Model Civil Jury Instructions.pdf

Model Civil Jury Instructions

Michigan Supreme Court

We are pleased to provide electronic copies of civil jury instructions adopted by the

Committee on Model Civil Jury Instructions. MCR 2.512. The Committee is composed of

attorneys and judges whose duty is to ensure that the Model Civil Jury Instructions are

concise, understandable, conversational, unslanted, and not argumentative. The Committee

has authority to amend or repeal existing instructions and, when appropriate, adopt new

instructions, although the instructions do not have the force and effect of a court rule. The

Committee is comprised of the following members:

Hon. Michael F. Gadola, Chair

Julie Clement, Reporter

Benjamin J. Aloia

Matthew Aneese

Robert L. Avers

Hilary A. Ballentine

Matthew J. Boettcher

Hon. Stephen L. Borrello

Debra A. Freid

Hon. Michael L. Jaconette

Amy M. Johnston

Hon. Annette Jurkiewicz-Berry

Hon. Charles T. LaSata

C. Thomas Ludden

Stefanie R. Reagan

Jennifer B. Salvatore

Daniel J. Schulte

Richard J. Suhrheinrich

Emily G. Thomas

Randy J. Wallace

Adam Winn

Hon. Christopher P. Yates

UPDATED: July 9, 2024

Michigan Model Civil Jury Instructions

Table of Contents

Rule 2.512 Instructions to the Jury 0-1

CHAPTER 1 Preliminary Instructions Before Jury Selection 1-1

Introductory Directions to the Court ................................................................................................................................. 1-2

M Civ JI 1.01 Introductory Comments................................................................................................................................ 1-3

M Civ JI 1.02 Defining Legal Names of Parties and Counsel............................................................................................... 1-4

M Civ JI 1.03 Explanation of Jury Selection and Voir Dire .................................................................................................. 1-5

M Civ JI 1.04 Juror Oath Before Voir Dire........................................................................................................................... 1-6

M Civ JI 1.05 Prospective Jurors—Health and Other Problems ......................................................................................... 1-7

M Civ JI 1.10 Juror Oath Following Selection ..................................................................................................................... 1-8

CHAPTER 2 Preliminary Instructions After Jury Is Sworn 2-1

M Civ JI 2.01 Responsibilities of Judge and Jury................................................................................................................. 2-2

M Civ JI 2.02 Description of Trial Procedure ...................................................................................................................... 2-3

M Civ JI 2.02A Cameras in the Courtroom ......................................................................................................................... 2-5

M Civ JI 2.03 Jury Deliberation; Jurors as Triers of Fact ..................................................................................................... 2-6

M Civ JI 2.04 Jury Must Only Consider Evidence; What Evidence Is / Prohibited Actions by Jurors.................................. 2-7

M Civ JI 2.05 Jurors to Keep Open Minds [ Instruction Deleted ] .................................................................................... 2-10

M Civ JI 2.06 Jurors to Keep Open Minds......................................................................................................................... 2-11

M Civ JI 2.07 Jurors Not to Consider Information Received outside Presence of Court [ Instruction Deleted ].............. 2-13

M Civ JI 2.08 Objections; Out-of-Presence Hearings........................................................................................................ 2-14

M Civ JI 2.09 Court to Instruct on Law ............................................................................................................................. 2-15

M Civ JI 2.10 Inability to Hear Witness or See Exhibit...................................................................................................... 2-16

M Civ JI 2.11 Questions by Jurors Allowed....................................................................................................................... 2-17

M Civ JI 2.12 Caution about Publicity in Cases of Public Interest [ Instruction Deleted ] ................................................ 2-18

M Civ JI 2.13 Note Taking by Jurors Allowed / Not Allowed ............................................................................................ 2-19

M Civ JI 2.14 Reference Documents................................................................................................................................. 2-20

CHAPTER 3 Cautionary Instructions 3-1

M Civ JI 3.01 Faithful Performance of Duties; Jury to Follow Instructions......................................................................... 3-2

M Civ JI 3.02 Facts to Be Determined from Evidence ........................................................................................................ 3-3

Michigan Model Civil Jury Instructions

M Civ JI 3.03 Admission of Evidence .................................................................................................................................. 3-4

M Civ JI 3.04 Attorneys’ Statements Not Evidence; Admission by Attorney [ Instruction Deleted ] ................................. 3-5

M Civ JI 3.05 Corporations Entitled to Unprejudiced Treatment....................................................................................... 3-6

M Civ JI 3.06 Whether Party Is Insured Is Irrelevant .......................................................................................................... 3-7

M Civ JI 3.07 Evidence Introduced for a Limited Purpose.................................................................................................. 3-8

M Civ JI 3.08 Judge’s Opinion as to Facts Is to Be Disregarded [ Instruction Deleted ]...................................................... 3-9

M Civ JI 3.09 Jury to Consider All the Evidence................................................................................................................ 3-10

M Civ JI 3.10 Circumstantial Evidence.............................................................................................................................. 3-11

M Civ JI 3.11 Jurors May Take into Account Ordinary Experience and Observations...................................................... 3-12

M Civ JI 3.12 Jury View of Premises / Scene / Object ...................................................................................................... 3-13

M Civ JI 3.13 Fact Judicially Noticed................................................................................................................................. 3-14

M Civ JI 3.15 Prior Inconsistent Statement of Witness .................................................................................................... 3-15

M Civ JI 3.16 Interim Commentary by Attorneys ............................................................................................................. 3-17

M Civ JI 3.17 Summary of Evidence by Judge................................................................................................................... 3-18

CHAPTER 4 Credibility and Weight 4-1

M Civ JI 4.01 Credibility of Witnesses ................................................................................................................................ 4-2

M Civ JI 4.01A Support Persons or Animals........................................................................................................................ 4-4

M Civ JI 4.02 Witness Need Not Be Believed [ Recommend No Instruction ].................................................................... 4-5

M Civ JI 4.03 Inherently Improbable Testimony [ Recommend No Instruction ]............................................................... 4-6

M Civ JI 4.04 Witness Willfully False [ Recommend No Instruction ]................................................................................. 4-7

M Civ JI 4.05 Party Competent as a Witness [ Recommend No Instruction ] .................................................................... 4-8

M Civ JI 4.06 Witness Who Has Been Interviewed by an Attorney.................................................................................... 4-9

M Civ JI 4.07 Weighing Conflicting Evidence—Number of Witnesses ............................................................................. 4-10

M Civ JI 4.08 One Witness against a Number [ Recommend No Instruction ] ................................................................. 4-11

M Civ JI 4.09 Credibility of Special Categories of Witnesses and Weight of Evidence [ Recommend No Instruction ] ... 4-12

M Civ JI 4.10 Weighing Expert Testimony ........................................................................................................................ 4-13

M Civ JI 4.11 Consideration of Deposition Evidence ........................................................................................................ 4-14

M Civ JI 4.12 Hospital and Business Records [ Recommend No Instruction ] .................................................................. 4-15

CHAPTER 5 Impeachment 5-1

M Civ JI 5.01 Prior Inconsistent Statement of Witness [ Renumbered to M Civ JI 3.15 ]................................................... 5-2

M Civ JI 5.02 Impeachment of a Party by Prior Inconsistent Statement [ Instruction Deleted ] ....................................... 5-3

M Civ JI 5.03 Impeachment by Proof of Conviction of Crime............................................................................................. 5-4

Michigan Model Civil Jury Instructions

CHAPTER 6 Failure to Produce 6-1

M Civ JI 6.01 Failure to Produce Evidence or a Witness .................................................................................................... 6-2

M Civ JI 6.02 Failure of Opposite Party to Testify in Case Involving “Dead Man’s Statute” [ Recommend No Instruction ] 6-

CHAPTER 7 Theories 7-1

M Civ JI 7.01 Theories of the Parties .................................................................................................................................. 7-2

CHAPTER 8 Definition of Burden of Proof 8-1

M Civ JI 8.01 Definition of Burden of Proof........................................................................................................................ 8-2

CHAPTER 10 Negligence: General Instructions 10-1

M Civ JI 10.01 Definitions Introduced .............................................................................................................................. 10-2

M Civ JI 10.02 Negligence of Adult—Definition ............................................................................................................... 10-3

M Civ JI 10.03 Ordinary Care—Adult—Definition [ Instruction Deleted ]........................................................................ 10-5

M Civ JI 10.04 Duty to Use Ordinary Care— Adult—Plaintiff........................................................................................... 10-6

M Civ JI 10.05 Duty to Use Ordinary Care—Adult—Defendant ....................................................................................... 10-7

M Civ JI 10.06 Ordinary Care—Minor—Definition ........................................................................................................... 10-8

M Civ JI 10.07 Conduct Required for Safety of Child........................................................................................................ 10-9

M Civ JI 10.08 Presumption of Ordinary Care—Death Case .......................................................................................... 10-10

M Civ JI 10.09 Presumption of Ordinary Care—Loss of Memory Case .......................................................................... 10-12

CHAPTER 11 Comparative Negligence 11-1

M Civ JI 11.01 Comparative Negligence—Definition ....................................................................................................... 11-2

M Civ JI 11.02 Negligence—Not an Issue as to One or More Plaintiffs............................................................................ 11-3

CHAPTER 12 Statutes and Ordinances Affecting Negligence 12-1

M Civ JI 12.01 Violation of Statute—Negligence.............................................................................................................. 12-2

M Civ JI 12.02 Excused Violation of Statute ..................................................................................................................... 12-3

M Civ JI 12.03 Violation of Ordinance by Defendant ....................................................................................................... 12-4

M Civ JI 12.04 Violation of Ordinance by Plaintiff............................................................................................................ 12-6

M Civ JI 12.05 Violation by Defendant of Rules or Regulations Promulgated Pursuant to Statutory Authority.............. 12-8

M Civ JI 12.06 Violation by Plaintiff of Rules or Regulations Promulgated Pursuant to Statutory Authority .................. 12-9

Michigan Model Civil Jury Instructions

M Civ JI 12.07 Violation of Statute or Ordinance by Minor [ No Instruction Prepared ]................................................ 12-10

CHAPTER 13 Other Special Factors Affecting Negligence 13-1

M Civ JI 13.01 Physical Disability...................................................................................................................................... 13-2

M Civ JI 13.02 Intoxication as Affecting Negligence......................................................................................................... 13-3

M Civ JI 13.03 Mental Illness—Adult................................................................................................................................ 13-4

M Civ JI 13.04 Duty of One in Imminent Peril and Responsibility of the Person Causing the Perilous Situation [ Recommend

No Instruction ] ................................................................................................................................................................ 13-5

M Civ JI 13.05 Unavoidable Accident [ Recommend No Instruction ].............................................................................. 13-6

M Civ JI 13.06 Assumption of Risk [ No Instruction Prepared ]........................................................................................ 13-7

M Civ JI 13.07 Attempted Rescue of One in Imminent Peril by a Person Who Did Not Cause Such Peril [ Instruction Deleted ]

13-8

M Civ JI 13.08 Presumption That Child Under Seven Years Is Incapable of Negligence .................................................. 13-9

M Civ JI 13.09 Effect of Parent’s Negligence on Claim of Child...................................................................................... 13-10

CHAPTER 14 Subsequent Negligence—Intentional Misconduct 14-1

M Civ JI 14.01 Subsequent Negligence (Last Clear Chance)—Helpless or Inattentive Plaintiff [ Instruction Deleted ] ... 14-2

M Civ JI 14.02 Willful and Wanton Misconduct—Common Law [ Instruction Deleted ] ................................................. 14-3

M Civ JI 14.10 Gross Negligence—Definition ................................................................................................................... 14-4

M Civ JI 14.11 Wanton Misconduct—Definition .............................................................................................................. 14-7

M Civ JI 14.12 Willful Misconduct—Definition................................................................................................................. 14-8

M Civ JI 14.20 Emergency Medical Services Act—Explanation ........................................................................................ 14-9

M Civ JI 14.21 Emergency Medical Services Act—Burden of Proof ............................................................................... 14-10

CHAPTER 15 Proximate Cause (Negligence) 15-1

M Civ JI 15.01 Definition of Proximate Cause .................................................................................................................. 15-2

M Civ JI 15.01A Definition of The Proximate Cause ......................................................................................................... 15-3

M Civ JI 15.02 Definition of Proximately Contributed [ Instruction Deleted ] ................................................................. 15-4

M Civ JI 15.03 More Than One Proximate Cause ............................................................................................................. 15-5

M Civ JI 15.04 Causation by Multiple Defendants............................................................................................................ 15-7

M Civ JI 15.05 Intervening Negligence or Conduct of Person Not a Party [ Instruction deleted ] ................................... 15-8

M Civ JI 15.06 Intervening Outside Force (Other Than Person)....................................................................................... 15-9

Michigan Model Civil Jury Instructions

CHAPTER 16 Burden of Proof (Negligence) 16-1

M Civ JI 16.01 Meaning of Burden of Proof [ Renumbered to M Civ JI 8.01 ].................................................................. 16-2

M Civ JI 16.02 Burden of Proof in Negligence Cases on the Issues and Legal Effect Thereof [INSTRUCTION DELETED] . 16-3

M Civ JI 16.02A Burden of Proof in Negligence Cases...................................................................................................... 16-4

M Civ JI 16.03 Burden of Proof in Negligence Cases on the Issues and Legal Effect Thereof, Including the Issues of

Contributory Negligence and Subsequent Negligence (Last Clear Chance) or Intentional Misconduct [ Instruction Deleted ]

16-6

M Civ JI 16.04 Burden of Proof in Negligence Cases on Affirmative Defenses Other Than Contributory Negligence..... 16-7

M Civ JI 16.05 Burden of Proof and Legal Effect Thereof in Negligence Cases—Complaint and Counterclaim .............. 16-8

M Civ JI 16.06 Burden of Proof and Legal Effect Thereof in Negligence Cases—Third-Party Complaint—Contribution Only.

16-11

M Civ JI 16.07 Evenly Balanced Evidence [ Recommend No Instruction ] ..................................................................... 16-13

M Civ JI 16.08 Burden of Proof in Negligence Cases (To Be Used in Cases Filed on or After March 28, 1996) ............. 16-14

CHAPTER 17 Admitted Liability (Negligence) 17-1

M Civ JI 17.01 Admitted Liability...................................................................................................................................... 17-2

CHAPTER 19 Premises Liability (Negligence) 19-1

M Civ JI 19.01 Invitee, Licensee, Trespasser—Definitions (Relationship Disputed)......................................................... 19-2

M Civ JI 19.02 Possessor of Land—Definition .................................................................................................................. 19-4

M Civ JI 19.03 Duty of Possessor of Land, Premises, or Place of Business to Invitee....................................................... 19-5

M Civ JI 19.04 Duty of Plaintiff to Use Ordinary Care in Self-Service Store or Store Displaying Goods [ Instruction Deleted ]

19-6

M Civ JI 19.05 Duty of Possessor of Land, Premises, or Place of Business to a Business Invitee Regarding the Natural

Accumulation of Ice and Snow......................................................................................................................................... 19-7

M Civ JI 19.06 Duty of Possessor of Land, Premises, or Place of Business to Licensee.................................................... 19-8

M Civ JI 19.07 Duty of Possessor of Land, Premises, or Place of Business to Trespasser .............................................. 19-10

M Civ JI 19.07A Duty of Possessor of Land, Premises, or Place of Business to Child Trespasser for Artificial Conditions. 19-

M Civ JI 19.08 Duty of Possessor of Land, Premises, or Place of Business to Trespasser Whose Presence Is Known or Should

Have Been Known to Possessor [ Instruction Deleted ] ................................................................................................. 19-13

M Civ JI 19.09 Duty of Possessor of Land, Premises, or Place of Business to Persons Traveling along Adjacent Street or Way

19-14

M Civ JI 19.10 Nondelegable Duty of Possessor or Occupier of Land, Premises, or Place of Business.......................... 19-15

M Civ JI 19.11 Landlord’s Nondelegable Duty for Negligent Repairs Made by an Independent Contractor ................. 19-16

Michigan Model Civil Jury Instructions

CHAPTER 25 Products Liability 25-1

M Civ JI 25.01 Definition of Proximate Cause—Warranty ............................................................................................... 25-2

M Civ JI 25.02 More Than One Proximate Cause—Warranty .......................................................................................... 25-3

M Civ JI 25.03 Causation—Multiple Defendants with Warranty and Negligence Counts................................................ 25-4

M Civ JI 25.04 Causation—Multiple Defendants with Warranty Counts Only................................................................. 25-5

M Civ JI 25.11 Express Warranty—Definition .................................................................................................................. 25-6

M Civ JI 25.12 Express Warranty—Burden of Proof......................................................................................................... 25-8

M Civ JI 25.21 Implied Warranty—Definition ................................................................................................................ 25-10

M Civ JI 25.22 Implied Warranty—Burden of Proof....................................................................................................... 25-12

M Civ JI 25.31 Negligent Production—Definition........................................................................................................... 25-14

M Civ JI 25.32 Negligent Production—Burden of Proof................................................................................................. 25-15

M Civ JI 25.41 Comparative Negligence—Burden of Proof [ Instruction Deleted ] ....................................................... 25-18

M Civ JI 25.45 Breach of Warranty: Comparative Fault—Burden of Proof (To Be Used in Cases Filed on or After March 28,

1996) .............................................................................................................................................................................. 25-19

CHAPTER 30 Malpractice 30-1

M Civ JI 30.01 Professional Negligence/Malpractice ....................................................................................................... 30-2

M Civ JI 30.02 Informed Consent ..................................................................................................................................... 30-3

M Civ JI 30.03 Burden of Proof......................................................................................................................................... 30-4

M Civ JI 30.04 Medical Malpractice: Cautionary Instruction on Medical Uncertainties .................................................. 30-5

M Civ JI 30.05 Medical Malpractice: Permissible Inference of Malpractice from Circumstantial Evidence (Res Ipsa Loquitur)

30-6

M Civ JI 30.10 Medical Malpractice: Exceptions to Cap................................................................................................... 30-7

M Civ JI 30.20 Medical Malpractice: Loss of Opportunity to Survive or Achieve a Better Result [ Instruction Deleted ] 30-8

M Civ JI 30.30 Medical Malpractice: Vicarious Tort Liability Based on Ostensible Agency............................................ 30-10

CHAPTER 35 First-Party Benefits Action 35-1

Introductory Directions to the Court ............................................................................................................................... 35-2

M Civ JI 35.01 No-Fault First-Party Benefits Action: Explanation of Statute.................................................................... 35-5

M Civ JI 35.02 No-Fault First-Party Benefits Action: Burden of Proof............................................................................ 35-10

M Civ JI 35.03 No-Fault: Benefits from First-Party Actions ............................................................................................ 35-13

M Civ JI 35.04 No-Fault First-Party Benefits Action: Statutory Interest......................................................................... 35-17

M Civ JI 35.05 No-Fault First-Party Benefits Action: Damages—Setoff for Governmental Benefits [ Instruction Deleted ] ...

35-19

M Civ JI 35.06 No-Fault First-Party Benefits Action: Damages—Setoff; Coordinated Benefits [ Instruction Deleted ] . 35-20

Michigan Model Civil Jury Instructions

CHAPTER 36 Third-Party Tort Action 36-1

Introductory Directions to the Court ............................................................................................................................... 36-2

M Civ JI 36.01 No-Fault Auto Negligence: Serious Impairment of Body Function—Definition (To Be Used in Cases in Which

1995 PA 222 Applies) ....................................................................................................................................................... 36-4

M Civ JI 36.01A No-Fault Auto Negligence: Serious Impairment of Body Function—Definition (To Be Used in Cases in Which

2019 PA 22 Applies) ......................................................................................................................................................... 36-7

M Civ JI 36.01B No-Fault Auto Negligence: Noneconomic Loss Damages for Non-Continuing Serious Impairment Threshold

Injury ................................................................................................................................................................................ 36-8

M Civ JI 36.02 No-Fault Auto Negligence: Mental or Emotional Injury............................................................................ 36-9

M Civ JI 36.03 No-Fault Auto Negligence: Permanent Serious Disfigurement............................................................... 36-10

M Civ JI 36.04 No-Fault Auto Negligence: Elements of Proof—Explanation of Noneconomic-Economic Distinction for

Michigan Resident Plaintiff ............................................................................................................................................ 36-11

M Civ JI 36.04A No-Fault Auto Negligence: Elements of Proof—Explanation of Noneconomic-Economic Distinction for Out-

of-State Resident Plaintiff .............................................................................................................................................. 36-13

M Civ JI 36.05 No-Fault Auto Negligence: Burden of Proof—Noneconomic Loss (To Be Used in Cases in Which 1995 PA 222

Does Not Apply) ............................................................................................................................................................. 36-14

M Civ JI 36.06 No-Fault Auto Negligence: Burden of Proof—Economic and/or Noneconomic Loss for Michigan Resident

Plaintiff ........................................................................................................................................................................... 36-15

M Civ JI 36.06A No-Fault Auto Negligence: Burden of Proof—Economic and Non-Economic Loss of Out-of-State Resident

Plaintiff ........................................................................................................................................................................... 36-19

M Civ JI 36.11 No-Fault Auto Negligence: Serious Impairment of Body Function—Definition (To Be Used in Cases in Which

1995 PA 222 Applies) ..................................................................................................................................................... 36-22

M Civ JI 36.15 No-Fault Auto Negligence: Burden of Proof—Economic and/or Noneconomic Loss ............................. 36-23

CHAPTER 38 Agency 38-1

M Civ JI 38.01 Agency Relationship: Definitions of Agent and Principal.......................................................................... 38-2

M Civ JI 38.10 Agency: Apparent Agency Relationship .................................................................................................... 38-3

M Civ JI 38.20 Vicarious Tort Liability Based on Ostensible Agency (For Cases Other Than Medical Malpractice) ......... 38-4

CHAPTER 40 Multiple Plaintiffs 40-1

M Civ JI 40.01 Two or More Plaintiffs—Separate Consideration—Repeating Instructions ............................................. 40-2

M Civ JI 40.02 Assessment of Damages ........................................................................................................................... 40-3

CHAPTER 41 Multiple Defendants 41-1

M Civ JI 41.01 Two or More Defendants—Separate Consideration—Repeating Instructions......................................... 41-2

M Civ JI 41.02 Damages Where There Is No Allocation of Fault Between Defendants ................................................... 41-3

Michigan Model Civil Jury Instructions

M Civ JI 41.03 Multiple Parties and Pleadings Where Jury May Not Be Able to Apportion Damages [ Instruction Deleted ].

41-4

M Civ JI 41.04 Damages Not to Be Allocated Among Joint Tort-Feasors [ Instruction Deleted ] ..................................... 41-5

CHAPTER 42 Allocation of Fault (Personal Injury Action) 42-1

M Civ JI 42.01 Allocation of Fault of Parties..................................................................................................................... 42-2

M Civ JI 42.05 Allocation of Fault of Parties and Identified Nonparties........................................................................... 42-3

CHAPTER 43 Contribution Among Tort-Feasors 43-1

M Civ JI 43.01A Contribution Among Tort-Feasors by Relative Fault [ Instruction Deleted ] .......................................... 43-2

M Civ JI 43.01B Contribution Among Tort-Feasors by Relative Fault (Bifurcation) [ Instruction Deleted ] ..................... 43-4

CHAPTER 45 Wrongful Death 45-1

M Civ JI 45.01 Wrongful Death—Explanation of Statute ................................................................................................. 45-2

M Civ JI 45.02 Wrongful Death—Damages ...................................................................................................................... 45-3

CHAPTER 50 Basic Instructions—Person and Property 50-1

Damages Introduction...................................................................................................................................................... 50-2

M Civ JI 50.01 Measure of Damages—Personal and Property......................................................................................... 50-3

M Civ JI 50.02 Elements of Damage — Pain and Suffering, Etc........................................................................................ 50-5

M Civ JI 50.03 Elements of Damage—Disability and Disfigurement ................................................................................ 50-7

M Civ JI 50.04 Element of Damage—Aggravation of Preexisting Ailment or Condition .................................................. 50-8

M Civ JI 50.05 Element of Damage—Medical Expenses .................................................................................................. 50-9

M Civ JI 50.06 Element of Damage—Loss of Earning Capacity—Past and Future—Adult Plaintiff, Emancipated Minor .. 50-

M Civ JI 50.07 Element of Damage—Loss of Future Earning Capacity—Unemancipated Minor Plaintiff ..................... 50-11

M Civ JI 50.08 Element of Damage—Miscellaneous Expense........................................................................................ 50-12

M Civ JI 50.09 Element of Damage—Personal Property ................................................................................................ 50-13

M Civ JI 50.10 Defendant Takes the Plaintiff As He/She Finds Him/Her........................................................................ 50-14

M Civ JI 50.11 Inability to Determine Extent of Aggravation of Injuries ........................................................................ 50-15

M Civ JI 50.21 Personal Injury Action: Definition of Economic Loss and Noneconomic Loss Damages; Separation of Future

Damages by Year............................................................................................................................................................ 50-16

Michigan Model Civil Jury Instructions

CHAPTER 51 Property Damage 51-1

Introduction ..................................................................................................................................................................... 51-2

M Civ JI 51.01 Measure of Damages—Personal Property................................................................................................ 51-3

M Civ JI 51.02 Measure of Damages—Damage to Personal Property—Cost of Repair Less Than Difference in Value... 51-4

M Civ JI 51.03 Measure of Damages—Damage to Personal Property—Irreparable Damage with Salvage .................... 51-5

M Civ JI 51.04 Measure of Damages—Damage to Personal Property—Irreparable Damage and No Salvage................ 51-6

M Civ JI 51.05 Measure of Damages—Damage to Personal Property—Dispute Whether Cost of Repair Is Less Than

Difference in Value........................................................................................................................................................... 51-7

M Civ JI 51.06 Measure of Damages—Damage to Personal Property—Cost of Repair with Loss in Value after Repair . 51-8

M Civ JI 51.07 Measure of Damages—Damage to Personal Property—Dispute Whether Cost of Repair plus Loss in Value

after Repair Is Less Than Difference in Value................................................................................................................... 51-9

CHAPTER 52 Injury to Spouse or Parent 52-1

M Civ JI 52.01 Measure of Damages—Injury to Spouse................................................................................................... 52-2

M Civ JI 52.02 Measure of Damages for Child of Injured Parent ..................................................................................... 52-4

CHAPTER 53 Particular Factors in Computing Damages 53-1

M Civ JI 53.01 Statutory Mortality Table—Injury Case [ Instruction Deleted ] ................................................................ 53-2

M Civ JI 53.02 Statutory Mortality Table—Death Case [ Instruction Deleted ]................................................................ 53-3

M Civ JI 53.03 Future Damages (Non-personal Injury Action)—Reduction to Present Cash Value ................................. 53-4

M Civ JI 53.03A Future Damages (Personal Injury Action)—Reduction to Present Cash Value....................................... 53-5

M Civ JI 53.04 Interest—As Part of Damages................................................................................................................... 53-6

M Civ JI 53.05 Mitigation of Damages—Failure to Exercise Ordinary Care ..................................................................... 53-8

M Civ JI 53.06 Effect of Inflation on Future Damages ...................................................................................................... 53-9

CHAPTER 60 Jury Deliberations 60-1

M Civ JI 60.01 Jury Deliberations ..................................................................................................................................... 60-2

M Civ JI 60.01A Cameras in the Courtroom ..................................................................................................................... 60-5

M Civ JI 60.02 Deadlocked Jury ........................................................................................................................................ 60-6

CHAPTER 65 Forms of Verdicts: General 65-1

M Civ JI 65.01 Forms of Verdicts: Single Defendant without Counterclaim [ Form of Verdict Deleted ]......................... 65-2

M Civ JI 65.02 Forms of Verdicts: Single Defendant with Counterclaim [ Form of Verdict Deleted ] .............................. 65-3

M Civ JI 65.03 Forms of Verdicts: Multiple Defendants with No Counterclaims [ Form of Verdict Deleted ] ................. 65-4

Michigan Model Civil Jury Instructions

M Civ JI 65.04 Forms of Verdicts: Multiple Defendants with One or More Counterclaims [ Form of Verdict Deleted ] . 65-5

CHAPTER 66 Forms of Verdicts: Comparative Negligence 66-1

M Civ JI 66.01 Form of Verdict: Comparative Negligence................................................................................................ 66-2

M Civ JI 66.01A Form of Verdict: Comparative Negligence (Personal Injury Action)....................................................... 66-4

M Civ JI 66.02 Form of Verdict: Comparative Negligence—Property Damage (To Be Used in Cases Filed on or after March

28, 1996) ........................................................................................................................................................................ 66-10

M Civ JI 66.03 Form of Verdict: Comparative Negligence—Personal Injury Action (To Be Used in Cases Filed on or after

March 28, 1996) ............................................................................................................................................................. 66-13

CHAPTER 67 Forms of Verdicts: Michigan No-Fault Automobile Insurance Law 67-1

M Civ JI 67.01 Form of Verdict: No-Fault First-Party Benefits Action .............................................................................. 67-2

M Civ JI 67.02 Form of Verdict: No-Fault Auto Negligence; Noneconomic Loss [ Form of Verdict Deleted ].................. 67-6

M Civ JI 67.02A Form of Verdict: No-Fault Auto Negligence; Noneconomic Loss (and Allocation of Fault) [ Form of Verdict

Deleted ]........................................................................................................................................................................... 67-7

M Civ JI 67.03 Form of Verdict: No-Fault Auto Negligence; Economic Loss [ Form of Verdict Deleted ]......................... 67-8

M Civ JI 67.03A Form of Verdict: No-Fault Auto Negligence; Economic Loss (and Allocation of Fault) [ Form of Verdict

Deleted ]........................................................................................................................................................................... 67-9

M Civ JI 67.04 Form of Verdict: No-Fault Auto Negligence; Economic Loss and Noneconomic Loss [ Form of Verdict Deleted ]

67-10

M Civ JI 67.04A Form of Verdict: No-Fault Auto Negligence; Economic Loss and Noneconomic Loss (and Allocation of Fault)

[ Form of Verdict Deleted ] ............................................................................................................................................ 67-11

M Civ JI 67.15 Form of Verdict: No-Fault Auto Negligence: Economic Loss and Noneconomic Loss—Comparative Negligence

Not an Issue [ Form of Verdict Deleted ]........................................................................................................................ 67-12

M Civ JI 67.16 Form of Verdict: No-Fault Auto Negligence: Economic Loss and Noneconomic Loss—and Comparative

Negligence/Multiple Defendants/Allocation of Fault (To Be Used in Cases in Which 1995 PA 222 Applies) [ Form of Verdict

Deleted ]......................................................................................................................................................................... 67-13

M Civ JI 67.17 Form of Verdict: No-Fault Auto Negligence: (As Applicable) Economic Loss and Noneconomic Loss—and

Comparative Negligence/Single or Multiple Defendants/Allocation of Fault................................................................ 67-14

CHAPTER 68 Forms of Verdicts: Product Liability 68-1

M Civ JI 68.01 Form of Verdict: Products Liability............................................................................................................ 68-2

M Civ JI 68.01A Form of Verdict: Products Liability (Personal Injury Action)................................................................... 68-4

M Civ JI 68.03 Form of Verdict: Products Liability—Personal Injury Action (To Be Used in Cases Filed on or After March 28,

1996) ................................................................................................................................................................................ 68-9

Michigan Model Civil Jury Instructions

CHAPTER 70 Forms of Verdicts: Medical Malpractice 70-1

M Civ JI 70.01 Form of Verdict: Special Questions in Medical Malpractice Cases (Limitation on Noneconomic Damages) ...

