WPC 8 r$ZB\t<#ʤ ,3\>&p5̱"Rwt$'p(Z ;#nאFV}jϣ"F4VtA`(A9`kG{  &V[>DI}I׍{W"od8LFD w*nDBVknNAȠ *fȓ qGC)AB߅s)4e$F^~2/+n)\KxK"JO>SYEH}LJ 0-4GҀKIN+x 7|О1X~Eg@ڋ0_iLDk {u\Z.6\v&iAr~.:VylHݖ] g%;T%}12.rm8#gU<Ni %'j 0 (-jUNUjU@j 6j 1uk 72k^ kwk4kkk 1k 6|l4l 6l4m mPm;gmmmmmmn nnnn"n(n.n4n:n@n BFncninonun{nnnnnnn 6nnnnnnnno oo 0CoZo`ofo 0Cloo4o 6op%p+p1p7p=pCpIpOpUp[papgpmpsp4yppp 6pppp4q5q;qAq 6Gq4}qqq 6qq4q-r3r 69r4orrrrrrr 6r4r1s 67s4mssssss 0Cst 0vt~tt 0&Attttt 1tjupuvu|uuu 4uu 6u4u22vdv4jv 6vvvvvvvvvw ww 1kwwwww 0Nwww4w'x 0T-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 6x#y)y/y5y;yAyGyMySyYy6_yyyyyyyyyyyy\y3z9z?zEzKzQzWz]zczizozuz{zzzzzzzzzzzzz\z%{+{1{7{ ={K{Q{i{8|>|D|J|||j|F}L}R}X}W^}}}}}}}}K}*~Z0~~W~~W~DXJK #)/5;AGMSY_ekqw}       ǀ  р  ۀ  W  F  PnZ  ȁ  ҁ  ܁W  =WG    W      '  1  ;  E  O  Y  c  m  w         ǃ  у  ۃ          !  +  5  ?  I  S  ]  g  q  {         ˄  Մ  ߄           %  /  9  C  M  W  a  k  u          Ņ  υ  م    L 0KM A^ 7N 72$'6  Z  d  n  x  z]  c  m  w         ǰ  Ѱ  ۰          !  +  5  ?  I  S  ]  g  q  {         ˱  ձ  ߱           %  /  9  C  M  W  a  k  uWWֲ  -  7  A  K  U  _  i  s  }        ó  ͳ  ׳           '  1  ;  E  O  Y  c  m  w         Ǵ  Ѵ  ۴          !  +  5  ?  I  S  ]  giq  ڵ            ɶ  Ӷ  ݶ  0 c 0XT 1 73 0XB 1 7!N0 722 0wdK۹N& 0D(slNߺ 1w 0UXs/  >  H  R  \  f  pLz  ƽLн 0U>LUK߾ 0* 0 0 0 02 0 0 0' 0 0 0L 0 0 0A 0 0q 0 0 0CW 0b 0 0 0N 0 0x 0M(N;K{  0KKIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII   B-.WXiiiXWXppkW333KsWHWWWMMMWWWRRWWWWWWWW\\WW WaaaaaaaWWWfffWXXllXWKsKK KTTKKL55XXX11WKK++++LvvLLKZZKLL<<LLL KllKLLNNLLL2222K~~KKK___KKL@KLK#QnKL KVLLL9KLLLhLLLLLKK/////KzzKKK[KKW<<KLL**LvvLKLYYYYYYYYYYYY 0Ck 0C 0( D+ AQDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDKLL,LxLWLgLLLKLLK/LzLLL^LLLBLLL&LrLL KVLK8 K   W  Wp p W  W Wu u K  K   b 0h h 1  d  W- - W  L  K'rrKW@@XXXGGWWWMMXXXTTXWX[[WW  WaaaKcKffLKKHHKKK))KttKK  KUUKKK66KKKKbbKKLCCCCCCKKK%%KpppKXX^WW  WddK, D3!!!!!!!!!p!L["L"L"L?#L#L#L#$Lo$L$L%LS%L%L%L7&L&L&L'Lg'f'a'L'(f7a7Dell 2335dn MFP0(9 Z6Times New Roman RegularX($(9 Z 6Times New Roman Regular) `(CG TimesScalableJ:\JURYCIV\SEC900~1.WPD3#37=CIQYag1.a.i.(1)(a)(i)1)a)i)?rb?JURYCIV3|x( CEKQW]cioAutoList9A.A.A.A.A.A.A.A.J:\JURYCIV\SEC500~1.WPDJ:\Juryciv\sec500.sub.wpdJ:\JURYCIV\SEC700~1.WPDJ:\Juryciv\sec700.sub.wpdUpage page chapter volume footnote endnote       dCJ:\JURYCIV\SEC550~1.WPD !"#$%(2C$ !  &'((2C$ !  )J:\Juryciv\sec550.sub.wpdTJ:\JURYCIV\SEC100~3.WPD*+,-./012345678J:\Juryciv\Sec100.sub.wpd9:[J:\JURYCIV\SEC300~1.WPD;<=J:\Juryciv\Sec300.sub.wpd>?@`J:\JURYCIV\SEC200~1.WPDJ:\Juryciv\Sec200.sub.wpdABeJ:\JURYCIV\SEC580~1.WPDCJ:\Juryciv\sec580.sub.wpdDEiJ:\JURYCIV\SEC570~1.WPDJ:\Juryciv\sec570.sub.wpdFGHIJKqJ:\JURYCIV\SEC400~2.WPDJ:\Juryciv\Sec400.sub.wpdLtJ:\JURYCIV\SEC590~1.WPDJ:\Juryciv\sec590.sub.wpdMNOPQ($    R(-!2Vf$ !  Ӏ  0  ST(Vm$0   UVWX(5hCEKQW]cioAutoList11.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.YZ[\]^J:\JURYCIV\INTRO~1.WPD_J:\JURYCIV\SEC600~1.WPDJ:\Juryciv\Sec600.sub.wpdJ:\JURYCIV\INTRO.SUB.wpd`J:\JURYCIV\Sec900.sub.wpdJ:\JURYCIV\SEC800~1.WPDabcdefghijk$35;AGMU]e2I.A.1.a.