| A
person who is injured as a result of the negligence of another person
is what we in the legal profession refer to as a personal injury claimant.
In other words, they have been injured as a result of an accident,
and now wish to prosecute a claim against a negligent property owner
and its insurance company. Kenneth Vercammen & Associates Law
Office helps people injured due to the negligence of others. We provide
representation throughout New Jersey. The insurance companies will
not help. Don't give up! Our Law Office can provide experienced attorney
representation if you are injured. If the case cannot settle, and
goes to the judge and jury, portion of the Model Jury charge set forth
what a judge should tell the jurors, prior to making a decision.
Outline of what the judge tells the jury
1. Explanation of Nature of Case
2. Duty of Citizens to Serve as Jurors
3. Counsel's Right to Peremptory Challenges
4. Introduction of Parties, Counsel and Potential Witnesses
5. Identification of Potential Witnesses
6. Particularized Questions
------------------------------------------------------------------INSTRUCTIO
NS TO JURORS
1. Explanation of Nature of Case
The judge will address the members of the jury pool and inform
them that a number of them (usually between six and twelve and two
alternates) will be selected to be jurors for the trial of a civil
case. The judge will explain the nature of the case. For example:
It arises out of an automobile accident that occurred on Route #1,
here in Middlesex County, on ( date ). The plaintiff brings this
suit contending that the accident was caused by the negligence or
fault of the driver of the other vehicle. She sues to recover money
damages for the injuries she says she sustained in the accident.
Her husband is also a plaintiff and he sues for money damages to
compensate him for his losses. The defendant in the case denies
that he caused this accident. The jury will be asked to decide fault
for the accident and, if the plaintiffs are entitled to an award
of damages. The jury will also be asked to decide on the appropriate
amount.
2. Duty of Citizens to Serve As Jurors
Serving as a juror is inconvenient, but jury service is an important
duty of citizenship. Having jurors available to decide the facts
in lawsuits is fundamental to our entire system of justice. The
courts cannot function without members of the public offering their
time to serve as jurors.
3. Counsel's Right To Peremptory Challenges
After the judge has asked you a number of questions which relate
to your ability to hear and decide this case with an open mind and
with complete impartiality. The attorneys who represent the parties
in the lawsuit can exercise the right to excuse one or more of the
jurors without giving any explanation or reason. If they are excused
in that manner, please do not take it personally. No offense is
intended. The law traditionally gives each attorney the right to
have a limited number of jurors excused for no expressed reason.
4. Introduction Of Parties, Counsel and Potential Witnesses
The judge will introduce the parties to the lawsuit as follows:
[The judge will give the full name and municipality of residence
of each party. If the parties are present in the courtroom, the
Court may, in its discretion, ask the party to stand so that the
jury can identify him or her.] The attorneys who represent the parties
are: [The judge will give the full name of each attorney and the
law firm for which he or she appears. The Court should consider
asking each attorney to rise upon introduction by the Court. The
Court might consider the option of asking each attorney to introduce
himself or herself and the party represented in lieu of the Court
performing the introduction.] Do any of you jurors know any of the
parties to this lawsuit or do you know anyone you believe to be
related to or acquainted with any party to the lawsuit? [If an affirmative
answer, ask the juror to explain.] Do any of you jurors know any
attorney involved in this lawsuit or any member of the firm for
which the attorney appears? Have you or anyone close to you ever
been represented by any of the law firms whose name the judge has
just given you? [If an affirmative answer, ask the juror to explain.]
5. Identification Of Potential Witnesses
The court will now identify for jurors all persons who are potential
witnesses in this trial. [Give name and address or some identification
of each potential witness.] Because knowing one of the potential
witnesses might influence your independent and impartial judgment
of the facts of this case, the judge needs to know if you recognize
any of the names the judge just read. Do you know any of the potential
witnesses in this trial? [If an affirmative answer, ask the juror
to explain.]
6. Particularized Questions
[At this point, the Court should question the jurors about all
subjects that might influence their impartiality. The nature of
those questions will depend upon the nature and the specific facts
of the case to be tried.] [In the event the Court anticipates that
some jurors may be asked to answer certain questions at side-bar
in the presence of only the Court and the attorneys, the following
instruction should be considered.] The judge may occasionally suggest
a conference over here at the side of the Bench because there is
a possibility that your comment could influence the other jurors
if they heard it. You also might feel more comfortable responding
to the questions in some degree of privacy rather than in front
of everyone in the courtroom. These conferences will be on the record
the same as every other word that is spoken in this courtroom.
