DOCSLIB.ORG

Alabama Tort Reform

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Alabama Tort Reform ALABAMA TORT REFORM Cap for Noneconomic Damages • Permits evidence of collateral source payments, • Recovery for including evidence that noneconomic insurance or worker’s damages is limited to compensation $400,000. reimbursed the plaintiff. • Statute held unconstitutional by Payment of Judgments Mobile Infirmary • For medical liability Medical Center v. judgments exceeding Hodgen, 884 So.2d $100,000, the court may 801 (Ala. 2003). deduct from the award Future Damages the amount covering out-of-pocket expenses • Not to be reduced to and allow the rest to be paid in present value and no interest monthly installments over the shall be charged lifetime of the plaintiff. • If judgment is greater than $150,000, the first $150,000 is to Burden of Proof be paid upon entering the • In any action for injury or judgment with the rest being damages or wrongful death, paid in periodic payments whether in contract or in tort, • Statute was held against a health care provider unconstitutional by Lloyd based on a breach of the Noland Hosp v. Durham, 906 standard of care, the minimum So.2d 157 (Ala. 2005). standard of proof required to Cap on Punitive Damages test the sufficiency of the evidence to support any issue • Punitive damages are generally of fact shall be proof by capped at either three times substantial evidence. compensatory damages or $500,000, whichever is greater. Evidentiary Standard However, the statute does • The Daubert v. Merrell Dow provide for exceptions. Pharmaceuticals, 509 U.S. 579 Collateral Sources (1993), standard only applies to the admissibility of DNA evidence. The court has not abandoned the general $500,000, whichever is acceptance standard of Frye v. greater. U.S., 393 F. 1013 (CA D.C. 1923), • If the conduct was ALASKA TORT REFORM in civil cases. motivated by financial gain, then the plaintiff may be Cap on Noneconomic Damages awarded the greatest of: 1) • Recovery for noneconomic four times compensatory damages damages, 2) in a four times the personal amount of injury suit is the limited to defendant’s $1,000,000 aggregate or the life financial expectanc gain, or 3) y in years $7,000,000. times • Punitive $25,000, whichever is damages will only be greater. awarded when the tort • In all other claims, action is proven by clear noneconomic damages are and convincing evidence. capped at $400,000 or the Collateral Sources life expectancy multiplied by $8,000, whichever is • Permits evidence of greater. collateral source payments, including evidence that Cap on Punitive Damages insurance or worker’s • Punitive damages are compensation reimbursed limited to either three times the plaintiff. the amount of Evidentiary Standard compensatory damages or • The Daubert standard has been adopted as controlling when determining the admissibility of scientific evidence. ARIZONA TORT REFORM reached based on the application of novel Unconstitutionality of Damages scientific principles, but Caps does not apply to • The Arizona Constitution conclusions based on states that no reasoning resulting law shall be from experience, enacted limiting observation, or the amount of research. damages to be recovered for causing death or injury of any person. • Statutes also may not operate to abrogate causes of action. Periodic Payments • In medical malpractice cases, any party may elect to receive or pay future damages for economic losses in periodic installments • Statute was held unconstitutional by Smith v. Myers, 181 Ariz. 11 (1994). Evidentiary Standard • Frye is applicable to scientific conclusions ARKANSAS TORT REFORM jury must have the assistance of experts to Periodic Payments decide the issue of • At the request of negligence. either party, future damages exceeding $100,000 may Evidentiary Standard be paid in periodic • The Daubert payments. standard has • Statute held unconstitutional explicitly been adopted. by McMullin v. U.S., 515 F.Supp.2d 914 (E.D. AR 2007). Experts in Medical Malpractice Cases • Expert testimony is not required in every medical malpractice case. • Medical malpractice plaintiff must present expert testimony only when the asserted negligence does not lie within the jury's comprehension as a matter of common knowledge, when the applicable standard of care is not a matter of common knowledge, and when the CALIFORNIA TORT REFORM beyond common experien Cap on Noneconomic ce, 2) the Damages opinion • Noneconomic would damages are assist the capped at trier of $250,000. fact, and 3) the Future Damages basis for • Future damage the awards opinion is exceeding a source $50,000 may be reasonab paid in periodic ly relied payments. upon by others in Collateral Sources the field. • Permits evidence of • Continue to adhere to the collateral source payments, “Kelly/Frye” general including evidence of Social acceptance standard Security or other forms of rather than transitioning to government reimbursement. Daubert. Evidentiary Standard Scope of Damages • Damages should be o California Evidence Code Rule 801 is awarded to fully distinct from the compensate the party for federal rules. A detriment caused, whether witness may testify as or not that harm was an expert if 1) the anticipated. subject is sufficiently COLORADO TORT REFORM repeated in a willful or wanton manner. Cap for Noneconomic Damages • Permits evidence of • In cases not collateral involving source medical payments. malpractice, noneconomic damages are Evidentiary Standard capped at • Focus of $250,000. Upon admissibility of clear and convincing expert testimony is on justification, the judge may whether it is reliable and exceed this cap, but may relevant, based on whether not award more than the prejudice outweighs the $500,000. probative value. • In cases involving medical malpractice, the total recovery cannot exceed $1 million, with no more than $300,000 of the award coming from noneconomic damages. Cap on