(1)(a)(i)a)lmno(O$pqJ:\JURYCIV\Sec800.sub.wpdr(,!$0  0` (#(#  stuvwxyz{|}~J:\JURYCIV\SEC100~2.WPDJ:\JURYCIV\sec1000.sub.wpdhttp://www.juryinstructions.ca8.uscourts.gov/http://www.juryinstructions.ca8.uscourts.gov/  =C'    uaX` hp x (#%'0*,.8135@8:<H?AXu@" TableofContents  | =C'  _@  PreliminaryInstructionsforUseatCommencementofTrial  ` AC*  _&0%XX!!G(#0.02 M AC*  _  !!G(#1.01 A AC*  _!!G(#1.028DocumentManagement::ModifiedBooleanTRUE M AC*  _  !!G(#1.03 M AC*  _  !!G(#1.04 N AC*  _  :!:!F(#1.04A A AC*  _!!G(#1.05           M AC*  _  !!G(#1.06    d =C'  _@]] InstructionsforUseDuringTrial    M AC*  _  !!G(#2.01  M AC*  _  !!G(#2.02    M AC*  _  !!G(#2.03               ! " # $ % & ' ( ) * + , - . / 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 : ; < = > ? @ A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z [ \ ] B AC*  _E!E!F(#8.81B( $ Figure  1   Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5O I&mage! <=8C#1.i) INSTRHruskaConmyRosserBurdickJarveyLimbaughSchreierBoatrightPophamMaloneyHolmanSchiavoneL.L.C.Medler Noce ReisSchumakerSchlichterLathropHubbellONealPershingRidinger pdf ADEANonsupervisor FMLAServicememberF.E.L.A."UNSEAWORTHINESSLONGSHORENONEMPLOYEE FLSAcellphones blogFacebookMySpaceYouTubeplaintiff[sdefendant[sallege[sdeny[iesunbracketedreadbacksDardenBassler CrimOMalleyHenerPenrodNotetakingPolowichakDeBenedettoWellivern]everthelessfact[s EvidMcMillanPolizzicodefendantscrime[sPossickOrlowskiverdict[s"misrecollectionMerrivalGolliherAshfordre]considerHecht suasponteLowenfieldBrasfield Sae ChuaArpanRinglandFioravantiSkillmanSiffertThropeCowansWyrickBillingsleyBoesing Rahn KuhaMinnetonkaTerrellSchoemehlarrestee PykaOrlandBolin NeerErvin I]f A.J.KierstWhitnackScherEngelkeAlbersMcMillianunconvictedBurginDeGidioStenzelCoffmanTrickeyAdkisonDuckworthFranzenPiphusStachuraSeiterGobertLaamanHelgemoeD.N.H.act[sKahle Papereh'gp]retrialHaleyTatumHouserKolstadAssnnonpartiesConAgraOberg TXOp]unitiveMorrellaffdGrebinIndep FBLPedigoP.A.M.Prejean w]e CRAGilkersonform[sTolanSyvockFarissaff'dHybertWoodlineNeufeldBosleyDoynenonpecuniaryFieldlerIndianheadCornettaDreyer ArcoProtosHazenRasimasDeptSysco EEOCAss'nSteamfittersMacDissiValmontNewhouseCivilettinonpersuasionHaslipremediationsubmissiblepretextualGaworski Drez E.R. KanGraefenhainPabstMaschkaSwapshire J.I.WitcoHerveyiIntlBuettnerRidgwayOrahoodBroadusBjerkeBrousardAugustanaBenceHodgsonVarnerBurrellP]erformingClymorePeltier Fyfe A]ll CtrsRichland SkieMeritor SysEllerthFaragherTuggleManganOncaleSundownerServsSchmeddingTnemecMoringu]nwelcomeCadwellSudersMcCurdyKnutsonBrownsteinF.E.P.C.S.D.N.Y.WeyersJoensCavinessYamatoMoylanMariesKaribianMcGregorKinmanNicholsNat'lHukkanenEngrsWesco InvsGillmingShopeSuprsRabidueOsceola KoppChiapuzioPedrozaCintasParton GTEStatonMinteerS]impleHenthorn Eich I]n a]nLacherQuanexSundorBarkette]mployeesimplantableHedberg t]heTreanorNesserSpanglerDropinskiNorthlandRehrs