Model Civil Jury Charges
1.11 PRELIMINARY CHARGE [To be given after the jury is sworn in
but before the openings.] Outline
A. Role of Jury, Court and Attorneys
B. Prohibition Against Discussing the Case
C. Jurors Not to Visit the Accident Scene or Do Investigations
D. Note-Taking Prohibited
E. Outline of Order of Events
F. Settling Defendants
A. Role of Jury, Court and Attorneys
The judge will say, "As the jury in this case, you will be
the judges of the facts and you will be the only judges of the facts.
You will have to decide what happened. The judge plays no part in
judging the facts. That is the jurors' responsibility. The judge
role is to be the judge of the law, that is to say, the judge makes
whatever legal decisions have to be made during the course of the
trial, and the judge will explain to you the legal principles that
must guide you in your decisions on the facts. You are to judge
the facts in this case based upon the evidence presented to you
and based only on the evidence. This evidence will consist of the
testimony of witnesses, the exhibits marked into evidence, and any
material that we read to you. As the trier of fact, it will be your
job to judge the believability of the witnesses. Size up the witness.
Is the witness telling the truth? Does the witness know what he/she
is talking about? How good is the witness's recollection? Is the
witness accurate and correct in what he/she is saying? You may also
consider the demeanor of the witness, that is, how is the witness
behaving and responding to the questions asked. You may believe
part of the witness's testimony and not believe other parts of it."
During the trial, the judge will be required to rule on the admission
or rejection of evidence. You are to give no consideration to any
evidence that the judge rules to be inadmissible and you are not
to speculate or guess about what that evidence might have been or
what it might have meant. Do not infer from any rulings the judge
makes in this case or anything the judge says what his/her feelings
might be about the outcome of this case. Even if you knew what the
judge's feelings were, you should disregard them, because it is
the your decisions on the facts that control, not the judge's. At
the close of the entire case, the judge will explain to you the
law, which applies to this case. You must accept the law as the
judge explains it to you and apply it to the facts as you find them
to be based on the evidence. During the course of the trial, you
will hear from the attorneys on numerous occasions. Always bear
in mind that the attorneys are not witnesses and what they say is
not evidence in the case, whether they are arguing, objecting or
asking questions. The attorneys are here as advocates and spokespersons
for their clients' positions.
B. Prohibition Against Discussing the Case
This case is very important to all the parties involved. They are
entitled to the full attention of the jury throughout the trial
and to fair and impartial consideration of the case by the jury.
It is important, therefore, that you keep an open mind about this
case until the very end when you are in the jury room deliberating.
You are not to make any judgments or come to any conclusions about
this case, until you have heard the whole story and that means until
all the evidence is presented and the judge has explained the law
to you. You are not to have any contact or discussions with any
of the parties, their attorneys, or any of the witnesses. You are
not to discuss the case with anyone or permit anyone to discuss
the case with you, whether here in the courthouse or anywhere outside
the courthouse. If anyone attempts to discuss this case with you
or attempts to influence your judgment about the case, you are to
report that to the judge immediately. If you are to keep an open
mind, you must not even discuss this case among yourselves until
it is over and you are deliberating. That means, when you convene
each morning, as you are leaving at the end of each trial day and
during your recesses and breaks you are not to talk about this case
among yourselves. Do not discuss this case with anyone that is not
on the jury. This includes your family and friends. When you go
home, you may tell your family you have been selected as a juror
in a civil case and the expected length of the trial. You should
not tell them anything more about the case. Even though a further
explanation by you may begin innocently, once you finish talking
the other person is not going to just stand there and say nothing.
That person will say something and that response may influence your
thinking. Your thinking should be influenced only by what you learn
in the courtroom.
C. Jurors Not to Visit Accident Scene or Do Investigations
While this case is pending, you must not visit the (accident) scene.
That area may have changed from the time of the (accident/incident)
until now. In addition, do not do any research or make any investigations
about this case on your own. That is not your job. You are here
to decide this case based solely on the evidence presented in this
courtroom.
D. Note-Taking (When note taking is prohibited)
You will not be permitted to take notes during this trial. The
concern is that note-taking would be distracting, that notes would
often be incomplete and that undue weight may be given to the notes.
The court wants you to rely upon your combined recollection of all
the evidence.