70-2

CHAPTER 72 Forms of Verdicts: Contribution Among Tort-Feasors 72-1

M Civ JI 72.01A Form of Verdict: Contribution Among Tort-Feasors by Relative Fault [ Form of Verdict Deleted ] ....... 72-2

M Civ JI 72.01B Form of Verdict: Contribution Among Tort-Feasors by Relative Fault (Bifurcation) [ Form of Verdict

Deleted ]........................................................................................................................................................................... 72-3

CHAPTER 73 Forms of Verdicts: Damages of Spouse of Injured Plaintiff 73-1

M Civ JI 73.01 Form of Verdict: Damages of Spouse of Injured Plaintiff.......................................................................... 73-2

CHAPTER 75 Dram Shop Actions 75-1

Dram Shop Actions—Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 75-2

M Civ JI 75.01 Dram Shop—Explanation of Statute ....................................................................................................... 75-10

M Civ JI 75.02 Dram Shop—Definitions ......................................................................................................................... 75-11

M Civ JI 75.11 Dram Shop—Sale to Minor: Burden of Proof.......................................................................................... 75-13

M Civ JI 75.12 Dram Shop—Sale to Visibly Intoxicated Person: Burden of Proof .......................................................... 75-15

M Civ JI 75.13 Dram Shop—Contributing to Occurrence Not a Defense ....................................................................... 75-16

CHAPTER 80 Dog Bite Actions 80-1

Introduction ..................................................................................................................................................................... 80-2

M Civ JI 80.01 Dog Bite Statute—Explanation ................................................................................................................. 80-3

M Civ JI 80.02 Dog Bite Statute—Burden of Proof........................................................................................................... 80-4

M Civ JI 80.03 Dog Bite Statute—Definition of Provocation ............................................................................................ 80-5

M Civ JI 80.04 Dog Bite Statute—Lawfully on Property ................................................................................................... 80-6

M Civ JI 80.05 Dog Bite Statute—Lawfully on Property of Dog Owner............................................................................ 80-7

CHAPTER 85 Emergency Vehicles 85-1

M Civ JI 85.01 Exemption of Emergency Vehicles from Certain Statutory Regulations................................................... 85-2

M Civ JI 85.02 Requirement of Due Care by Operator of an Emergency Vehicle ............................................................ 85-3

Michigan Model Civil Jury Instructions

CHAPTER 90 Condemnation 90-1

Introductory Directions to the Court ............................................................................................................................... 90-3

M Civ JI 90.01 Pretrial Instruction: Nature of Condemnation Action............................................................................... 90-5

M Civ JI 90.02 Power of Eminent Domain ........................................................................................................................ 90-7

M Civ JI 90.03 Burden of Proof [ Recommend No Instruction ] ....................................................................................... 90-8

M Civ JI 90.04 Absence of Fault........................................................................................................................................ 90-9

M Civ JI 90.05 Just Compensation—Definition .............................................................................................................. 90-10

M Civ JI 90.06 Market Value—Definition ....................................................................................................................... 90-11

M Civ JI 90.07 Special Purpose Property ........................................................................................................................ 90-12

M Civ JI 90.08 Assessed Value........................................................................................................................................ 90-13

M Civ JI 90.09 Highest and Best Use .............................................................................................................................. 90-14

M Civ JI 90.10 Possibility of Rezoning ............................................................................................................................ 90-15

M Civ JI 90.11 Refusal to Rezone.................................................................................................................................... 90-16

M Civ JI 90.12 Partial Taking........................................................................................................................................... 90-17

M Civ JI 90.13 Date of Valuation .................................................................................................................................... 90-19

M Civ JI 90.14 Date of Valuation: Early Date of Taking .................................................................................................. 90-20

M Civ JI 90.15 Effect of Proposed Public Improvement ................................................................................................. 90-21

M Civ JI 90.16 Comparable Market Transactions........................................................................................................... 90-22

M Civ JI 90.17 Easements............................................................................................................................................... 90-24

M Civ JI 90.18 Total Taking............................................................................................................................................. 90-25

M Civ JI 90.19 Benefits ................................................................................................................................................... 90-26

M Civ JI 90.20 Compensation for Fixtures; Definition.................................................................................................... 90-27

M Civ JI 90.21 Fixtures: Election to Remove—Compensation ....................................................................................... 90-28

M Civ JI 90.22 Effect of View .......................................................................................................................................... 90-29

M Civ JI 90.22A Valuation Witnesses [DELETED]............................................................................................................ 90-30

M Civ JI 90.23 Range of Testimony ................................................................................................................................ 90-31

M Civ JI 90.24 Mechanics of Verdict .............................................................................................................................. 90-32

M Civ JI 90.30 Going Concern......................................................................................................................................... 90-33

M Civ JI 90.31 Business Interruption.............................................................................................................................. 90-34

CHAPTER 97 Child Protection Proceedings 97-1

M Civ JI 97.01 Preliminary Instructions to Prospective Jurors ......................................................................................... 97-4

M Civ JI 97.02 Selection of Fair and Impartial Jury........................................................................................................... 97-5

M Civ JI 97.03 Challenges ................................................................................................................................................. 97-6

Michigan Model Civil Jury Instructions

M Civ JI 97.04 Brief Description ....................................................................................................................................... 97-7

M Civ JI 97.05 Introduction to Parties, Counsel, and Witnesses...................................................................................... 97-8

M Civ JI 97.06 Reading of Petition.................................................................................................................................... 97-9

M Civ JI 97.07 Juror Oath Before Voir Dire .................................................................................................................... 97-10

M Civ JI 97.08 Seating of Jurors...................................................................................................................................... 97-11

M Civ JI 97.09 Juror Oath Following Selection ............................................................................................................... 97-12

M Civ JI 97.10 Description of Trial Procedure ................................................................................................................ 97-13

M Civ JI 97.11 Function of Judge and Jury...................................................................................................................... 97-14

M Civ JI 97.12 Jury Must Only Consider Evidence; What Evidence Is; Prohibited Actions by Jurors ............................. 97-15

M Civ JI 97.13 Judging Credibility and Weight of Evidence............................................................................................ 97-18

M Civ JI 97.14 Questions Not Evidence .......................................................................................................................... 97-20

M Civ JI 97.15 Court’s Questioning Not Reflective of Opinion....................................................................................... 97-21

M Civ JI 97.16 Questions by Jurors Allowed................................................................................................................... 97-22

M Civ JI 97.17 Objections ............................................................................................................................................... 97-23

M Civ JI 97.18 Disregard Out-of-Presence Hearings ...................................................................................................... 97-24

M Civ JI 97.19 Jurors Not to Discuss Case ...................................................................................................................... 97-25

M Civ JI 97.20 Recesses .................................................................................................................................................. 97-27

M Civ JI 97.21 Caution about Publicity in Cases of Public Interest................................................................................. 97-28

M Civ JI 97.22 Visiting Scene/Conducting Experiments ................................................................................................. 97-29

M Civ JI 97.23 Notetaking by Jurors Allowed ................................................................................................................. 97-30

M Civ JI 97.24 Notetaking Not Allowed.......................................................................................................................... 97-31

M Civ JI 97.25 Inability to Hear Witness or See Exhibit.................................................................................................. 97-32

M Civ JI 97.26 Defining Legal Names of Parties and Counsel......................................................................................... 97-33

M Civ JI 97.27 Number of Jurors .................................................................................................................................... 97-34

M Civ JI 97.28 Instructions to be Taken as a Whole....................................................................................................... 97-35

M Civ JI 97.29 Deliberations and Verdict ....................................................................................................................... 97-36

M Civ JI 97.30 Maintaining an Open Mind ..................................................................................................................... 97-37

M Civ JI 97.31 Duties of Judge and Jury ......................................................................................................................... 97-38

M Civ JI 97.32 Evidence.................................................................................................................................................. 97-39

M Civ JI 97.33 Witnesses-Credibility .............................................................................................................................. 97-41

M Civ JI 97.34 Circumstantial Evidence.......................................................................................................................... 97-43

M Civ JI 97.35 Statutory Grounds................................................................................................................................... 97-44

M Civ JI 97.36 Definitions ............................................................................................................................................... 97-46

M Civ JI 97.37 Standard of Proof.................................................................................................................................... 97-48

Michigan Model Civil Jury Instructions

M Civ JI 97.38 No Duty to Present Evidence .................................................................................................................. 97-49

M Civ JI 97.39 Treatment of One Child as Evidence of Treatment of Another Child ..................................................... 97-50

M Civ JI 97.40 Improvement in Circumstances Not Controlling..................................................................................... 97-51

M Civ JI 97.41 Not Necessary to Prove Each Fact Alleged.............................................................................................. 97-52

M Civ JI 97.42 Unfit Home by Reason of Neglect or Cruelty—Res Ipsa Loquitur........................................................... 97-53

M Civ JI 97.43 Findings Re: Statutory Grounds .............................................................................................................. 97-54

M Civ JI 97.43A Legitimate Practice of Religious Beliefs ............................................................................................... 97-56

M Civ JI 97.44 Court to Determine Disposition .............................................................................................................. 97-57

M Civ JI 97.45 Not a Criminal Proceeding ...................................................................................................................... 97-58

M Civ JI 97.46 Deliberations and Verdict ....................................................................................................................... 97-59

M Civ JI 97.47 Communications with the Court ............................................................................................................. 97-61

M Civ JI 97.48 Exhibits.................................................................................................................................................... 97-62

M Civ JI 97.49 Verdict..................................................................................................................................................... 97-63

M Civ JI 97.50 Dismissal of Extra Juror ........................................................................................................................... 97-64

M Civ JI 97.51 Bailiff’s Oath............................................................................................................................................ 97-65

M Civ JI 97.52 Begin Deliberations ................................................................................................................................. 97-66

M Civ JI 97.60 Form of Verdict: Statutory Grounds Alleged........................................................................................... 97-67

M Civ JI 97.61 Form of Verdict: One Statutory Ground Alleged [ Instruction Deleted] ................................................. 97-71

CHAPTER 100 Rent Action—Residential Property 100-1

Introduction ................................................................................................................................................................... 100-2

M Civ JI 100.01 Rent Action: Explanation of Statutes; Defense of Failure to Keep Premises Fit for Use Intended / Failure to

Repair / Noncompliance with Health or Safety Laws / Retaliatory Rent Increase......................................................... 100-7

M Civ JI 100.02 Rent Action: Burden of Proof................................................................................................................ 100-9

CHAPTER 101 Termination Action—Residential Property 101-1

Introduction ................................................................................................................................................................... 101-2

M Civ JI 101.01 Termination Action: Explanation of Statutes ........................................................................................ 101-7

M Civ JI 101.02 Termination Action: Retaliatory Termination—Explanation of Statute................................................ 101-8

M Civ JI 101.03 Termination Action: Issues—Notice of Termination / Retaliatory Termination................................. 101-10

M Civ JI 101.04 Termination Action: Retaliatory Termination—Tenant Burden of Proof ........................................... 101-11

M Civ JI 101.05 Termination Action: Retaliatory Termination—Landlord Burden of Proof......................................... 101-13

M Civ JI 101.06 Termination Action: Retaliatory Termination—Tenant Burden of Proof on Complaint within Ninety Days..

101-15

Michigan Model Civil Jury Instructions

CHAPTER 105 Employment Discrimination 105-1

Introduction ................................................................................................................................................................... 105-3

M Civ JI 105.01 Employment Discrimination Statute (Disparate Treatment)—Explanation.......................................... 105-4

M Civ JI 105.02 Employment Discrimination (Disparate Treatment)—Definition ......................................................... 105-5

M Civ JI 105.03 Employment Discrimination (Disparate Treatment)—Cautionary Instruction as to Business Judgment 105-

M Civ JI 105.04 Employment Discrimination (Disparate Treatment)—Burden of Proof................................................ 105-7

M Civ JI 105.04A Employment Discrimination—Burden of Proof —Retaliation ............................................................ 105-8

M Civ JI 105.05 Employment Discrimination (Constructive Discharge)—Definition...................................................... 105-9

M Civ JI 105.10 Employment Discrimination—Sexual Harassment—Explanation....................................................... 105-10

M Civ JI 105.12 Employment Discrimination—Quid Pro Quo Harassment—Burden of Proof..................................... 105-11

M Civ JI 105.14 Employment Discrimination—Hostile Environment Sexual Harassment—Burden of Proof—Employer

Defendant .................................................................................................................................................................... 105-13

M Civ JI 105.18 Employment Discrimination—Hostile Environment Sexual Harassment—Burden of Proof—Unwelcome

Sexual Conduct or Communication.............................................................................................................................. 105-14

M Civ JI 105.20 Employment Discrimination—Hostile Environment Sexual Harassment—Sexually Hostile Work

Environment................................................................................................................................................................. 105-15

M Civ JI 105.24 Employment Discrimination—Hostile Environment Sexual Harassment—Employer Liability ........... 105-16

M Civ JI 105.26 Employment Discrimination—Hostile Environment Sexual Harassment—Notice ............................. 105-17

M Civ JI 105.28 Employment Discrimination—Hostile Environment Sexual Harassment—Prompt Remedial Action 105-18

M Civ JI 105.30 Employment Discrimination—Hostile Environment Sexual Harassment—Damages—Tangible Employment

Act Not Required.......................................................................................................................................................... 105-19

M Civ JI 105.32 Employment Discrimination—Hostile Environment Sexual Harassment—Burden of Proof—Employee

Defendant .................................................................................................................................................................... 105-20

M Civ JI 105.41 Employment Discrimination—Mitigation of Damages for Loss of Compensation.............................. 105-21

M Civ JI 105.42 Employment Discrimination—Mitigation of Damages for Loss of Compensation: Conditional and

Unconditional Offers by Defendant ............................................................................................................................. 105-23

CHAPTER 106 Persons With Disabilities Civil Rights Act 106-1

M Civ JI 106.01 Employment Discrimination Statute—Explanation .............................................................................. 106-3

M Civ JI 106.05 Employment Discrimination—Disability—Definition............................................................................ 106-4

M Civ JI 106.07A Employment Discrimination—Burden of Proof—Disability................................................................ 106-6

M Civ JI 106.07C Employment Discrimination—Burden of Proof—Physical or Mental Examinations .......................... 106-7

M Civ JI 106.07D Employment Discrimination—Burden of Proof—Accommodation.................................................... 106-8

M Civ JI 106.07E Employment Discrimination—Burden of Proof—Retaliation ........................................................... 106-10

M Civ JI 106.09 Employment Discrimination Statute—Accommodation—Duty of Employer ..................................... 106-11

Michigan Model Civil Jury Instructions

M Civ JI 106.11A Employment Discrimination Statute—Accommodation—Undue Hardship—Equipment or Device 106-12

M Civ JI 106.11B Employment Discrimination Statute—Accommodation—Undue Hardship—Equipment or Device 106-13

M Civ JI 106.11C Employment Discrimination Statute—Accommodation—Undue Hardship—Equipment or Device 106-14

M Civ JI 106.11D Employment Discrimination Statute—Accommodation—Undue Hardship—Readers or Interpreters 106-

M Civ JI 106.11E Employment Discrimination Statute—Accommodation—Undue Hardship—Reader or Interpreter 106-16

M Civ JI 106.21 Public Accommodation Statute—Explanation—Accommodation...................................................... 106-17

M Civ JI 106.23 Public Accommodation—Disability—Definition ................................................................................. 106-18

M Civ JI 106.25 Public Accommodation—Definition.................................................................................................... 106-19

M Civ JI 106.27 Public Service—Definition................................................................................................................... 106-20

M Civ JI 106.29 Public Accommodation—Burden of Proof.......................................................................................... 106-21

M Civ JI 106.29A Public Accommodation—Burden of Proof—Retaliation .................................................................. 106-22

M Civ JI 106.30 Educational Institution Statute—Explanation..................................................................................... 106-23

M Civ JI 106.31 Accommodation—Educational Institution—Definition ...................................................................... 106-25

M Civ JI 106.33 Accommodation—Educational Institution—Disability—Definition.................................................... 106-26

M Civ JI 106.35 Accommodation—Educational Institution—Burden of Proof ............................................................ 106-27

M Civ JI 106.36 Educational Institution—Burden of Proof—Retaliation ..................................................................... 106-28

CHAPTER 107 Whistleblowers’ Protection Act 107-1

Introduction ................................................................................................................................................................... 107-2

M Civ JI 107.01 Whistleblowers’ Protection Act: Explanation ....................................................................................... 107-3

M Civ JI 107.02 Whistleblowers’ Protection Act: Protected Activity—Definition.......................................................... 107-4

M Civ JI 107.03 Whistleblowers’ Protection Act: Causation .......................................................................................... 107-6

M Civ JI 107.04 Whistleblowers’ Protection Act: Good Faith Belief .............................................................................. 107-7

M Civ JI 107.11 Whistleblowers’ Protection Act: Distinction in Standard of Proof Between “Report” and “About to Report”

107-8

M Civ JI 107.15 Whistleblowers’ Protection Act: Burden of Proof................................................................................. 107-9

CHAPTER 108 Public Accommodations 108-1

M Civ JI 108.01 Public Accommodation or Services; Prohibited Practices—Explanation .............................................. 108-2

M Civ JI 108.02 Public Accommodation—Definition...................................................................................................... 108-3

M Civ JI 108.03 Public Service—Definition..................................................................................................................... 108-4

M Civ JI 108.04 Public Accommodation/Public Service Discrimination—Disparate Treatment—Definition................. 108-5

M Civ JI 108.06 Public Accommodation/Public Service Discrimination—Burden Of Proof ........................................... 108-6

M Civ JI 108.06A Public Accommodation/Public Service Discrimination-Burden of Proof-Retaliation ......................... 108-7

Michigan Model Civil Jury Instructions

M Civ JI 108.07 Public Accommodation/Public Service Discrimination—Sexual Harassment—Explanation ................ 108-8

M Civ JI 108.09 Public Accommodation/Public Service Discrimination—Quid Pro Quo Harassment—Burden of Proof 108-

M Civ JI 108.11 Public Accommodation/Public Service Discrimination—Hostile Environment Harassment—Burden of Proof

108-10

M Civ JI 108.12 Public Accommodation/Public Service Discrimination—Hostile Environment Harassment—Unwelcome

Sexual Conduct or Communication—Definition .......................................................................................................... 108-11

M Civ JI 108.13 Public Accommodation/Public Service Discrimination—Hostile Environment Harassment—Sexually Hostile

Environment—Definition ............................................................................................................................................. 108-12

CHAPTER 110 Wrongful Discharge 110-1

Introduction ................................................................................................................................................................... 110-2

M Civ JI 110.01 Introductory Instruction Where Wrongful Discharge Is Combined with Other Claims ........................ 110-3

M Civ JI 110.05 Wrongful Discharge: Employment Relationship Terminable at Will Unless Terms or Conditions to the

Contrary ......................................................................................................................................................................... 110-4

M Civ JI 110.06 Wrongful Discharge: Employment Policies or Terms or Conditions of the Employment Contract ...... 110-5

M Civ JI 110.07 Wrongful Discharge: Employment Policies or Terms or Conditions of the Employment Contract—Express or

Implied ........................................................................................................................................................................... 110-7

M Civ JI 110.10 Wrongful Discharge: Good or Just Cause Contract or Policy—Burden of Proof ................................... 110-8

M Civ JI 110.11 Wrongful Discharge: Satisfaction Contract or Policy—Burden of Proof ............................................. 110-11

M Civ JI 110.12 Wrongful Discharge: Special Conditions or Performance Standards—Burden of Proof..................... 110-13

M Civ JI 110.13 Wrongful Discharge: Procedural Terms or Conditions—Burden of Proof .......................................... 110-14

M Civ JI 110.20 Wrongful Discharge: Mitigation of Damages [ No Instruction Prepared ].......................................... 110-15

CHAPTER 112 Franchise Investment Law 112-1

M Civ JI 112.01 Franchise Investment Law; Prohibited Practices—Explanation............................................................ 112-2

M Civ JI 112.02 Franchise—Definition ........................................................................................................................... 112-3

M Civ JI 112.03 Franchisee and Franchisor—Definition................................................................................................. 112-4

M Civ JI 112.04 Offer or Offer to Sell—Definition.......................................................................................................... 112-5

M Civ JI 112.05 Person—Definition................................................................................................................................ 112-6

M Civ JI 112.06 Sale or Sell—Definition ......................................................................................................................... 112-7

M Civ JI 112.07 Franchise Fee—Definition..................................................................................................................... 112-8

M Civ JI 112.08 Payment for Goods and Services as Franchise Fee ............................................................................... 112-9

M Civ JI 112.09 Payments That Do Not Constitute a Franchise Fee............................................................................. 112-10

M Civ JI 112.10 Franchise Investment Law—Burden of Proof ..................................................................................... 112-11

Michigan Model Civil Jury Instructions

CHAPTER 113 Consumer Protection Act 113-1

M Civ JI 113.01 Trade or Commerce; Prohibited Practices-Explanation........................................................................ 113-2

M Civ JI 113.02 Unfair, Unconscionable, or Deceptive Methods, Acts, or Practices ..................................................... 113-3

M Civ JI 113.03 Trade or Commerce-Definition ............................................................................................................. 113-4

M Civ JI 113.04 Loss—Definition ................................................................................................................................... 113-5

M Civ JI 113.05 Material—Definition ............................................................................................................................. 113-6

M Civ JI 113.07 Bona Fide Error—Definition.................................................................................................................. 113-7

M Civ JI 113.09 Unfair, Unconscionable, or Deceptive Methods, Acts, or Practices—Burden of Proof ........................ 113-8

CHAPTER 114 Invasion of Privacy Act 114-1

M Civ JI 114.01 Invasion of Privacy—Intrusion into Another’s Private Affairs—Elements ............................................ 114-2

M Civ JI 114.02 Invasion of Privacy—Intrusion Into Another’s Private Affairs—Burden of Proof ................................. 114-3

M Civ JI 114.03 Invasion of Privacy—Public Disclosure of Private Facts—Elements ..................................................... 114-4

M Civ JI 114.04 Invasion of Privacy—Public Disclosure of Private Facts—Burden of Proof........................................... 114-5

M Civ JI 114.05 Invasion of Privacy—Publicity Which Places Plaintiff in a False Light—Elements ................................ 114-6

M Civ JI 114.06 Invasion of Privacy—Publicity Which Places Plaintiff in a False Light—Burden of Proof...................... 114-7

CHAPTER 115 Assault and Battery 115-1

M Civ JI 115.01 Assault—Definition ............................................................................................................................... 115-2

M Civ JI 115.02 Battery—Definition ............................................................................................................................... 115-3

M Civ JI 115.05 Assault and Battery—Defense of Self-Defense..................................................................................... 115-4

M Civ JI 115.06 Assault and Battery—Defense of Consent by Voluntarily Entering a Mutual Affray ............................ 115-5

M Civ JI 115.07 Assault and Battery—Provocation by Mere Words Not a Defense ...................................................... 115-6

M Civ JI 115.08 Assault and Battery—Defense— Right to Resist an Unlawful Arrest.................................................... 115-7

M Civ JI 115.09 Battery—Defense—Use of Force by Law Enforcement Officer in Lawful Arrest .................................. 115-8

M Civ JI 115.20 Assault—Burden of Proof ..................................................................................................................... 115-9

M Civ JI 115.21 Battery—Burden of Proof ................................................................................................................... 115-10

M Civ JI 115.30 Partial Privilege of Merchant as to Exemplary Damages and Damages for Mental Anguish—False Arrest,

False Imprisonment, Assault, Battery, Libel, Slander................................................................................................... 115-11