IamsestopsHardinArtificialsFenneyt]hisFjellestadHennenfentCanniceBuckhornWallinDep'tDeanePoconoGerdesEckrichW]hereWidnallFentonPritchardEchazabalDoanebackpayValentecKiscomailroomAlvordHowson AICBragdonSalitrosKimzeyVajdlMesabiKidspeaceWentz CasArtisc]onstructive J.C.Ryther KAREEstes decisionmakingassertedlyBeshearsAsbillMcKennonSheehanDonlenp]roving TusaNietoHusonBedsworthOettingerLakeviewDuvalBergeronStenson FELA Urie foreseeability CSXMcGivernSiegristLackawannaGallickSinkler T]oCaillouetteMarconeFlaniganBeanlandWilkersonrecodifiedBeimertForerF.R.D.BeetheU.M.K.C. F]orVanskike dismAlmendarez S.F. N.W. LewyDennistonBaynumScarlettAliquippaAngellPinkhamHolfesterGorniackDeChicoDownieHendyHysellKauzlarichfollow[edSayreMusiclandVreelandKozarMarlandDuBoseHeffnerFrabuttDickersonMonessennoneconomicLiepelt FMCPaquetteAtlanskaPlovidbaWattigney contributorilyBridgerRiegerMathesDrydockGarrisKermarec"TransatlantiqueLHWCACont'l a]nyChandrisLatsisBrittonHarberScindiaDeLosBallardAlholmbeneficientMcAllisterHechingerUsnerLuckenbachInternatWilanderPapaiSlatton Eby MgmtwatercraftDigiovanniTraylorTonnesenEllenderEng'gPavoneRiverboatHurstnonseamanempts"longshoreworker ULSHowlettBirkdale hacMoragneHorsleyWactorStanislawskinondisclosedHagertyIsbrandtsentortfeasorsnonsettlingtortfeasorAmClydeRobisondelegableMoreheadKiewitshipbreakerlongshoringaquacultureCaputoMortsLivingstonFanettiurlingtonRapisardiSaleebyKingswayAguilarPenrilDatacommFermentaBancsharesfactfinderRocheSpearlingHennepinShalalaSkidmoreHensleyRosenwasser&misclassificationmisclassifiedRecordkeepingMaxey ERCBraswell sousparalegalsretoucher WorkweekEnding$CompensationThat ^ _ ` a b p =C'  _@b b  Prisoner/PretrialDetaineeCivilRightsCases  S =C'  _@" EmploymentCases c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t u v w x y z { | } ~                           M AC*  _  !!G(#2.04 M AC*  _  !!G(#2.05                                                           _ =C'  _@ EmploymentCasesTitleVII      =C'  _@TT  EmploymentCasesAgeDiscriminationinEmploymentAct(ADEA)         (;3$2#  0  .3  0  @\0Custom1Custom123  "8wx?OU[agmsyCustom2Custom21.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.#1.@\0Custom3Custom323  "%0?OU[agmsyCustom4Custom4A.1)1.1.1.1.1.1.&1.i)(O;$0  2#  a  .3  0` (#(# A AC*  _!!G(#5.00(3$ !   i =C'  _@  EmploymentCasesRaceDiscrimination 83?EKQW]ciRomanI.I.I.I.I.I.I.I.*+ (_2623  .. x =C'  _@R R  EmploymentCasesDiscriminationbyPublicEmployers  i =C'  _@  EmploymentCasesEqualPayAct(EPA)  =C'  _@HH EmploymentCasesHarassmentunderTitleVII,1981&1983,ADA&ADEA       B AC*  _E!E!F(#5.54B  B AC*  _E!E!F(#5.54CGenerated Bookmark108\  `&Times New Roman K AC*  _=(#5.86[Deleted] A AC*  _!!G(#8.82*D+D (_25   ," <DL,23  ..," <DL,   *5+5 (_24  ) <DL)23  ..) <DL)  *2+2 (_23 ` &<<DL&23  ..&<<DL& ` */+/ (_22  #DL#23  ..