Punitive Damages • Punitive damages cannot exceed the amount of actual damages awarded. • The judge may increase the award to up to three times actual damages if the conduct has been CONNECTICUT TORT REFORM Payment of Judgments • When economic and noneconomi c damages totaled are more than $200,000, the judge will enter a judgment for a lump sum of $200,000 and give the parties 50 days to negotiate a periodic payment plan of the remaining amount. Collateral Sources • The amount of award representing economic damages shall be reduced by the amount received from collateral sources. Evidentiary Standard • Court has expressly adopted the Daubert standard. FLORIDA TORT REFORM • In vegetative state or death cases, noneconomic Cap for damages are capped at $1.5 Noneconomic million unless there is Damages catastrophic injury or • Recovery for manifest injustice. noneconomic Noneconomic Damages damages for Cap for Emergency medical Service Providers negligence is limited to • Noneconomic $500,000 per damages shall not claimant, with exceed $150,000 per no practitioner being liable for claimant. more than $500,000, regardless • Noneconomic damages from of the number of claimants. all claimants shall not exceed This is increased to $1 million if $300,000. failure to do so would result in Effect of Settlements manifest injustice or if the patient suffered catastrophic • Settlements are to be used to injury. setoff the amount awarded in • In death or permanent order to avoid exceeding the vegetative state cases, caps. noneconomic damages may not exceed $1 million. Effect of Arbitration • Noneconomic Damages Caps for In medical liability cases, Non-Practitioners noneconomic damages are capped at $350,000 if the • In personal injury or wrongful plaintiff refuses to arbitrate. death claims of medical • In a voluntarily arbitrated negligence of non- case, noneconomic damages practitioners, noneconomic are capped at $250,000 per damages are capped at incident and punitive $750,000 per claimaint. damages are precluded. Evidentiary Standard • Continue to follow the Frye test in lieu of adopting Daubert. GEORGIA TORT REFORM Cap for Noneconomic Damages • Jury may apportion damages to non-parties when (1) the • Recovery for noneconomic non-party settles with the damages for medical plaintiff, or (2) a negligence limited to defendant gives $350,000 for all notice of intent to medical providers seek combined, with an apportionment to additional $350,000 the non-party. each for up to two medical facilities. Qualified Experts • Held to be an • To testify as an unconstitutional expert (or give an infringement on the right to a affidavit) in a medical jury trial in Atlanta malpractice case, an Oculoplastic Surgery, P.C. v. otherwise qualified expert Nestlehutt, 286 Ga. 731 (2010). must have been in active Emergency Medical Providers practice or teaching in his area of specialty for at least • Medical providers providing three of the last five years. emergency care in a hospital • Such practice must include emergency room, obstetrical performing the procedure, unit, or surgical suite are diagnosing the condition, or immune from liability absent rendering the treatment at clear and convincing issue in the lawsuit (or evidence of gross negligence. teaching regarding the same). Joint and Several Liability Evidentiary Standard • Joint and several liability • Specifically adopted much of eliminated. Jury must the language from the federal apportion damages to all rules of evidence, and statute parties based on degree of states that Georgia courts fault. There is no right to “may” apply Daubert and its contribution for any amount progeny. apportioned. HAWAII TORT REFORM transcended the breach of contract Liability for Accidental Harm in Motor Vehicle Collision • Tort liability is Effect of Settlements abolished with • Settlements are to be respect to used to setoff the accidental amount awarded in harm from a order to avoid motor vehicle exceeding the caps. collision. • Liability remains Evidentiary Standard where a death occurs, the injury is • The essential inquiry is permanent with respect to whether the proffered a part or function of the expert testimony will assist body, a permanent the trier of fact. disfigurement, or personal • HRS 702 has incorporated injury protection benefits many aspects of Daubert, incurred equal to or and it has also incorporated exceeding $5,000.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • That Is the Question! Postaccident Police Investigations
    TRUCKING LAW To Cooperate or Not… That Is the Question! Postaccident Police By Brian Del Gatto Investigations and Julia Paridis Use of response teams, Consider the following hypothetical scenario. A driver as well as driver training, for your motor carrier client is headed to a rest stop for a can limit potentially much-needed break. Before moving into the exit-only lane, damaging statements. he or she checks his or her rear- and side-view mirrors and doesn’t notice any cars in the lane to his or The next few minutes are crucial and will her right. As the driver signals to change have a profound impact on the ultimate out- lanes and moves right into the exit lane, come of this matter for the driver, the motor the driver’s phone rings, and he or she looks carrier, and the insurers of each. down for a second to determine who it is. The driver then looks up just as the right- Postaccident Investigations front passenger side of the tractor collides The policeman on the beat or in the with the left-back driver side of a four-door patrol car makes more decisions and sedan. exercises broader discretion affecting The motor carrier’s driver pulls over and the daily lives of people every day and is confronted by someone yelling, “You hit to a greater extent, in many respects, me!” The person complains of neck and than a judge will ordinarily exercise in back pain and calls 911. The ambulance a week. arrives and places the sedan driver on a —Warren E.