CHAPTER 116 False Arrest and Imprisonment 116-1

M Civ JI 116.01 False Arrest—Definition........................................................................................................................ 116-2

M Civ JI 116.02 False Imprisonment—Definition ........................................................................................................... 116-3

M Civ JI 116.05 False Arrest—Law Enforcement Officer—Probable Cause to Arrest for Felony without Warrant....... 116-4

Michigan Model Civil Jury Instructions

M Civ JI 116.06 False Arrest—Defense—Right of Private Citizen to Arrest ................................................................... 116-6

M Civ JI 116.07 False Arrest—Arrest with Warrant ....................................................................................................... 116-7

M Civ JI 116.20 False Arrest—Burden of Proof .............................................................................................................. 116-8

M Civ JI 116.21 False Imprisonment—Burden of Proof ................................................................................................. 116-9

CHAPTER 117 Malicious Prosecution 117-1

M Civ JI 117.01 Malicious Prosecution—Criminal Proceeding....................................................................................... 117-2

M Civ JI 117.02 Malicious Prosecution—Criminal Proceeding: Burden of Proof ........................................................... 117-3

M Civ JI 117.03 Malicious Prosecution—Criminal Proceeding: Termination in Favor of Accused................................. 117-5

M Civ JI 117.04 Malicious Prosecution—Criminal Proceeding: Probable Cause............................................................ 117-6

M Civ JI 117.20 Malicious Prosecution—Civil Proceeding.............................................................................................. 117-8

M Civ JI 117.21 Malicious Prosecution—Civil Proceeding—Burden of Proof ................................................................ 117-9

CHAPTER 118 Libel and Slander 118-1

M Civ JI 118.01 Libel—Definition ................................................................................................................................... 118-2

M Civ JI 118.02 Slander—Definition............................................................................................................................... 118-3

M Civ JI 118.03 Libel, Slander—Statement of and Concerning the Plaintiff .................................................................. 118-4

M Civ JI 118.04 Libel, Slander—Meaning of a Statement .............................................................................................. 118-5

M Civ JI 118.05 Libel, Slander—Burden of Proof ........................................................................................................... 118-6

M Civ JI 118.06 Libel or Slander of Public Figure or Public Person (Actual Malice) ....................................................... 118-8

M Civ JI 118.07 Libel, Slander—Common-Law Qualified Privilege (Actual Malice) ..................................................... 118-10

M Civ JI 118.08 Libel or Slander of Private Person—Nonprivileged Communication .................................................. 118-11

M Civ JI 118.19 Libel-Actual Damages (Public Figure or Public Person)....................................................................... 118-12

M Civ JI 118.20 Libel—Economic Damages (Private Individual)................................................................................... 118-13

M Civ JI 118.21 Libel—Exemplary Damages................................................................................................................. 118-14

CHAPTER 119 Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress 119-1

M Civ JI 119.01 Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress—Burden of Proof ............................................................. 119-2

CHAPTER 125 Tortious Interference With Contract 125-1

M Civ JI 125.01 Tortious Interference with Contract: Elements .................................................................................... 125-2

M Civ JI 125.02 Tortious Interference with Contract: Contract/Consideration—Definitions ........................................ 125-3

M Civ JI 125.03 Tortious Interference with Contract: Intent—Definition...................................................................... 125-4

M Civ JI 125.04 Tortious Interference with Contract: Improper—Definition ................................................................ 125-5

Michigan Model Civil Jury Instructions

M Civ JI 125.05 Tortious Interference with Contract: Breach—Definition .................................................................... 125-7

CHAPTER 126 Tortious Interference with Business Relationship or Expectancy 126-1

M Civ JI 126.01 Tortious Interference with Business Relationship or Expectancy: Elements ........................................ 126-2

M Civ JI 126.02 Tortious Interference with Business Relationship or Expectancy: Business Relationship or Expectancy—

Definition........................................................................................................................................................................ 126-4

M Civ JI 126.03 Tortious Interference with Business Relationship or Expectancy: Intent—Definition.......................... 126-5

M Civ JI 126.04 Tortious Interference with Business Relationship or Expectancy: Improper—Definition .................... 126-6

CHAPTER 128 Fraud and Misrepresentation 128-1

M Civ JI 128.01 Fraud Based on False Representation................................................................................................... 128-2

M Civ JI 128.02 Fraud Based on Failure to Disclose Facts (Silent Fraud)........................................................................ 128-4

M Civ JI 128.03 Fraud Based on Bad-Faith Promise ....................................................................................................... 128-6

M Civ JI 128.04 Innocent Misrepresentation ................................................................................................................. 128-8

M Civ JI 128.10 Material Fact—Definition ..................................................................................................................... 128-9

M Civ JI 128.11 Reliance—Definition ........................................................................................................................... 128-10

CHAPTER 130 Promissory Estoppel 130-1

M Civ JI 130.01 Promissory Estoppel.............................................................................................................................. 130-2

M Civ JI 130.05 Promissory Estoppel: Promise—Definition........................................................................................... 130-5

CHAPTER 140 Contract Action—UCC 140-1

M Civ JI 140.01 Contract Action—UCC: Explanation and Burden of Proof .................................................................... 140-3

M Civ JI 140.02 Contract Action—UCC: Offer and Acceptance...................................................................................... 140-5

M Civ JI 140.03 Contract Action—UCC: Acceptance with Different or Additional Terms.............................................. 140-6

M Civ JI 140.04 Contract Action—UCC: Enforceability of Contract: Statute of Frauds.................................................. 140-7

M Civ JI 140.05 Contract Action—UCC: Contract Terms—Written Acceptance or Confirmation with Different or Additional

Terms ............................................................................................................................................................................. 140-9

M Civ JI 140.11 Contract Action—UCC: Buyer’s Acceptance of Nonconforming Goods.............................................. 140-11

M Civ JI 140.12 Contract Action—UCC: Buyer’s Revocation of Acceptance ................................................................ 140-13

M Civ JI 140.13 Contract Action—UCC: Buyer’s Rejection of Goods—Installment Contract....................................... 140-15

M Civ JI 140.14 Contract Action—UCC: Buyer’s Rejection of Goods or Part of the Goods.......................................... 140-17

M Civ JI 140.15 Contract Action—UCC: Anticipatory Repudiation—Definition ........................................................... 140-19

M Civ JI 140.21 Contract Action—UCC: Lost or Damaged Goods (Risk of Loss—Absence of Breach) ......................... 140-20

Michigan Model Civil Jury Instructions

M Civ JI 140.22 Contract Action—UCC: Lost or Damaged Goods (Risk of Loss—Seller’s Breach) ............................... 140-22

M Civ JI 140.23 Contract Action—UCC: Lost or Damaged Goods (Risk of Loss—Buyer’s Breach) ............................... 140-23

M Civ JI 140.31 Contract Action—UCC: Resale by Seller—Private Sale ....................................................................... 140-24

M Civ JI 140.32 Contract Action—UCC: Resale by Seller—Public Sale......................................................................... 140-25

M Civ JI 140.41 Contract Action—UCC: Express Warranty—Definition....................................................................... 140-26

M Civ JI 140.42 Contract Action—UCC: Express Warranty—Burden of Proof ............................................................. 140-27

M Civ JI 140.43 Contract Action—UCC: Implied Warranty of Merchantability—Definition ........................................ 140-28

M Civ JI 140.44 Contract Action—UCC: Implied Warranty of Merchantability—Elimination or Modification ............ 140-29

M Civ JI 140.45 Contract Action—UCC: Implied Warranty of Merchantability—Burden of Proof .............................. 140-31

M Civ JI 140.51 Contract Action—UCC: Warranty of Title (Ownership)....................................................................... 140-33

M Civ JI 140.52 Contract Action—UCC: Warranty of Title (Encumbrances) ................................................................ 140-34

M Civ JI 140.53 Contract Action—UCC: Warranty of Title (Ownership and Encumbrances—Burden of Proof).......... 140-35

CHAPTER 141 Contract Damages—UCC 141-1

Introduction ................................................................................................................................................................... 141-2

M Civ JI 141.01 Contract Damages—UCC: Seller’s Breach by Delivery of Nonconforming Goods Which the Buyer Accepts—

Buyer’s Damages............................................................................................................................................................ 141-3

M Civ JI 141.02 Contract Damages—UCC: Seller’s Breach by Failure to Deliver/Repudiation/Delivery of Nonconforming

Goods Rejected/Acceptance Rightfully Revoked—Buyer’s Damages............................................................................ 141-5

M Civ JI 141.11 Contract Damages—UCC: Buyer’s Breach by Nonpayment after Acceptance—Seller’s Action for Price 141-

M Civ JI 141.12 Contract Damages—UCC: Buyer’s Breach by Nonpayment—Goods Identified to the Contract—No Resale—

Seller’s Action for Price .................................................................................................................................................. 141-8

M Civ JI 141.13 Contract Damages—UCC: Buyer’s Breach by Nonpayment—Lost or Damaged Goods—Seller’s Action for

Price ............................................................................................................................................................................... 141-9

M Civ JI 141.14 Contract Damages—UCC: Buyer’s Breach by Nonacceptance or Repudiation—Seller Resells— Seller’s

Damages....................................................................................................................................................................... 141-10

M Civ JI 141.15 Contract Damages—UCC: Buyer’s Breach by Nonacceptance or Repudiation—Seller’s Damages .... 141-11

CHAPTER 142 Contracts 142-1

M Civ JI 142.01 Introduction and Burden of Proof......................................................................................................... 142-3

M Civ JI 142.10 Offer—Defined...................................................................................................................................... 142-5

M Civ JI 142.11 Duration of Offer................................................................................................................................... 142-6

M Civ JI 142.12 Revocation of Offer............................................................................................................................... 142-7

M Civ JI 142.13 Acceptance............................................................................................................................................ 142-8

M Civ JI 142.14 Time of Acceptance............................................................................................................................... 142-9

Michigan Model Civil Jury Instructions

M Civ JI 142.15 Counteroffer ....................................................................................................................................... 142-10

M Civ JI 142.16 Consideration...................................................................................................................................... 142-11

M Civ JI 142.17 Adequacy of Consideration................................................................................................................. 142-12

M Civ JI 142.18 Need Not Be in Writing ....................................................................................................................... 142-13

M Civ JI 142.19 Modification........................................................................................................................................ 142-14

M Civ JI 142.20 Breach of Contract/Substantial Performance..................................................................................... 142-16

M Civ JI 142.21 Time of Performance .......................................................................................................................... 142-17

M Civ JI 142.22 Conditions Precedent.......................................................................................................................... 142-18

M Civ JI 142.30 Introduction to Damages .................................................................................................................... 142-19

M Civ JI 142.31 Contract Damages: Benefit of Bargain................................................................................................ 142-20

M Civ JI 142.32 Lost Profits .......................................................................................................................................... 142-21

M Civ JI 142.33 Reliance Damages ............................................................................................................................... 142-22

M Civ JI 142.34 Consequential Damages...................................................................................................................... 142-23

M Civ JI 142.35 Mitigation............................................................................................................................................ 142-24

M Civ JI 142.40 Duress ................................................................................................................................................. 142-25

M Civ JI 142.41 Waiver................................................................................................................................................. 142-26

M Civ JI 142.42 Impracticability ................................................................................................................................... 142-27

M Civ JI 142.43 Frustration of Purpose ........................................................................................................................ 142-28

M Civ JI 142.50 Introduction to Contract Interpretation ............................................................................................. 142-29

M Civ JI 142.51 Must Consider All Parts of Contract.................................................................................................... 142-30

M Civ JI 142.52 Effect of Incorporated Documents...................................................................................................... 142-31

M Civ JI 142.53 Words Given Ordinary Meaning ......................................................................................................... 142-32

M CIV JI 142.53A Giving Effect to Every Word ............................................................................................................. 142-33

M Civ JI 142.54 Custom and Usage of Trade / Business / Industry .............................................................................. 142-34

M Civ JI 142.55 Conduct of Parties............................................................................................................................... 142-35

M CIV JI 142.56 Determining the Meaning of Ambiguous Language in an Agreement ............................................... 142-36

M CIV JI 142.57 Interpretation Against the Drafter ..................................................................................................... 142-37

M Civ JI 142.60 Affirmative Defense—Release ............................................................................................................ 142-38

M Civ JI 142.61 Affirmative Defense—Failure of Performance.................................................................................. 142-39

CHAPTER 143 Sales Representatives' and Commissions Act 143-1

M Civ JI 143.01 Commission—Defined .......................................................................................................................... 143-2

M Civ JI 143.02 Principal—Defined ................................................................................................................................ 143-3

M Civ JI 143.03 Sales Representative—Defined............................................................................................................. 143-4

Michigan Model Civil Jury Instructions

M Civ JI 143.10 Payment of Commissions Due At The Time of Contract Termination .................................................. 143-5

M Civ JI 143.11 Payment of Commissions That Become Due After Contract Termination............................................ 143-6

M Civ JI 143.12 When Commissions Become Due ......................................................................................................... 143-7

M Civ JI 143.20 Failure to Pay Commissions Due At Time of Termination..................................................................... 143-8

M Civ JI 143.21 Failure to Pay Commissions Due After Termination ............................................................................. 143-9

M Civ JI 143.22 Actual Damages / Intentional Failure to Pay Commissions When Due............................................... 143-10

CHAPTER 170-180 Probate 170-180-1

Introduction ............................................................................................................................................................ 170-180-1

CHAPTER 170 Will Contests 170-1

M Civ JI 170.01 Will Contests: Defining Legal Names of Parties and Counsel................................................................ 170-3

M Civ JI 170.02 Will Contests: Will/Codicil—Definition ................................................................................................. 170-4

M Civ JI 170.03 Will Contests: Holographic Will—Definition ......................................................................................... 170-5

M Civ JI 170.04 Will Contests: Cautionary Instruction as to Decedent’s Right to Leave Property by a Will .................. 170-6

M Civ JI 170.05 Will Contests: Letter, Deed, Bill of Sale, Contract as a Will................................................................... 170-7

M Civ JI 170.08 Will Contests: Will—Writings Intended as Wills ................................................................................... 170-9

M Civ JI 170.11 Will Contests: Will Signed by Another for Decedent .......................................................................... 170-11

M Civ JI 170.12 Will Contests: Decedent Signing Will by Mark.................................................................................... 170-12

M Civ JI 170.13 Will Contests: Requirements for Witnessing Will ............................................................................... 170-13

M Civ JI 170.15A Will Contests: Proving Execution of Self-Proved Wills...................................................................... 170-14

M Civ JI 170.15B Will Contests: Proving Execution of Will That Is Not Self-Proved..................................................... 170-15

M Civ JI 170.16 Will Contests: Proving Execution of Will Where Witnesses Cannot Be Found [ Instruction Deleted ] 170-16

M Civ JI 170.17A Will Contests: Execution—Witness Not Remembering or Denying Contents of Witnessing Clause (Self-

Proved Will).................................................................................................................................................................. 170-17

M Civ JI 170.17B Will Contests: Execution—Witness Not Remembering or Denying Contents of Witnessing Clause (Will That

Is Not Self-Proved) ....................................................................................................................................................... 170-18

M Civ JI 170.21 Will Contests: Lost, Destroyed or Otherwise Unavailable Will ........................................................... 170-19

M Civ JI 170.31 Will Contests: Revocation of Will by Physical Means ......................................................................... 170-20

M Civ JI 170.32 Will Contests: Revocation—Presumption from Failure to Produce Original Will Retained by Decedent 170-

M Civ JI 170.33 Will Contests: Revocation—Presumption from Failure to Produce Executed Duplicate Will Retained by

Decedent...................................................................................................................................................................... 170-23

M Civ JI 170.34 Will Contests: Conditional Revocation of Will (Dependent Relative Revocation) .............................. 170-24

M Civ JI 170.41 Will Contests: Mental Capacity—Definition ....................................................................................... 170-25

Michigan Model Civil Jury Instructions

M Civ JI 170.42 Will Contests: Mental Capacity—Will Made before or after Adjudication of Incompetency, after

Commitment or While under Guardianship or Conservatorship ................................................................................. 170-26

M Civ JI 170.43 Will Contests: Insane Delusion—Definition ........................................................................................ 170-27

M Civ JI 170.44 Will Contests: Undue Influence—Definition; Burden of Proof ........................................................... 170-28

M Civ JI 170.45 Will Contests: Existence of Presumption of Undue Influence—Burden of Proof [ Instruction Deleted ] 170-

M Civ JI 170.46 Will Contests: Fraud in Procurement of Will....................................................................................... 170-32

M Civ JI 170.51 Will Contests: Burden of Proof............................................................................................................ 170-33

CHAPTER 171 Mental Illness 171-1

M Civ JI 171.01 Mental Illness: Involuntary Treatment—Defining Legal Names of Parties and Counsel ...................... 171-2

M Civ JI 171.02 Mental Illness: Involuntary Treatment—Elements and Burden of Proof ............................................. 171-3

CHAPTER 172 Guardians and Conservators 172-1

M Civ JI 172.01 Appointment of Guardian or Conservator or Termination of Guardianship or Conservatorship: Defining

Legal Names of Parties and Counsel .............................................................................................................................. 172-2

M Civ JI 172.02 Appointment of Guardian of an Adult .................................................................................................. 172-3

M Civ JI 172.03 Termination of Guardianship of an Adult ............................................................................................. 172-5

M Civ JI 172.11 Appointment of Conservator of an Adult ............................................................................................. 172-6

M Civ JI 172.12 Termination of Conservatorship of an Adult ........................................................................................ 172-8

CHAPTER 173 Bank Accounts 173-1

M Civ JI 173.01 Determination of Title to Bank Accounts—Defining Legal Names of Parties and Counsel................... 173-2

M Civ JI 173.02 Determination of Title to Bank Account ............................................................................................... 173-3

CHAPTER 174 Felonious and Intentional Killing 174-1

M Civ JI 174.01 Felonious and Intentional Killing—Defining Legal Names of Parties and Counsel ............................... 174-2

M Civ JI 174.02 Felonious and Intentional Killing—Definition ....................................................................................... 174-4

M Civ JI 174.03 Felonious and Intentional Killing: Aiding and Abetting—Definition ..................................................... 174-6

M Civ JI 174.11 Felonious and Intentional Killing: Self-Defense—Definition................................................................. 174-8

M Civ JI 174.12 Felonious and Intentional Killing: Defense of Others—Definition ...................................................... 174-10

M Civ JI 174.13 Felonious and Intentional Killing: Legal Insanity—Definition ............................................................. 174-11

M Civ JI 174.14 Felonious and Intentional Killing: Accident—Definition ..................................................................... 174-13

Michigan Model Civil Jury Instructions

CHAPTER 175 Pretermitted Heirs 175-1

M Civ JI 175.01 Pretermitted Heirs—Defining Legal Names of Parties and Counsel ..................................................... 175-2

M Civ JI 175.02 Omission of Child or Issue of Deceased Child in Will As a Result of Mistake or Accident .................... 175-3

M Civ JI 175.11 Omission of Spouse in Will As a Result of Oversight or Mistake .......................................................... 175-5

M Civ JI 175.12 Omission of Spouse in Will Made Prior to Marriage Where There Are Transfers Made in Lieu of Will

Provision......................................................................................................................................................................... 175-6

CHAPTER 176 Claims for Services Rendered 176-1

M Civ JI 176.01 Claim for Services Rendered—Defining Legal Names of Parties and Counsel...................................... 176-2

M Civ JI 176.02 Claim for Services Rendered ................................................................................................................. 176-3

CHAPTER 178 Pretermitted Heirs (EPIC) 178-1

Introduction ................................................................................................................................................................... 178-2

M Civ JI 178.01 Pretermitted Heirs: Defining Legal Names of Parties and Counsel (EPIC) ............................................ 178-4

M Civ JI 178.02 Pretermitted Child: Will Executed Prior to Birth or Adoption of Child Omitted from Will (EPIC)......... 178-5

M Civ JI 178.03 Pretermitted Child: Omission of Living Child from Will Because of Mistaken Belief Child Is Dead (EPIC)......

178-8

M Civ JI 178.12 Pretermitted Spouse: Will Executed Prior to Marriage (EPIC) ............................................................ 178-10

CHAPTER 179 Trust Contests 179-1

Introduction ................................................................................................................................................................... 179-2

M Civ JI 179.01 Trust Contests: Defining Legal Names of Parties and Counsel.............................................................. 179-3

M Civ JI 179.02 Trust Contests: Definitions.................................................................................................................... 179-4

M Civ JI 179.03 Trust Contests: Creation of a Trust ....................................................................................................... 179-5

M Civ JI 179.04 Trust Contests: Sufficient Mental Capacity—Definition ....................................................................... 179-6

M Civ JI 179.05 Trust Contests: Intention to Create a Trust .......................................................................................... 179-7

M Civ JI 179.06 Trust Contests: Trust Need Not Be in Writing....................................................................................... 179-8

M Civ JI 179.07 Trust Contests: Cautionary Instruction as to Settlor’s Right to Leave Property by a Trust................... 179-9

M Civ JI 179.10 Trust Contests: Undue Influence—Definition—Burden of Proof........................................................ 179-10

M Civ JI 179.12 Trust Contests: Fraud in Procurement of Trust................................................................................... 179-12

M Civ JI 179.15 Trust Contests: Revocation or Amendment of Trust .......................................................................... 179-13

M Civ JI 179.20 Trust Contests: Burden of Proof.......................................................................................................... 179-14

M Civ JI 179.25 Trust Contests: Existence of Presumption of Undue Influence—Burden of Proof [ Instruction Deleted ].....

179-16

Michigan Model Civil Jury Instructions

CHAPTER 180 Attorney Fees 180-1

M Civ JI 180.01 Attorney Fees—Defining Legal Names of Parties and Counsel............................................................. 180-2

M Civ JI 180.02 Attorney Fees—Explanation of Statute ................................................................................................ 180-3

M Civ JI 180.03 Attorney Fees—Reasonable Value of Legal Services ............................................................................ 180-4

CHAPTER 190-241 Forms of Verdicts, Volume 2 190-241-1

M Civ JI 190.01 Form of Verdict: Dram Shop—Sale to Minor ................................................................................. 190-241-3

M Civ JI 190.02 Form of Verdict: Dram Shop—Sale to Visibly Intoxicated Person ................................................. 190-241-9

M Civ JI 195.01 Form of Verdict: Paternity [ Form of Verdict Deleted ]................................................................ 190-241-14

M Civ JI 196.01 Form of Verdict: Landlord-Tenant—Rent Action ......................................................................... 190-241-15

M Civ JI 196.02 Form of Verdict: Landlord-Tenant--Termination Action .............................................................. 190-241-16

M Civ JI 197.01 Form of Verdict: Child Protection Proceeding [ Form of Verdict Deleted ] ................................. 190-241-17

M Civ JI 208.01 Form of Verdict: Libel................................................................................................................... 190-241-18

M Civ JI 220.01 Form of Verdict: Will Contests ..................................................................................................... 190-241-21

M Civ JI 220.05 Form of Verdict: Will Contests—Lost, Destroyed or Otherwise Unavailable Will ....................... 190-241-23

M Civ JI 221.01 Form of Verdict: Mental Illness--Involuntary Treatment............................................................. 190-241-24

M Civ JI 222.01 Form of Verdict: Appointment of Guardian of Adult ................................................................... 190-241-25

M Civ JI 222.02 Form of Verdict: Termination of Guardianship of Adult .............................................................. 190-241-26

M Civ JI 222.11 form of Verdict: Appointment of Conservator of Adult............................................................... 190-241-27

M Civ JI 222.12 Form of Verdict: Termination of Conservatorship of Adult ......................................................... 190-241-28

M Civ JI 223.01 Form of Verdict: Determination of Title to Bank Accounts.......................................................... 190-241-29

M Civ JI 224.01 Form of Verdict: Felonious and Intentional Killing....................................................................... 190-241-30

M Civ JI 225.02 Form of Verdict: Omission of Child or Issue of Deceased Child in Will As a Result of Mistake or Accident ...

190-241-31

M Civ JI 225.11 Form of Verdict: Omission of Spouse in Will As a Result of Oversight or Mistake ...................... 190-241-32

M Civ JI 225.12 Form of Verdict: Omission of Spouse in Will Made Prior to Marriage Where There Are Transfers Made in

Lieu of Will Provision............................................................................................................................................. 190-241-33

M Civ JI 226.01 Form of Verdict: Claim for Services Rendered ............................................................................. 190-241-34

M Civ JI 228.02 Form of Verdict: Pretermitted Child: Will Executed Prior to Birth or Adoption of Child Omitted from Will

(EPIC) ..................................................................................................................................................................... 190-241-36

M Civ JI 228.03 Form of Verdict: Pretermitted Child: Omission of Living Child from Will Because of Mistaken Belief Child is

Dead (EPIC)............................................................................................................................................................ 190-241-37

M Civ JI 228.12 Form of Verdict: Pretermitted Spouse: Will Executed Prior to Marriage (EPIC).......................... 190-241-38

M Civ JI 230.01 Form of Verdict: Attorney Fees.................................................................................................... 190-241-39

M Civ JI 241.01 Form of Verdict: Contract Damages—UCC: Seller’s Breach by Delivery of Nonconforming Goods Which the

Michigan Model Civil Jury Instructions

Buyer Accepts........................................................................................................................................................ 190-241-40

M Civ JI 241.02 Form of Verdict: Contract Damages—UCC: Seller’s Breach by Failure to Deliver/Repudiation/Delivery of

Nonconforming Goods Rejected ........................................................................................................................... 190-241-42

M Civ JI 241.14 Form of Verdict: Contract Damages—UCC: Buyer’s Breach by Nonacceptance or Repudiation—Seller

Resells—Seller’s Damages..................................................................................................................................... 190-241-44

M Civ JI 241.15 Form of Verdict: Contract Damages--UCC: Buyer’s Breach by Nonacceptance or Repudiation--Seller’s

Damages................................................................................................................................................................ 190-241-46

Michigan Model Civil Jury Instructions

Michigan Supreme Court Rule 2.512-1

Rule 2.512

Instructions to the Jury

(A) Request for Instructions.

(1) At a time the court reasonably directs, the parties must file written requests

that the court instruct the jury on the law as stated in the requests. In the

absence of a direction from the court, a party may file a written request for jury

instructions at or before the close of the evidence.

(2) In addition to requests for instructions submitted under subrule (A)(1), after

the close of the evidence, each party shall submit in writing to the court a

statement of the issues and may submit the party’s theory of the case regarding

each issue. The statement must be concise, be narrative in form, and set forth

as issues only those disputed propositions of fact that are supported by the

evidence. The theory may include those claims supported by the evidence or

admitted.

(3) A copy of the requested instructions must be served on the adverse parties

in accordance with MCR 2.107.

(4) The court shall inform the attorneys of its proposed action on the requests

before their arguments to the jury.

(5) The court need not give the statements of issues or theories of the case in

the form submitted if the court presents to the jury the material substance of

the issues and theories of each party.

(B) Instructing the Jury.

(1) At any time during the trial, the court may, with or without request, instruct

the jury on a point of law if the instruction will materially aid the jury in

understanding the proceedings and arriving at a just verdict.

(2) Before or after arguments or at both times, as the court elects, the court

shall instruct the jury on the applicable law, the issues presented by the case,

and, if a party requests as provided in subrule (A)(2), that party’s theory of the

Michigan Model Civil Jury Instructions

Rule 2.512-2 Michigan Supreme Court

case.

only if the party objects on the record before the jury retires to consider the verdict (or, in

the case of instructions given after deliberations have begun, before the jury resumes

deliberations), stating specifically the matter to which the party objects and the grounds for

the objection. Opportunity must be given to make the objection out of the hearing of the

jury.

