate v. Marsteller, supra, 32 Cal. App. 2d at p. 614.) Counsel objecting on appeal explained there was no prompt objection because the questions were not regarded as being special interrogatories, but the court of appeal said the trial judge did not err. ( Id. at pp. 614, 617.)