    [Show full text]
  • A New Look at Contract Mistake Doctrine and Personal Injury Releases
    19 NEV. L.J. 535, GIESEL 4/25/2019 8:36 PM A NEW LOOK AT CONTRACT MISTAKE DOCTRINE AND PERSONAL INJURY RELEASES Grace M. Giesel* “[C]ourts cannot make for the parties better agreements than they themselves have been satisfied to make.”1 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................... 536 I. THE SETTING: THE TYPICAL CASE ..................................................... 542 II. CONTRACT DOCTRINE APPLIES .......................................................... 544 III. CONTRACT MISTAKE DOCTRINE ......................................................... 545 IV. TRADITIONAL APPLICATION OF CONTRACT DOCTRINE TO THE TYPICAL PERSONAL INJURY RELEASE SITUATION.............................. 547 A. A Shared Mistake of Fact and Not a Speculation or Prediction . 547 B. The Injured Party Has the Risk of Mistake by Conscious Ignorance .................................................................................... 548 C. The Release Places the Risk of Mistake on the Injured Party ..... 549 D. Traditional Application of the Unilateral Mistake Doctrine to the Typical Personal Injury Release Situation ............................ 554 E. Conclusions about Traditional Application of the Mistake Doctrine ...................................................................................... 555 V. COURTS’ TREATMENT OF PERSONAL INJURY RELEASES .................... 555 A. Mistake Doctrine Applies with an Unknown Injury But Not with an Unknown Consequence of a Known Injury ...................
    [Show full text]
  • Contingency Fee Retainer Agreement (Personal Injury)
    Contingency Fee Retainer Agreement (Personal Injury) This document incorporates more than two dozen required clauses further to the Solicitors Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.S.15, Contingency Fee Agreements, O. Reg. 195/04. This document should be adapted to suit your practice and the matter for which it is being used. See endnote. [Firm Name, Address, Telephone Number, Email] [Date] [Client Name] [Client Address] Re: Accident of [date of accident] Part 1: Our Services Legal services covered by this contract [Firm Name and/or Lawyer Name] is being retained by the client to provide the following services and to represent the client in respect to injuries, losses and damages resulting from a [type of accident] which occurred on or about [date]. We agree to act for you in your legal claim against [name of Defendant(s)], once we receive a signed and dated copy of this contract. We will then be your lawyers throughout the whole legal process including going to trial if necessary. (The attached document called Steps in a Lawsuit explains the basic steps most lawsuits go through as well as some legal terms.) The limitation period, or the latest date by which we will commence a lawsuit, is [Day, Month, Year]. At the same time, we will try to settle your case to obtain a favourable settlement for you. A settlement is an agreement between the parties to a lawsuit which sets out how they will resolve the claim. If your claim is settled, it will not have to go to trial. We will keep you informed about matters that arise, and discuss with you any significant decisions you must make.