#DL#  *,+, (_21   DL 23  .. DL  *)+) (_20 h DDL23  ..DDL h *&+& (_19  L23  ..L  *#+# (_18   L23  .. L  *>> (_17  2( 4 <DL223  Ԁ2( 4 <DL2  *DD (_16   ," <DL,23  Ԁ," <DL,   *55 (_15  ) <DL)23  Ԁ) <DL)  *22 (_14 ` &<<DL&23  Ԁ&<<DL& ` *// (_13  #DL#23  Ԁ#DL#  *,, (_12   DL 23  Ԁ DL  *)) (_11 h DDL23  ԀDDL h *&& (_10  L23  ԀL  (## &_9   L23  Ԁ L  (>> &_8  2( 4 <DL223  2( 4 <DL2  (DD &_7   ," <DL,23  ," <DL,    M AC*  _  !!G(#2.06(55 &_6  ) <DL)23  ) <DL)  (22 &_5 ` &<<DL&23  &<<DL& ` (// &_4  #DL#23  #DL#  (,, &_3   DL 23   DL  ()) &_2 h DDL23  DDL h (&& &_1  L23  L  &## $_   L23   L   { =C'  _@  EmploymentCasesAmericanswithDisabilitiesAct(ADA)  =C'  _@ EmploymentCasesRetaliationUnderEmploymentDiscriminationStatutes  A AC*  _!!G(#8.83 q =C'  _@| |  EmploymentCasesFirstAmendmentRetaliation  y =C'  _@  EmploymentCasesFamilyandMedicalLeaveAct(FMLA)  =C'  _@DD EmploymentCasesMiscellaneousInstructionsandSpecialInterrogatories _Ref229725251Generated Bookmark124 A AC*  _!!G(#5.63 A AC*  _!!G(#5.64SR;4998SR;4999)Hairline d  !  _    ?+ ` hp x X? ?XtXhX  1  󀀀#XtXh?Xt#?XtXhXt1#XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXtThedefinitionof vesselundertheLHWCAshouldbeconsideredthesameasthatunder  theJonesAct.Stewartv.DutraConstr.Co.,543U.S.481,#XtXX?XtC#?XtXXXt491#XtXX?Xt8#?XtXXXt,125S.Ct.1118,1125(2005)  ( atthetimeCongressenactedtheJonesActandtheLHWCAinthe1920's,itwassettledthat | 3definedthetermvesselforpurposesofthosestatutes.).?8 X?Xt#8  ?8}#?8  8 $ !  _    ?+ ` hp x X? ?XtXhX󀀀#XtXh?Xt#?XtXhXt2#XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXtSomecaseshaveallowedtherecoveryofpunitivedamagestononseameninmaritimecases.   #XtXX?Xt-#?XtXXXt InreHorizonCruisesLitigation#XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXt,2000WL685365(_S.D.N.Y._Ԁ2000)(acknowledgessplitamong  courts); #XtXX?XtL#?XtXXXt contraInreDiamondBMarineServices,Inc.#XtXX?Xt #?XtXXXt,2000WL222847(E.D.La.2000); |  #XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXt O'Harav.CelebrityCruises#XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXt,979F.Supp.254(_S.D.N.Y._Ԁ1997).?8 X?Xt#8  ?8a#?8  8 M AC*  _  !!G(#2.07 N AC*  _  :!:!F(#2.08A N AC*  _  E!E!F(#2.08B M AC*  _  !!G(#2.09 N AC*  _  :!:!F(#2.10A a AC*  _&0%XXl!l!F(#2.10B M AC*  _  !!G(#2.11 A AC*  _!!G(#2.12 i =C'  _@  InstructionsforUseatCloseofTrial  M AC*  _  !!G(#3.01 M AC*  _  !!G(#3.04 M AC*  _  !!G(#3.02 M AC*  _  !!G(#3.03 M AC*  _  !!G(#3.04 M AC*  _  !!G(#3.05 M AC*  _  !!G(#3.06 M AC*  _  !!G(#3.07 M AC*  _  !!G(#4.10 M AC*  _  !!G(#4.20 M AC*  _  !!G(#4.20 M AC*  _  !!G(#4.30 M AC*  _  !!G(#4.31 M AC*  _  !!G(#4.32 M AC*  _  !!G(#4.40 M AC*  _  !!G(#4.42 M AC*  _  !!G(#4.43 M AC*  _  !!G(#4.44 M AC*  _  !!G(#4.45 M AC*  _  !!G(#4.46 N AC*  _  :!:!F(#4.50A N AC*  _  E!E!F(#4.50B N AC*  _  E!E!F(#4.50C M AC*  _  !!G(#4.60 A AC*  _!!G(#1.00 A AC*  _!!G(#2.00 A AC*  _!!G(#3.00 A AC*  _!!G(#4.00 A AC*  _!!G(#6.00 A AC*  _!!G(#5.01 B AC*  _:!:!F(#5.01A N AC*  _  :!:!F(#5.02A N AC*  _  E!E!F(#5.02B N AC*  _  E!E!F(#5.02C M AC*  _  !!G(#5.03 A AC*  _!!G(#5.10 A AC*  _!!G(#5.11 B AC*  _:!:!F(#5.12A B AC*  _E!E!F(#5.12B B AC*  _E!E!F(#5.12C A AC*  _!!G(#5.13 A AC*  _!!G(#5.20 B AC*  _:!:!F(#5.21A B AC*  _E!E!F(#5.21B B AC*  _:!:!F(#5.22A B AC*  _E!E!F(#5.22B B AC*  _E!E!F(#5.22C A AC*  _!!G(#5.23 A AC*  _!!G(#5.25 B AC*  _:!:!F(#5.26A