E. Outline of Order of Events
The trial will start with the attorneys' opening statements. In
their opening statements the attorneys will explain to you the position
of their clients in this litigation. They will tell you what they
think this case is about, and what they believe the evidence will
show. The opening statements are designed to highlight for you the
disagreements and factual differences between the parties in order
to help you judge the significance of the evidence when it is presented.
Once the attorneys have made their opening statements then each
party is given an opportunity to present its evidence. First, the
plaintiff presents its evidence. Then the defense will present its
evidence. Each witness will undergo direct examination which means
that the attorney calling the witness will ask that person questions.
After that the other attorneys are given an opportunity to question
the witness, which is referred to as cross-examination. Once all
the evidence has been presented, the attorneys will make their closing
arguments. They will give you their analysis of what the evidence
means and will attempt to highlight the significant evidence that
is helpful to their clients' positions. Once the closing arguments
are completed, the judge will instruct you on the legal principles
to be followed when deciding this case.
F. Settling Defendants
When this case started, the plaintiff claimed that there was a
cause of the accident. Before the trial started, settled with plaintiff
and for that reason will no longer be involved in this trial. The
effect of that settlement on the parties still here is of no concern
to you at the present time and you should not speculate about that.
The judge will explain the effect that settlement will have on your
deliberations at the end of the case.
------------------------------------------------------------------
GENERAL PROVISIONS AND OUTLINE FOR STANDARD CHARGE (11/98)
Outline
Introduction
A. Purpose of Charge
B. Role of the Court
C. Role of the Attorneys
D. Role of the Jury
E. The Evidence
F. Contention of the Parties
G. Burden of Proof
H. Preponderance of the Evidence
I. Direct and Circumstantial Evidence or Inferences
J. Credibility
K. False in One - False in All
L. Damages
M. No Prejudice, Passion, Bias or Sympathy
N. Deliberations
O. Alternates
P. Verdict
Q. Jury Verdict Sheet
R. Communications with Court
------------------------------------------------------------------
A. Purpose of Charge
The judge is now going to tell you about the principles of law
governing this case. You are required to accept the judge's instructions
as the law. (You should consider these instructions as a whole,
and do not pick out any particular instruction and place undue emphasis
upon it).
B. Role of the Court
The judge sits here as the judge of the law. As part of this responsibility,
the judge will make various rulings and statements throughout this
trial. Do not view these rulings and statements as clues about how
the judge thinks this case should be decided. They are not. They
are based solely on the judge's understanding of the law and rules
of evidence, and they do not reflect any opinions of the judge about
the merits of this case. Even if they did, you should disregard
them, because it is the your role to decide this case, not the judge's.
C. Role of the Attorneys
The lawyers are here as advocates for their clients. In their opening
statements and in their summations, they have given you their views
of the evidence and their arguments in favor of their client's position.
While you may consider their comments, nothing that the attorneys
say is evidence and their comments are not binding upon you. (In
addition, you must not decide this case based on the performance
of the attorneys.)
D. Role of the Jury
You sit here as judges of the facts. You alone have the responsibility
of deciding the factual issues in this case. It is the your recollection
and evaluation of the evidence that controls. If the attorneys or
the judge say anything about the facts in this case that disagrees
with your recollection of the evidence, it is your recollection
that you should rely on. Your decision in this case must be based
solely on the evidence presented and the judge's instructions on
the law.
E. The Evidence
The evidence in this case consists of [refer to appropriate items]:
1. the testimony that you heard from the witness (including any
videotaped testimony); 2. the exhibits that have been marked into
evidence; 3. the deposition testimony and answers to interrogatories
that were read into the record; 4. the stipulations and admissions
that were placed on the record. As you recall, the stipulation and
admissions are facts that the parties agree are true. Therefore,
you can accept all admissions and stipulations as true in your deliberations.
(Use when applicable) Any testimony that the judge has stricken
from the record is not evidence and should not be considered by
you in your deliberations. This means that even though you may remember
the testimony, you are not to use it in your discussions or deliberations.
F. Contention of the Parties
[Judge explains the contentions of the parties.]
G. Burden of Proof
The burden of proof is on the plaintiff/each party to establish
his/her/their claim by a preponderance of the evidence. In other
words, if a person makes an allegation, then that person must prove
the allegation. In this action, the plaintiff has the burden of
establishing by a preponderance of the evidence all of the facts
necessary to prove the following issues:
[Judge explains issues raised by defendant.]
