35.05 [1998 Revision] Illustrations(Multiple Defendants(Damages and Apportionment of Fault Determined in Same Trial

Instruction No 1 35.05 [1998 Revision] IllustrationsCMultiple DefendantsCDamages and Apportionment of Fault Determined in Same Trial Nancy Neighbor was a passenger in a Ford automobile being driven by her friend Harriet Host. This Ford was being driven on a through highway when it collided with a Chevrolet pickup driven by Fred Farmer. The pickup entered the through highway from an intersecting farm road. A stop sign faced Farmer. Neighbor brought an action for her personal injuries against both Farmer and Host. Defendants filed cross-claims seeking apportionment of fault. Instruction No. 1 Instruction No. 2 (Same as MAI 2.01) (See MAI 2.03 (1980 New)) As you remember, the court gave you a general instruction before the presentation of any evidence in this case. The court will not repeat that instruction at this time. However, that instruction and the additional instructions, to be given to you now, constitute the law of this case and each such instruction is equally binding upon you. You should consider each instruction in light of and in harmony with the other instructions, and you should apply the instructions as a whole to the evidence. The order in which the instructions are given is no indication of their relative importance. All of the instructions are in writing and will be available to you in the jury room. Instruction No. 3 (See MAI 11.03 (1996 Revision)) The term "negligent" or "negligence" as used in these instructions means the failure to use the highest degree of care. The phrase "highest degree of care" means that degree of care that a very careful person would use under the same or similar circumstances. Instruction No. 4 (See MAI 14.05 (1978 Revision)) The phrase "yield the right-of-way" as used in these instructions means a driver is required to yield at the stop sign if the other vehicle is within the intersection or is so close to the intersection that it is an immediate hazard. Instruction No. 5 (See MAI 3.01 (1998 Revision)) In these instructions, you are told that your verdict depends on whether or not you believe certain propositions of fact submitted to you. The burden is upon the party who relies upon any such proposition to cause you to believe that such proposition is more likely to be true than not true. In determining whether or not you believe any proposition, you must consider only the evidence and the reasonable inferences derived from the evidence. If the evidence in the case does not cause you to believe a particular proposition submitted, then you cannot return a verdict requiring belief of that proposition. Instruction No. 6 (See MAI 2.02 (1980 Revision)) In returning your verdicts you will form beliefs as to the facts. The court does not mean to assume as true any fact referred to in these instructions but leaves it to you to determine what the facts are. Instruction No. 7 (See MAI 2.04 (1981 Revision)) There are two claims submitted to you and each of them contains a separate verdict form. The verdict forms included in these instructions contain directions for completion and will allow you to return the permissible verdicts in this case. Nine or more of you must agree in order to return any verdict. A verdict must be signed by each juror who agrees to it. ****** Instruction No. 8 (See MAI 2.05 (1980 New)) Instructions 8 through 11 and general instructions 1 through 7 apply to the claim of plaintiff Nancy Neighbor for personal injury. Use Verdict A to return your verdict on this claim. Instruction No. 9 (See MAI 17.02 (1980 Revision), 17.05 (1965 New), 17.08 (1965 New), 19.01 (1986 Revision)) Your verdict must be for plaintiff Nancy Neighbor and against defendant Fred Farmer if you believe: First, either: Second, defendant Farmer, in any one or more of the respects submitted in Paragraph First, was thereby negligent, and Third, such negligence either directly caused damage to plaintiff or combined with the acts of defendant Host to directly cause damage to plaintiff. Instruction No. 10 (See MAI Revision), 19.01 (1986 Revision)) 17.01 (1980 Revision), 17.04 (1978 Your verdict must be for plaintiff Nancy Neighbor and against defendant Harriet Host if you believe: First, defendant Host knew or by the use of the highest degree of care could have known that there was a reasonable likelihood of collision in time thereafter to have slackened her speed but defendant Host failed to do so, and Second, defendant Host was thereby negligent, and Third, such negligence either directly caused damage to plaintiff or combined with the acts of defendant Farmer to directly cause damage to plaintiff. Instruction No. 11 (See MAI 4.01 (1980 Revision)) If you find in favor of plaintiff, then you must award the plaintiff such sum as you believe will fairly and justly compensate plaintiff for any damages you believe she sustained and is reasonably certain to sustain in the future that the collision directly caused or directly contributed to cause. VERDICT A (See MAI 36.01 (1980 Revision)) Note: Complete this form by writing in the name required by your verdict. On the claim of plaintiff Nancy Neighbor for personal injuries against defendant Fred Farmer, we, the undersigned jurors, find in favor of: (Plaintiff Nancy Neighbor) or (Defendant Fred Farmer) On the claim of plaintiff Nancy Neighbor for personal injuries against defendant Harriet Host, we, the undersigned jurors, find in favor of: (Plaintiff Nancy Neighbor) or (Defendant Harriet Host) Note: Complete the following paragraph only if one or both of the above findings are in favor of plaintiff Nancy Neighbor. We, the undersigned jurors, assess the damages of plaintiff Nancy Neighbor at $ (stating the amount). Note: All jurors who agree to the above findings must sign below. ****** Instruction No. 12 (See MAI 2.05 (1980 New)) Instructions 12 and 13 and general instructions 1 through 7 apply to the claim for assessment of the proportions of fault. Use Verdict B to return your verdict on this claim. Instruction No. 13 (See MAI 4.12 (1979 New)) If your verdict is in favor of plaintiff Neighbor and against both defendants on Verdict A, you must assess the proportion of the fault which each party listed in Verdict B has for plaintiff's damages. VERDICT B (See MAI 36.15 (1979 New)) Note: Complete this form if fault is to be apportioned. On the claim between defendants for assessment of the proportions of fault for plaintiff's damage assessed in Verdict A, we, the undersigned jurors, find: Note: Complete by writing