35.16 [1998 Revision] Illustrations(Comparative Fault(Head(On Collision(Personal Injury and Loss of Consortium

Instruction No 1 35.16 [1998 Revision] IllustrationsCComparative CollisionCPersonal Injury and Loss of Consortium FaultCHeadBOn Vehicles driven by plaintiff John Host and defendant Robert Hitter had a head-on collision on a two-lane highway. Plaintiffs claim defendant Hitter was on the wrong side of the highway. Plaintiff John Host received serious personal injuries. Plaintiff Mary Host has a consortium claim only and was not in the car. Defendant claims Host failed to keep a careful lookout. Instruction Number 1 (Same as MAI 2.01) Instruction Number 2 (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 Number 3 (See MAI 2.02 (1980 Revision)) In returning your verdict, 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. 4 (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 Number 5 (See MAI 11.02 II (1996 Revision)) The term "negligent" or "negligence" as used in these instructions means the failure to use that degree of care that a very careful person would use under the same or similar circumstances. Instruction Number 6 (See MAI 2.04 (1981 Revision)) The verdict form included in these instructions contains directions for completion and will allow you to return the permissible verdict 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 Number 7 (See MAI 37.01 (1986 New), 17.01 (1980 Revision), 17.13 (1978 Revision), 19.01 (1986 Revision) (First Option)) In your verdict you must assess a percentage of fault to defendant Hitter, whether or not plaintiff John Host was partly at fault, if you believe: First, defendant Hitter's automobile was on the wrong side of the road, and Second, defendant Hitter was thereby negligent, and Third, such negligence directly caused or directly contributed to cause damage to plaintiff John Host. Instruction Number 8 (See MAI 37.04 (1986 New), 33.03(1) (1995 Revision)) In your verdict you must not assess a percentage of fault to defendant Hitter unless you believe defendant Hitter's automobile was on the wrong side of the road. Instruction Number 9 (See MAI 37.02 (1986 New), 17.01 (1980 Revision), 17.05 (1965 New), 19.01 (1986 Revision) (First Option)) In your verdict you must assess a percentage of fault to plaintiff John Host, whether or not defendant Hitter was partly at fault, if you believe: First, plaintiff John Host failed to keep a careful lookout, and Second, plaintiff John Host was thereby negligent, and Third, such negligence directly caused or directly contributed to cause any damage plaintiff John Host may have sustained. Instruction Number 10 Revision)) (See MAI 37.04 (1986 New), 33.03(1) (1995 In your verdict you must not assess a percentage of fault to plaintiff John Host unless you believe plaintiff John Host failed to keep a careful lookout. Instruction Number 11 (See MAI 31.04 (1991 Revision)) If you assess a percentage of fault to defendant and if you believe that plaintiff Mary Host sustained damage as a direct result of injury to her husband John Host, then in your verdict you must find that plaintiff Mary Host did sustain such damage. Instruction Number 12 (See MAI 33.03, Modified (1995 Revision)) Unless you believe plaintiff Mary Host sustained damage as a direct result of injury to her husband John Host, then in your verdict you must find that plaintiff Mary Host did not sustain such damage. Instruction Number 13 (See MAI 37.08 (1991 New)) If you assess a percentage of fault to defendant, then, disregarding any fault on the part of plaintiff John Host, you must determine the total amount of plaintiff John Host's damages on his claim for personal injury. If you further find that plaintiff Mary Host did sustain damage as a direct result of injury to her husband, John Host, you must determine the total amount of Mary Host's damages on her claim for damages due to injury to her husband. Total damages on each claim must be such sum as will fairly and justly compensate the plaintiff on that claim for any such damages you believe that plaintiff sustained and is reasonably certain to sustain in the future that the collision directly caused or directly contributed to cause. You must state separately in your verdict the total amount of each plaintiff's damages on each claim. In determining the total amount of each plaintiff's damages you must not reduce such damages by any percentage of fault you may assess to plaintiff John Host. The judge will compute the recovery of each plaintiff under the law and the percentages of fault you assess. Verdict (See MAI 37.09 (1991 New)) Note: Complete the following paragraph by filling in the blanks as required by your verdict. If you assess a percentage of fault to any of those listed below, write in a percentage not greater than 100%, otherwise write in "zero" next to that name. If you assess a percentage of fault to any of those listed below, the total of such percentages must be 100%. We, the undersigned jurors, assess percentages of fault as follows: Defendant Hitter Plaintiff John Host TOTAL % (zero to 100%) % (zero to