(D) Model Civil Jury Instructions.

(1) The Committee on Model Civil Jury Instructions appointed by the Supreme

Court has the authority to adopt model civil jury instructions (M Civ JI) and to

amend or repeal those instructions approved by the predecessor committee.

Before adopting, amending, or repealing an instruction, the committee shall

publish notice of the committee’s intent, together with the text of the

instruction to be adopted, or the amendment to be made, or a reference to the

instruction to be repealed, in the manner provided in MCR 1.201. The notice

shall specify the time and manner for commenting on the proposal. The

committee shall thereafter publish notice of its final action on the proposed

change, including, if appropriate, the effective date of the adoption,

amendment, or repeal. A model civil jury instruction does not have the force

and effect of a court rule.

(2) Pertinent portions of the instructions approved by the Committee on Model

Civil Jury Instructions or its predecessor committee must be given in each

action in which jury instructions are given if

(a)they are applicable,

(b)they accurately state the applicable law, and

(c)they are requested by a party.

(3)Whenever the committee recommends that no instruction be given on a

particular matter, the court shall not give an instruction unless it specifically

finds for reasons stated on the record that

(a) the instruction is necessary to state the applicable law accurately, and

(b) the matter is not adequately covered by other pertinent model civil jury

instructions.

(4)This subrule does not limit the power of the court to give additional

instructions on applicable law not covered by the model instructions.

Michigan Supreme Court Rule 2.512-3

Rule 2.512 Instructions to the Jury

Additional instructions, when given, must be patterned as nearly as practicable

after the style of the model instructions and must be concise, understandable,

conversational, unslanted, and nonargumentative.”

Michigan Model Civil Jury Instructions

Rule 2.512-4 Michigan Supreme Court

Michigan Supreme Court Page 1-1

CHAPTER 1

Preliminary Instructions Before

Jury Selection

Introductory Directions to the Court ............................................................................. 1-2

M Civ JI 1.01 Introductory Comments............................................................................ 1-3

M Civ JI 1.02 Defining Legal Names of Parties and Counsel........................................... 1-4

M Civ JI 1.03 Explanation of Jury Selection and Voir Dire .............................................. 1-5

M Civ JI 1.04 Juror Oath Before Voir Dire ...................................................................... 1-6

M Civ JI 1.05 Prospective Jurors—Health and Other Problems ..................................... 1-7

M Civ JI 1.10 Juror Oath Following Selection ................................................................. 1-8

Michigan Model Civil Jury Instructions

Page 1-2 Michigan Supreme Court

Introductory Directions to the Court

These instructions utilize masculine and feminine pronouns. In the use of these instructions,

trial judges are directed to follow the requirements of MCR 1.109 concerning the use of

personal pronouns when referencing the parties to litigation or others who have expressed

a preferred form of address or personal pronoun. Trial judges are further directed to adhere

to the dictates of MCR 1.109 when addressing jurors collectively (e.g., “members of the

jury,” rather than “ladies and gentlemen”) and individually.

History

Introductory Directions to the Court were added July 2024.

Michigan Supreme Court Page 1-3

Chapter 1: Preliminary Instructions Before Jury Selection

M Civ JI 1.01 Introductory Comments

[ Good morning / Good afternoon]. I am Judge , and it is my pleasure to welcome you to

the ______________ Court.

You have been called here today for possible selection as a juror in a civil case. The remarks

which I am about to make are intended as an outline of the trial of this case so that you may

be generally aware of what occurs during a trial and some of the legal principles that control

the conduct of civil cases.

I know that jury duty may be a new experience for some of you. Jury duty is one of the most

serious duties that members of a free society are asked to perform. Our system of self-

government could not exist without it.

The jury is an important part of this court. The right to a jury trial is an ancient tradition and

part of our heritage. The parties have a right to a jury that is selected fairly, that comes to

the case without bias, and that will attempt to reach a verdict based on the evidence

presented. Because you are making very important decisions in this case, you are to

evaluate the evidence carefully and avoid decisions based on generalizations, prejudices,

sympathies, stereotypes, or biases. The law and your oath demand that you return a just

verdict, based solely on the evidence, your reason and common sense, and these

instructions. As jurors, your sole duty is to find the truth and do justice. Each side in a trial

is entitled to jurors who keep open minds until the time comes to decide the case. Take the

time you need to reflect carefully about the evidence. You must each reach your own

conclusions about this case individually, but you should do so only after listening to and

considering the opinions of the other jurors, who may have different backgrounds and

perspectives from yours. Working together will help achieve a fair result.

History

Amended January 1993, October 1993, September 2007, July 2019, May 2023, July 2024.

Michigan Model Civil Jury Instructions

Page 1-4 Michigan Supreme Court

M Civ JI 1.02 Defining Legal Names of Parties and Counsel

This is a civil case involving [ Describe case briefly. ], which I will explain more fully later.

The person bringing this case is called the plaintiff. The plaintiff is [ State plaintiff? name

and indicate where seated. ]. The lawyer for the plaintiff is [ State lawyers’ name and

indicate where seated. ]. The person defending the case brought by the plaintiff is called the

defendant. The defendant is [ State defendants’ name and indicate where seated. ]. The

lawyer for the defendant is [ State lawyers’ name and indicate where seated. ]. [ Describe

the function of other persons seated at the counsel table. ].

History

Amended January 1993, October 1993, September 2007.

Michigan Supreme Court Page 1-5

Chapter 1: Preliminary Instructions Before Jury Selection

M Civ JI 1.03 Explanation of Jury Selection and Voir Dire

A trial begins with jury selection. The purpose of this process is to obtain information about

you that will help us choose a fair and impartial jury to hear this case.

During jury selection [ the lawyers and ] I will ask you questions. The questions are meant

to find out if you know anything about the case. Also, we need to find out if you have any

opinions or personal experiences that might influence you for or against a party or witness.

One of these could cause you to be excused, even though you may be otherwise qualified

to be a juror.

The questions may probe deeply into your attitudes, beliefs, and experiences. The law

requires that we get this information so that an impartial jury can be chosen. They are not

meant to be an unreasonable prying into your private life.

If you do not hear or understand a question, you should say so. If you do understand it, you

should answer it truthfully and completely. Please do not hesitate to speak freely about

anything you believe we should know.

During jury selection you may be excused from serving on the jury in one of two ways.

First, I may excuse you for cause; that is, I may decide that there is a valid reason why you

cannot or should not serve in this case. The second way to be excused is by one of the

lawyers. The law gives the lawyers for each side the right to excuse a limited number of

jurors without giving any reason for doing so. If you are excused, don’t feel bad or take it

personally.

During the course of the jury selection process, if there is any matter you wish to discuss in

private, please raise your hand or write a note to the bailiff.

History

M Civ JI 1.03 was added September 1980. Amended October 1993, March 1996,

September 2007.

Michigan Model Civil Jury Instructions

Page 1-6 Michigan Supreme Court

M Civ JI 1.04 Juror Oath Before Voir Dire

I will now ask you to swear or affirm to answer truthfully, fully, and honestly all the

questions that you will be asked about your qualifications to serve as a juror in this case.

Please stand and raise your right hand.

“Do you solemnly swear or affirm that you will truthfully and completely answer all

questions about your qualifications to serve as jurors in this case?”

History

M Civ JI 1.04 was added October 1993. Amended September 2007.

Michigan Supreme Court Page 1-7

Chapter 1: Preliminary Instructions Before Jury Selection

M Civ JI 1.05 Prospective Jurors—Health and Other Problems

(a) The witnesses who may be called in this case are: [ read list of witnesses without

designation of party who will call them ]. Does anyone know the [ defendant / defendants

], the [ plaintiff / plaintiffs ], or any of the lawyers or witnesses?

(b) We think this trial will last for [ number of days / number of weeks ]. If you believe that

the length of the trial will be a real hardship for you, please let me know now.

Does anyone have a physical, mental, or other problem that may prevent you from serving

on the jury? For example, does anyone have a medical problem that makes you unable to

sit for two or three hours at a time? Does anyone have a sight or hearing problem?

(d) Under guidelines established by the Michigan Supreme Court, I have approved a media

request for cameras to be used during trial. I’ll discuss this more later, but one of the rules

is that you cannot be filmed or photographed. However, if you believe that the presence of

the cameras will interfere with your ability to concentrate and render a fair and impartial

verdict, raise your hand.

Note on Use

Subsection (d) would only be read if the trial judge has allowed cameras in the courtroom

as permitted by Michigan Supreme Court Administrative Order 1989-1. The subsection

contemplates follow-up questions if a juror indicates his or her ability to concentrate or

render a fair verdict would be impaired.

History

M Civ JI 1.05 was added October 1993. Amended March 1996, September 2007, October

2013.

Michigan Model Civil Jury Instructions

Page 1-8 Michigan Supreme Court

M Civ JI 1.10 Juror Oath Following Selection

I will now ask you to swear or affirm to perform your duty to try the case justly and to reach

a true verdict. Please stand and raise your right hand.

“Do you solemnly swear or affirm that, in this case now before the court, you will justly

decide the questions submitted to you, that, unless you are discharged by the court from

further deliberation, you will render a true verdict, and that you will render your verdict

only on the evidence introduced and in accordance with the instructions of the court, so help

you God?”

History

M Civ JI 1.10 was added October 1993. Amended September 2007.

Michigan Supreme Court Page 2-1

CHAPTER 2

Preliminary Instructions After

Jury Is Sworn

M Civ JI 2.01 Responsibilities of Judge and Jury............................................................. 2-2

M Civ JI 2.02 Description of Trial Procedure .................................................................. 2-3

M Civ JI 2.02A Cameras in the Courtroom ..................................................................... 2-5

M Civ JI 2.03 Jury Deliberation; Jurors as Triers of Fact ................................................. 2-6

M Civ JI 2.04 Jury Must Only Consider Evidence; What Evidence Is / Prohibited Actions by

Jurors.............................................................................................................................. 2-7

M Civ JI 2.05 Jurors to Keep Open Minds [ Instruction Deleted ] ................................ 2-10

M Civ JI 2.06 Jurors to Keep Open Minds..................................................................... 2-11

M Civ JI 2.07 Jurors Not to Consider Information Received outside Presence of Court

[ Instruction Deleted ] .................................................................................................. 2-13

M Civ JI 2.08 Objections; Out-of-Presence Hearings.................................................... 2-14

M Civ JI 2.09 Court to Instruct on Law ......................................................................... 2-15

M Civ JI 2.10 Inability to Hear Witness or See Exhibit.................................................. 2-16

M Civ JI 2.11 Questions by Jurors Allowed................................................................... 2-17

M Civ JI 2.12 Caution about Publicity in Cases of Public Interest [ Instruction

Deleted ]....................................................................................................................... 2-18

M Civ JI 2.13 Note Taking by Jurors Allowed / Not Allowed ........................................ 2-19

M Civ JI 2.14 Reference Documents............................................................................. 2-20

Michigan Model Civil Jury Instructions

Page 2-2 Michigan Supreme Court

M Civ JI 2.01 Responsibilities of Judge and Jury

Now I am going to briefly explain to you my responsibilities as judge and your

responsibility as jurors.

My responsibilities as the judge in this trial are to make sure that the trial is run fairly and

efficiently, to make decisions about evidence, and to instruct you about the law that applies

to this case. You must take the law as I give it to you. Nothing I say is meant to reflect my

own opinions about the facts of the case.

Your responsibility as jurors is to decide what the facts of the case are. This is your job, and

no one else’s. You must think about all the evidence and all the testimony and then decide

what each piece of evidence means and how important you think it is.

History

Amended January 1993, September 2007.

Michigan Supreme Court Page 2-3

Chapter 2: Preliminary Instructions After Jury Is Sworn

M Civ JI 2.02 Description of Trial Procedure

Now I will briefly explain the general order of procedure in the trial from this point forward.

First, the lawyer for the plaintiff makes an opening statement in which [ he / she ] outlines

[ his / her ] theory of the case. The lawyer for the defendant can then make an opening

statement, or [ he / she ] can wait until later. These opening statements are not evidence.

They are only intended to assist you in understanding the viewpoints and claims of the

parties.

After the opening statements, we will begin the taking of evidence. Plaintiff’s lawyer will

present evidence first. [ He / she ] may call witnesses to testify and may also offer exhibits

such as documents or physical objects. Defendant’s lawyer has a right to cross-examine the

witnesses called by the plaintiff. Following the plaintiff’s presentation, the defendant has

the opportunity to present evidence. Plaintiff’s lawyer has a right to cross-examine the

witnesses called by the defendant. [ During the taking of evidence the lawyers may be

allowed to present interim commentary regarding evidence that has been submitted. This

commentary is not evidence. Like the opening statements, it is only intended to assist you

in understanding the viewpoints and claims of the parties. ]

After all the evidence has been presented, the lawyers for each side will make their closing

arguments to you in support of their cases. You are again reminded that the statements of

the lawyers are not evidence but are only intended to help you in understanding the

evidence and the way each side sees the case. You must base your decision only on the

evidence.

In this case, the Plaintiff has brought [ a claim / claims ] involving [ state nature of claims ].

[ Insert instructions regarding the elements of all civil claims (including definitions of legal

terms), legal presumptions, and burdens of proof. ]

Because no one can predict the course of a trial, these instructions may change at the end

of the trial; if so, you should follow the instructions given at the conclusion of the trial. You

will be given a written copy of the instructions I have just read for your use during the trial.

Note on Use

The words “plaintiff” and “defendant” may be replaced by “petitioner” and “respondent”

in cases in which the latter terms are used to describe the parties.

Because the elements of civil claims may include legal terms, e.g. proximate cause,

ordinary care, invitee, licensee, and allowable expenses, definitions of those legal terms

should also be given.

The bracketed language should not be given if the court has determined before trial that

Michigan Model Civil Jury Instructions

Page 2-4 Michigan Supreme Court

interim commentary will not be permitted. If interim commentary is permitted, M Civ JI

3.16 should be given immediately before the commentary.

Comment

The 2011 amendments reflect the amendments to MCR 2.513(A) and (D) ordered by the

Michigan Supreme Court on June 29, 2011, which became effective September 1, 2011.

These amendments require the court to include in its preliminary instructions the elements

of all civil claims, as well as legal presumptions and burdens of proof. Additionally, the

court is given discretion to permit the parties to present interim commentary.

History

Amended January 1993, September 2007, October 2011.

Michigan Supreme Court Page 2-5

Chapter 2: Preliminary Instructions After Jury Is Sworn

M Civ JI 2.02A Cameras in the Courtroom

In order to increase public knowledge of court proceedings and to make the courts as open

as possible, the Michigan Supreme Court allows cameras in courtrooms as long as certain

guidelines are followed. One of those guidelines is that no one is allowed to film or

photograph you, so you will not end up on television or in the newspaper.

The presence of cameras does not make this case more important than any other. All trials

are equally important to the parties. You should not draw any inferences or conclusions

from the fact that cameras are present at this particular trial. Also, since the news media is

generally able to decide what portions of the trial they wish to attend, their attendance may

be periodic from day to day. You are not to concern yourself with why certain witnesses

are filmed or photographed and others are not. Whether a particular witness is filmed or

photographed is not any indication as to the value of, or weight to be given to, that witness’s

testimony.

Your complete attention must be focused on the trial. You should ignore the presence of

the cameras. If you find at any time that you are unable to concentrate because of the

cameras, please notify me immediately through the bailiff so that I can take any necessary

corrective action.

Note on Use

This instruction would only be given if the trial judge has allowed cameras in the courtroom

as permitted by Michigan Supreme Court Administrative Order 1989-1. M Civ JI 60.01A

would also be given before the jury deliberates.

History

M Civ JI 2.02A was added October 2013. Amended July 2017.

Michigan Model Civil Jury Instructions

Page 2-6 Michigan Supreme Court

M Civ JI 2.03 Jury Deliberation; Jurors as Triers of Fact

After all of the evidence has been presented and the lawyers have given their arguments, I

will give you detailed instructions about the rules of law that apply to this case. Then you

will go to the jury room to decide on your verdict.

The responsibility of the jury is to determine the facts. You are the judges of the facts. You

determine the weight, effect, and value of the evidence, as well as the credibility of the

witnesses. You must consider and weigh the testimony of all witnesses who appear before

you, and you determine whether to believe any witnesses and the extent to which any

witness should be believed. It is your responsibility to consider any conflicts in testimony

which may arise during the course of the trial. Your decision as to any fact in the case is

final. On the other hand, it is your duty to accept the law as I instruct you.

History

Amended January 1993, September 2007.

Michigan Supreme Court Page 2-7

Chapter 2: Preliminary Instructions After Jury Is Sworn

M Civ JI 2.04 Jury Must Only Consider Evidence; What Evidence Is /

Prohibited Actions by Jurors

(1)Your determination of the facts in this case must be based only upon the evidence

admitted during the trial. Evidence consists of the sworn testimony of the witnesses. It also

includes exhibits, which are documents or other things introduced into evidence.

*(It may also include some things which I specifically tell you to consider as evidence.)

(2)There are some things presented in the trial that are not evidence, and I will now explain

what is not evidence:

(a)The lawyers’ statements, commentaries, and arguments are not

evidence. They are only meant to help you understand the evidence and

each side’s legal theories. You should only accept things the lawyers say

that are supported by the evidence or by your own common sense and

general knowledge. However, an admission of a fact by a lawyer is

binding on [ his / her ] client.

(b)Questions by the lawyers, you or me to the witnesses are not evidence.

You should consider these questions only as they give meaning to the

witnesses’ answers.

(c)My comments, rulings, [ summary of the evidence, ] and instructions

are also not evidence. It is my duty to see that the trial is conducted

according to the law, and to tell you the law that applies to this case.

However, when I make a comment or give an instruction, I am not trying

to influence your vote or express a personal opinion about the case. If you

believe that I have an opinion about how you should decide this case, you

must pay no attention to that opinion. You are the only judges of the facts,

and you should decide this case from the evidence.

(3)In addition, you are not to consider anything about the case from outside of the

courtroom as it is not evidence admitted during the trial. Under the law, the evidence you

consider to decide the case must meet certain standards. For example, witnesses must swear

to tell the truth, and the lawyers must be able to cross-examine them. Because information

obtained outside of the courtroom does not have to meet these standards, it could give you

incorrect or misleading information that might unfairly favor one side, or you may begin to

improperly form an opinion on information that has not been admitted. This would

compromise the parties’ right to have a verdict rendered only by the jurors and based only

on the evidence you hear and see in the courtroom. So, to be fair to both sides, you must

follow these instructions. I will now describe some of the things you may not consider from

outside of the courtroom:

(a)Newspaper, television, radio and other news reports, emails, blogs and

social media posts and commentary about this case are not evidence.

Michigan Model Civil Jury Instructions

Page 2-8 Michigan Supreme Court

Until I discharge you as jurors, do not search for, read, listen to, or watch

any such information about this case from any source, in any form

whatsoever.

(b)Opinions of people outside of the trial are not evidence. You are not to

discuss or share information, or answer questions, about this case at all in

any manner with anyone—this includes family, friends or even

strangers—until you have been discharged as a juror. Don’t allow anyone

to say anything to you or say anything about this case in your presence. If

anyone does, advise them that you are on the jury hearing the case, ask

them to stop, and let me know immediately.

(c)Research, investigations and experiments not admitted in the

courtroom are not evidence. You must not do any investigations on your

own or conduct any research or experiments of any kind. You may not

research or investigate through the Internet or otherwise any evidence,

testimony, or information related to this case, including about a party, a

witness, an attorney, a court officer, or any topics raised in the case.

(d)Except as otherwise admitted in trial, the scene is not evidence. You

must not visit the scene of the occurrence that is the subject of this trial. If

it should become necessary that you view or visit the scene, you will be

taken as a group. You must not consider as evidence any personal

knowledge you have of the scene.

(4)To avoid even the appearance of unfairness or improper conduct on your part, you must

follow the following rules of conduct:

(a)While you are in the courtroom and while you are deliberating, you are

prohibited altogether from using a computer, cellular telephone or any

other electronic device capable of making communications. You may use

these devices during recesses so long as your use does not otherwise

violate my instructions.

(b)Until I have discharged you as a juror, you must not talk to any party,

lawyer, or witness even if your conversation has nothing to do with this

case. This is to avoid even the appearance of impropriety.

(5)If you discover that any juror has violated any of my instructions about prohibited

conduct, you must report it to me.

(6)After you are discharged as a juror, you may talk to anyone you wish about the case.

Until that time, you must control your natural desire to discuss the case outside of what I’ve

said is permitted.

Note on Use

*Use the sentence in parentheses if it is applicable.

Michigan Supreme Court Page 2-9

Chapter 2: Preliminary Instructions After Jury Is Sworn

If a fact is admitted by a lawyer, this shall be explained to the jury as binding on his or her

client to the extent of the admission, regardless of evidence to the contrary.

If a specific admission, such as negligence or contributory negligence, is made, then the

court should explain that particular admission to the jury when giving the instructions on

that subject.

Comment

Occasionally lawyers argue on matters that are within their personal knowledge but are not

of record, or in the heat of forensic attack will make statements not based on the evidence.

Ordinarily this is objected to and a request is made to instruct the jury to disregard the

statement, but it is impossible or impractical to object to every such statement. It is

therefore proper to inform the jury that arguments and statements of counsel not based on

the evidence should be disregarded. Dalm v Bryant Paper Co, 157 Mich 550; 122 NW 257

(1909).

For admissions on the pleadings, see MCR 2.111(E); for admissions by a lawyer in the

course of trial, see Ortega v Lenderink, 382 Mich 218; 169 NW2d 470 (1969).

Subsection (2)(c) is so worded to inform the jury that comments the judge might make on

the evidence are not binding on them. Cook v Vineyard, 291 Mich 375; 289 NW 181 (1939).

Since the remarks and rulings of the trial judge may erroneously be interpreted by the jury

as comments on the evidence, this instruction is proper. Mawich v Elsey, 47 Mich 10; 10

NW 57 (1881).

The bracketed language reflects the amendment to MCR 2.513(M) effective September 1,

2011. This amendment permits the court to sum up the evidence under certain conditions.

Any summary of the evidence by the court should be immediately preceded by M Civ JI

3.17.

History

Amended January 1993, September 2007, January 2014.

Michigan Model Civil Jury Instructions

Page 2-10 Michigan Supreme Court

M Civ JI 2.05 Jurors to Keep Open Minds [ Instruction Deleted ]

Comment

This instruction was deleted by the Committee in October 2011. The instruction was

deleted because its provisions were consolidated with M Civ JI 2.06 in response to the

amendment of MCR 2.513. The new consolidated instruction has been designated M Civ

JI 2.06.

History

Amended February 1991, January 1993, September 2007. Deleted October 2011.

Michigan Supreme Court Page 2-11

Chapter 2: Preliminary Instructions After Jury Is Sworn

M Civ JI 2.06 Jurors to Keep Open Minds

(1) Because the law requires that cases be decided only on the evidence presented during

the trial and only by the deliberating jurors, you must keep an open mind and not make a

decision about anything in the case until after you have (a) heard all of the evidence, (b)

heard the closing arguments of counsel, (c) received all of my instructions on the law and

the verdict form, and (d) any alternate jurors have been excused. At that time, you will be

sent to the jury room to decide the case. Sympathy must not influence your decision. Nor

should your decision be influenced by prejudice or bias regarding disability, gender or

gender identity, race, religion, ethnicity, sexual orientation, age, national origin,

socioeconomic status or any other factor irrelevant to the rights of the parties.

Each of us may have biases about or certain perceptions or stereotypes of other people. We

may be aware of some of our biases, though we may not share them with others. We may

not be fully aware of some of our other biases.

As jurors, you are being asked to make very important decisions in this case. You must not

let prejudice or public opinion influence your decision. You must not be biased in favor of

or against any party, witness, or lawyer because of his or her disability, gender or gender

identity, race, religion, ethnicity, sexual orientation, age, national origin, socioeconomic

status or any other factor irrelevant to the rights of the parties.

Your verdict must be based solely on the evidence presented. You must carefully evaluate

the evidence and resist any urge to reach a verdict that is influenced by bias for or against

any party, witness, or lawyer.

Take the time you need to reflect carefully about the evidence. I caution you to avoid

reaching conclusions that may have been influenced by unintended stereotypes or

associations. You must each reach your own conclusions about this case individually, but

you should do so only after listening to and considering the opinions of the other jurors,

who may have different backgrounds and perspectives from yours. Working together will

help achieve a fair result.

As you deliberate with your fellow jurors, it is important to keep an open mind about the

evidence, including how it may be viewed through different perspectives. I encourage you

to explain to your fellow jurors the reasons why you believe the evidence supports your

decision to vote a certain way. It is equally important for you to listen to your fellow jurors,

and to carefully consider any differing points of view.

(2)

[ Alternative A ] (Before you are sent to the jury room to decide the case, you may

discuss the case among yourselves during recesses in the trial, but there are strict rules that

must be followed.

Michigan Model Civil Jury Instructions

Page 2-12 Michigan Supreme Court

First, you may only discuss the case when (a) all of you are together, (b) you are all in the

jury room, and (c) no one else is present in the jury room. You must not discuss the case

under any other circumstances. The reason you may not discuss the case with other jurors

while some of you are not present is that all of you are entitled to participate in all of the

discussions about the case.

Second, as I stated before, you must keep an open mind until I send you to the jury room to

decide the case. Your discussions before then are only tentative.

Third, you do not have to discuss the case during the trial. But if you choose to do so, you

must follow the rules I have given you.)

[ Alternative B ] (Before you are sent to the jury room to decide the case, you are not to

discuss the case even with the other members of the jury. This is to ensure that all of you

are able to participate in all of the discussions about the case, and so that you do not begin

to express opinions about the case until it has been submitted to you for deliberation.)

Note on Use

The court will choose between Alternative A or B in paragraph 2 based on the court's

decision whether to permit the jurors to discuss the evidence among themselves during trial

recesses.

Comment

M Civ JI 2.05 and 2.06 were deleted in October 2011 and combined into a new instruction

that was designated M Civ JI 2.06. This action reflected the September 2011 amendment to

MCR 2.513(K), which granted the court discretion to permit juror discussion of the

evidence during trial recesses. In January 2014, a large portion of M Civ JI 2.06 was

transferred to M Civ JI 2.04.

The May 2023 amendments were drawn from amended instructions suggested by the

American College of Trial Lawyers and are "designed to counter cognitive flaws and focus

jurors' attention, increase their use of deliberative thought, mitigate ‘confirmation bias,’

and broaden participation during jury deliberation." Improving Jury Deliberations

through Jury Instructions Based on Cognitive Science, American College of Trial

Lawyers, February 2019.

History

Adopted October 2011. Amended January 2014, July 2019, May 2023.

Michigan Supreme Court Page 2-13

Chapter 2: Preliminary Instructions After Jury Is Sworn

M Civ JI 2.07 Jurors Not to Consider Information Received outside

Presence of Court [ Instruction Deleted ]

History

This instruction was deleted by the Committee September 1, 2009. The instruction was

deleted because its provisions were combined with MCJI 2.06 in response to the

amendment of MCR 2.511.

Michigan Model Civil Jury Instructions

Page 2-14 Michigan Supreme Court

M Civ JI 2.08 Objections; Out-of-Presence Hearings

A trial follows established rules of procedure and evidence. During the trial the lawyers

might make objections and motions. I will rule on these objections and motions according

to the law. Don’t conclude from any of my rulings that I have an opinion on the case or that

I favor one side or the other. If I sustain an objection to a question and do not permit the

witness to answer, don’t guess what the answer might have been or draw any inference

from the question itself.