B AC*  _E!E!F(#5.26B B AC*  _:!:!F(#5.27A B AC*  _E!E!F(#5.27B B AC*  _E!E!F(#5.27C A AC*  _!!G(#5.28 A AC*  _!!G(#5.30 A AC*  _!!G(#5.31 A AC*  _!!G(#5.32 A AC*  _!!G(#5.33 A AC*  _!!G(#5.34 B AC*  _:!:!F(#5.51A A AC*  _!!G(#5.35 B AC*  _E!E!F(#5.51B A AC*  _!!G(#5.40 G AC*  _A(#5.51A/B(1) A AC*  _!!G(#5.41 B AC*  _E!E!F(#5.51C A AC*  _!!G(#5.42 B AC*  _:!:!F(#5.52A B AC*  _:!:!F(#5.42A B AC*  _E!E!F(#5.52B A AC*  _!!G(#5.43 B AC*  _E!E!F(#5.52C B AC*  _:!:!F(#5.44A B AC*  _:!:!F(#5.53A B AC*  _E!E!F(#5.44B B AC*  _E!E!F(#5.53B B AC*  _E!E!F(#5.44C B AC*  _:!:!F(#5.54A A AC*  _!!G(#5.50 A AC*  _!!G(#5.55 A AC*  _!!G(#5.56 A AC*  _!!G(#5.57 A AC*  _!!G(#5.60 A AC*  _!!G(#5.61 A AC*  _!!G(#5.61 A AC*  _!!G(#5.62 M AC*  _  !!G(#5.70 A AC*  _!!G(#5.71 B AC*  _:!:!F(#5.71A B AC*  _:!:!F(#5.72A B AC*  _E!E!F(#5.72B B AC*  _E!E!F(#5.72C A AC*  _!!G(#5.73 B AC*  _:!:!F(#5.73A Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5(2C$ !  (2C$ !  ($'dxdMNOPQC<< c A AC*  _!!G(#5.80 B AC*  _:!:!F(#5.81A B AC*  _E!E!F(#5.81B B AC*  _E!E!F(#5.81C B AC*  _:!:!F(#5.81D M AC*  _  !!G(#0.01 B AC*  _P!P!F(#5.81E B AC*  _[![!F(#5.81F B AC*  _:!:!F(#5.81G B AC*  _:!:!F(#5.81H B AC*  _!!F(#5.81I B AC*  _|!|!F(#5.81J A AC*  _!!G(#5.82 B AC*  _:!:!F(#5.83A B AC*  _E!E!F(#5.83B B AC*  _E!E!F(#5.83C B AC*  _:!:!F(#5.83D B AC*  _P!P!F(#5.83E B AC*  _[![!F(#5.83F B AC*  _:!:!F(#5.83G B AC*  _:!:!F(#5.83H B AC*  _!!F(#5.83I B AC*  _|!|!F(#5.83J B AC*  _:!:!F(#5.83K B AC*  _P!P!F(#5.83L B AC*  _!!F(#5.83M A AC*  _!!G(#5.84 B AC*  _:!:!F(#5.84A A AC*  _!!G(#5.85 AC*  _!!G(#5.86     `     A AC*  _!!G(#5.87 M AC*  _  !!G(#5.90 M AC*  _  !!G(#5.92 M AC*  _  !!G(#5.93 M AC*  _  !!G(#5.93 M AC*  _  !!G(#5.94 A AC*  _!!G(#5.95 A AC*  _!!G(#5.96H &_!!G(#5.97 '_:!:!F(#5.97A Z =C'  _  @% FraudCases  M AC*  _  !!G(#6.01 M AC*  _  !!G(#6.51 B AC*  _:!:!F(#6.51A A AC*  _!!G(#7.00 y =C'  _  @  FederalEmployersLiabilityAct(FELA)  A AC*  _!!G(#7.01 M AC*  _  !!G(#7.02 N AC*  _  :!:!F(#7.02A N AC*  _  E!E!F(#7.02B N AC*  _  E!E!F(#7.02C M AC*  _  !!G(#7.03 M AC*  _  !!G(#7.04 M AC*  _  !!G(#7.05 N AC*  _  :!:!F(#7.06A N AC*  _  E!E!F(#7.06B N AC*  _  E!E!F(#7.06C N AC*  _  :!:!F(#7.06D M AC*  _  !!G(#7.08 N AC*  _  :!:!F(#7.08A M AC*  _  !!G(#7.09 M AC*  _  !!G(#7.10 M AC*  _  !!G(#7.11 A AC*  _!!G(#8.00 Y =C'  _@ AdmiraltyInstructions  A AC*  _!!G(#8.10 B AC*  _:!:!F(#8.10A A AC*  _!!G(#8.11 A AC*  _!!G(#8.12 A AC*  _!!G(#8.13 A AC*  _!!G(#8.14 A AC*  _!!G(#8.15 A AC*  _!!G(#8.16 A AC*  _!!G(#8.20 A AC*  _!!G(#8.21 A AC*  _!!G(#8.22 A AC*  _!!G(#8.30 A AC*  _!!G(#8.31 A AC*  _!!G(#8.32 A AC*  _!!G(#8.33 A AC*  _!!G(#8.34 A AC*  _!!G(#8.35 A AC*  _!!G(#8.40 A AC*  _!!G(#8.41 A AC*  _!!G(#8.81 B AC*  _:!:!F(#8.81A A AC*  _!!G(#8.84 A AC*  _!!G(#8.85 A AC*  _!!G(#8.86 A AC*  _!!G(#8.90 A AC*  _!!G(#9.00 N =C'  _@% Definitions  N =C'  _@% Definitions  M AC*  _  !!G(#9.01 M AC*  _  !!G(#9.02 M AC*  _  !!G(#9.03 A AC*  _!!G(#9.04'   Amy Maloney00Information Systems .   &&&&'dxd f =C'  _@x x  TheFairLaborStandardsAct(FLSA)  B AC*  _f!f!F(#10.01 B AC*  _f!f!F(#10.02 B AC*  _f!f!F(#10.03 B AC*  _f!f!F(#10.04 B AC*  _f!f!F(#10.05 B AC*  _f!f!F(#10.06 B AC*  _f!f!F(#10.07 B AC*  _f!f!F(#10.20 B AC*  _f!f!F(#10.21 B AC*  _f!f!F(#10.22 B AC*  _f!f!F(#10.23 B AC*  _f!f!F(#10.24 B AC*  _f!f!F(#10.30 B AC*  _f!f!F(#10.40 B AC*  _f!f!F(#10.41 B AC*  _f!f!F(#10.42 B AC*  _f!f!F(#10.43 B AC*  _f!f!F(#10.44Table_A B AC*  _f!f!F(#10.45  NC"  _B.` hp x (#XB*6&7 ddd Xdd Xdd Xxx,ZZ,ZZ,SZZ+  1' 1  Workweek  Beginning  Date '  '  Workweek  EndingDate '  '  Hours  Worked ?5   ?   '  '  '   '  ?5    ?  '   '  '   '  ?5    ?  '~~  '  '~~  '  ?5~~   ?  'dd  '  'dd  '  ?5dd   ?  'JJ  '  'JJ  '  ?5JJ   ?  '00  '  '00  '  ?500   ?  '  '  '  '  ?5   ?  '  '  '  '  ?5   ?  '   '  ' !  '  ?5 "   ?  ' #  '  ' $  '  ?5 %   ?  ' &  '  ' '  '  ?5 (   ?  ' )  '  ' *  '  ?5 +   ?  'z z ,  '  'z z -  '  ?5z z .   ?  '``/  '  '``0  '  ?5``1   ?  'FF2  '  'FF3  '  ?5FF4   ?  ',,5  '  ',,6  '  ?5,,7   ?  '8  '  '9  '  ?5:   ?  ';  '  '<  '  ?5=   ?  '>  '  '?  '  -#!@    -Table_B !  _     `    @& MANUALOF . ~ @99%MODELCIVIL  J @"JURYINSTRUCTIONS       `     h      p @--'FORTHE x  @QQ#DISTRICTCOURTS D  @ OFTHEEIGHTHCIRCUIT  ` @'(2012)  t 8tXXdd80_   `     h   _@#CITETHISWORK x  @ 8THCIR.CIVILJURYINSTR.4.50A(2012) D @)or  @ 8THCIR.CIVILJURYINSTR.4.50Acomment(2012)  \ _@cc% DEDICATION     TheCommitteeishonoredtodedicatetheseinstructionstotheHonorableScottO. | Wright,oneofthefoundingfathersoftheJudicialCommitteeonModelJuryInstructionsforthe % EighthCircuit.HeservedasChairmanoftheCommitteefromitscreationin1983andguided . ~ theCommitteeuntil2009.Hisbeliefthatjurytrialsareessentialtoourliberty,andhis   dedicationtogivingjurieswritteninstructionsinlanguagethatcouldbeunderstoodbythe  0  averagejurorhaveguidedtheCommitteefromitsbeginning.Theleadershipand 9   encouragementofScottWrightarelargelyresponsibleforthecreationoftheCommitteeandits   continuedexistence. ;    ItisagreatprivilegefortheCommitteetorecognizeScott'sleadershipontheCommittee D  anddedicatetheseInstructionsinrecognitionofhisoutstandingcontributions.    @  COMMITTEEONMODELJURYINSTRUCTIONS  @#EIGHTHCIRCUIT   CHAIRMAN:0 ` 0 ` (#` (#XtXXXHonorableBillR.Wilsonb (# (# 0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (#UnitedStatesSeniorDistrictJudgeH (# (# 0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (#RichardS.ArnoldU.S.Courthouse. ~ (# (# 0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (#600W.CapitolAvenue,SuiteA_Ԅ401_ d (# (# 0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (#LittleRock,Arkansas72201 J (# (# 0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (#0 (# (#(501)6045140 0(#(# 0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (#0 (# (#(501)6045149(fax)  (#(# #XtXXXtx #XtXXXtMEMBERS:   (X(#(#(#XtXXXt #XtXXXt0  HonorableLaurieSmithCamp^  0  UnitedStatesDistrictJudgeD  0  RomanL.HruskaU.S.Courthouse*z  0  111S.EighteenthPlaza,Suite3210` 0  Omaha,Nebraska68102F 0  0` (402)6617323,` `  0  0` (402)6617326(fax)` `  #XtXXXtX #XtXXXt0  HonorablePatrickA.Conmy 0  UnitedStatesSeniorDistrictJudget 0  WilliamL.GuyFederalBldg.and Z U.S.Courthouse@ 0  220E.RosserAvenue,Suite160&v 0  Bismarck,NorthDakota58501 \ 0  0` (701)5302315B` `  0  0` (701)5302318(fax)(` `  #XtXXXt#0  HonorableBethM.Deere 0  UnitedStatesMagistrateJudge  0  RichardS.ArnoldU.S.Courthousep!  