Fill and Sign the Mississippi Jury Instructions 497315440 Form

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE       JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF       COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI       PLAINTIFF V. CAUSE NO.             DEFENDANT JURY INSTRUCTION NO.       The Court instructs the jury to find for the plaintiff,       against the defendant       . IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE       JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF       COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI       PLAINTIFF V. CAUSE NO.             DEFENDANT JURY INSTRUCTION NO.       It is not necessary that all twelve (12) of you agree upon a verdict in this case. When any nine of you agree upon a verdict, it may be returned in the Court as the verdict of the entire jury. IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE       JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF       COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI       PLAINTIFF V. CAUSE NO.             DEFENDANT JURY INSTRUCTION NO.       When you reach a verdict in this case, it should be written on a separate sheet of paper and need not be signed by you. If you find against the defendant,       , then your verdict shall be in the following form: "We, the jury, find for the plaintiff       and against       ." IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE       JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF       COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI       PLAINTIFF V. CAUSE NO.             DEFENDANT JURY INSTRUCTION NO.       You the jury are the sole judges of the credibility of witnesses and of the weight to be given to the testimony of each witness. In determining the credit to be given to any witness, you may take into account his or her ability and opportunity to observe, his or her memory, his or her manner while testifying, any interest, bias or prejudice he or she may have and the reasonableness of his or her testimony considered in the light of all the evidence in the case. IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE       JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF       COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI       PLAINTIFF V. CAUSE NO.             DEFENDANT JURY INSTRUCTION NO.       The term "preponderance of the evidence" as used in the instructions of the Court means the superior or greater weight of the credible evidence, that is the evidence which is more convincing to the jury and worthy of belief than the evidence in opposition thereto, or the evidence that, when weighed with that opposed to it, has more convincing force; in other words, preponderance does not depend upon the number of witnesses called, but is that evidence which, by comparison with the other evidence, is more convincing to the jury and outweighs the other as to the probabilities. IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE       JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF       COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI       PLAINTIFF V. CAUSE NO.             DEFENDANT JURY INSTRUCTION NO.       The rule that a party is required to prove his/her claim by a preponderance of the evidence does not require such a degree of proof as produces certainty. To prove a claim by a preponderance of the evidence merely means to prove that something is more likely so than not so. In other words, a preponderance of the evidence means such evidence as when compared and considered with that opposed to it has more convincing force and produces in your mind belief that what is sought to be proved is more likely true than not true. IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE       JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF       COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI       PLAINTIFF V. CAUSE NO.             DEFENDANT JURY INSTRUCTION NO.       The Court instructs the jury that the term "negligence" when used in the several instructions of the Court to the jury means the doing of something that a person of ordinary and reasonable care would not do under the circumstances, or, on the other hand, the failure to do something that a person of ordinary and reasonable care would do under the circumstances. IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE       JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF       COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI       PLAINTIFF V. CAUSE NO.             DEFENDANT JURY INSTRUCTION NO.       It is your duty as jurors to determine not only whether the defendant was negligent, but also whether that negligence was what the law calls a proximate cause of the accident. The Court instructs you that a proximate cause is that cause which, in natural and probable sequence, brought about the accident. It need not be the only cause or the last or nearest cause. It is sufficient if it concurs with some other cause acting at the same time which in combination with it brings about the injury. If you find from a preponderance of the evidence in this case that the negligence of the defendant,       , caused the accident in question, then you shall find against the defendant. IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE       JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF       COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI       PLAINTIFF V. CAUSE NO.             DEFENDANT JURY INSTRUCTION NO.       The Court instructs the jury that under the laws of the State of Mississippi the driver of a vehicle has a duty to exercise reasonable care to: 1. maintain his or her car under reasonable control; 2. maintain a reasonable lookout for other traffic on the road; 3. drive his or her vehicle at a reasonable speed under the circumstances then and there existing; and 4. refrain from passing on the right unless the passed vehicle is turning left, and there is sufficient clearance to do so without driving off the pavement or on the shoulder. If you believe from a preponderance of the evidence that the defendant,       , at the time and place in question, and under the circumstances then and there existing, 1. failed to have her car under reasonable control; or 2. failed to keep a reasonable and proper lookout for other vehicles using the roadway, or 3. failed to drive her vehicle at a reasonable speed under the circumstances then and there existing; or 4. attempted to pass on the right under circumstances when he/she ought not to have attempted such a maneuver, then the Defendant was guilty of negligence; if you further believe from a preponderance of the evidence that such negligence, if any, proximately caused the accident and injuries to       , then it is your sworn duty to return a verdict for the plaintiff       . IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE       JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF       COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI       PLAINTIFF V. CAUSE NO.             