    [Show full text]
  • The Virginia Car Accident Guide: a Former Insurance Lawyer’S Guide to Auto Accident Injury Claims
    The Virginia Car Accident Guide: A Former Insurance Lawyer’s Guide to Auto Accident Injury Claims: By James R. Parrish, Esquire If you are reading this book then CONGRATULATIONS! You have taken the first step to obtaining a better understanding of the automobile accident personal injury claims process. This book is designed to educate you about this area of the law and teach you how the insurance companies operate. Over the last several years, the insurance industry has spent millions (maybe billions) of dollars successfully brainwashing the general public to believe that people who make personal injury claims are lazy, good for nothing men and women just looking for a “free ride” and “easy money.” In fact, the insurance companies will go to almost any length to prevent you from successfully pursuing your claim. I know this because I used to defend insurance companies and worked intimately with everyone in the insurance industry from front-line adjusters to corporate “big wigs.” I used to lecture to insurance professionals to help them more successfully settle claims for small amounts or deny claims altogether. I wrote articles for insurance/risk management companies. I even graduated from the International Association of Defense Counsel trial academy! This book is written with knowledge I gained from all of my interactions with the insurance companies with which I now do battle on behalf of people injured in car accidents. It is my hope that the information contained within this book will arm you with the knowledge you will need if you have been injured in an automobile accident and deserve to recover compensation for those injuries.
    [Show full text]
  • EQUITABLE JURISDICTION to PROTECT PERSONAL RIGHTS Joseph R
    YALE LAW JOURNAL Vol. XXXIII DECEMBER, 1923 No. 2 EQUITABLE JURISDICTION TO PROTECT PERSONAL RIGHTS JosEPH R. LONG It is a curious fact in the history of the court of equity that certain limitations upon its jurisdiction have been insistently declared by text- writers and judges which are not only contrary to the fundamental theory of equitable jurisdiction, but also have no substantial foundation in the actual decisions and practice of the courts. Among these anoma- lous limitations may be mentioned the doctrines that a court of equity will not grant relief against a pure mistake of law; that it will never enforce a forfeiture; and that it has no jurisdiction to protect personal rights where no property rights are involved. After a long struggle the courts of equity have now about broken away from the unsound doctrines that they cannot grant relief against mistakes of law nor enforce forfeitures, and there are clear signs that the equally unsound doctrine that they have no jurisdiction to protect personal rights will soon be abandoned. The unreasonableness of so arbitrary and unjust a doctrine that a court of equity will protect one in his rights of contract and property, but deny protection to his far more sacred and vital rights of person, has often been commented upon, but the unsubstantial char- acter of the foundation upon which this doctrine rests has not been so generally recognized. Until recently it was inevitable that the jurisdiction of the court of equity should, in practice, have been almost entirely confined to the protection of property rights.
    [Show full text]
  • Speaking for the Dead: Voice in Last Wills and Testaments Karen J
    St. John's Law Review Volume 85 Article 12 Issue 2 Volume 85, Spring 2011, Number 2 April 2014 Speaking for the Dead: Voice in Last Wills and Testaments Karen J. Sneddon Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarship.law.stjohns.edu/lawreview Recommended Citation Sneddon, Karen J. (2014) "Speaking for the Dead: Voice in Last Wills and Testaments," St. John's Law Review: Vol. 85: Iss. 2, Article 12. Available at: http://scholarship.law.stjohns.edu/lawreview/vol85/iss2/12 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at St. John's Law Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in St. John's Law Review by an authorized administrator of St. John's Law Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. ARTICLE SPEAKING FOR THE DEAD: VOICE IN LAST WILLS AND TESTAMENTS KARENJ. SNEDDONt INTRODUCTION ................................. ..... 684 I. FUNCTION OF WILLS ........................... .......685 II. VOICE ..................................... ...... 689 A. Term Defined. ...................... ....... 689 B. Applicability of Voice to Wills ............ ..... 696 C. Pitfalls.......................... ........ 708 D. Benefits ............................ ..... 720 III. VOICE IN WILLS ........................... ..... 728 A. Voice in Non-Attorney Drafted Wills ...... ...... 728 1. Nuncupative Wills ................. ...... 729 2. Ethical Wills...... ................. 729 3. Holographic Wills .................. ..... 732 4. Commercial Fill-in-the-Blank Forms and
    [Show full text]
  • Nber Working Paper Series Economic Analysis Of
    NBER WORKING PAPER SERIES ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF ACCIDENT LAW Steven Shavell Working Paper 9694 http://www.nber.org/papers/w9694 NATIONAL BUREAU OF ECONOMIC RESEARCH 1050 Massachusetts Avenue Cambridge, MA 02138 May 2003 Research support from the John M. Olin Center for Law, Economics, and Business is gratefully acknowledged.The views expressed herein are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the National Bureau of Economic Research. ©2003 by Steven Shavell. All rights reserved. Short sections of text not to exceed two paragraphs, may be quoted without explicit permission provided that full credit including ©notice, is given to the source. Economic Analysis of Accident Law Steven Shavell NBER Working Paper No. 9694 May 2003 JEL No. D00, D8, K13 ABSTRACT Accident law is the body of legal rules governing the ability of victims of harm to sue and to collect payments from those who injured them. This paper contains the chapters on accident law from a general, forthcoming book, Foundations of Economic Analysis of Law (Harvard University Press, 2003). The analysis is first concerned (chapters 2-4) with the influence of liability rules on incentives to reduce accident risks. Then consideration of accident law is broadened (chapter 5) to reflect the effect of liability rules on compensation of victims and the allocation of risk. In this regard a central issue is the roles of victims’ insurance and of liability insurance, and how they alter the incentives inherent in liability rules. Finally, the administrative costs of the liability system, namely, the private and public legal costs of litigation, are examined (chapter 6).