0  500W.Capitol,SuiteC150V"! 0  LittleRock,Arkansas72201<#" 0  0` (501)6045110"$r#` `  0  0` (501)6045117(fax)%X $` `  0  HonorableRalphR.Erickson&$"& 0  ChiefUnitedStatesDistrictJudge' #' 0  QuentinN.BurdickU.S.Courthouse(#( 0  655FirstAvenueN,Suite410)$) 0  Fargo,NorthDakota58102l*%* 0  0` (701)2977080R+&+` `  0  0` (701)2977085(fax)8,',` `  Ї0 p HonorableJohnA.Jarvey^ ,p(#p(# 0 p UnitedStatesDistrictJudgeD -p(#p(# 0 p 131E.FourthStreet,Suite252*z .p(#p(# 0 p Davenport,Iowa52801`/p(#p(# 0 p 0p(#p(#(563)8847727F0(#(# 0 p 0p(#p(#(563)8847729(fax),1(#(# 0 p HonorableRichardH.Kyle3p(#p(# 0 p UnitedStatesSeniorDistrictJudge4p(#p(# 0 p WarrenE.BurgerFederalBuildingt5p(#p(# 0 p 316N.RobertStreet,Suite772Z6p(#p(# 0 p St.Paul,Minnesota55101@7p(#p(# 0 p 0p(#p(#(651)8481160&v8(#(# 0 p 0p(#p(#(651)8481162(fax) \9(#(# 0 p HonorableNanetteK._Laughrey_(;p(#p(# 0 p UnitedStatesDistrictJudge<p(#p(# 0 p U.S.PostOfficeandCourthouse=p(#p(# 0 p 131W.HighStreet,Suite307 >p(#p(# 0 p JeffersonCity,Missouri65101p!?p(#p(# 0 p 0p(#p(#(573)6326623V"@(#(# 0 p 0p(#p(#(573)6365108(fax)<#A(#(# 0 p HonorableStephenN.Limbaugh,Jr.%X Cp(#p(# 0 p UnitedStatesDistrictJudge%>!Dp(#p(# 0 p RushH.Limbaugh,Sr.,U.S. &$"E Courthouse' #Fp(#p(# 0 p 555IndependenceStreet(#Gp(#p(# 0 p CapeGirardeau,Missouri63703)$Hp(#p(# 0 p 0p(#p(#(573)3318873l*%I(#(# 0 p 0p(#p(#(573)3318874(fax)R+&J(#(#  8,'K 0  HonorableAnnD.Montgomery 0  UnitedStatesDistrictJudge 0  U.S.Courthouse| 0  300S.FourthStreet,Suite13Wb 0  Minneapolis,Minnesota55415H 0  0` (612)6645090. ~` `  0  0` (612)6645097(fax) d` `  0  HonorableJamesM.Moody 0 0  UnitedStatesSeniorDistrictJudge   0  RichardS.ArnoldU.S.Courthouse   0  500W.CapitolAvenue,SuiteC446  0  LittleRock,Arkansas72201x  0  0` (501)6045150^ ` `  0  0` (501)6045373(fax)D ` `  0  HonorableKarenE.Schreier` 0  ChiefUnitedStatesDistrictJudgeF 0  U.S.Courthouse, 0  400S.PhillipsAvenue,Suite233 0  SiouxFalls,SouthDakota57104 0  0` (605)3306670` `  0  0` (605)3306671(fax)t` `  0  HonorableMattJeffrey_Whitworth_@ 0  UnitedStatesMagistrateJudge&v 0  U.S.PostOfficeandCourthouse \ 0  131W.HighStreet,Suite204B 0  JeffersonCity,Missouri65101( 0  0` (573)6343418` `  0  0` (573)6365208(fax)` `    (X(   @ SUBCOMMITTEEONMODELCIVILJURYINSTRUCTIONS  @#EIGHTHCIRCUIT   _CHAIR:_0 ` 0 ` (#` (#HonorableBethM.Deereb (# (# 0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (#UnitedStatesMagistrateJudgeH (# (# 0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (#RichardS.ArnoldU.S.Courthouse. ~ (# (# 0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (#500W.Capitol,SuiteC150 d (# (# 0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (#LittleRock,Arkansas72201 J (# (# 0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (#0 (# (#(501)6045110 0(#(# 0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (#0 (# (#(501)6045117(fax)  (#(# (X(#(#(MEMBERS:   0  DanielB.Boatright,Esq.