Wayne Michigan Jury Instruction - 1.3 Duty To Mitigate In General Pursuing Medical Care

• Category: Federal - Jury Instructions - Supplemental Damage
• State: Multi-State
• County: Wayne
• Control #: US-11C-1-3-0
• 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. The Wayne Michigan Jury Instruction — 1.3 Duty To Mitigate In General Pursuing Medical Care is a legal guideline that outlines the responsibility of a plaintiff to act reasonably in seeking medical treatment after an injury or accident. This instruction highlights the importance of ensuring that plaintiffs take appropriate steps to minimize the potential harm resulting from their injuries. When a plaintiff files a personal injury lawsuit, it is generally expected that they actively seek medical care to treat their injuries and prevent any further complications. In line with this duty to mitigate, the jury is instructed to consider whether the plaintiff pursued reasonable or necessary medical care. The purpose of this instruction is to prevent plaintiffs from exacerbating their injuries or causing additional harm due to negligence or lack of action on their part. It is important to note that the duty to mitigate applies to different types of injuries or conditions. Some examples include: 1. Physical Injuries: If the plaintiff has suffered physical harm, such as a broken bone, sprain, or any other bodily injury, they are expected to seek appropriate medical care. This may involve visiting a doctor, specialist, chiropractor, or physical therapist to ensure proper treatment and rehabilitation. 2. Emotional Distress: In cases where the plaintiff claims emotional distress or psychological harm as a result of the incident, they are expected to seek therapy or counseling sessions to mitigate the effects of the trauma. Failure to pursue appropriate treatment may affect the damages awarded in such cases. 3. Long-Term or Chronic Conditions: In situations where the plaintiff has a pre-existing condition or develops a chronic condition as a result of the incident, they have a duty to pursue ongoing medical care. This may include regular doctor visits, prescribed medications, or specialized treatments to manage their condition and prevent any worsening of symptoms. 4. Referral to Specialists: Depending on the circumstances, the jury instruction may also emphasize the duty to pursue specialist consultations. If a general practitioner recommends further assessment or treatment from a specialist, such as a surgeon, orthopedist, or neurologist, the plaintiff should follow through with the referral in order to fulfill their duty to mitigate. By understanding and adhering to the duty to mitigate through pursuing appropriate medical care, plaintiffs can demonstrate their commitment to their own recovery and minimize any potential damages that may be attributed to their failure to mitigate. It is essential for the jury to carefully consider whether the plaintiff fulfilled their duty to mitigate and sought the necessary treatment, as this can significantly impact the outcome of the case.

The Wayne Michigan Jury Instruction — 1.3 Duty To Mitigate In General Pursuing Medical Care is a legal guideline that outlines the responsibility of a plaintiff to act reasonably in seeking medical treatment after an injury or accident. This instruction highlights the importance of ensuring that plaintiffs take appropriate steps to minimize the potential harm resulting from their injuries. When a plaintiff files a personal injury lawsuit, it is generally expected that they actively seek medical care to treat their injuries and prevent any further complications. In line with this duty to mitigate, the jury is instructed to consider whether the plaintiff pursued reasonable or necessary medical care. The purpose of this instruction is to prevent plaintiffs from exacerbating their injuries or causing additional harm due to negligence or lack of action on their part. It is important to note that the duty to mitigate applies to different types of injuries or conditions. Some examples include: 1. Physical Injuries: If the plaintiff has suffered physical harm, such as a broken bone, sprain, or any other bodily injury, they are expected to seek appropriate medical care. This may involve visiting a doctor, specialist, chiropractor, or physical therapist to ensure proper treatment and rehabilitation. 2. Emotional Distress: In cases where the plaintiff claims emotional distress or psychological harm as a result of the incident, they are expected to seek therapy or counseling sessions to mitigate the effects of the trauma. Failure to pursue appropriate treatment may affect the damages awarded in such cases. 3. Long-Term or Chronic Conditions: In situations where the plaintiff has a pre-existing condition or develops a chronic condition as a result of the incident, they have a duty to pursue ongoing medical care. This may include regular doctor visits, prescribed medications, or specialized treatments to manage their condition and prevent any worsening of symptoms. 4. Referral to Specialists: Depending on the circumstances, the jury instruction may also emphasize the duty to pursue specialist consultations. If a general practitioner recommends further assessment or treatment from a specialist, such as a surgeon, orthopedist, or neurologist, the plaintiff should follow through with the referral in order to fulfill their duty to mitigate. By understanding and adhering to the duty to mitigate through pursuing appropriate medical care, plaintiffs can demonstrate their commitment to their own recovery and minimize any potential damages that may be attributed to their failure to mitigate. It is essential for the jury to carefully consider whether the plaintiff fulfilled their duty to mitigate and sought the necessary treatment, as this can significantly impact the outcome of the case.