PI027

Document Sample
PI027 Powered By Docstoc
					STATE OF NEW YORK

SUPREME COURT                    COUNTY OF [INSERT COUNTY]

__________________________________________
[INSERT PLAINTIFF]

                                      Plaintiff                              Index No: [INSERT]

                                                                             RJI NO: [INSERT]

                   vs.                                                       Hon. [INSERT]

[INSERT DEFENDANT]

                                      Defendant
__________________________________________

                      PLAINTIFF’S REQUEST FOR JURY CHARGE*
     Plaintiff, by her attorneys [Name of Law Firm], submits the foregoing request for jury
charges, in addition to the charges set forth in Judge [Insert] trial checklist, a copy of which is
attached to this request to charge.

     Plaintiff reserves the right to request other charges prior to the charge conference, and up
until the jury is charged.

PJI 1:29           Alternate Jurors

PJI 1:55           General Instruction – Admission Against Interest – By Statement

PJI 1:60           General Instruction – Burden of Proof – When Burden Differs on Different Issues

PJI 1:63           General Instruction – Burden of Proof – Effect of Presumption

PJI 1:65           General Instruction – Evidence Admitted for Limited Purpose – Insurance

PJI 1:65.1         Social Security Benefits

PJI 1:75           General Instruction – Evidence – Failure to Produce Witness – In General

PJI 1:94           General Instruction – Use of Pre-Trial Depositions Upon Trial

PJI 1:97           General Instruction – Special Verdicts


*
    Jury charges are fact specific and vary by case. The foregoing is an example of one proposed charge tailored to a specific
    case. Counsel should review the PJI carefully before submitting actual charges on a specific case.
PJI 1:103      General Instruction – Supplemental Charge – Note – Taking by Jurors

PJI 1:104      General Instruction – Supplemental Charge – Questions by Jurors

PJI 2:10       Common Law Standard of Care – Negligence Defined – Generally

PJI 2:10       (Additional Supplemental Charge attached)

PJI 2:26       Statutory Standard of Care – Vehicle and Traffic Law Violation (VTL §§ 1101,
               1123, 1129, 1146, 1151, 1163(c), 1180)

PJI 2:46       Comparative Negligence – Persons Under Disability – Mental Deficiency

PJI 2:70       Proximate Cause – In General

PJI 2:71       Proximate Cause – Concurrent Causes

PJI 2:75       Motor Vehicle Accidents – Pedestrian Crossing Highway

PJI 2:82       Motor Vehicle Accidents – Close Following

PJI 2:83       Motor Vehicle Accidents – Sudden Stopping

PJI 2:84       Motor Vehicle Accidents – Skidding

PJI 2:88C      No-Fault Law – Threshold – Fracture

PJI 2:235      Vicarious or Derivative Responsibility – Employer-Employee – Scope of
               Employment

PJI 2:245      Vicarious Responsibility – Owner of a Vehicle for Acts of Operator – Permission,
               Express or Implied

PJI 2:275      Comparative Fault – Apportionment of Fault Between Defendants

PJI 2:280.2    Income Taxes

PJI 2:285      Damages – Personal Injury – Expenses Incurred

PJI 2:290      Damages – Personal Injury – Loss of Earnings – In General

PJI 2:301      Damages – Personal Injury – Collateral Services – Itemized Verdict

Dated: [Insert Date]

                                                           ______________________________
                                                           [Name of Attorney]
                                                           [Name of Law Firm]
                                                           Attorneys for Plaintiff
                                                              [Address]
                                                              [Telephone Number]

PJI 2:10 Additional Modified Charge on Common Law Negligence of Driver for Waving
Pedestrian into Oncoming Traffic

I instruct you that when a defendant driver gestures or signals to pedestrian that it is safe to cross
a road, a voluntary duty is assumed by inference to direct that pedestrian with reasonable care,
and you may find a defendant driver negligent if you find that he failed to use reasonable care in
how he directed the pedestrian.

Legal Basis

     Thrane v. Haney, 264 A.D.2d 926, 927, 695 N.Y.S.2d 628 (3d Dep’t 1999); Robbins v. New
York City Transit Auth., 105 A.D.2d 616, 617, 481 N.Y.S.2d 349 (1st Dep’t 1984) (sustaining
jury verdict based on record that plaintiff suffered injuries when proceeding across a street due to
a bus driver assuring her of safety by waving her across the street); Valdez v. Bernard, 123
A.D.2d 351, 506 N.Y.S.2d 363 (2d Dep’t 1986) (holding that a driver of a motor vehicle may be
liable to a pedestrian where that driver undertakes to direct a pedestrian safely across the road in
front of his vehicle and negligently carries out that duty).

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Tags:
Stats:
views:1
posted:3/20/2012
language:
pages:3
yaohongm yaohongm http://
About