Sometimes the lawyers and I are required to consider objections and motions outside your

hearing. We may take care of these matters at the bench or in my chambers, or I may excuse

you so that we can take care of them in the courtroom. It is impossible to predict when such

a conference may be required or how long it will last. I will conduct these conferences so

as to use as little of your time as possible. I may also have to take care of other matters

which have nothing to do with this case. Do not concern yourselves with any of these

matters which must be decided out of your presence or hearing.

History

Amended January 1993, September 2007.

Michigan Supreme Court Page 2-15

Chapter 2: Preliminary Instructions After Jury Is Sworn

M Civ JI 2.09 Court to Instruct on Law

I might give you more instructions during the course of the trial, and at the end of the trial

I will give you detailed instructions about the law you are to apply to the case.

History

M Civ JI 2.09 was added September 1980. Amended September 2007.

Michigan Model Civil Jury Instructions

Page 2-16 Michigan Supreme Court

M Civ JI 2.10 Inability to Hear Witness or See Exhibit

Please let me know immediately if you cannot hear a witness or see what is being

demonstrated.

Note on Use

Following this instruction, the Court may explain to the jury the anticipated schedule of

recesses and adjournments as well as any expected interruptions or distractions, the

availability of restaurants, restrooms, etc.

History

M Civ JI 2.10 was added September 1980. Amended October 1993.

Michigan Supreme Court Page 2-17

Chapter 2: Preliminary Instructions After Jury Is Sworn

M Civ JI 2.11 Questions by Jurors Allowed

During the testimony of a witness, you might think of an important question that you

believe will help you better understand the facts in this case. Please wait to ask the question

until after the witness has finished testifying and both sides have finished their questioning.

If your question is still unanswered, write the question down, raise your hand, and pass the

question to the bailiff. The bailiff will give it to me. Do not ask the witness the question

yourself, show the question to the other jurors, or announce what the question is.

There are rules of evidence that a trial must follow. If your question is allowed under those

rules, I will ask the witness your question. If your question is not allowed, I will either

rephrase it or I will not ask it at all.

Note on Use

If questions from jurors are allowed, this instruction may be used. The questioning of, and

the method of such questioning of, witnesses by jurors is within the discretion of the trial

judge. The court does not have to allow such questioning, but must recognize that it has

discretion to do so. People v Heard, 388 Mich 182 (1972).

MCR 2.513(I), as amended by the Michigan Supreme Court effective September 1, 2011,

requires, among other things, the court to employ a procedure that ensures that the parties

have an opportunity outside the hearing of the jury to object to the questions.

Comment

MCR 2.513(I).

History

M Civ JI 2.11 was added October 1993. Amended October 1994, September 2007, October

2011.

Michigan Model Civil Jury Instructions

Page 2-18 Michigan Supreme Court

M Civ JI 2.12 Caution about Publicity in Cases of Public Interest

[ Instruction Deleted ]

History

This instruction was deleted by the Committee September 1, 2009. The instruction was

deleted because its provisions were combined with MCJI 2.06 in response to the

amendment of MCR 2.511.

Michigan Supreme Court Page 2-19

Chapter 2: Preliminary Instructions After Jury Is Sworn

M Civ JI 2.13 Note Taking by Jurors Allowed / Not Allowed

(a) *(You may take notes during the trial if you wish, but of course you don’t have to. If

you do take notes, you should be careful that it does not distract you from paying attention

to all the evidence. When you go to the jury room to decide your verdict, you may use your

notes to help you remember what happened in the courtroom. If you take notes, do not let

anyone see them. After you have begun your deliberations, it is then permissible to allow

other jurors to see your notes. [ You must turn your notes over to the bailiff during

recesses. ] The notes will be destroyed at the end of the trial.)

(b) *(I do not believe that it is helpful for you to take notes because you might not be able

to give your full attention to the evidence. So please do not take any notes while you are in

the courtroom.)

Note on Use

*The court may use paragraph (a) or paragraph (b), depending on whether the jurors are

allowed to take notes.

If paragraph (a) is given, the bracketed sentence in that paragraph may be read if the court

wants to assure that notes are not seen by anyone except the jurors.

Paragraph (b) should be given only when a juror requests to take notes and the court decides

not to allow note taking.

Comment

The 2011 amendment reflects the amendment to MCR 2.513(H) ordered by the Michigan

Supreme Court on June 29, 2011, which became effective September 1, 2011. This

amendment requires the court to ensure that all juror notes are collected and destroyed at

the conclusion of trial. The amended instruction informs the jurors of that fact.

History

M Civ JI 2.13 was added October 1993. Amended December 1994, October 2011.

Michigan Model Civil Jury Instructions

Page 2-20 Michigan Supreme Court

M Civ JI 2.14 Reference Documents

You will now be given [ a reference document / reference documents / a notebook ]

including [ describe contents, including list of witnesses, relevant statutory provisions,

documents ]. [ The parties have stipulated that the contents of the (document / documents /

notebook) are admitted as exhibits. ] [ In the event (one / one or more of) the (document /

documents / contents of the notebook) (is / are) not admitted, you must disregard (it / them)

at the end of the trial. ] You must turn your [ reference document / reference documents /

notebook ] over to the bailiff during recesses. The [ reference document / reference

documents / notebook ] will be destroyed at the end of the trial.

Note on Use

Jurors may be told that they can write in their notebook. Because jurors may have written

in their notebook, any additions to the notebook made during trial should be made by court

personnel or the jurors in order to prevent the parties from observing any writings made by

the jurors.

Comment

The 2011 adoption of this instruction reflects the amendment to MCR 2.513(E) ordered by

the Michigan Supreme Court on June 29, 2011, which became effective September 1, 2011.

This amendment gives the court the discretion to authorize or require counsel to provide the

jurors with a reference document or notebook. Informing the jurors that the reference

document/notebook will be destroyed is consistent with MCR 2.513(H), which provides

that the court is to ensure that all juror notes are collected and destroyed at the conclusion

of trial.

History

M Civ JI 2.14 was added October 2011.

Michigan Supreme Court Page 3-1

CHAPTER 3

Cautionary Instructions

M Civ JI 3.01 Faithful Performance of Duties; Jury to Follow Instructions..................... 3-2

M Civ JI 3.02 Facts to Be Determined from Evidence .................................................... 3-3

M Civ JI 3.03 Admission of Evidence .............................................................................. 3-4

M Civ JI 3.04 Attorneys’ Statements Not Evidence; Admission by Attorney [ Instruction

Deleted ]......................................................................................................................... 3-5

M Civ JI 3.05 Corporations Entitled to Unprejudiced Treatment................................... 3-6

M Civ JI 3.06 Whether Party Is Insured Is Irrelevant ...................................................... 3-7

M Civ JI 3.07 Evidence Introduced for a Limited Purpose.............................................. 3-8

M Civ JI 3.08 Judge’s Opinion as to Facts Is to Be Disregarded [ Instruction Deleted ].. 3-9

M Civ JI 3.09 Jury to Consider All the Evidence............................................................ 3-10

M Civ JI 3.10 Circumstantial Evidence.......................................................................... 3-11

M Civ JI 3.11 Jurors May Take into Account Ordinary Experience and Observations.. 3-12

M Civ JI 3.12 Jury View of Premises / Scene / Object .................................................. 3-13

M Civ JI 3.13 Fact Judicially Noticed............................................................................. 3-14

M Civ JI 3.15 Prior Inconsistent Statement of Witness ................................................ 3-15

M Civ JI 3.16 Interim Commentary by Attorneys ......................................................... 3-17

M Civ JI 3.17 Summary of Evidence by Judge............................................................... 3-18

Michigan Model Civil Jury Instructions

Page 3-2 Michigan Supreme Court

M Civ JI 3.01 Faithful Performance of Duties; Jury to Follow

Instructions

Members of the jury, the evidence and argument in this case have been completed and I will

now instruct you on the law. That is, I will explain the law that applies to this case.

Faithful performance by you of your duties is vital to the administration of justice.

The law you are to apply in this case is contained in these instructions, and it is your duty

to follow them. In other words, you must take the law as I give it to you. You must consider

them as a whole and not pick out one or some instructions and disregard others.

Following my instructions you will go to the jury room and deliberate and decide on your

verdict.

Comment

This instruction is designed to prevent jurors from capriciously selecting one of several

statements of law and using it in their deliberations out of context with the whole charge.

People v Gardner, 143 Mich 104 (1906); Kempsey v McGinniss, 21 Mich 123 (1870).

History

M Civ JI 3.01 was SJI 1.01(1), (2). Amended January 1982, September 2007.

Michigan Supreme Court Page 3-3

Chapter 3: Cautionary Instructions

M Civ JI 3.02 Facts to Be Determined from Evidence

It is your duty to determine the facts from evidence received in open court. You are to apply

the law to the facts and in this way decide the case. Sympathy must not influence your

decision. Nor should your decision be influenced by prejudice regarding disability, gender

or gender identity, race, religion, ethnicity, sexual orientation, age, national origin,

socioeconomic status or any other factor irrelevant to the rights of the parties.

Each of us may have biases about or certain perceptions or stereotypes of other people. We

may be aware of some of our biases, though we may not share them with others. We may

not be fully aware of some of our other biases. Our biases often affect how we act,

favorably or unfavorably, toward someone. Bias can affect our thoughts, how we

remember, what we see and hear, whom we believe or disbelieve, and how we make

important decisions. Witnesses can have the same implicit biases. As jurors you are being

asked to make very important decisions in this case. You must not let bias, prejudice, or

public opinion influence your decision. You must not be biased in favor of or against any

party, witness, or lawyer because of his or her disability, gender or gender identity, race,

religion, ethnicity, sexual orientation, age, national origin, socioeconomic status or any

other factor irrelevant to the rights of the parties. Your verdict must be based solely on the

evidence presented. You must carefully evaluate the evidence and resist any urge to reach

a verdict that is influenced by bias for or against any party, witness, or lawyer.

Comment

The subject matter of this instruction is often covered in greater detail by a number of

separate instructions outlining the duties of the jury and admonishing them as to what

should not enter into their deliberations. To inform the jury that they are to find the facts

from the evidence, and to then apply the law to those facts, is the rule set forth in the

Michigan cases. Souvais v Leavitt, 50 Mich 108; 15 NW 37 (1883); Wisner v Davenport, 5

Mich 501 (1858); Erickson v Sovars, 356 Mich 64; 45 NW2d 844 (1959).

The prohibition against sympathy or prejudice is equally applicable to both parties.

Moreover, it is sufficient to caution the jury once against allowing sympathy and prejudice

to enter into their consideration of the case. Doyle v Dobson, 74 Mich 562; 42 NW 137

(1889).

The November 2021 amendment added gender identity to the list of things that should not

influence the jury’s decision.

History

M Civ JI 3.02 was SJI 1.01(3). Amended February 1991. Amended July 2019. Amended

November 2021.

Michigan Model Civil Jury Instructions

Page 3-4 Michigan Supreme Court

M Civ JI 3.03 Admission of Evidence

When you discuss the case and decide on your verdict, you may only consider the evidence

that has been admitted in this case. Evidence includes only the sworn testimony of

witnesses [, the exhibits admitted into evidence, and anything else I told you to consider as

evidence ]. The admission of evidence in court is governed by rules of law. From time to

time it has been my duty as judge to rule on the admissibility of evidence. You must not

concern yourselves with the reasons for these rulings, and you must not consider *(any

exhibit to which an objection was sustained or) any testimony *(or exhibit) which was

ordered stricken.

Note on Use

*Omit the references to exhibits if there are no exhibits.

Comment

Although some rulings on evidence are made out of the jury's hearing, the great bulk of such

rulings are made in the presence of the jury, who hear not only the reasons for objections

but often the reasons for rulings as well. Whether offered evidence is admitted or excluded,

the jury may be influenced by what it hears, and, consequently, it is proper to tell them of

the Court's duty in these matters and admonish them to ignore stricken or excluded

evidence and the reasons for the rulings.

History

M Civ JI 3.03 was SJI 1.01(4). Amended January 1992, October 2017.

Michigan Supreme Court Page 3-5

Chapter 3: Cautionary Instructions

M Civ JI 3.04 Attorneys’ Statements Not Evidence; Admission by

Attorney [ Instruction Deleted ]

Comment

This instruction was deleted by the Committee in January 2014. The instruction was deleted

because its provisions were consolidated with M Civ JI 2.04 in order to streamline the

instructions and make them more understandable and logical for the jurors.

History

M Civ JI 3.04 was SJI 1.01(5). Amended September 2007, October 2011. Deleted January

2014.

Michigan Model Civil Jury Instructions

Page 3-6 Michigan Supreme Court

M Civ JI 3.05 Corporations Entitled to Unprejudiced Treatment

The corporation [ plaintiff / defendant ] in this case is entitled to the same fair and

unprejudiced treatment as an individual would be under like circumstances, and it is your

duty to decide the case with the same impartiality you would use in deciding a case between

individuals.

Note on Use

This instruction should be given only in those cases where there are both corporate and

individual parties.

Comment

The subject matter of this instruction is an exception to the general rule prohibiting the

singling out of evidence or a particular party or witness. In view of the possibility that some

jurors might have various attitudes prejudicial to corporations, a jury should be informed

that a corporation is to be treated no differently from an individual. Cornell v Manistee &

N R Co, 117 Mich 238; 75 NW 472 (1898).

History

M Civ JI 3.05 was SJI 1.01(6).

Michigan Supreme Court Page 3-7

Chapter 3: Cautionary Instructions

M Civ JI 3.06 Whether Party Is Insured Is Irrelevant

Whether a party is insured has no bearing whatever on any issue that you must decide. Don't

even discuss or speculate about insurance.

Note on Use

This instruction is to be used only where the subject of liability insurance has been brought

out during the trial and has no bearing on any of the issues. It has no application, for

example, in an action on an insurance policy.

Comment

Rule 411 of the Michigan Rules of Evidence provides that” [ e ]vidence that a person was

or was not insured against liability is not admissible to prove whether the person acted

negligently or otherwise wrongfully.” See also MCL 500.3030. MRE 411 further provides

that “the court may admit this evidence for another purpose, such as proving a witness’s

bias or prejudice or – if controverted – proving agency, ownership or control.” See also

Gegan v Kemp, 302 Mich 218 (1942) (insurance adjuster’s statements used for

impeachment).

Where insurance coverage of a party has been improperly disclosed, an instruction that it

has no bearing on the case is proper. Ehlers v Barbeau, 291 Mich 528 (1939); see also

Cassidy v McGovern, 86 Mich App 321 (1978) (tort action under Michigan no-fault act).

The January 2024 amendments are housekeeping changes reflecting stylistic revisions to

the Michigan Rules of Evidence that became effective January 1, 2024.

History

M Civ JI 3.06 was SJI 1.01(7). Amended September 2007, January 2024.

Michigan Model Civil Jury Instructions

Page 3-8 Michigan Supreme Court

M Civ JI 3.07 Evidence Introduced for a Limited Purpose

Whenever evidence was received for a limited purpose or limited to [ one party / certain

parties ], you must not consider it for any other purpose or as to any other [ party / parties ].

Note on Use

This instruction should be used only when evidence has been limited to a specific purpose

or to specific parties. When used, the particular evidentiary limitation as to purpose or party

shall be explained, either here or under another more appropriate instruction. (An example

of such use would be where evidence was introduced on negligence of one plaintiff but it

was not applicable to another of the parties plaintiff. In the section on negligence, the Court

should specifically point out that the particular evidence that was admitted as to party A is

not binding on party B.)

Comment

This instruction should be used when evidence has been restricted to a given purpose, or

admitted against one or more but not all of the parties. An example of the first limitation

occurs when prior inconsistent statements are admitted solely for impeachment purposes

and not as substantive evidence. See MRE 801. Similarly, evidence may be admissible

against one party while inadmissible as to another.

Rule 105 of the Michigan Rules of Evidence is consistent with this instruction. It requires

that on request the Court instruct the jury as to the restriction on the evidence.

History

M Civ JI 3.07 was SJI 1.01(8).

Michigan Supreme Court Page 3-9

Chapter 3: Cautionary Instructions

M Civ JI 3.08 Judge’s Opinion as to Facts Is to Be Disregarded

[ Instruction Deleted ]

Comment

This instruction was deleted by the Committee in January 2014. The instruction was deleted

because its provisions were consolidated with M Civ JI 2.04 in order to streamline the

instructions and make them more understandable and logical for the jurors.

History

Amended October 2011. Deleted January 2014.

Michigan Model Civil Jury Instructions

Page 3-10 Michigan Supreme Court

M Civ JI 3.09 Jury to Consider All the Evidence

In determining whether any fact has been proved, you shall consider all of the evidence

bearing on that fact without regard to which party produced the evidence.

Note on Use

If evidence has been received for a limited purpose or is limited to a particular party or

parties, M Civ JI 3.07 must also be given.

Comment

This instruction states the familiar principle that once evidence is admitted, it is in the case

for all purposes and every party is entitled to the benefit of the evidence whether he or she

or the adversary produced it.

History

M Civ JI 3.09 was SJI 1.02.

Michigan Supreme Court Page 3-11

Chapter 3: Cautionary Instructions

M Civ JI 3.10 Circumstantial Evidence

Facts can be proved by direct evidence from a witness or an exhibit. Direct evidence is

evidence about what we actually see or hear. For example, if you look outside and see rain

falling, that is direct evidence that it is raining.

Facts can also be proved by indirect or circumstantial evidence. Circumstantial evidence is

evidence that normally or reasonably leads to other facts. So, for example, if you see a

person come in from outside wearing a raincoat covered with small drops of water, that

would be circumstantial evidence that it is raining.

Circumstantial evidence by itself, or a combination of circumstantial evidence and direct

evidence, can be used to prove or disprove a proposition. You must consider all the

evidence, both direct and circumstantial.

History

M Civ JI 3.10 is a revision of SJI 1.03. Amended February 1981, September 2007.

Michigan Model Civil Jury Instructions

Page 3-12 Michigan Supreme Court

M Civ JI 3.11 Jurors May Take into Account Ordinary Experience and

Observations

You have a right to consider all the evidence in the light of your own general knowledge

and experience in the affairs of life, and to take into account whether any particular

evidence seems reasonable and probable. However, if you have personal knowledge of any

particular fact in this case, that knowledge may not be used as evidence.

Comment

Because jurors have been told it is their duty to determine the facts from evidence produced

in open court, M Civ JI 3.02, it is proper also to inform them that they may rely on their

general intelligence and knowledge of affairs. Rajnowski v Detroit, BC & A R Co, 74 Mich

15 (1889).

History

M Civ JI 3.11 was SJI 1.04. Amended September 2007.

Michigan Supreme Court Page 3-13

Chapter 3: Cautionary Instructions

M Civ JI 3.12 Jury View of Premises / Scene / Object

Your view of the [ premises / scene / object ] was intended to help you understand the

evidence. You are not to consider as evidence anything you may have learned from the

view which was not covered by the testimony *(and exhibits) received in evidence.

Note on Use

This instruction should be used only when the Court has permitted a view of something

other than an exhibit and has determined that the view does not constitute evidence.

Appropriate designation of the kind of view may be selected instead of the bracketed words.

This instruction may be given even though the court convenes at the scene and takes

testimony, because the jury still might have seen or heard things not covered by the

testimony. The instruction may be given before or at the time of the view.

If the court has determined that a jury view does constitute evidence, this instruction should

not be given. See Note on Use to M Civ JI 3.03.

*The words in parentheses may be used if appropriate.

In condemnation cases, M Civ JI 90.22 should be given in lieu of this instruction.

Comment

The authority to have the jury view the scene comes from MCR 2.513(J).

Generally the jury can consider information obtained by them from the view only to assist

them in understanding evidence presented in open court, Valenti v Mayer, 301 Mich 551;

4 NW2d 5 (1942); but in some cases, the view itself may be evidence. Sunday v Wolverine

Service Stations, 265 Mich 19; 251 NW 402 (1933).

The jury view is appropriate in all civil actions, but is completely discretionary with the trial

judge. MCR 2.513(J).

History

M Civ JI 3.12 was SJI 1.04(A).

Michigan Model Civil Jury Instructions

Page 3-14 Michigan Supreme Court

M Civ JI 3.13 Fact Judicially Noticed

In this case, you must accept it as a fact that [ identify fact judicially noticed ].

Note on Use

This instruction should be used only in cases in which a fact has been judicially noticed.

The instruction conforms with Rule 201(f) of the Michigan Rules of Evidence. Rule 201(f)

provides: “In a civil case, the court must instruct the jury to accept the noticed fact as

conclusive.”

Comments

The January 2024 amendments are housekeeping changes reflecting stylistic revisions to

the Michigan Rules of Evidence that became effective January 1, 2024.

History

M Civ JI 3.13 was added February 1, 1981. Amended January 2024.

Michigan Supreme Court Page 3-15

Chapter 3: Cautionary Instructions

M Civ JI 3.15 Prior Inconsistent Statement of Witness

If you decide that a witness said something earlier that is not consistent with what the

witness said at this trial, you may consider the earlier statement in deciding whether to

believe the witness, but you may not consider it as proof of the facts in this case.

However, there [ is an exception / are exceptions ]. You may consider an earlier statement

as proof of the facts in this case if:

(a) the statement was made by the plaintiff, the defendant, or an agent or

employee of either party; or

(b) the statement was given under oath subject to the penalty of perjury at a

trial, hearing, [ describe other proceeding ], or in a deposition; or

Note on Use

This instruction should not be given if all prior inconsistent statements of witnesses are

admissible as substantive evidence.

If all prior inconsistent statements are admissible only for credibility, only the first

paragraph of this instruction should be given.

If some prior inconsistent statements of witnesses are admissible for credibility and some as

substantive evidence, both paragraphs of this instruction should be given, but the trial judge

should select only the subsections of paragraph two that are applicable.

Comment

A witness may be impeached through a showing of prior statements inconsistent with his or

her testimony. Gilchrist v Gilchrist, 333 Mich 275 (1952); Michigan Pipe Co v North

British & Mercantile Insurance Co, 97 Mich 493 (1893); Geerds v Ann Arbor R Co, 181

Mich 12 (1914). A prior inconsistent statement given under oath subject to the penalty of

perjury at a trial, hearing, or other proceeding, or in a deposition, may also be considered as

substantive evidence. MRE 801(d)(l)(A). If the witness adopts by admission the truth of the

prior inconsistent statement, that may also become substantive evidence. Schraff v Fila, 371

Mich 238 (1963).

Prior inconsistent conduct that is not intended as an assertion is admissible as competent

proof, but conduct intended as an assertion is subject to the hearsay objection. MRE 801(a),

(c).

Michigan Model Civil Jury Instructions

Page 3-16 Michigan Supreme Court

A statement offered against a party that is his or her own statement is admissible as

substantive evidence. MRE 801(d)(2). The same is true if the statement is made by a person

authorized by a party to make a statement on the subject (MRE 801(d)(2)(C)), or a statement

by a party’s agent or employee on a matter within the scope of the agency or employment

and made while the relationship existed (MRE 80l(d)(2)(D)).

The January 2024 amendments are housekeeping changes reflecting stylistic revisions to

the Michigan Rules of Evidence that became effective January 1, 2024.

History

M Civ JI 3.15 (former M Civ JI 5.01) was SJI 3.01. Amended December 1982, November

1983, August 1991, October 1993, February 1998. Renumbered from M Civ JI 5.01 to M

Civ JI 3.15 January 1999. Amended September 2007, January 2024.

Michigan Supreme Court Page 3-17

Chapter 3: Cautionary Instructions

M Civ JI 3.16 Interim Commentary by Attorneys

At this juncture in the trial, the court finds it appropriate to allow each party to provide

interim commentary. The lawyers’ commentaries are not evidence. They are only meant to

help you understand the evidence and each side’s legal theories. You should only accept

things that the lawyers say that are supported by the evidence or by your own common

sense and general knowledge. All of my earlier instructions regarding basing your decision

on the evidence and law continue to apply.

Note on Use

The court may place reasonable time limits on the interim commentary.

Comment

The 2011 adoption of this instruction reflects the amendment to MCR 2.513(D) ordered by

the Michigan Supreme Court on June 29, 2011, which became effective September 1, 2011.

This amendment gives the court discretion to permit the parties to present interim

commentary.

History

M Civ JI 3.16 was added October 2011.

Michigan Model Civil Jury Instructions

Page 3-18 Michigan Supreme Court

M Civ JI 3.17 Summary of Evidence by Judge

I will now summarize the evidence for you. It is intended only as a summary and you should

consider all of the evidence when deciding this case, even if I do not mention all of the

evidence in this summary. Remember that it is your job to decide what the facts of this case

are. This is your job and nobody else’s. It is for you to determine the weight of the evidence

and the credit to be given to the witnesses, and you are free to decide that something I have

not mentioned, but which has been admitted into evidence, is significant to your decision.

You are not bound by my summary of the evidence. [ Summary is then given. ]

Again, it is for you to determine for yourself the weight of the evidence and the credit to be

given to the witnesses. You are not bound by my summation.

Comment

The 2011 adoption of this instruction reflects the amendment to MCR 2.513(M) ordered by

the Michigan Supreme Court on June 29, 2011, which became effective September 1, 2011.

This amendment permits the court to sum up the evidence under certain conditions.

History

M Civ JI 3.17 was added October 2011.

Michigan Supreme Court Page 4-1

CHAPTER 4

Credibility and Weight

M Civ JI 4.01 Credibility of Witnesses ............................................................................ 4-2

M Civ JI 4.01A Support Persons or Animals.................................................................... 4-4

M Civ JI 4.02 Witness Need Not Be Believed [ Recommend No Instruction ]................ 4-5

M Civ JI 4.03 Inherently Improbable Testimony [ Recommend No Instruction ]........... 4-6

M Civ JI 4.04 Witness Willfully False [ Recommend No Instruction ]............................. 4-7

M Civ JI 4.05 Party Competent as a Witness [ Recommend No Instruction ] ................ 4-8

M Civ JI 4.06 Witness Who Has Been Interviewed by an Attorney................................ 4-9

M Civ JI 4.07 Weighing Conflicting Evidence—Number of Witnesses ......................... 4-10

M Civ JI 4.08 One Witness against a Number [ Recommend No Instruction ] ............. 4-11

M Civ JI 4.09 Credibility of Special Categories of Witnesses and Weight of Evidence

[ Recommend No Instruction ]..................................................................................... 4-12

M Civ JI 4.10 Weighing Expert Testimony .................................................................... 4-13

M Civ JI 4.11 Consideration of Deposition Evidence .................................................... 4-14

M Civ JI 4.12 Hospital and Business Records [ Recommend No Instruction ] .............. 4-15

Michigan Model Civil Jury Instructions

Page 4-2 Michigan Supreme Court

M Civ JI 4.01 Credibility of Witnesses

(1) You are the judges of the facts in this case, and you must determine which witnesses to

believe and what weight to give to their testimony. You do not have to accept or reject

everything a witness says. You are free to believe all, none, or part of any witness’s

testimony.

(2) In deciding which testimony you believe, you should rely on your own common sense

and everyday experience. However, in deciding whether you believe a witness’s testimony,

you must set aside any bias or prejudice you have based on the witness’s disability, gender

or gender identity, race, religion, ethnicity, sexual orientation, age, national origin,

socioeconomic status or any other factor irrelevant to the rights of the parties.

(3) There is no fixed set of rules for judging whether you believe a witness, but it may help

you to think about these questions:

(a) Was the witness able to see or hear clearly? How long was the witness

watching or listening? Was anything else going on that might have distracted

the witness?

(b) Does the witness seem to have a good memory?