H. Preponderance of the Evidence
The term "preponderance of the evidence" means the amount
of evidence that causes you to conclude that the allegation is probably
true. To prove an allegation by the preponderance of the evidence,
a party must convince you that the allegation is more likely true
than not true. If the evidence on a particular issue is equally
balanced, that issue has not been proven by a preponderance of the
evidence. Therefore, the party having the burden of proving that
issue has failed with respect to that particular issue.
I. Direct and Circumstantial Evidence or Inferences
1. Direct and Circumstantial Evidence Evidence may be direct or
circumstantial. Direct evidence is direct proof of a fact, such
as the testimony of an eyewitness. Circumstantial evidence (sometimes
called inferences) consists of a chain of circumstances pointing
to the existence of certain facts. Circumstantial evidence is based
upon deductions or logical conclusions that you reach from the direct
evidence. An example of direct and circumstantial evidence is followed.
If a witness testified that he/she observed snow falling last night,
that would be an example of direct evidence. On the other hand,
if a witness testified that there was no snow on the ground before
going to sleep and that when he/she arose in the morning the ground
was snow covered, the jurors could infer from these facts that it
snowed during the night. That would be an example of circumstantial
evidence. You may consider both direct and circumstantial evidence
in deciding this case. The law permits you to give equal weight
to both, but it is for you to decide how much weight to give to
any evidence.
2. Inferences When deciding this case, you are permitted to draw
inferences from the evidence. Inferences are deductions or logical
conclusions drawn from the evidence. Use logic, your collective
common knowledge, and your common sense when determining what inferences
can be made from the evidence.
J. Credibility
You will have to decide which witnesses to believe and which witnesses
not to believe. Regardless of whether the witness is a lay person
or expert, you may believe everything a witness said or only part
of it or none of it. In deciding what testimony to believe, you
may take into consideration:
1. the witness' interest, if any in the outcome of this case; 2.
the accuracy of the witness' recollection; 3. the witness' ability
to know what he/she is talking about; 4. the reasonableness of the
testimony; 5. the witness' demeanor on the stand; 6. the witness'
candor or evasion; 7. the witness' willingness or reluctance to
answer; 8. the inherent believability of the testimony; 9. the presence
of any inconsistent or contradictory statements.
K. False in One - False in All
[A trial judge has the discretion to give this charge in any situation
in which the judge reasonably believes a jury may find a basis for
its application. See State v. Ernst, 32 N.J. 567 (1960). When given,
this charge usually will follow the section on credibility.]
(Sample l) If you believe that any witness deliberately lied to
you, on any fact significant to your decision in this case, you
have the right to reject all of that witness's testimony. However
in your discretion you may believe some of the testimony and not
believe other parts of the testimony.
L. Damages
The judge will now instruct the jurors on the law governing damages
in the event you decide the liability issue in favor of the plaintiff.
The fact that the judge instructs you on damages should not be considered
as suggesting any view of the judge about which party is entitled
to prevail in this case. Instructions on damages are given for your
guidance in the event they find that the plaintiff is entitled to
a verdict. The judge is required to provide instructions on damages
in all cases where the trial includes a claim for damages. The plaintiff
has the burden of establishing by a preponderance of the evidence
each item of damages that he/she claims. The plaintiff must also
prove that the damages were the natural and probable consequences
of the defendant's negligence. The accident must have been a proximate
cause of the damages. Damages may not be based on conjecture or
speculation. In this case the plaintiff is seeking the following
types of damages [select the appropriate categories]: 1. medical
expenses [Charge 6. ll A.]; 2. past and future lost wages [Charge
6.11D.]; 3. pain, suffering, disability, impairment and loss of
enjoyment of life [Charge 6. ll F. & G.]. In addition, the plaintiff's
spouse is seeking compensation in what we call a per quod claim
[Charge 6.12].
M. No Prejudice, Passion, Bias or Sympathy
Your oath as jurors requires you to decide this case fairly and
impartially, without sympathy, passion, bias or prejudice. You are
to decide this case based solely upon the evidence that you find
believable and in accordance with the rules of law that the judge
gives you. Sympathy is an emotion which is normal for human beings.
No one can be critical of you for feeling some degree of sympathy
in this matter. However, that sympathy must play no part in your
thinking and in the decision you reach in the jury room. Similarly,
your decision must not be based upon bias or prejudice which you
might have developed during the trial, for or against any party.
