Idaho Jury Instruction — 7.2 Duty To Deliberate When Both Plaintiff and Defendant Claim Damages or When Damages Are Not an Issue is a legal instruction provided to the jury in cases where both the plaintiff and defendant assert claims for damages, or when damages are not in dispute. The purpose of this instruction is to guide the jury in their deliberations and ensure a fair and thorough evaluation of the evidence presented. Below are some key points related to this jury instruction: 1. Duty to Deliberate: The instruction emphasizes the jury's duty to carefully consider all the evidence and arguments presented during the trial. They are instructed to deliberate in a way that is independent, impartial, and free from bias. 2. Both Plaintiff and Defendant Claim Damages: In cases where both the plaintiff and defendant seek damages, the instruction instructs the jury to evaluate the evidence pertaining to each party's claims separately. They should weigh the evidence, consider any witness testimonies, documents, or other relevant factors to determine the extent, if any, of damages that should be awarded to each party. 3. When Damages Are Not an Issue: In certain cases, damages may not be in dispute, meaning that the parties generally agree on the extent of the damages suffered by the plaintiff. In such instances, this instruction guides the jury's focus away from determining the damages and towards other issues that may be present in the case, such as liability or causation. 4. Fair Evaluation of Evidence: The instruction emphasizes the importance of evaluating the witnesses' credibility, considering the quality and weight of the evidence, and assessing the consistency and plausibility of the parties' claims. The jury should make their decisions based on the evidence presented, rather than personal bias or sympathy. 5. Multiple Versions of Events: In cases where there are conflicting versions of the events or differing accounts provided by witnesses, the instruction directs the jury to assess the credibility of each version and determine which is more reliable, considering factors such as consistency, corroboration, and the witnesses' demeanor during testimony. 6. Reasonable Doubt: The instruction also reminds the jury of the plaintiff's burden of proof, which requires them to establish their claims by a preponderance of the evidence. It explains that if the evidence leaves the jury with a reasonable doubt as to the validity of the claims or the extent of damages, they should resolve such doubt in favor of the party against whom the burden of proof rests. Different types of Idaho Jury Instruction — 7.2 Duty To Deliberate When Both Plaintiff and Defendant Claim Damages or When Damages Are Not an Issue may include variations tailored to specific legal contexts, such as personal injury cases, breach of contract disputes, or property damage claims. However, the fundamental principles outlined in the instruction generally remain the same.