(1) Human memory is not like video recordings that a witness can simply

replay to remember precisely what happened;

(2) when a witness has been exposed to statements, conversations,

questions, writings, documents, photographs, media reports, and opinions

of others, the accuracy of their memory may be affected; and

(3) a witness's memory, even if testified to in good faith, and with a high

degree of confidence, may be inaccurate.

to be making

an honest effort to tell the truth, or does the witness seem to evade

the questions or argue with the lawyers?

(d) Does the witness’s age or maturity affect how you judge his or her

testimony?

(e) Does the witness have any bias or prejudice, motives for testifying, or any

personal interest in how this case is decided?

(f) Have there been any promises, threats, suggestions, or other influences that

Michigan Supreme Court Page 4-3

Chapter 4: Credibility and Weight

affect how the witness testifies?

(g) In general, does the witness have any special reason to tell the truth, or any

special reason to lie?

(h) All in all, how reasonable does the witness’s testimony seems when you

think about all the other evidence in the case?

Comment

Instructions including the credibility factors in this instruction have been approved in

numerous cases by the Michigan Supreme Court. See, e.g., Hitchcock v Davis, 87 Mich

629; 49 NW 912 (1891); Lovely v Grand Rapids & I R Co, 137 Mich 653; 100 NW 894

(1904); Foley v Detroit & M R Co, 193 Mich 233; 159 NW 500 (1916); Vinton v Plainfield

Twp, 208 Mich 179; 175 NW 403 (1919).

History

M Civ JI 4.01 was SJI 2.01. Amended January 1993, September 2022.

Michigan Model Civil Jury Instructions

Page 4-4 Michigan Supreme Court

M Civ JI 4.01A Support Persons or Animals

You [ are about to hear / have heard ] testimony from a witness who I [ will allow / have

allowed ] to be accompanied by a support [ person / animal ]. You should disregard the

support [ person / animal ]’s presence and decide the case based solely on the evidence

presented. You should not consider the witness’s testimony to be any more or less credible

because of the [ person / animal ]’s presence. You must not allow the use of a support [

person / animal ] to influence your decision in any way.

History

M Civ JI 4.01A was added April 2019.

Michigan Supreme Court Page 4-5

Chapter 4: Credibility and Weight

M Civ JI 4.02 Witness Need Not Be Believed [ Recommend No

Instruction ]

Comment

The committee recommends that no instruction that the “witness need not be believed” be

given. An instruction of this type is not necessary where M Civ JI 4.01 is given, as that

instruction adequately covers credibility factors.

The Michigan Supreme Court has held that it is for the jury to determine whether to believe

the testimony of a witness, even though it is uncontradicted, where other circumstances or

parts of his or her testimony are inconsistent with his or her story. Preuschoff v B Stroh

Brewing Co, 132 Mich 107; 92 NW 945 (1903); Michigan Pipe Co v Michigan Fire &

Marine Insurance Co, 92 Mich 482; 52 NW 1070 (1892). Counsel can adequately cover the

subject in argument.

History

M Civ JI 4.02 was SJI 2.02.

Michigan Model Civil Jury Instructions

Page 4-6 Michigan Supreme Court

M Civ JI 4.03 Inherently Improbable Testimony [ Recommend No

Instruction ]

Comment

The committee recommends that no “inherently improbable testimony” instruction be

given. An instruction of this type is not necessary where M Civ JI 4.01 is given, as that

instruction adequately covers credibility factors.

The trial judge may point out inherently improbable testimony if he or she chooses to

comment upon the evidence. Cook v Vineyard, 291 Mich 375; 289 NW 181 (1939).

Whether or not this is done is, of course, within the discretion of the trial judge.

However, a specific instruction on this point is argumentative and invades the province of

the jury. Counsel can adequately cover the subject in argument.

History

M Civ JI 4.03 was SJI 2.03.

Michigan Supreme Court Page 4-7

Chapter 4: Credibility and Weight

M Civ JI 4.04 Witness Willfully False [ Recommend No Instruction ]

Comment

The committee recommends that no instruction on the “willfully false witness” be given.

An instruction of this type is not necessary where M Civ JI 4.01 is given, as that instruction

adequately covers credibility factors.

The Michigan Supreme Court has approved an instruction that if the jury finds that a

witness has willfully sworn falsely as to a material fact, and the jury should be of the

opinion that such false swearing rendered the witness incredible as a whole, they have a

right to disregard his or her entire testimony. O’Rourke v O’Rourke, 43 Mich 58; 4 NW 531

(1880). One case held it is error to refuse such an instruction where the evidence supports

it. Ketchum v Fillingham, 162 Mich 704; 127 NW 702 (1910).

The instruction, however, has been criticized on the basis that questions concerning

credibility of witnesses are the sole province of the jury; if the instruction is given, the jury

should also be instructed that no rule of law prevents their giving credit to parts of a

witness’s testimony they believe to be true. Hillman v Schwenk, 68 Mich 293; 36 NW 77

(1888); see also Jewell v Kelley, 155 Mich 301; 118 NW 987 (1909).

History

M Civ JI 4.04 was SJI 2.04.

Michigan Model Civil Jury Instructions

Page 4-8 Michigan Supreme Court

M Civ JI 4.05 Party Competent as a Witness [ Recommend No

Instruction ]

Comment

The committee recommends that no instruction on the “party competent as a witness” be

given.

M Civ JI 4.01 informs the jury that they may consider any interest or bias a witness has in

determining his or her credibility. It will cover the interest of a party witness, and the

committee recommends that no separate instruction on this subject be given. A separate

instruction may place undue emphasis upon particular aspects of the evidence.

An instruction which mentioned the interest of an individual party by name or otherwise

was disapproved in Seitz v Starks, 144 Mich 448; 108 NW 354 (1906).

History

M Civ JI 4.05 was SJI 2.05.

Michigan Supreme Court Page 4-9

Chapter 4: Credibility and Weight

M Civ JI 4.06 Witness Who Has Been Interviewed by an Attorney

It has been brought out that a lawyer *(or a representative of a lawyer) has talked with a

witness. There is nothing wrong with a lawyer *(or a representative of a lawyer) talking

with a witness for the purpose of learning what the witness knows about the case and what

testimony the witness will give.

Note on Use

*The words in parentheses should be used if appropriate.

Comment

This instruction is unnecessary unless the fact of an interview has been mentioned during

the trial. The Court may wish to give this instruction at the time this fact is brought out.

This instruction was approved in Socha v Passino, 405 Mich 458 (1979).

History

M Civ JI 4.06 was SJI 2.06. Amended January 1993, September 2007.

Michigan Model Civil Jury Instructions

Page 4-10 Michigan Supreme Court

M Civ JI 4.07 Weighing Conflicting Evidence—Number of Witnesses

Although you may consider the number of witnesses testifying on one side or the other

when you weigh the evidence as to a particular fact, the number of witnesses alone should

not persuade you if the testimony of the lesser number of witnesses is more convincing.

Comment

An instruction that weight of the evidence does not mean the number of witnesses was

approved in Strand v Chicago & W M R Co, 67 Mich 380; 34 NW 712 (1887), and

American Seed Co v Cole, 174 Mich 42; 140 NW 622 (1913). However, any instruction on

this subject should make it clear that the ultimate decision is for the jury. King v Ann Arbor

R Co, 137 Mich 487; 100 NW 783 (1904); Spalding v Lowe, 56 Mich 366; 23 NW 46

(1885). Therefore, this instruction should be given in conjunction with M Civ JI 4.01.

History

M Civ JI 4.07 is a revision of SJI 2.07. Amended April 1981.

Michigan Supreme Court Page 4-11

Chapter 4: Credibility and Weight

M Civ JI 4.08 One Witness against a Number [ Recommend No

Instruction ]

Comment

The committee recommends that no “one witness against a number” instruction be given.

The Michigan Supreme Court has held that it is error to point out cases where one witness

was to be believed against many. Butler v Detroit, Y & AA R Co, 138 Mich 206; 101 NW

232 (1904); Harrison v Green, 157 Mich 690; 122 NW 205 (1909); Lendberg v Brotherton

Iron Mining Co, 75 Mich 84; 42 NW 675 (1889). Such instructions have been criticized as

suggesting that the trial Court believed one side’s witnesses over the other.

This type of charge is unwarranted where M Civ JI 4.01 and 4.07 are given.

History

M Civ JI 4.08 was SJI 2.08.

Michigan Model Civil Jury Instructions

Page 4-12 Michigan Supreme Court

M Civ JI 4.09 Credibility of Special Categories of Witnesses and

Weight of Evidence [ Recommend No Instruction ]

Comment

The committee recommends that no instructions on the credibility of special categories of

witnesses be given. Such a charge has not been the usual practice and it would seem that

these special categories of witnesses, e.g., eyewitnesses, employees, etc., would be

adequately covered under M Civ JI 4.01. Counsel can cover such matters more properly in

argument.

History

M Civ JI 4.09 was SJI 2.09.

Michigan Supreme Court Page 4-13

Chapter 4: Credibility and Weight

M Civ JI 4.10 Weighing Expert Testimony

You have heard opinion testimony from one or more witnesses who have been offered as

experts. As in the case of other witnesses, you are free in your considered judgment to

accept all, part, or none of the testimony of an expert witness.

Comment

The factors listed in former M Civ JI 90.22A are left to argument of counsel. These factors

may include, but are not limited to, the length and diversity of the witness’s experience; the

professional attainments of the witness; whether the witness is regularly retained by

diverse, responsible persons and thus has a widespread professional standing to maintain;

and the experience that the witness has had in dealing with the nature of the issue about

which [ he / she ] has testified.

History

M Civ JI 4.10 was SJI 2.10. Adopted October 2018. Comment amended January 2019.

Michigan Model Civil Jury Instructions

Page 4-14 Michigan Supreme Court

M Civ JI 4.11 Consideration of Deposition Evidence

[ Members of the jury. You are now going to hear a summary of a deposition that was taken.

A deposition is the sworn testimony of a party or witness taken before trial. All parties and

their lawyers had the right to be present and to ask questions. The summary was prepared

to more efficiently present this evidence. You are also being given a copy of the summary

so you can follow along as it is being read. You are to give this evidence the same

consideration as you would have given it had the witness testified in open court. ]

During the trial, [ you heard testimony from a deposition/ you were read the summary of a

deposition ]. A deposition is the sworn testimony of a party or witness taken before trial.

All parties and their lawyers had the right to be present and to ask questions. [ The summary

was prepared to more efficiently present this evidence. ]

You are to give this evidence the same consideration as you would have given it had the [

witness / witnesses ] testified in open court.

Note on Use

The bracketed language in the first paragraph should be given if a deposition summary is

read to the jury as contemplated by MCR 2.513(F).

Comment

The Court may wish to give this instruction at the time a deposition is read or shown to the

jury, see MCR 2.512(B)(l), and to explain why the deposition is admissible, see MCR

2.308(A). Instructions that deposition evidence should be given the same fair consideration

as testimony produced in open court have been approved. Coburn v Moline, EM & WR Co,

243 Ill 448; 90 NE 741 (1909); Pyle v McNealy, 227 Mo App 1035; 62 SW2d 921 (1933);

see also 3 Callaghan’s Michigan Pleading & Practice (2d ed) § 35.104.

The 2011 amendment reflects the amendment to MCR 2.513(F) ordered by the Michigan

Supreme Court on June 29, 2011, which became effective September 1, 2011. This

amendment calls for the court to encourage the use of written deposition summaries in lieu

of full depositions.

History

M Civ JI 4.11 was JI 2.11. Amended January 1988, September 2007, October 2011, July

2024.

Michigan Supreme Court Page 4-15

Chapter 4: Credibility and Weight

M Civ JI 4.12 Hospital and Business Records [ Recommend No

Instruction ]

Comment

The committee recommends that no instruction be given concerning hospital and business

records. An instruction on this subject is not necessary and would place undue emphasis

upon particular portions of the evidence.

In Siirila v Barrios, 398 Mich 576; 248 NW2d 171 (1976), the Michigan Supreme Court,

quoting with approval SJI 2.12 (now M Civ JI 4.12), held that the trial judge properly

refused to give a requested instruction that the jury may consider as evidence matter

contained in a hospital record and absence of an entry in that record.

History

M Civ JI 4.12 was SJI 2.12.

Michigan Model Civil Jury Instructions

Page 4-16 Michigan Supreme Court

Michigan Supreme Court Page 5-1

CHAPTER 5

Impeachment

M Civ JI 5.01 Prior Inconsistent Statement of Witness [ Renumbered to

M Civ JI 3.15 ] ................................................................................................................. 5-2

M Civ JI 5.02 Impeachment of a Party by Prior Inconsistent Statement [ Instruction

Deleted ]......................................................................................................................... 5-3

M Civ JI 5.03 Impeachment by Proof of Conviction of Crime......................................... 5-4

Michigan Model Civil Jury Instructions

Page 5-2 Michigan Supreme Court

M Civ JI 5.01 Prior Inconsistent Statement of Witness [ Renumbered

to M Civ JI 3.15 ]

History

M Civ JI 5.01 was SJI 3.01. Amended December 1982, November 1983, August 1991,

October 1993, February 1998. Renumbered to M Civ JI 3.15 January 1999.

Michigan Supreme Court Page 5-3

Chapter 5: Impeachment

M Civ JI 5.02 Impeachment of a Party by Prior Inconsistent

Statement [ Instruction Deleted ]

History

M Civ JI 5.02 was SJI 3.01(A). Amended November 1983. Deleted October 1993.

Michigan Model Civil Jury Instructions

Page 5-4 Michigan Supreme Court

M Civ JI 5.03 Impeachment by Proof of Conviction of Crime

In deciding whether you should believe a witness, you may consider the fact that

the

witness has been convicted of a crime, and you may give that fact the weight you

believe it deserves under the circumstances.

Note on Use

This instruction applies to both a nonparty witness and a witness who is a party.

Comment

Evidence of a criminal conviction may be used for the purpose of drawing in question a

witness’s credibility. This evidence is admissible if elicited from the witness or established

by public record during cross-examination. MRE 609(a). The conviction must be of a crime

punishable by death or by imprisonment for more than one year, or the conviction must

involve theft, dishonesty, or false statement. The Court must determine that the probative

value outweighs its prejudicial effect and must articulate on the record the factors

considered. MRE 609(a)(l), (2).

The January 2024 amendments are housekeeping changes reflecting stylistic revisions to

the Michigan Rules of Evidence that became effective January 1, 2024.

History

M Civ JI 5.03 is a revision of SJI 3.02. Amended April 1981, January 2024.

Michigan Supreme Court Page 6-1

CHAPTER 6

Failure to Produce

M Civ JI 6.01 Failure to Produce Evidence or a Witness ................................................ 6-2

M Civ JI 6.02 Failure of Opposite Party to Testify in Case Involving “Dead Man’s Statute”

[ Recommend No Instruction ]....................................................................................... 6-4

Michigan Model Civil Jury Instructions

Page 6-2 Michigan Supreme Court

M Civ JI 6.01 Failure to Produce Evidence or a Witness

(a)*(The [ plaintiff / defendant ] in this case has not offered [ the testimony of [ name ] /

[ identify exhibit ] ]. As this evidence was under the control of the [ plaintiff / defendant ]

and could have been produced by [ him / her ], and no reasonable excuse for the [ plaintiff’s

/ defendant’s ] failure to produce the evidence was given, you may infer that the evidence

would have been adverse to the [ plaintiff / defendant ].)

(b)†(The [ plaintiff / defendant ] in this case has not offered [ the testimony of [ name ] /

[ identify exhibit ] ]. As no reasonable excuse for the [ plaintiff’s / defendant’s ] failure to

produce this evidence was given, you may infer that the evidence would have been adverse

to the [ plaintiff / defendant ], if you believe that the evidence was under the control of the

[ plaintiff / defendant ] and could have been produced by [ him / her ].)

(c)**(The [ plaintiff / defendant ] in this case has not offered [ the testimony of [ name ] /

[ identify exhibit ] ]. As this evidence was under the control of the [ plaintiff / defendant ]

and could have been produced by [ him / her ], you may infer that the evidence would have

been adverse to the [ plaintiff / defendant ], if you believe that no reasonable excuse for

[ plaintiff’s / defendant’s ] failure to produce the evidence has been shown.)

(d)††(The [ plaintiff / defendant ] in this case has not offered [ the testimony of [ name ] /

[ identify exhibit ] ]. You may infer that this evidence would have been adverse to the

[ plaintiff / defendant ] if you believe that the evidence was under the control of the

[ plaintiff / defendant ] and could have been produced by [ him / her ], and no reasonable

excuse for [ plaintiff’s / defendant’s ] failure to produce the evidence has been shown.)

Note on Use

The words “plaintiff” and “defendant” may be replaced by “petitioner” and “respondent”

in cases in which the latter terms are used to describe the parties.

If requested, the appropriate one of the above instructions should be given under the

following circumstances:

*Instruction a should be given when the Court finds that—

1.the evidence was under the control of the (plaintiff) (defendant) and could have been

produced by him or her;

2.no reasonable excuse for (plaintiff’s) (defendant’s) failure to produce the evidence has

been shown; and

3.the evidence would have been material, not merely cumulative, and not equally available

Michigan Supreme Court Page 6-3

Chapter 6: Failure to Produce

to the opposite party.

†Instruction b should be given when a question of fact arises in regard to “control” in

subparagraph 1 above, and the Court finds in the affirmative in regard to subparagraphs 2

and 3 above.

**Instruction c should be given when a question of fact arises in regard to “reasonable

excuse” in subparagraph 2 above, and the Court finds in the affirmative in regard to

subparagraphs 1 and 3 above.

††Instruction d should be given when a question of fact arises in regard to both “control”

and “reasonable excuse” in subparagraphs 1 and 2 above, and the Court finds in the

affirmative in regard to subparagraph 3 above.

Comment

For general authority on the above instructions, see Vergin v Saginaw, 125 Mich 499; 84

NW 1075 (1901); Dowagiac Manufacturing Co v Schneider, 181 Mich 538; 148 NW 173

(1914); Fontana v Ford Motor Co, 278 Mich 199; 270 NW 266 (1936); Ward v

Consolidated Rail Corp, 472 Mich 77 (2005).

For authority on the limitation in regard to “control,” see Prudential Insurance Co v Cusick,

369 Mich 269; 120 NW2d 1 (1963); Barringer v Arnold, 358 Mich 594; 101 NW2d 365

(1960); Brandt v C F Smith & Co, 242 Mich 217; 218 NW 803 (1928); in regard to

“reasonable excuse,” see Cole v Lake Shore & M S R Co, 81 Mich 156; 45 NW 983 (1890);

Leeds v Masha, 328 Mich 137; 43 NW2d 92 (1950); in regard to “material,” see Dowagiac

Manufacturing Co; in regard to “merely cumulative,” see Barringer; in regard to “equally

available,” see Urben v Public Bank, 365 Mich 279; 112 NW2d 444 (1961); Barringer;

DeGroff v Clark, 358 Mich 274; 100 NW2d 214 (1960); Macklem v Warren Construction

Co, 343 Mich 334; 72 NW2d 60 (1955); Holmes v Jones, 41 Mich App 63; 199 NW2d 538

(1972); Kaniewski v Emmerson, 44 Mich App 737; 205 NW2d 812 (1973). See also United

States v Beekman, 155 F2d 580, 584 (CA 2, 1946); Prudential Insurance Co.

History

M Civ JI 6.01 was SJI 5.01.

Michigan Model Civil Jury Instructions

Page 6-4 Michigan Supreme Court

M Civ JI 6.02 Failure of Opposite Party to Testify in Case Involving

“Dead Man’s Statute” [ Recommend No Instruction ]

Comment

The committee recommends that no instruction be given on the failure of the opposite party

to testify in a case involving the “dead man’s statute.”

If heirs, assigns, devisees, legatees, or personal representatives were parties to a suit, the

former dead man’s statute, MCL 600.2160, 617.64, prevented testimony by an adverse

party as to matters which, if true, must have been equally within the knowledge of the

deceased person. The prohibition was absolute if the statutory conditions were met.

The present statute, MCL 600.2166, represents an effort to loosen the strictures of the prior

law. It applied originally only to actions against the person “incapable of testifying,” but

1969 PA 63 and GCR 1963, 608 extended it to actions “by” as well as “against.” Under the

statute and rule the opposite party’s testimony was admissible if “some material portion of

his testimony is supported by some other material evidence tending to corroborate his

claim.”

In 1978, GCR 1963, 608 was abolished and MRE 601 was adopted. It provides generally

that any person is competent to be a witness. The committee commentary to rule 601

indicates that it changes present law by not requiring exclusion of testimony on grounds

covered by the Michigan dead man’s statute. In James v Dixon, 95 Mich App 527; 291

NW2d 106 (1980), the court of appeals held that the dead man’s statute was impliedly

abrogated by the adoption of MRE 601.

History

M Civ JI 6.02 was SJI 5.02.

Michigan Supreme Court Page 7-1

CHAPTER 7

Theories

M Civ JI 7.01 Theories of the Parties .............................................................................. 7-2

Michigan Model Civil Jury Instructions

Page 7-2 Michigan Supreme Court

M Civ JI 7.01 Theories of the Parties

These are the theories of the parties. I express no preference as to which, if any, you will

accept.

[ State the parties’ theories of the case ].

Comment

The present provision concerning the Court’s charge to the jury on issues in the case and

theories of the parties is found in MCR 2.512(A)(2), (B)(2):

Rule 2.512 Instructions to Jury

(A) Request for Instructions.

* * *

(2) In addition to requests for instructions submitted under subrule (A)(1), after the close

of the evidence, each party shall submit in writing to the court a statement of the issues and

may submit the party’s theory of the case regarding each issue. The statement must be

concise, be narrative in form, and set forth as issues only those disputed propositions of fact

that are supported by the evidence. The theory may include those claims supported by the

evidence or admitted.

* * *

(B) Instructing the Jury.

* * *

(2) Before or after arguments or at both times, as the court elects, the court shall instruct

the jury on the applicable law, the issues presented by the case, and, if a party requests as

provided in subrule (A)(2), that party’s theory of the case.

It is the duty of the trial Court to present to the jury the material issues of the case, whether

requested to or not. Barton v Gray, 57 Mich 662; 24 NW 638 (1885); Daigle v Berkowitz,

273 Mich 140; 262 NW 652 (1935); De Forest v Soules, 278 Mich 557; 270 NW 785

(1936); Tinkler v Richter, 295 Mich 396; 295 NW 201 (1940); Jorgenson v Howland, 325

Mich 440; 38 NW2d 906 (1949); Brown v Nichols, 337 Mich 684; 60 NW2d 907 (1953);

Martiniano v Booth, 359 Mich 680; 103 NW2d 502 (1960); Sakorraphos v Eastman Kodak

Stores, Inc, 367 Mich 96; 116 NW2d 227 (1962).

Michigan Supreme Court Page 7-3

Chapter 7: Theories

The jury should not be instructed on issues that are not found in the pleadings, Pettibone v

Smith, 37 Mich 579 (1877); Denman v Johnston, 85 Mich 387; 48 NW 565 (1891); Curth

v New York Life Insurance Co, 274 Mich 513; 265 NW 749 (1936), unless supported by the

evidence in accordance with MCR 2.118(C). There should not be submitted as issues those

propositions of fact that are admitted or have not been disputed. Richardson v Coddington,

45 Mich 338; 7 NW 903 (1881); Lange v Perley, 47 Mich 352; 11 NW 193 (1882); Vitaioli

v Berklund, 296 Mich 56; 295 NW 557 (1941); Houck v Snyder, 375 Mich 392; 134 NW2d

689 (1965). The same is true with issues raised but not supported by the evidence. Litvin v

Joyce, 329 Mich 56; 44 NW2d 867 (1950); White v Grismore, 333 Mich 568; 53 NW2d

499 (1952).

The trial judge need not give the charge in the form submitted by counsel, so long as the

substance of such requested charge, if proper, is covered. Ferries v Copco Steel &

Engineering Co, 344 Mich 345; 73 NW2d 850 (1955); Schattilly v Yonker, 347 Mich 660;

81 NW2d 343 (1957); Horst v Tikkanen, 370 Mich 65; 120 NW2d 808 (1963).

History

M Civ JI 7.01 was added April 1981 and replaced SJI 20.01, 25.12, 25.22 and 27.03.

Amended January 1988, February 1989.

Michigan Model Civil Jury Instructions

Page 7-4 Michigan Supreme Court

Michigan Supreme Court Page 8-1

CHAPTER 8

Definition of Burden of Proof

M Civ JI 8.01 Definition of Burden of Proof.................................................................... 8-2

Michigan Model Civil Jury Instructions

Page 8-2 Michigan Supreme Court

M Civ JI 8.01 Definition of Burden of Proof

(a) I have just listed for you the propositions on which the [ plaintiff / defendant ] has the

burden of proof. For the [ plaintiff / defendant ] to satisfy this burden, the evidence must

persuade you that it is more likely than not that the proposition is true.

You must consider all the evidence regardless of which party produced it.

(b) I have just listed for you the propositions on which the [ plaintiff / defendant ] has the

burden of proof. In this case the [ plaintiff / defendant ] must prove those propositions by

clear and convincing evidence. This means that [ plaintiff / defendant ] must do more than

merely persuade you that the proposition is probably true. To be clear and convincing, the

evidence must be strong enough to cause you to have a clear and firm belief that the

proposition is true.

You must consider all the evidence regardless of which party produced it.

different burdens of proof on the claims [ he / she / it / they ] make[ s ].

On the following propositions, [ list the propositions ], [ plaintiff / defendant ] has the

burden of proof. For the [ plaintiff / defendant ] to satisfy this burden, the evidence must

persuade you that it is more likely than not that the proposition is true.

On the following propositions, [ list the propositions ], the [ plaintiff / defendant ] has an

additional burden of proof. On these listed propositions, the [ plaintiff / defendant ] must

prove those propositions by clear and convincing evidence. This means that [ plaintiff /

defendant ] must do more than merely persuade you that the proposition is probably true.

To be clear and convincing, the evidence must be strong enough to cause you to have a clear

and firm belief that the proposition is true.

You must consider all the evidence regardless of which party produced it.

Note on Use

This instruction should be given directly after M Civ JI 14.21, 16.02A, 16.04, 16.05, 16.06,

25.12, 25.22, 25.32, 25.45, 30.03, 35.02, 36.05, 36.06, 36.15, 75.11, 75.12, 80.02, 100.02,

101.04, 101.05, 101.06, 105.04, 105.012, 105.14, 105.32, 106.07A, 106.07C, 106.07D,

106.29, 106.35, 107.15, 110.10, 110.11, 110.12, 110.13, 115.20, 115.21, 116.20, 116.21,

117.02, 117.21, 118.05, 140.01, 140.42, 140.45, 140.53, 142.01, 170.45, 170.51, and

171.02.

Only the paragraph that applies should be read. For example, paragraph (c) is to be used

Michigan Supreme Court Page 8-3

Chapter 8: Definition of Burden of Proof

where there is a mixed burden of proof because of the nature of the claims brought.

Comment

The revised instruction makes clearer that the evidence in support of a proposition must

have a qualitative as well as a quantitative character. In other words, the evidence must do

more than simply outweigh that against it. A jury may disbelieve the evidence proffered in

support of a proposition even when that evidence is unopposed. In that situation, although

the evidence quantitatively outweighs that opposed to it, qualitatively it does not meet the

burden of proof because the jury must still be persuaded that the evidence supports a finding

that the proposition is true. Strand v Chicago & W M R Co, 67 Mich 380 (1887); Four

States Coal Co v Ohio & Michigan Coal Co, 228 Mich 360 (1924); Hanna v McClave, 273

Mich 571 (1935); Cook v Vineyard, 291 Mich 375 (1939); Kelly v Builders Square, Inc, 465

Mich 29 (2001).

