Nevada Jury Instruction - 6.6.1 General Instruction - Comparative Negligence Defense

• Category: Federal - Jury Instructions
• State: Multi-State
• Control #: US-11CF-6-6-1
• Format: Word; Rich Text

Description

This form contains sample jury instructions, to be used across the United States. These questions are to be used only as a model, and should be altered to more perfectly fit your own cause of action needs. Nevada Jury Instruction — 6.6.1 GeneraInstructionio— - Comparative Negligence Defense Explained Nevada Jury Instruction 6.6.1, also known as the General Instruction — Comparative Negligence Defense, is a legal principle used in civil cases to determine the extent to which each party involved in an accident or incident is responsible for the damages incurred. This instruction is crucial in cases where multiple parties may share some level of fault or negligence, allowing the jury to apportion fault accordingly. Comparative negligence is a legal concept that recognizes that sometimes more than one party can contribute to an accident or harm. In these cases, the comparative negligence defense is employed to determine the proportion of fault held by each party. It is important to note that Nevada follows the doctrine of modified comparative negligence, specifically the 51% rule. Under this rule, an injured party can only recover damages if they are found to be at 50% or less at fault for the incident. Nevada Jury Instruction 6.6.1 provides guidance to the jury on how to properly assess comparative negligence and allocate fault among the parties involved. The instruction outlines the steps the jury should follow when determining liability: 1. The jury must first determine the total amount of damages suffered by the plaintiff. This includes both economic (such as medical expenses and lost wages) and non-economic damages (such as pain and suffering). 2. The jury must then determine the degree or percentage of negligence attributable to the plaintiff, known as their contributory negligence. This step involves evaluating the plaintiff's actions or omissions leading to the incident, assessing their responsibility in causing or contributing to the harm suffered. 3. The jury must also assess the negligence of the other parties involved in the case. This includes defendants, third parties, or even non-parties, depending on the circumstances. The instruction aids the jury in evaluating and comparing the negligence of all relevant parties. 4. Once the jury has determined the percentage of fault for each party, they must assign a proportionate share of the total damages to each party involved accordingly. The plaintiff's recovery will be reduced by their percentage of fault. It is essential to understand that Nevada follows the rule of comparative negligence, as opposed to contributory negligence. This means that even if the plaintiff is found partially at fault, they can still recover damages, albeit reduced. The instruction helps the jury navigate this process and ensure a fair and just outcome. While Nevada Jury Instruction 6.6.1 is the general instruction for comparative negligence defense, there can be variations or supplemental instructions depending on the specific circumstances of the case. These additional instructions may address particular elements unique to the case, such as multiple defendants, joint and several liabilities, or specific laws applicable to different types of incidents (e.g., medical malpractice, car accidents, slip and fall cases, etc.). It is important for the jury to consider all relevant instructions provided by the judge in a particular case to make an informed decision on comparative negligence and the allocation of fault.

Nevada Jury Instruction — 6.6.1 GeneraInstructionio— - Comparative Negligence Defense Explained Nevada Jury Instruction 6.6.1, also known as the General Instruction — Comparative Negligence Defense, is a legal principle used in civil cases to determine the extent to which each party involved in an accident or incident is responsible for the damages incurred. This instruction is crucial in cases where multiple parties may share some level of fault or negligence, allowing the jury to apportion fault accordingly. Comparative negligence is a legal concept that recognizes that sometimes more than one party can contribute to an accident or harm. In these cases, the comparative negligence defense is employed to determine the proportion of fault held by each party. It is important to note that Nevada follows the doctrine of modified comparative negligence, specifically the 51% rule. Under this rule, an injured party can only recover damages if they are found to be at 50% or less at fault for the incident. Nevada Jury Instruction 6.6.1 provides guidance to the jury on how to properly assess comparative negligence and allocate fault among the parties involved. The instruction outlines the steps the jury should follow when determining liability: 1. The jury must first determine the total amount of damages suffered by the plaintiff. This includes both economic (such as medical expenses and lost wages) and non-economic damages (such as pain and suffering). 2. The jury must then determine the degree or percentage of negligence attributable to the plaintiff, known as their contributory negligence. This step involves evaluating the plaintiff's actions or omissions leading to the incident, assessing their responsibility in causing or contributing to the harm suffered. 3. The jury must also assess the negligence of the other parties involved in the case. This includes defendants, third parties, or even non-parties, depending on the circumstances. The instruction aids the jury in evaluating and comparing the negligence of all relevant parties. 4. Once the jury has determined the percentage of fault for each party, they must assign a proportionate share of the total damages to each party involved accordingly. The plaintiff's recovery will be reduced by their percentage of fault. It is essential to understand that Nevada follows the rule of comparative negligence, as opposed to contributory negligence. This means that even if the plaintiff is found partially at fault, they can still recover damages, albeit reduced. The instruction helps the jury navigate this process and ensure a fair and just outcome. While Nevada Jury Instruction 6.6.1 is the general instruction for comparative negligence defense, there can be variations or supplemental instructions depending on the specific circumstances of the case. These additional instructions may address particular elements unique to the case, such as multiple defendants, joint and several liabilities, or specific laws applicable to different types of incidents (e.g., medical malpractice, car accidents, slip and fall cases, etc.). It is important for the jury to consider all relevant instructions provided by the judge in a particular case to make an informed decision on comparative negligence and the allocation of fault.