Your duty is to decide this case impartially and a decision based
on sympathy, passion, bias or prejudice would violate that duty.
N. Deliberations
Jurors are not advocates for either party. You are judges of the
facts. Your sole interest is to determine the truth from the evidence
in the case. It is your duty, as jurors, to consult with one another
and to deliberate with a view to reaching an agreement, if you can
do so without compromising your individual judgment. Each of you
must decide the case for yourself, but do so only after an impartial
consideration of the evidence with the other jurors.
O. Alternates
There are now (seven/eight) of you in the jury box. Six of you
will make up the jury which will deliberate and decide the case.
The other(s) will be alternate jurors who will participate if one
of the other jurors is unable to continue for some reason. Then
the alternate will serve as a replacement. [See R. 1:8-2(d).]
P. Verdict
Since this is a civil case, any verdict of 5-1 or 6-0 is a legal
verdict. Therefore, it is not necessary that all six jurors agree
on each question. An agreement of any five jurors is sufficient.
All six jurors must deliberate fully and fairly on each and every
question, and all six jurors must determine and vote upon each question.
It is not necessary that the same five jurors agree upon the answers
to all questions. Whenever at least five jurors have agreed to any
answer, that question has been decided, and you may move on to consider
the remaining questions in the case if it is appropriate to do so.
All six jurors must participate fully in deliberating on the remaining
questions. A juror who has been outvoted on any question shall continue
to deliberate with the other jurors fairly, impartially, honestly
and conscientiously to decide the remaining questions. Each juror
must consider each question with an open mind. When at least five
of you have agreed upon a verdict, knock on the jury room door.
Indicate to the attendant that you have reached a verdict and say
nothing more. The attendant will escort you back to the jury box
so that the court may receive your verdict.
Q. Jury Verdict Sheet
The judge will prepare a jury verdict sheet which the judge believes
should make your task simpler. The judge will be sending that sheet
with you to the jury room. The sheet has questions that you must
consider and answer within the framework of the instructions that
the judge has given you.
R. Communications with Court
After you have begun deliberations, all communications are done
by sending a note from your foreperson. Knock on the door and hand
the note to the attendant. No member of the jury should communicate
with anyone outside the jury room except in this fashion. No member
of the jury should indicate at any time how the jury stands numerically
or otherwise until after you have reached a verdict. When the judge
receives your note that it has reached a verdict, the attorneys
will be gathered, and the judge will have the entire jury into court
to receive the verdict. [Note: the jury may have the foreperson
read the verdict sheet or the judge may ask the question on the
verdict sheet and have the foreperson respond and give the vote.]
Should you desire to communicate for any other reason, you must
send a note in the same fashion. After the judge has your note,
the judge will discuss it with counsel and then reply to you in
open court on the record.
Conclusion If you are injured, call KENNETH A. VERCAMMEN, ESQ.
732-572-0500 for a confidential in office appointment
About Kenneth Vercammen:
Kenneth Vercammen is a Litigation Attorney in Edison, NJ, approximately
17 miles north of Princeton. He often lectures for the New Jersey
State Bar Association on personal injury, criminal / municipal court
law and drunk driving. He has published 125 articles in national
and New Jersey publications on municipal court and litigation topics.
He has served as a Special Acting Prosecutor in seven different
cities and towns in New Jersey and also successfully defended hundreds
of individuals facing Municipal Court and Criminal Court charges.
In his private practice, he has devoted a substantial portion of
his professional time to the preparation and trial of litigated
matters. He has appeared in Courts throughout New Jersey several
times each week on many personal injury matters, Municipal Court
trials, arbitration hearings and contested administrative law hearings.
Since 1985, his primary concentration has been on litigation matters.
Mr. Vercammen gained other legal experiences as the Confidential
Law Clerk to the Court of Appeals of Maryland (Supreme Court), with
the Delaware County, PA District Attorney Office handling Probable
Cause Hearings, Middlesex County Probation Dept as a Probation Officer,
and an Executive Assistant to Scranton District Magistrate, Thomas
Hart, in Scranton, PA.
KENNETH VERCAMMEN & ASSOCIATES, PC ATTORNEY AT LAW 2053 Woodbridge
Ave. Edison, NJ 08817 (Phone) 732-572-0500 (Fax) 732-572-0030 website:
www.njlaws.com
|