In re Martin, 450 Mich 204 (1995); In re Chmura, 464 Mich 58 (2001).

History

M Civ JI 8.01 (former M Civ JI 16.01) was SJI 21.01. Amended October 1984.

Renumbered from M Civ JI 16.01 to M Civ JI 8.01 November 1998. Amended September

2007.

Michigan Model Civil Jury Instructions

Page 8-4 Michigan Supreme Court

Michigan Supreme Court Page 10-1

CHAPTER 10

Negligence: General Instructions

M Civ JI 10.01 Definitions Introduced .......................................................................... 10-2

M Civ JI 10.02 Negligence of Adult—Definition ........................................................... 10-3

M Civ JI 10.03 Ordinary Care—Adult—Definition [ Instruction Deleted ].................... 10-5

M Civ JI 10.04 Duty to Use Ordinary Care— Adult—Plaintiff....................................... 10-6

M Civ JI 10.05 Duty to Use Ordinary Care—Adult—Defendant ................................... 10-7

M Civ JI 10.06 Ordinary Care—Minor—Definition ....................................................... 10-8

M Civ JI 10.07 Conduct Required for Safety of Child.................................................... 10-9

M Civ JI 10.08 Presumption of Ordinary Care—Death Case ...................................... 10-10

M Civ JI 10.09 Presumption of Ordinary Care—Loss of Memory Case ...................... 10-12

Michigan Model Civil Jury Instructions

Page 10-2 Michigan Supreme Court

M Civ JI 10.01 Definitions Introduced

I shall now give you the definitions of some important legal terms. Please listen carefully

to these definitions so that you will understand the terms when they are used later.

Note on Use

This instruction may be given as a transition from the General Instructions to the applicable

definitions.

History

M Civ JI 10.01 is a revision of SJI 10.00.

Michigan Supreme Court Page 10-3

Chapter 10: Negligence: General Instructions

M Civ JI 10.02 Negligence of Adult—Definition

Negligence is the failure to use ordinary care. Ordinary care means the care a reasonably

careful *person would use. Therefore, by “negligence,” I mean the failure to do something

that a reasonably careful *person would do, or the doing of something that a reasonably

careful *person would not do, under the circumstances that you find existed in this case.

The law does not say what a reasonably careful *person using ordinary care would or would

not do under such circumstances. That is for you to decide.

Note on Use

*Use of the word “person” may be inappropriate depending on the nature of the defendant’s

activity. Laney v Consumers Power Co, 418 Mich 180; 341 NW2d 106 (1983).

This instruction is not intended to apply to the defendant in a malpractice case. See M Civ

JI 30.01 and 30.02.

This instruction should not be used in a case involving co-participants in a recreational

activity. Ritchie-Gamester v City of Berkley, 461 Mich 73; 597 NW2d 517 (1999) (co-

participants owe each other a duty not to act recklessly).

Comment

Authority for this instruction appears in numerous cases, some of which are Detroit & M R

Co v Van Steinburg, 17 Mich 99, 118 (1868); Knarian v South Haven Sand Co, 361 Mich

631, 643; 106 NW2d 151, 157 (1960); Muth v W P Lahey’s, Inc, 338 Mich 513, 523; 61

NW2d 619, 623 (1953); Reedy v Goodin, 285 Mich 614, 620; 281 NW 377, 379 (1938);

and Frederick v Detroit, 370 Mich 425, 435; 121 NW2d 918, 922 (1963); Case v

Consumers Power Co, 463 Mich 1; 615 NW2d 17 (2000).

Under Michigan law, the standard of conduct required may differ depending on the activity,

trade, occupation, or profession, but the degree of care does not change. It is always what

a reasonably careful person engaged in a particular activity, trade, occupation, or profession

would do or would refrain from doing under the circumstances then existing. Frederick;

Laney. It is ordinarily error to instruct a jury on the specific standard of conduct. Case (in

this stray-voltage case, the court held it was reversible error to instruct the jury that

defendant had a duty to inspect and repair electrical wires); but see Schultz v Consumers

Power, 443 Mich 445; 506 NW2d 175 (1993), which approved that standard of conduct in

a case involving dangers from high-voltage electricity.

The general rule for a child as set forth in Restatement (Second) of Torts §283A, is that “the

standard of conduct to which he must conform to avoid being negligent is that of a

Michigan Model Civil Jury Instructions

Page 10-4 Michigan Supreme Court

reasonable person of like age, intelligence, and experience under like circumstances.”

However, there is an exception to this rule where the child is engaging in an adult activity.

The exception is set forth in comment c to §283A, which states as follows:

An exception to the rule stated in this Section may arise where the child engages in an

activity which is normally undertaken only by adults, and for which adult qualifications are

required. As in the case of one entering upon a professional activity which requires special

skill (see §299A), he may be held to the standard of adult skill, knowledge, and

competence, and no allowance may be made for his immaturity. Thus, for example, if a boy

of fourteen were to attempt to fly an airplane, his age and inexperience would not excuse

him from liability for flying it in a negligent manner. The same may be true where the child

drives an automobile. In this connection licensing statutes, and the examinations given to

drivers, may be important in determining the qualifications required; but even if the child

succeeds in obtaining a license he may thereafter be required to meet the standard

established primarily for adults.

It is not clear whether the court or jury decides whether the activity is one normally

undertaken only by adults.

The Michigan Supreme Court considered this exception in Constantino v Wolverine

Insurance Co, 407 Mich 896; 284 NW2d 463 (1979). Reversing an unpublished court of

appeals opinion, the supreme court said that “the instruction that the appellee driver was not

held to the same standard of conduct as an adult was erroneous. When a minor engages in

a dangerous and adult activity, e.g., driving an automobile, he is charged with the same

standard of conduct as an adult.” See also Osner v Boughner, 180 Mich App 248; 446

NW2d 873 (1989). The adult standard of care applies even if the minor is a student driver.

Stevens v Veenstra, 226 Mich App 441; 573 NW2d 341 (1997).

History

M Civ JI 10.02 is a revision of SJI 10.01 and SJI 10.02. Amended February 1, 1981, June

1998.

Michigan Supreme Court Page 10-5

Chapter 10: Negligence: General Instructions

M Civ JI 10.03 Ordinary Care—Adult—Definition [ Instruction

Deleted ]

Comment

This instruction was deleted by the committee June 1998. The subject matter of this

instruction is now part of M Civ JI 10.02.

History

M Civ JI 10.03 was SJI 10.02. Deleted June 1998.

Michigan Model Civil Jury Instructions

Page 10-6 Michigan Supreme Court

M Civ JI 10.04 Duty to Use Ordinary Care— Adult—Plaintiff

It was the duty of the plaintiff, in connection with this occurrence, to use ordinary care for

[ [ his / her ] own safety / and / the safety of [ his / her ] property ].

Note on Use

If the plaintiff is age 18 or over, this instruction should be used with M Civ JI 10.02,

Negligence of Adult—Definition. If the plaintiff is under age 18, refer to the Comment

following M Civ JI 10.02.

If the conduct of a person other than plaintiff was involved in the occurrence, substitute

name or other descriptive term in the instruction.

This instruction should not be used if the injury results from participation in a recreational

activity; coparticipants in such activity owe each other a duty not to act recklessly. Ritchie-

Gamester v City of Berkley, 461 Mich 73; 597 NW2d 517 (1999)

Comment

This instruction is supported by Detroit & M R Co v Van Steinburg, 17 Mich 99 (1868), and

Mack v Precast Industries, Inc, 369 Mich 439; 120 NW2d 225 (1963).

History

M Civ JI 10.04 was SJI 10.03.

Michigan Supreme Court Page 10-7

Chapter 10: Negligence: General Instructions

M Civ JI 10.05 Duty to Use Ordinary Care—Adult—Defendant

It was the duty of the defendant, in connection with this occurrence, to use ordinary care

for the safety of [ the plaintiff / and / plaintiff’s property ].

Note on Use

If the defendant or other person whose conduct was involved in the occurrence is age 18 or

over, this instruction should be used with M Civ JI 10.02, Negligence of Adult—Definition.

If the plaintiff is under age 18, refer to the Comment following M Civ JI 10.02.

If the conduct of a person other than defendant was involved in the occurrence, substitute

name or other descriptive term in the instruction.

This instruction should not be used if the injury results from participation in a recreational

activity; coparticipants in such activity owe each other a duty not to act recklessly. Ritchie-

Gamester v City of Berkley, 461 Mich 73; 597 NW2d 517 (1999)

Comment

This instruction is supported by Detroit & M R Co v Van Steinburg, 17 Mich 99 (1868);

Knarian v South Haven Sand Co, 361 Mich 631, 643; 106 NW2d 151, 157 (1960); and

Ryder v Murphy, 371 Mich 474, 478; 124 NW2d 238, 240 (1963).

History

M Civ JI 10.05 was SJI 10.04.

Michigan Model Civil Jury Instructions

Page 10-8 Michigan Supreme Court

M Civ JI 10.06 Ordinary Care—Minor—Definition

A minor is not held to the same standard of conduct as an adult. When I use the words

“ordinary care” with respect to [ the minor / [ name of minor ] ], I mean that degree of care

which a reasonably careful minor of the age, mental capacity and experience of [ the minor

/ [ name of minor ] ] would use under the circumstances which you find existed in this case.

It is for you to decide what a reasonably careful minor would do or would not do under such

circumstances.

Note on Use

This instruction should not be used if the minor is engaged in an adult activity that is

dangerous, such as driving an automobile. Constantino v Wolverine Ins Co, 407 Mich 896;

284 NW2d 463 (1979). See also the Comment following M Civ JI 10.02. In such cases, M

Civ JI 10.04 or M Civ JI 10.05 should be used.

When a plaintiff is under age seven, use M Civ JI 13.08. No instruction is needed if

defendant is under age seven.

Substitute name or other descriptive term for “the minor” when appropriate.

Comment

The degree of care to be exercised by a minor over age seven is that which a reasonably

careful person of the same age, capacity and experience would exercise under the same or

similar circumstances. Baker v Alt, 374 Mich 492; 132 NW2d 614 (1965); Tyler v Weed,

285 Mich 460; 280 NW 827 (1938); Easton v Medema, 246 Mich 130; 224 NW 636 (1929);

Trudell v Grand Trunk R Co, 126 Mich 73, 78; 85 NW 250, 252 (1901); Baker v Flint & P

M R Co, 68 Mich 90; 35 NW 836 (1888); Cooper v Lake Shore & M S R Co, 66 Mich 261;

33 NW 306 (1887); Daniels v Clegg, 28 Mich 32 (1873); East Saginaw City R Co v Bohn,

27 Mich 503 (1873); Hargreaves v Deacon, 25 Mich 1, 2 (1872).

If the child is under age seven, he or she cannot be guilty of contributory negligence. Baker.

If the child is under age seven, he or she cannot be guilty of negligence or intentional tort

and the suit must be dismissed. Queen Insurance Co v Hammond, 374 Mich 655; 132

NW2d 792 (1965).

History

M Civ JI 10.06 was SJI 10.05.

Michigan Supreme Court Page 10-9

Chapter 10: Negligence: General Instructions

M Civ JI 10.07 Conduct Required for Safety of Child

The law recognizes that children act upon childish instincts and impulses. If you find the

defendant knew or should have known that a child or children were or were likely to be in

the vicinity, then the defendant is required to exercise greater vigilance and this is a

circumstance to be considered by you in determining whether reasonable care was used by

the defendant.

Note on Use

This instruction is to be used in appropriate cases where the plaintiff seeks damages for

injury to a minor. If the conduct of a person, e.g., agent, driver, etc., other than defendant

was involved in the occurrence, substitute name or other descriptive term in the instruction.

This instruction should be given immediately after M Civ JI 10.03.

See Bolser v Davis, 62 Mich App 731; 233 NW2d 845 (1975), where defendant’s

knowledge that there were homes along the road on which she was driving was a fact from

which a jury could infer that she knew or should have known that a child or children were

or were likely to be in the vicinity, and therefore the evidence was sufficient to make this

instruction appropriate.

Comment

The law recognizes that children, wherever they go, must be expected to act upon childish

instincts and impulses. Powers v Harlow, 53 Mich 507, 515; 19 NW 257, 260 (1884);

Edgerton v Lynch, 255 Mich 456, 460; 238 NW 322, 323–324 (1931). Michigan law

requires greater vigilance toward children than toward adults, although the degree of care

does not change. See Comment, M Civ JI 10.02.

Michigan Model Civil Jury Instructions

Page 10-10 Michigan Supreme Court

M Civ JI 10.08 Presumption of Ordinary Care—Death Case

Because [ name of decedent ] has died and cannot testify, you may infer that [ he / she ]

exercised ordinary care for [ his / her ] safety *(and for the safety of others) at and before

the time of the occurrence. However, you should weigh all the evidence in determining

whether the decedent exercised due care.

Note on Use

This instruction can be given only in a case involving negligence or a willful and wanton

action, when one or both of the parties (or a person acting for one of the parties) is deceased.

*The phrase in parentheses should be used if appropriate.

In certain circumstances, it may not be appropriate to use this instruction. Where there is

clear, positive and credible evidence showing negligence by the deceased, this instruction

should not be given. Potts v Shepard Marine Construction Co, 151 Mich App 19; 391

NW2d 357 (1986); see also Gillett v Michigan United Traction Co, 205 Mich 410; 171 NW

536 (1919). Also, MCL 600.5805(12) limits the use of presumptions in certain products

liability actions: “for a product that has been in use for not less than 10 years, the plaintiff,

in proving a prima facie case, must do so without benefit of any presumption.” In Johnson

v White, 430 Mich 47, 49 n1; 420 NW2d 87, 88 n1 (1988), the Michigan Supreme Court

addressed the issue of the trial court’s refusal to give an instruction on the presumption of

due care and concluded:

Because the error was harmless, if error at all, we do not address the question

whether the instruction on the presumption of due care, M Civ JI 10.08, remains

viable where principles of comparative negligence are applied.

Comment

The presumption of ordinary care originally appeared in Teipel v Hilsendegen, 44 Mich

461, 462; 7 NW 82, 82 (1880).

Other cases dealing with this presumption include: Weller v Mancha, 351 Mich 50; 87

NW2d 134 (1957); Weller v Mancha (On Rehearing), 353 Mich 189; 91 NW2d 352 (1958);

Hill v Harbor Steel & Supply Corp, 374 Mich 194; 132 NW2d 54 (1965); Bolser v Davis,

62 Mich App 731; 233 NW2d 845 (1975).

If plaintiff and defendant are deceased, then both are entitled to the presumption. Detroit

Automobile Inter-Insurance Exchange v Powe, 348 Mich 548; 83 NW2d 292 (1957); Booth

v Bond, 354 Mich 561; 93 NW2d 161 (1958).

Michigan Supreme Court Page 10-11

Chapter 10: Negligence: General Instructions

This is a proper instruction even though the burden of proving contributory negligence is

now on the defendant. Mack v Precast Industries, Inc, 369 Mich 439, 454; 120 NW2d 225,

232 (1963).

History

Amended December 1987.

Michigan Model Civil Jury Instructions

Page 10-12 Michigan Supreme Court

M Civ JI 10.09 Presumption of Ordinary Care—Loss of Memory Case

[ If you find that / Since ] [ plaintiff / defendant ] has a loss of memory concerning the facts

of this case and it was caused by the occurrence, you may infer that the [ plaintiff /

defendant ] was not negligent. However, you should weigh all the evidence in determining

whether the [ plaintiff / defendant ] was or was not negligent.

Note on Use

This instruction can be given only in a case involving negligence or a willful and wanton

action, when one or both of the parties (or a person acting for one of the parties) is suffering

from loss of memory related to injuries received in the accident.

In certain products liability actions, this instruction should not be used: “for a product that

has been in use for not less than 10 years, the plaintiff, in proving a prima facie case, must

do so without benefit of any presumption.” MCL 600.5805(12). For other circumstances in

which this instruction may not be appropriate, see Note on Use to M Civ JI 10.08 and

Comment below.

Comment

The above instruction is to be given in cases where either of the parties is suffering from

loss of memory. Knickerbocker v Samson, 364 Mich 439, 448; 111 NW2d 113, 117–118

(1961), see also Shaw v Bashore, 353 Mich 31; 90 NW2d 688 (1958). The loss of memory

must be related to injuries received in the accident. Thompson v Southern Michigan

Transportation Co, 261 Mich 440, 446; 246 NW 174, 176 (1933). However, medical

evidence does not necessarily have to be presented to prove the injury caused the amnesia.

Knickerbocker.

In two cases involving claims of traumatic amnesia, the trial court’s refusal to give a

presumption of due care instruction was upheld as a proper exercise of discretion. Tien v

Barkel, 351 Mich 276; 88 NW2d 552 (1958); Holloway v Cronk, 76 Mich App 577; 257

NW2d 175 (1977).

History

Amended December 1987.

Michigan Supreme Court Page 11-1

CHAPTER 11

Comparative Negligence

M Civ JI 11.01 Comparative Negligence—Definition ................................................... 11-2

M Civ JI 11.02 Negligence—Not an Issue as to One or More Plaintiffs........................ 11-3

Michigan Model Civil Jury Instructions

Page 11-2 Michigan Supreme Court

M Civ JI 11.01 Comparative Negligence—Definition

The total amount of damages that the plaintiff would otherwise be entitled to recover shall

be reduced by the percentage of plaintiff’s negligence that contributed as a proximate cause

to [ his / her ] [ injury / property damage ].

This is known as comparative negligence.

*(The plaintiff, however, is not entitled to noneconomic damages if [ he / she ] is more than

50 percent at fault for [ his / her ] injury.)

Note on Use

This instruction should be given where there is a question for the jury as to the negligence

of one or more of the plaintiffs. If there is no such question, see M Civ JI 11.02

Negligence—Not an Issue as to One or More Plaintiffs.

*This paragraph should be deleted if the case was filed before March 28, 1996. See 1995

PA 161, §3.

Comment

See Placek v Sterling Heights, 405 Mich 638; 275 NW2d 511 (1979), and MCL 600.2959,

added by 1995 PA 161.

History

M Civ JI 11.01 was added September 1980. Amended June 1997.

Michigan Supreme Court Page 11-3

Chapter 11: Comparative Negligence

M Civ JI 11.02 Negligence—Not an Issue as to One or More Plaintiffs

You must not consider whether there was negligence on the part of the [ plaintiff, [ name

of plaintiff ] / plaintiffs, [ names of plaintiffs ] ], *(because [ explain briefly ]).

Note on Use

If there is a question for the jury as to the negligence of one or more plaintiffs, but not as to

other plaintiffs, both M Civ JI 11.01 and M Civ JI 11.02 should be given.

*The words in parentheses may be added if appropriate.

History

M Civ JI 11.02 is a revision of SJI 11.02. Amended September 1980.

Michigan Model Civil Jury Instructions

Page 11-4 Michigan Supreme Court

Michigan Supreme Court Page 12-1

CHAPTER 12

Statutes and Ordinances

Affecting Negligence

M Civ JI 12.01 Violation of Statute—Negligence.......................................................... 12-2

M Civ JI 12.02 Excused Violation of Statute ................................................................. 12-3

M Civ JI 12.03 Violation of Ordinance by Defendant ................................................... 12-4

M Civ JI 12.04 Violation of Ordinance by Plaintiff........................................................ 12-6

M Civ JI 12.05 Violation by Defendant of Rules or Regulations Promulgated

Pursuant to Statutory Authority................................................................................... 12-8

M Civ JI 12.06 Violation by Plaintiff of Rules or Regulations Promulgated Pursuant to

Statutory Authority ...................................................................................................... 12-9

M Civ JI 12.07 Violation of Statute or Ordinance by Minor [ No Instruction

Prepared ]................................................................................................................... 12-10

Michigan Model Civil Jury Instructions

Page 12-2 Michigan Supreme Court

M Civ JI 12.01 Violation of Statute—Negligence

We have a state statute which provides that [ here quote or paraphrase the applicable part

of the statute as construed by the courts ].

If you find that the [ defendant / plaintiff ] violated this statute before or at the time of the

occurrence, you may infer that the [ defendant / plaintiff ] was negligent. *(You must then

decide whether such negligence was a proximate cause of the occurrence.)

Note on Use

*If a sudden emergency or other excuse for the violation of the statute is an issue in the case,

omit the last sentence of this instruction and add M Civ JI 12.02.

This instruction should be given only if defendant or plaintiff has alleged a statutory

violation as a ground for negligence, and only if—

the statute is intended to protect against the result of the violation;

the plaintiff is within the class intended to be protected by the statute; and

the evidence will support a finding that the violation was a proximate

contributing cause of the occurrence.

If applicable, this instruction should be given in close association with the applicable

instructions defining proximate cause. See M Civ JI 15.01–15.06.

If there is no dispute or question that the statute was violated, and if there is no claim of

excuse for the violation, then the jury may be instructed that the plaintiff or defendant was

negligent as a matter of law, and only the remaining issues should be submitted to the jury.

Comment

Zeni v Anderson, 397 Mich 117; 243 NW2d 270 (1976); Klanseck v Anderson Sales &

Service, Inc, 426 Mich 78; 393 NW2d 356 (1986).

History

M Civ JI 12.01 and 12.02 were added September 1980. They replace SJI 12.01 through

12.04.

Michigan Supreme Court Page 12-3

Chapter 12: Statutes and Ordinances Affecting Negligence

M Civ JI 12.02 Excused Violation of Statute

However, if you find that [ defendant / plaintiff ] used ordinary care and was still unable to

avoid the violation because of [ state here the excuse claimed ], then [ his / her ] violation

is excused.

If you find that [ defendant / plaintiff ] violated this statute and that the violation was not

excused, then you must decide whether such violation was a proximate cause of the

occurrence.

Note on Use

This instruction should be given immediately following M Civ JI 12.01 and only where the

evidence would support a finding that a legal excuse existed.

Comment

See MRE 301 and cases collected in Zeni v Anderson, 397 Mich 117; 243 NW2d 270

(1976). See also Klanseck v Anderson Sales & Service, Inc, 426 Mich 78; 393 NW2d 356

(1986).

Five categories of excused violations are indicated by Restatement (Second) of Torts §288

A, at 32–33:

(a)the violation is reasonable because of the actor’s incapacity;

(b)he neither knows nor should know of the occasion for compliance;

(c)he is unable after reasonable diligence or care to comply;

(d)he is confronted by an emergency not due to his own misconduct;

(e)compliance would involve a greater risk of harm to the actor or to others.

History

M Civ JI 12.01 and 12.02 were added September 1980. They replace SJI 12.01 through

12.04.

Michigan Model Civil Jury Instructions

Page 12-4 Michigan Supreme Court

M Civ JI 12.03 Violation of Ordinance by Defendant

The [ city / township / village / [ other political subdivision ] ] of ________________ has

an ordinance which provides that [ here quote or paraphrase the applicable part of the

ordinance as construed by the courts ].

If you find that defendant violated this ordinance before or at the time of the occurrence,

such violation is evidence of negligence which you should consider, together with all the

other evidence, in deciding whether defendant was negligent. If you find that defendant was

negligent, you must then decide whether such negligence was a proximate cause of the

[ injury / damage ] to plaintiff.

Note on Use

This instruction should be given only if—

the ordinance is intended to protect against the injury involved;

the plaintiff is within the class intended to be protected by the ordinance; and

the evidence will support a finding that the violation was a proximate cause of

the injury involved.

If applicable, it should be given in close association with the applicable instructions

defining proximate cause. See M Civ JI 15.01–15.06. If there is no dispute or question as

to a violation of the ordinance, then the jury should be so instructed, leaving, however, the

question as to whether such violation constituted negligence, under the facts and

circumstances of the case, to the jury. A suggested alternative is as follows:

[ It is conceded / There is no question ] that defendant violated this ordinance at

the time of the occurrence. You should consider this fact, together with all the

other evidence, in deciding whether defendant was negligent. If you find that

defendant was negligent, you must then decide whether such negligence was a

proximate cause of the [ injury / damage ] to plaintiff.

Where both statute and ordinance violations are involved, the instructions should not

attempt to analyze the difference in treatment, this being more appropriately left to

argument of counsel.

Comment

In Michigan, violation of an ordinance is only evidence of negligence, Stinson v Payne, 231

Mich 158; 203 NW 831 (1925); Smith v Grand Rapids R Co, 240 Mich 637; 216 NW 439

Michigan Supreme Court Page 12-5

Chapter 12: Statutes and Ordinances Affecting Negligence

(1927); Baker v Saginaw City Lines, Inc, 366 Mich 180; 113 NW2d 912 (1962), which is

to be considered, in connection with other evidence, in determining whether a party was

negligent.

History

M Civ JI 12.03 was SJI 12.05.

Michigan Model Civil Jury Instructions

Page 12-6 Michigan Supreme Court

M Civ JI 12.04 Violation of Ordinance by Plaintiff

The [ city / township / village / [ other political subdivision ] ] of ________________ has

an ordinance which provides that [ here quote or paraphrase the applicable part of the

ordinance as construed by the courts ].

If you find that plaintiff violated this ordinance before or at the time of the occurrence, such

violation is evidence of negligence which you should consider, together with all the other

evidence, in deciding whether plaintiff was negligent. If you find that plaintiff was

negligent, you must then decide whether such negligence was a proximate contributing

cause of the [ injury / damage ] to plaintiff.

Note on Use

This instruction should be given only if—

the ordinance is intended to protect against the result of the violation;

the plaintiff is within the class intended to be protected by the ordinance; and

the evidence will support a finding that the violation was a proximate

contributing cause of the injury involved.

If applicable, it should be given in close association with the applicable instructions

defining proximate cause. See M Civ JI 15.01–15.06. If there is no dispute or question as

to a violation of the ordinance, then the jury should be so instructed, leaving, however, the

question as to whether such violation constituted negligence, under the facts and

circumstances of the case, to the jury. A suggested alternative is as follows:

[ It is conceded / There is no question ] that plaintiff violated this ordinance at the

time of the occurrence. You should consider this fact, together with all the other

evidence, in deciding whether plaintiff was negligent. If you find that plaintiff

was negligent, you must then decide whether such negligence was a proximate

contributing cause of the [ injury / damage ] to plaintiff.

Where both statute and ordinance violations are involved, the instructions should not

attempt to analyze the difference in treatment, this being more appropriately left to

argument of counsel.

Comment

See Comment to M Civ JI 12.03.

Michigan Supreme Court Page 12-7

Chapter 12: Statutes and Ordinances Affecting Negligence

History

M Civ JI 12.04 was SJI 12.06.

Michigan Model Civil Jury Instructions

Page 12-8 Michigan Supreme Court

M Civ JI 12.05 Violation by Defendant of Rules or Regulations

Promulgated Pursuant to Statutory Authority

The [ name of state agency ] in Michigan has adopted certain regulations pursuant to

authority given to it by a state statute. [ Rule / Rules ] ________ of [ name of state agency ]

[ provides / provide ] that [ here quote or paraphrase applicable parts of regulation(s) as

construed by the courts ].

If you find that defendant violated [ this regulation / one or more of these regulations ]

before or at the time of the occurrence, such [ violation / violations ] [ is / are ] evidence of

negligence which you should consider, together with all the other evidence, in deciding

whether defendant was negligent. If you find that defendant was negligent, you must then

decide whether such negligence was a proximate cause of the [ injury / damage ] to

plaintiff.

Note on Use

See Note on Use to M Civ JI 12.03.