    [Show full text]
  • Personal Injury Torts Between Spouses
    Volume 4 Issue 3 Article 1 1959 Personal Injury Torts between Spouses William E. McCurdy Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/vlr Part of the Family Law Commons, and the Torts Commons Recommended Citation William E. McCurdy, Personal Injury Torts between Spouses, 4 Vill. L. Rev. 303 (1959). Available at: https://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/vlr/vol4/iss3/1 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Villanova University Charles Widger School of Law Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Villanova Law Review by an authorized editor of Villanova University Charles Widger School of Law Digital Repository. McCurdy: Personal Injury Torts between Spouses Villanova Law Review VOLUME 4 SPRING, 1959 NUMBER 3 PERSONAL INJURY TORTS BETWEEN SPOUSES WILLIAM E. MCCURDY f A MARRIED WOMAN may have been injured by her husband by conduct which if it had injured a person not his wife would be actionably tortious; or a married man may have suffered such in- jury from acts of his wife. Such acts may have arisen from or have been connected with marital relation; injuries may have been inflicted intentionally and wilfully; carelessness may have occurred in the oper- ation of the domestic establishment or of the family automobile and there may or may not have been liability insurance. The fact that the injured person and the person causing the injury were husband and wife may have been co-incidental; or one spouse may have injured the other while acting as servant or employee of a third person.
    [Show full text]
  • Settlement/Mediation Considerations & Strategies in Trucking
    SETTLEMENT/MEDIATION CONSIDERATIONS & STRATEGIES IN TRUCKING OR AUTO ACCIDENT CASES Presented & Written By: FRANK E. (DIRK) MURCHISON III Frank E. Murchison P.C. Lubbock, TX Office: P.O. Drawer 98600 Lubbock TX 79499 806.792.4870 806.792.4970 Fax Taos, NM Office: P.O. Drawer 700 Taos NM 87571 575.751.3156 575.751.3157 Fax [email protected] State Bar of Texas PROSECUTING OR DEFENDING A TRUCKING OR AUTO ACCIDENT CASE November 15-16, 2012 San Antonio CHAPTER 15 FRANK E. MURCHISON, P.C. FRANK E. (DIRK) MURCHISON III Attorney at Law Lubbock, TX Office: Taos, NM Office: P.O. Drawer 98600 P.O. Drawer 700 Lubbock, TX 79499 Taos, NM 87571 806.792.4870 575.751.3156 806.792.4970 Fax Fax 575.751.3157 _______________________________________________________________________________________________________ EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND: BBA: (Finance) Texas Tech University 1971 J.D.: Texas Tech University School of Law 1974 LICENSURE: Texas: 1974; New Mexico: 2012 BOARD CERTIFICATIONS: Board Certified – Civil Trial Law & Personal Injury Trial Law Texas Board of Legal Specialization PROFESSIONAL MEMBERSHIPS & HONORS: Fellow --- American College of Trial Lawyers Best Lawyers in America --- Arbitration & Mediation 2012 Texas Lawyer of the Year-- 1 of 4 Selected Diplomate --- American Board of Trial Advocates Texas Super Lawyer --- Alternate Dispute Resolution Member --- Civil Trial Advisory Commission Texas Board of Specialization 1987-1992 PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE & EXPERIENCE: 1974-2001: Approximately 100 cases tried to jury verdict as lead counsel 2001-Present: Practice limited to arbitration & mediation of catastrophic personal injury and complex commercial, estate, trust, employment and sexual abuse cases Mediator in Mike Leach V. Texas Tech University; Over 850 cases arbitrated or mediated, including approximately 40 clergy sexual abuse cases successfully mediated.