DEFENDANT JURY INSTRUCTION NO.       The Court instructs the jury that under the laws of the State of Mississippi the driver of a vehicle has a duty to exercise reasonable care to keep a reasonable and proper lookout for other vehicles using the roadway. If you believe from a preponderance of the evidence that the defendant,       , at the time and place in question, and under the circumstances then and there existing, failed to keep a reasonable and proper lookout for other vehicles using the roadway, then the Defendant was guilty of negligence; if you further believe from a preponderance of the evidence that such negligence, if any, proximately caused the accident and injuries to       , then it is your sworn duty to return a verdict for the plaintiff       against the defendant,       . IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE       JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF       COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI       PLAINTIFF V. CAUSE NO.             DEFENDANT JURY INSTRUCTION NO.       The Court instructs the jury that under the laws of the State of Mississippi the driver of a vehicle has a duty to exercise reasonable care to operate his vehicle at a reasonable speed under the circumstances then and there existing. If you believe from a preponderance of the evidence that the defendant,       , at the time and place in question, and under the circumstances then and there existing, operated her vehicle at a dangerous and excessive rate of speed, then the defendant was guilty of negligence; if you further believe from a preponderance of the evidence that such negligence, if any, proximately caused the accident and injuries to       , then it is your sworn duty to return a verdict for the plaintiff       against the defendant,       . IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE       JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF       COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI       PLAINTIFF V. CAUSE NO.             DEFENDANT JURY INSTRUCTION NO.       The Court instructs the jury that under the laws of the State of Mississippi the driver of a vehicle has a duty to exercise reasonable care to keep his vehicle under reasonable control. If you believe from a preponderance of the evidence that the defendant,       , at the time and place in question, and under the circumstances then and there existing, failed to have his/her vehicle under reasonable control, then the Defendant was guilty of negligence; if you further believe from a preponderance of the evidence that such negligence, if any, proximately caused the accident and injuries to       , then it is your sworn duty to return a verdict for the plaintiff       against the defendant,       . IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE       JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF       COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI       PLAINTIFF V. CAUSE NO.             DEFENDANT JURY INSTRUCTION NO.       The Court instructs the jury that Mississippi Code Annotated, Section 63-3-505 requires the driver of a vehicle to exercise reasonable care to slow his vehicle down when it is reasonable and prudent to do so under the conditions then and there existing. If you believe from a preponderance of the evidence that the defendant,       , at the time and place in question, and under the circumstances then and there existing, failed to slow his/her vehicle down when it was reasonable and prudent to do so under the conditions then and there existing, then the Defendant was guilty of negligence; if you further believe from a preponderance of the evidence that such negligence, if any, proximately caused the accident and injuries to       , then it is your sworn duty to return a verdict for the plaintiff       against the defendant,       . IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE       JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF       COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI       PLAINTIFF V. CAUSE NO.             DEFENDANT JURY INSTRUCTION NO.       The Court instructs the jury that Mississippi Code Annotated, Section 63-3-619 states that the driver of a vehicle shall not follow another vehicle more closely than is reasonable and prudent to do so under the conditions then and there existing. If you believe from a preponderance of the evidence that the defendant,       , at the time and place in question, and under the circumstances then and there existing, failed to provide a reasonable and prudent following distance under the conditions then and there existing, then the Defendant was guilty of negligence; if you further believe from a preponderance of the evidence that such negligence, if any, proximately caused the accident and injuries to       , then it is your sworn duty to return a verdict for the plaintiff       against the defendant,       . IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE       JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF       COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI       PLAINTIFF V. CAUSE NO.             DEFENDANT JURY INSTRUCTION NO.       The Court instructs you that the violation of any laws of the State of Mississippi, applicable to driving of an automobile, is prima facia evidence of negligence, that is, it creates a presumption of negligence; in other words, if you find from a preponderance of the evidence presented that the defendant violated any traffic laws then you should presume that the defendant was driving negligently. You are instructed that if you find from a preponderance of the evidence in this case that the defendant,       , violated the laws of the State of Mississippi governing the control of traffic, and that the accident occurred as a result of the violation of these laws, that is, the violation of the laws of the State of Mississippi was a direct, proximate or contributing proximate cause of the accident in question, then in that event you shall find against the defendant,       . IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE       JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF       COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI       PLAINTIFF V. CAUSE NO.             