Comment

Violations of regulations promulgated pursuant to statutory authority are only evidence of

negligence in Michigan. Douglas v Edgewater Park Co, 369 Mich 320; 119 NW2d 567

(1963); Juidici v Forsyth Twp, 373 Mich 81; 127 NW2d 853 (1964).

History

M Civ JI 12.05 was SJI 12.07.

Michigan Supreme Court Page 12-9

Chapter 12: Statutes and Ordinances Affecting Negligence

M Civ JI 12.06 Violation by Plaintiff of Rules or Regulations

Promulgated Pursuant to Statutory Authority

The [ name of state agency ] in Michigan has adopted certain regulations pursuant to

authority given to it by a state statute. [ Rule / Rules ] ________ of [ name of state agency ]

[ provides / provide ] that [ here quote or paraphrase applicable parts of regulation(s) as

construed by the courts ].

If you find that plaintiff violated [ this regulation / one or more of these regulations ] before

or at the time of the occurrence, such [ violation / violations ] [ is / are ] evidence of

negligence which you should consider, together with all the other evidence, in deciding

whether plaintiff was negligent. If you find that plaintiff was negligent, you must then

decide whether such negligence was a proximate contributing cause of the [ injury /

damage ] to plaintiff.

Note on Use

See Note on Use to M Civ JI 12.04.

Comment

See Comment to M Civ JI 12.05.

History

M Civ JI 12.06 was SJI 12.08.

Michigan Model Civil Jury Instructions

Page 12-10 Michigan Supreme Court

M Civ JI 12.07 Violation of Statute or Ordinance by Minor [ No

Instruction Prepared ]

Comment

No instruction on the violation of a statute or ordinance by a minor has been prepared by

the committee because the Michigan cases have not distinguished between minors’ and

adults’ violations of statutes, ordinances, rules and regulations. Ertzbischoff v Smith, 286

Mich 306; 282 NW 159 (1938); Strong v Kittenger, 300 Mich 126; 1 NW2d 479 (1942);

Brown v Tanner, 281 Mich 150; 274 NW 744 (1937); Rotter v Detroit United R Co, 205

Mich 212; 171 NW 514 (1919). Where a minor is engaged in an activity for which adult

qualifications are required, such as driving an automobile, the general rule is that the

standard to be applied is the same as for an adult. Restatement (Second) of Torts §283 A,

at 14. The Michigan Supreme Court dealt with this in Constantino v Wolverine Insurance

Co, 407 Mich 896; 284 NW2d 463 (1979). Reversing an unpublished Court of Appeals

opinion, the Supreme Court said that “the instruction that the appellee driver was not held

to the same standard of conduct as an adult was erroneous. When a minor engages in a

dangerous and adult activity, e.g., driving an automobile, he is charged with the same

standard of conduct as an adult.”

No cases have been found in Michigan which discuss the question of the effect of an actor’s

minority on the issue of his or her statutory or ordinance violation where primary

negligence is involved. In other jurisdictions, apparently the situation is the same. Anno:

Child’s violation of statute or ordinance as affecting question of his negligence or

contributory negligence, 174 ALR 1170, at 1198–1200.

The majority of jurisdictions considering the effect of a statutory or ordinance violation by

a minor upon the question of his or her contributory negligence have held that the minor’s

age, mental capacity and experience must be considered in determining whether the

violation of a statute or ordinance constitutes contributory negligence. That is, if the

minor’s conduct is reasonable for persons of like age, mental capacity and experience, then

the jury should be instructed that, in determining whether the minor violated the statute or

ordinance, they should consider whether he or she had the mental and physical capacity to

comply with it. 174 ALR 1170, at 1174–1178; 7A Am Jur 2d, Automobiles & Highway

Traffic, §498, at 725.

Restatement (Second) of Torts takes the view that minority is to be considered in

determining whether a particular violation will be excused. §288 A (2)(a), at 32–33.

Where a child is under the age of seven, the issue of negligence or contributory negligence

should not be submitted to the jury, as he or she cannot be guilty of negligence, Queen

Insurance Co v Hammond, 374 Mich 655; 132 NW2d 792 (1965), or contributory

negligence, Baker v Alt, 374 Mich 492; 132 NW2d 614 (1965).

Michigan Supreme Court Page 12-11

Chapter 12: Statutes and Ordinances Affecting Negligence

History

M Civ JI 12.07 was SJI 12.09.

Michigan Model Civil Jury Instructions

Page 12-12 Michigan Supreme Court

Michigan Supreme Court Page 13-1

CHAPTER 13

Other Special Factors Affecting

Negligence

M Civ JI 13.01 Physical Disability.................................................................................. 13-2

M Civ JI 13.02 Intoxication as Affecting Negligence..................................................... 13-3

M Civ JI 13.03 Mental Illness—Adult............................................................................ 13-4

M Civ JI 13.04 Duty of One in Imminent Peril and Responsibility of the Person

Causing the Perilous Situation [ Recommend No Instruction ] .................................... 13-5

M Civ JI 13.05 Unavoidable Accident [ Recommend No Instruction ].......................... 13-6

M Civ JI 13.06 Assumption of Risk [ No Instruction Prepared ].................................... 13-7

M Civ JI 13.07 Attempted Rescue of One in Imminent Peril by a Person Who Did

Not Cause Such Peril [ Instruction Deleted ] ................................................................ 13-8

M Civ JI 13.08 Presumption That Child Under Seven Years Is Incapable of

Negligence.................................................................................................................... 13-9

M Civ JI 13.09 Effect of Parent’s Negligence on Claim of Child.................................. 13-10

Michigan Model Civil Jury Instructions

Page 13-2 Michigan Supreme Court

M Civ JI 13.01 Physical Disability

One who is ill or otherwise physically disabled is required to use the same degree of care

that a reasonably careful person who has the same illness or physical disability would use.

Note on Use

This instruction does not apply where voluntary intoxication or mental illness is involved.

For the appropriate instructions in those cases see M Civ JI 13.02 and M Civ JI 13.03.

Comment

Physical handicaps and infirmities, such as blindness, deafness, short stature, a clubfoot, or

the weakness of age or sex, are treated as part of the circumstances under which a

reasonable person must act. Thus the standard of conduct for a blind person becomes that

of a reasonable person who is blind. Restatement (Second) of Torts §283 C, at 18.

The same allowance is made for physical illness. Thus a heart attack or a temporary

dizziness due to a fever or nausea or other similar illnesses is regarded merely as

circumstances to be taken into account in determining what the reasonable person would

do. Id.

This rule has been recognized in Michigan. See Daniels v Clegg, 28 Mich 32, 41 (1873);

Clemens v Sault Ste Marie, 289 Mich 254, 256; 286 NW 232, 233–234 (1939).

The rule has been applied in the following Michigan cases: Armstrong v Cook, 250 Mich

180; 229 NW 433 (1930) (fainting); Covert v Randall, 298 Mich 38, 42; 298 NW 396, 397

(1941) (deaf mute); and Jakubiec v Hasty, 337 Mich 205, 212; 59 NW2d 385, 388 (1953)

(deaf mute).

Michigan Supreme Court Page 13-3

Chapter 13: Other Special Factors Affecting Negligence

M Civ JI 13.02 Intoxication as Affecting Negligence

It has been claimed that [ name ] had been drinking [ alcoholic beverage ]. According to

the law, one who voluntarily impairs his or her abilities by drinking is held to the same

standard of care as a person whose abilities have not been impaired by drinking. It is for

you to decide whether [ name ]’s conduct was, in fact, affected by drinking and whether, as

a result, [ he / she ] failed to exercise the care of a reasonably careful person under the

circumstances which you find existed in this case.

Note on Use

If it is claimed that a statute or ordinance was violated, give appropriate instructions from

M Civ JI 12.01, 12.03 and 12.04.

This instruction may be inappropriate where a person is suffering from delirium tremors

rather than intoxication. Thornton v City of Flint, 39 Mich App 260; 197 NW2d 485 (1972).

Comment

Michigan recognizes that intoxication is a factor the jury may consider in deciding whether

a person is negligent or contributorily negligent. Devlin v Morse, 254 Mich 113; 235 NW

812 (1931). One who voluntarily disables himself or herself through the consumption of

alcoholic beverages is nevertheless held to the same standard of conduct as a reasonably

careful person who is sober. See Strand v Chicago & W M R Co, 67 Mich 380; 34 NW 712

(1887). It is for the jury to decide whether an intoxicated person exercised reasonable care.

Fors v LaFreniere, 284 Mich 5, 11; 278 NW 743, 745 (1938).

Michigan Model Civil Jury Instructions

Page 13-4 Michigan Supreme Court

M Civ JI 13.03 Mental Illness—Adult

An adult who is disabled by reason of mental illness must still observe the same standard

of care which a normal and reasonably careful person would exercise under the

circumstances which existed in this case.

Comment

No Michigan cases have been found on this subject.

However, the general rule outside of Michigan is that unless the actor is a child, mental

illness does not relieve him or her from liability for conduct which does not conform to the

standards of a reasonable person under like circumstances. Restatement (Second) of Torts

§283 B, at 16–17.

History

M Civ JI 13.03 is a revision of SJI 13.03. Amended February 1, 1981.

Michigan Supreme Court Page 13-5

Chapter 13: Other Special Factors Affecting Negligence

M Civ JI 13.04 Duty of One in Imminent Peril and Responsibility of

the Person Causing the Perilous Situation [ Recommend No

Instruction ]

Comment

The committee recommends that no instruction be given on either the duty of one in

imminent peril or the responsibility of the person causing the perilous situation.

The degree of care required of one confronted with imminent peril does not vary merely

because of the unusual circumstances. The standard is neither higher nor lower, the inquiry

remaining the same as to whether the one sought to be charged with negligence or

contributory negligence acted as a reasonably careful person would act under the same or

similar circumstances. Triestram v Way, 286 Mich 13, 17; 281 NW 420, 421 (1938).

The liability of one causing a perilous situation is governed by the general principles of

negligence law.

The committee recommends that no special instruction be given concerning this matter.

The principles suggested are treated in part by instructions on negligence (M Civ JI 10.02

and 11.01) and sudden emergency (M Civ JI 12.02). Any additional instructions may be

misleading and argumentative and the matter should be left for argument by counsel.

Michigan Model Civil Jury Instructions

Page 13-6 Michigan Supreme Court

M Civ JI 13.05 Unavoidable Accident [ Recommend No Instruction ]

Comment

The committee recommends that no instruction be given on “unavoidable accident.”

The Michigan Supreme Court has stated that in most cases an instruction that the “accident”

was “unavoidable” constitutes a false and immaterial issue. Lober v Sklar, 357 Mich 166,

170; 97 NW2d 617, 619 (1959); see also McClarren v Buck, 343 Mich 300, 303; 72 NW2d

31, 32 (1955).

Michigan Supreme Court Page 13-7

Chapter 13: Other Special Factors Affecting Negligence

M Civ JI 13.06 Assumption of Risk [ No Instruction Prepared ]

Comment

The committee has prepared no instruction on “assumption of risk.”

Since Felgner v Anderson, 375 Mich 23; 133 NW2d 136 (1965), was decided, the doctrine

of assumption of risk has applied only in cases between employee and employer for injuries

incurred in the course of employment where the statutory bar of the Worker’s Disability

Compensation Act is not applicable, and in cases where it is claimed there has been an

express contractual assumption of risk.

These situations arise infrequently and the principles involved have not been sufficiently

defined to permit the drafting of appropriate instructions.

Michigan Model Civil Jury Instructions

Page 13-8 Michigan Supreme Court

M Civ JI 13.07 Attempted Rescue of One in Imminent Peril by a

Person Who Did Not Cause Such Peril [ Instruction Deleted ]

Comment

Former M Civ JI 13.07 was deleted because the subject matter of that instruction is covered

by the general negligence instructions. See Solomon v Shuell, 435 Mich 104; 457 NW2d

669 (1990).

History

M Civ JI 13.07 was added September 1980. Deleted February 1991.

Michigan Supreme Court Page 13-9

Chapter 13: Other Special Factors Affecting Negligence

M Civ JI 13.08 Presumption That Child Under Seven Years Is

Incapable of Negligence

You must not consider whether there was negligence on the part of [ name of child ],

because, under the law, a child of [ his / her ] age cannot be charged with negligence.

Note on Use

This instruction may be used only when the plaintiff was under seven at the time of the

occurrence. If there is a jury issue as to the child’s age, this instruction must be modified.

Comment

Before Michigan’s adoption of comparative negligence in Placek v Sterling Heights, 405

Mich 638; 275 NW2d 511 (1979), it was held that a child under seven cannot be guilty of

contributory negligence. Baker v Alt, 374 Mich 492; 132 NW2d 614 (1965).

History

M Civ JI 13.08 is a revision of SJI 11.03. Amended September 1980.

Michigan Model Civil Jury Instructions

Page 13-10 Michigan Supreme Court

M Civ JI 13.09 Effect of Parent’s Negligence on Claim of Child

You must not consider whether there was negligence on the part of [ name of child ]’s

parents, because, under the law, any negligence on the part of the parents cannot affect a

claim on behalf of the child.

Note on Use

There are no reported decisions on the impact, if any, of MCL 600.2957 in a case involving

a claim for a child’s injury. If the court determines that a parent can be named as a nonparty

under MCL 600.2957, then this instruction should not be given. The cases discussed in this

use note and the comment were all decided prior to the enactment of MCL 600.2957.

This is a cautionary instruction that is to be used only in a case involving a claim on behalf

of an injured child in which the parent’s negligence is not a defense to the child’s claim but

the parent’s negligence has been improperly injected into the lawsuit in the evidence or in

argument of counsel. Conners v Benjamin I Magid, Inc, 353 Mich 628; 91 NW2d 875

(1958); Elbert v Saginaw, 363 Mich 463; 109 NW2d 879 (1961). However at least one

Michigan case has held that a cautionary instruction will not cure the error of injecting

parental negligence in a lawsuit in which it is not a defense. Lapasinskas v Quick, 17 Mich

App 733; 170 NW2d 318 (1969).

See the comment below for Michigan case law on the legal effect of a parent’s negligence

in cases involving the injury or death of a child.

Comment

Prior to the adoption of comparative negligence in Placek v Sterling Heights, 405 Mich

638; 275 NW2d 511 (1979), Michigan cases held that a parent’s negligence may not be

imputed to a child so as to bar the child’s cause of action for his or her injuries. Conners;

Elbert; Nielsen v Henry H Stevens, Inc, 359 Mich 130; 101 NW2d 284 (1960).

In a case involving a claim on behalf of a child for the child’s injuries that was consolidated

for trial with the parent’s claim for consequential damages due to injury to the child, the

court distinguished between the child’s case in which the parent’s negligence is not a

defense and the parent’s cause of action for which the parent’s own negligence is a defense.

Nielsen, 359 Mich at 133–137; 101 NW2d at 287–289 (concurring opinion of Justice

Black). (Because of this distinction and the possibility of prejudicing the child’s case,

Justice Black cautioned against the dangers of consolidation.)

The distinction in the treatment of parental negligence between the child’s cause of action

and the parent’s cause of action has been applied in cases involving the death of a child. In

a case in which the child did not die instantly, where the cause of action was for the child’s

Michigan Supreme Court Page 13-11

Chapter 13: Other Special Factors Affecting Negligence

own damages prior to death (case brought under the former Survival Act), the court held

that the mother’s negligence is not a defense even though the parents were the sole heirs

and distributees of the child’s estate. Love v Detroit J & C R Co, 170 Mich 1; 135 NW 963

(1912). But where the cause of action was brought under the former Death Act for a

parent’s consequential damages due to the death of a child, courts have held that a parent’s

negligence is a defense, at least to the extent of his or her own recovery. Feldman v Detroit

United R Co, 162 Mich 486; 127 NW 687 (1910); McCann v Detroit, 234 Mich 268; 207

NW 923 (1926); Flintoff v Muskegon Traction & Lighting Co, 208 Mich 527; 175 NW 438

(1919). See McCann for a discussion of the distinction between Death and Survival Act

cases.

This distinction in the treatment of parental negligence in cases involving the death of a

child survived both the consolidation of the former Death and Survival Acts into the

Wrongful Death Act and the adoption of comparative negligence. In Byrne v Schneider’s

Iron & Metal, Inc, 190 Mich App 176; 475 NW2d 854 (1991), the court held that the

parent’s negligence cannot reduce an award to the estate for the conscious pain and

suffering of the child (even though such award will inure to the benefit of the parents), but

the parent’s negligence can reduce a parent’s recovery for the loss of the deceased child’s

services and society and companionship:

We conclude that the reasoning set forth in Feldman, McCann, and Nielsen is still

persuasive; it remains in keeping with the objective of a fair apportionment of damages

under the doctrine of comparative negligence. See Placek v Sterling Heights, 405 Mich

638; 275 NW2d 511 (1979). The parent’s comparative negligence is relevant under the

wrongful death statute where recovery is sought for damages sustained by the parent

because of the wrongful death of the child. However, the comparative negligence of the

parent may not be imputed to the recovery attributable to the child’s damages.

Byrne, 190 Mich App at 189; 475 NW2d at 860.

History

M Civ JI 13.09 was SJI 11.04.

Michigan Model Civil Jury Instructions

Page 13-12 Michigan Supreme Court

Michigan Supreme Court Page 14-1

CHAPTER 14

Subsequent Negligence—

Intentional Misconduct

M Civ JI 14.01 Subsequent Negligence (Last Clear Chance)—Helpless or Inattentive

Plaintiff [ Instruction Deleted ]..................................................................................... 14-2

M Civ JI 14.02 Willful and Wanton Misconduct—Common Law [ Instruction

Deleted ]....................................................................................................................... 14-3

M Civ JI 14.10 Gross Negligence—Definition ............................................................... 14-4

M Civ JI 14.11 Wanton Misconduct—Definition .......................................................... 14-7

M Civ JI 14.12 Willful Misconduct—Definition............................................................. 14-8

M Civ JI 14.20 Emergency Medical Services Act—Explanation .................................... 14-9

M Civ JI 14.21 Emergency Medical Services Act—Burden of Proof ........................... 14-10

Michigan Model Civil Jury Instructions

Page 14-2 Michigan Supreme Court

M Civ JI 14.01 Subsequent Negligence (Last Clear Chance)—Helpless

or Inattentive Plaintiff [ Instruction Deleted ]

Comment

The doctrine of last clear chance as a separate defense to contributory negligence has been

superseded by the adoption of pure comparative negligence. Petrove v Grand Trunk W R

Co (On Remand), 437 Mich 31; 464 NW2d 711 (1991). In addition, the doctrine of last

clear chance as a formulation of gross negligence has been discarded. Jennings v

Southwood, 446 Mich 125; 521 NW2d 230 (1994).

History

M Civ JI 14.01 was a revision of SJI 14.01. Deleted August 1991.

Michigan Supreme Court Page 14-3

Chapter 14: Subsequent Negligence—Intentional Misconduct

M Civ JI 14.02 Willful and Wanton Misconduct—Common Law

[ Instruction Deleted ]

Comment

Comparative fault should be applied in all actions filed on or after March 28, 1996, that are

based on tort or another legal theory and seek damages for personal injury, property

damage, or wrongful death. 1995 PA 249 (MCL 600.2957). Fault is defined to include “an

act, an omission, conduct, including intentional conduct, a breach of warranty, or a breach

of a legal duty, or any conduct that could give rise to the imposition of strict liability, that

is a proximate cause of damage sustained by a party.” 1995 PA 249 (MCL 600.6304(8)).

Prior law held that comparative negligence should be applied in all common-law tort

actions sounding in negligence where defendant’s misconduct falls short of being

intentional. Vining v Detroit, 162 Mich App 720; 413 NW2d 486 (1987); lv denied, 430

Mich 892 (1988).

History

Deleted July 1988.

Michigan Model Civil Jury Instructions

Page 14-4 Michigan Supreme Court

M Civ JI 14.10 Gross Negligence—Definition

Gross negligence means conduct or a failure to act that is so reckless that it demonstrates a

substantial lack of concern for whether an injury will result.

Note on Use

This instruction may be used in cases arising under the government tort liability act, MCL

691.1407(2)(c), if gross negligence is an issue for the jury in the case. Tallman v

Markstrom, 180 Mich App 141; 446 NW2d 618 (1989); Vermilya v Dunham, 195 Mich

App 79; 489 NW2d 496 (1992).

This instruction may also be used in cases arising under the statutes limiting the liability of

certain governmental units to gross negligence in regard to off-road recreational vehicles,

MCL 324.81131, and snowmobiles, MCL 324.82124, and the statutes making the

insurance commissioner and his or her representatives immune from civil liability for

conduct not amounting to gross negligence, MCL 500.214. All of these statutes contain the

definition of gross negligence from the government tort liability act.

This instruction may be combined with the definitions of wanton, M Civ JI 14.11, and

willful, M Civ JI 14.12, misconduct, if appropriate. M Civ JI 14.20, Emergency Medical

Services Act—Explanation, and M Civ JI 14.21, Emergency Medical Services Act—

Burden of Proof, provide a model for such instructions.

The committee takes no position on the application of this instruction in a context other than

the statutes discussed in this use note and comment.

Comment

The definition of gross negligence in M Civ JI 14.10 comes from the government tort

liability act. MCL 691.1407(2)(c). Jennings v Southwood, 446 Mich 125; 521 NW2d 230

(1994), adopted this definition as the standard for gross negligence under the Emergency

Medical Services Act. In adopting this definition, Jennings discarded the common-law

definition of gross negligence (also called last clear chance, subsequent negligence, etc.) as

both outdated in a comparative negligence system and inconsistent with the legislative

intent to shield emergency medical services workers from liability for ordinary negligence.

The “last clear chance” formulation of gross negligence had been applied in cases involving

both the Emergency Medical Services Act and the recreational use statute. Burnett v City

of Adrian, 414 Mich 448; 326 NW2d 810 (1982).

The committee notes that the term gross negligence is used but not defined in other statutes

that share the purpose of immunizing against liability for ordinary negligence. The

threshold for liability in most of these statutes is gross negligence, but many add willful and

Michigan Supreme Court Page 14-5

Chapter 14: Subsequent Negligence—Intentional Misconduct

wanton misconduct, bad faith conduct, or other terms without defining them.

The following statutes dealing with health and medical assistance uniformly limit liability

to “gross negligence or willful and wanton misconduct” (sometimes adding “good faith

conduct”):

 specific medical personnel who render medical care at the scene of an

emergency or perform physical examinations or emergency care in

competitive sports situations, MCL 691.1501

 specific medical personnel who are not under a duty to respond but do

respond to life-threatening emergencies in hospitals or medical care

facilities, MCL 691.1502

 block parent volunteers who aid minors in emergencies, MCL 691.1505

 registered members of national ski patrol systems who provide emergency

care, MCL 691.1507

 municipal or private ambulance drivers or attendants, or police officers or

firefighters who provide first aid at the scene of emergencies, MCL

41.711a

 school administrators, teachers, or other designated school employees who

administer medication to pupils with written permission, MCL 380.1178

 health personnel who participate in free immunization programs, MCL

333.9203

 persons who voluntarily render cardiopulmonary resuscitation or use an

automated external defibrillator, MCL 691.1504

 peace officers who are involved in mental illness admissions, MCL

330.1427b

 persons who file petitions to have others treated or committed for mental

illness, MCL 330.1439

 peace officers, staff of approved service programs, and certain others who

deal with apparently incapacitated substance abusers, MCL 330.1282.

There is also a statute that protects members of the state health planning council or

employees of that office from criminal or civil liability except for “wanton and willful

misconduct.” MCL 325.2021.

Michigan Model Civil Jury Instructions

Page 14-6 Michigan Supreme Court

Several statutes provide partial immunity in disaster relief or other emergency situations.

The emergency management act limits the liability of various disaster relief workers as well

as of landowners who provide shelter, MCL 30.411, and allows for a directive limiting the

liability of suppliers of voluntary or private assistance, MCL 30.407. Similar statutes

provide partial immunity for volunteers in hazardous spill remedial actions. MCL

324.20302. The environmental response act sets limitations on costs and damages resulting

from the release or the threat of release of hazardous substances, MCL 324.20131, and

limits liability in response activities MCL 324.20126. Another statute limits liability for

civil damages for those who provide emergency telephone services, MCL 484.1604

(repealed effective December 31, 2006, see 1999 PA 79).

Three statutes give landowners, lessees, and tenants partial immunity; all set the threshold

at “gross negligence or willful and wanton misconduct.” The recreational use act limits the

liability of landowners, tenants, or lessees for injury to persons (usually gratuitous users)

on the property for outdoor recreation or agricultural, fishing, or hunting purposes. MCL

324.73301. The recreational trespass act limits the liability of owners, tenants, or lessees

for injury to persons on the land with consent for recreational or trapping use who have not

paid valuable consideration. MCL 324.73107. Another statute protects landowners who

lease their land for habitat development and hunter access. MCL 324.43556.

Finally, two sections of the Insurance Code protect various persons from liability for

statements made concerning insureds or applicants for insurance, MCL 500.2124, or acts

or omissions relating to the exchange of claim information, MCL 500.2130, unless there is

gross negligence or bad faith with malice in fact.

History

M Civ JI 14.10 was added September 1995.

Michigan Supreme Court Page 14-7

Chapter 14: Subsequent Negligence—Intentional Misconduct

M Civ JI 14.11 Wanton Misconduct—Definition

Wanton misconduct means conduct or a failure to act that shows such indifference to

whether harm will result as to be equal to a willingness that harm will result.

Note on Use

This instruction may be used in combination with M Civ JI 14.10 and 14.12 in cases arising

under the recreational use statute, Burnett v City of Adrian, 414 Mich 448; 326 NW2d 810

(1982); and the good Samaritan act, Higgins v Detroit Osteopathic Hospital Corp, 154

Mich App 752; 398 NW2d 520 (1986). It should also be applicable to most other limited

tort liability statutes that employ the terms willful and wanton without defining them. See

comment to M Civ JI 14.10. M Civ JI 14.20, Emergency Medical Services Act—

Explanation, and M Civ JI 14.21, Emergency Medical Services Act—Burden of Proof,

provide a model for instructions combining one or more of the definitions in M Civ JI

14.10, 14.11, and 14.12.

The committee takes no position on the application of this instruction in a context other than

the statutes discussed in this comment and the comment to M Civ JI 14.10.

Comment

In Burnett, the Michigan Supreme Court defined willful and wanton: “[ W ]illful and

wanton misconduct is made out only if the conduct alleged shows an intent to harm or, if

not that, such indifference to whether harm will result as to be the equivalent of a

willingness that it does.” Burnett, at 455. In Jennings v Southwood, 446 Mich 125; 521

NW2d 230 (1994), which construed willful as used in the Emergency Medical Services

Act, the court approved the Burnett definition with a refinement. The court said that willful

and wanton are distinct and logically inconsistent, so “willful and wanton” is to be read as

“willful or wanton.” Willful, as Burnett said, requires intent to harm while wanton means

the equivalent, reckless conduct without intent to harm but with indifference as to the result.

History

M Civ JI 14.11 was added September 1995.

Michigan Model Civil Jury Instructions

Page 14-8 Michigan Supreme Court

M Civ JI 14.12 Willful Misconduct—Definition

Willful misconduct means conduct or a failure to act that was intended to harm the plaintiff.

Note on Use

This instruction may be used in combination with M Civ JI 14.10 and 14.11 in cases arising

under the recreational use statute, Burnett v City of Adrian, 414 Mich 448; 326 NW2d 810

(1982); and the good samaritan act, Higgins v Detroit Osteopathic Hospital Corp, 154