    [Show full text]
  • 2020 Spring Newsletter
    ARDITO & ARDITO ATTORNEYS AT LAW Spring 2020 We’d like to connect WE PROVIDE THE SERVICE with you via email! If you’d prefer to receive YOU GET THE RESULTS our future publications Ardito & Ardito Attorneys at Law is an experienced full service law electronically, please send us an email at: firm established specifically to provide professional, personal and [email protected] effective legal services to our clients. Inside this issue: COVID-19 UPDATE All of us at Ardito & Ardito hope that you, your family, loved ones, COVID-19 Information 2 for Clients friends and co-workers are all safe during these unprecedented times; and that you are finding a way to cope with the new “normal” as our lives have 3 been transformed in a way we never could have imagined. Estate and Although the end of this crisis may not be in sight, we must all do our best Asset Planning to remain positive and continue to cautiously assist those in need, such as the elderly or persons with underlying conditions, as well as taking the Our thank you: 4 threat from this illness very seriously for ourselves and others by complying COVID-19 Good “Will” with all recommended safety measures. Drive We would like you to know that our office remains functional and we continue to serve our clients as their needs arise in the midst of this pandemic by reviewing and updating existing estate planning documents, or assisting with creating planning documents for the first time. Need legal advice? Mention this newsletter The state and federal governments have implemented certain acts and to receive a free half hour mandates to provide some relief to those affected such as: consultation.
    [Show full text]
  • 5 Secrets Insurance Companies Don't Want You to Know
    Dear Friend: If you (or someone you care about) have been injured in an accident, you are probably worrying about what to do next. Chances are, you are feeling angry that a stranger has suddenly turned your life upside down. You may be frustrated that no one is stepping forward to take care of the situation. Shortly after an accident, you will probably be contacted by an insurance adjuster. You may be asking: “Can I trust the insurance company to settle my claim fairly?” You might be wondering whether it makes sense to talk to a lawyer about your legal rights. Regardless of whether you choose to deal with the insurance company on your own or decide to get a lawyer, you are going to have many questions. Since 1984, we have been devoted to the aggressive and ethical representation of people who have suffered harm due to the negligence of others. Over the years, we’ve become increasingly frustrated about how hard it is for accident victims to get straight answers to their questions after an accident. We’ve learned that many accident victims cause irreparable harm to their legal claim because they decide to deal with the insurance company directly before obtaining legal advice. Making a claim for personal injuries has become such a hassle that many people just “give up” and don’t try to fight for what they deserve. It is our sincere hope that this informational letter will help you learn the important things that you should, and should not do, after being involved in an accident.
    [Show full text]
  • Virginia Model Jury Instructions – Civil
    Virginia Model Jury Instructions – Civil Release 20, March 2020 NOTICE TO USERS: THE FOLLOWING SET OF UNANNOTATED MODEL JURY INSTRUCTIONS ARE BEING MADE AVAILABLE WITH THE PERMISSION OF THE PUBLISHER, MATTHEW BENDER & COMPANY, INC. PLEASE NOTE THAT THE FULL ANNOTATED VERSION OF THESE MODEL JURY INSTRUCTIONS IS AVAILABLE FOR PURCHASE FROM MATTHEW BENDER® BY WAY OF THE FOLLOWING LINK: https://store.lexisnexis.com/categories/area-of-practice/civil-procedure- 154/virginia-model-jury-instructions-civil-skuusSku7357 Matthew Bender is a registered trademark of Matthew Bender & Company, Inc. Instruction No. 2.000 Preliminary Instructions to Jury Members of the jury, the order of the trial of this case will be in four stages: 1. Opening statements 2. Presentation of the evidence 3. Instructions of law 4. Final argument After the conclusion of final argument, I will instruct you concerning your deliberations. You will then go to your room, select a foreperson, deliberate, and arrive at your verdict. Opening Statements The plaintiff's attorney may make an opening statement outlining the plaintiff's case. Then the defendant's attorney also may make an opening statement. Neither side is required to do so. Presentation of the Evidence Following the opening statements, the plaintiff will introduce evidence, after which the defendant then has the right to introduce evidence (but is not required to do so). Rebuttal evidence may then be introduced if appropriate. Instructions of Law At the conclusion of all evidence, I will instruct you on the law which is to be applied to this case. Final Argument Once the evidence has been presented and you have been instructed on the law, then the attorneys may make their closing arguments.
    [Show full text]