DEFENDANT JURY INSTRUCTION NO.       A driver of an automobile has a duty to see what he or she reasonably should see, or by the exercise of ordinary care should have seen, when driving his or her vehicle, and to use ordinary care in relation to other vehicles on the roadway. If you find from a preponderance of the evidence in this case that       observed that       was turning right, or that by the exercise of ordinary care, should have seen that       was turning right, but did not use ordinary care by attempting to pass his vehicle on the right, then the defendant,       was guilty of negligence; if you further believe that such negligence, if any, proximately caused the accident and injuries to       , then in that event, it shall be your sworn duty to find for the plaintiff       against the defendant,       . IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE       JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF       COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI       PLAINTIFF V. CAUSE NO.             DEFENDANT JURY INSTRUCTION NO.       The Court instructs the jury that Mississippi Code Annotated, Section 63-3-613 provides that the driver or operator of any motor vehicle must not pass on the right by driving off the pavement or upon the shoulder of the road. If you find from a preponderance of the evidence in this case that       attempted to pass on the right Of       's vehicle by driving off the pavement or upon the shoulder of the road, then the Defendant was guilty of negligence as a matter of law; if you further believe from a preponderance of the evidence that such negligence, if any, proximately caused the accident and injuries to       , then it is your sworn duty to return a verdict for the plaintiff       against the defendant,       . IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE       JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF       COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI       PLAINTIFF V. CAUSE NO.             DEFENDANT JURY INSTRUCTION NO.       The Court instructs the jury that Mississippi Code Annotated, Section 63-3-613 provides that the driver or operator of any motor vehicle must not pass on the right unless the vehicle in front is making or about to make a left turn. If you find from a preponderance of the evidence in this case that       was not making a left turn and that the defendant,       attempted to pass him/her on the right, then the Defendant was guilty of negligence as a matter of law; if you further believe from a preponderance of the evidence that such negligence, if any, proximately caused the accident and injuries to       , then it is your sworn duty to return a verdict for the plaintiff       against the defendant,       . IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE       JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF       COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI       PLAINTIFF V. CAUSE NO.             DEFENDANT JURY INSTRUCTION NO.       The Court instructs the jury that Mississippi Code Annotated, Section 63-3-613 provides that a vehicle may pass upon the right if there is sufficient clearance to do so, but a vehicle cannot drive off the pavement or onto the shoulder of the roadway in order to pass on the right. If you find by preponderance of the evidence that       violated this statute by driving off the pavement or onto the shoulder of the roadway, or attempted to pass on the right under circumstances when he/she ought not to have attempted to pass on the right because of insufficient clearance to do so, then the Defendant was guilty of negligence as a matter of law; if you further believe from a preponderance of the evidence that such negligence, if any, proximately caused the accident and injuries to       , then it is your sworn duty to return a verdict for the plaintiff       against the defendant,       . IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE       JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF       COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI       PLAINTIFF V. CAUSE NO.             DEFENDANT JURY INSTRUCTION NO.       If you find for Plaintiff, you should determine and write on the verdict form, in dollars, the total amount of injury which the greater weight of the evidence shows he sustained as a result of the incident complained of, including any such damage as Plaintiff is reasonably certain to experience in the future. You shall consider the following elements: 1. Injury, pain, disability, loss of capacity for enjoyment of life: Any bodily injury sustained by       , and any resulting pain and suffering, disability, mental anguish and loss of capacity for the enjoyment of life experienced in the past or to be experienced in the future. There is no exact standard for measuring such damage. The amount should be fair and just in the light of the evidence. 2. Aggravation or activation of a physical defect: Any aggravation of an existing physical defect resulting from such injury. If you find that there was such an aggravation, you should determine, if you can, what portion of       's condition resulted from the aggravation and make allowance in your verdict only for the aggravation. However, if you cannot make that determination or if it cannot be said that the condition would have existed apart from the injury, you should consider and make allowance in your verdict for the entire condition. 3. Medical expenses: The reasonable of hospitalization, medical and/or nursing care and treatment necessarily or reasonably obtained by Plaintiff in the past. 4. Lost earnings, lost time, lost earning capacity: Any earnings or lost working time lost in the past and any loss of ability to earn money in the future. Any loss of ability to earn money sustained in the past and any such loss in the future. IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE       JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF       COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI       PLAINTIFF V. CAUSE NO.             DEFENDANT CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE       I,       do hereby certify that I have this day hand delivered, a true and correct copy of the foregoing Jury Instructions to the Honorable SO CERTIFIED this       day of       , 20       . _________________________________