^  0  LittlerMendelson,P.C.D  0  2300MainStreet,Suite900*z  0  KansasCity,Missouri64108` 0  0` (816)6274401F` `  0  0` (816)8177703(fax),` `   0  AnnE.Buckley,Esq. 0  Buckley&Buckley,LLC 0  1139Olive,Suite800t 0  St.Louis,Missouri63101Z 0  0` (314)6213434@` `  0  0` (314)6213485(fax)&v` `  XtXXXt0  JeromeDobson,Esq.B   DobsonGoldbergBerns&Rich_LLP_ (   5017WashingtonPlFl3    St.Louis,Missouri63108     ` (314)6218363     DennisE.Egan,Esq. V"! 0  ThePophamLawFirm,P.C.<#" 0  712Broadway,Suite100"$r# 0  KansasCity,Mo.64105%X $ 0  0` (816)2212288%>!%` `  0  0` (816)2213999(fax)&$"&` `  #XtXXXtS.#0  MichaelGross,Esq.(#(   OfCounsel,_Sher_Ԁ_Corwin_ )$)   190_Carondelet_ԀPlaza,Suite1100 l*%*   St.Louis,Missouri63105 R+&+    ` (314)7215200 8,', Ї p HonorableJeromeT.Kearney ^ . 0 p UnitedStatesMagistrateJudgeD /p(#p(# 0 p RichardS.ArnoldU.S.Courthouse*z 0p(#p(# 0 p 500W.CapitolAvenue,SuiteC459`1p(#p(# 0 p LittleRock,Arkansas72201F2p(#p(# 0 p 0p(#p(#(501)6045170,3(#(# 0 p 0p(#p(#(501)6045178(fax)4(#(#  p HonorableWilliamA.Knox 6 0 p UnitedStatesMagistrateJudget7p(#p(# 0 p U.S.PostOffice&CourthouseZ8p(#p(# 0 p 131W.HighStreet,Suite204@9p(#p(# 0 p JeffersonCity,Missouri65101&v:p(#p(# 0 p 0p(#p(#(573)6343418 \;(#(# 0 p 0p(#p(#(573)6365208(fax)B<(#(# XtXXXt#XtXXXt7#0 p AmyP.Maloney,Esq.>p(#p(# 0 p HolmanSchiavoneL.L.C.?p(#p(# 0 p 4600MadisonAvenue,Suite810 @p(#p(# 0 p KansasCity,Missouri64112p!Ap(#p(# 0 p 0p(#p(#(816)2838738V"B(#(# XtXXXt0 p HonorableMaryAnnL.Medler"$rDp(#p(# 0 p UnitedStatesMagistrateJudge%X Ep(#p(# 0 p U.S.Courthouse%>!Fp(#p(# 0 p 111S.TenthStreet,Suite13S&$"Gp(#p(# 0 p St.Louis,Missouri63102' #Hp(#p(# 0 p 0p(#p(#(314)2447490(#I(#(# 0 p 0p(#p(#(314)2447499(fax))$J(#(# 0 p  p(#p(#  8,'M   MartinM.Meyers,Esq.  0  TheMeyersLawFirm,LC 0  222W.Gregory,Suite340| 0  KansasCity,Missouri64114b 0  0` (816)4448500H` `  0  0` (816)4448508(fax). ~` `  #XtXXXt8#  d 0 p XtXXXt p(#p(#  b  0  HonorableDavidD.Noce 0  0  UnitedStatesMagistrateJudge   0  U.S.Courthouse   0  111S.TenthStreet,Suite17N  0  St.Louis,Missouri63102x  0  0` (314)2447630^ ` `  0  0` (314)2447639(fax)D ` `  #XtXXXt<#0  CharlesE.Reis,IV,Esq.` 0  LittlerMendelson,P.C.F 0  OneMetropolitanSquare, 0  211N.Broadway,Suite1500 0  St.Louis,Missouri63141 0  0` (314)6592002` `  0  0` (314)6592099(fax)t` `  XtXXXt0  LarryM.Schumaker,Esq.@ 0  SchumakerCenterforEmployment &v Law,P.C. \ 0  10401HolmesRoad,Suite480B 0  KansasCity,Missouri64131( 0  0` (816)9419994` `  0  0` (816)9418244(fax)` `  #XtXXXtFA#0  HonorableMattJ._Whitworth_p!! 0  UnitedStatesMagistrateJudgeV"" 0  U.S.PostOfficeandCourthouse<## 0  131W.HighStreet,Suite204"$r$ 0  JeffersonCity,Missouri65101%X % 0  0` (573)6343418%>!&` `  0  0` (573)6365208(fax)&$"'` `    0' (X( (#' @  SubcommitteeonModelCivilJuryInstructions  @ppEighthCircuit@@zz&Admiralty   HonorableDavidD.Noce(Chairman) b UnitedStatesMagistrateJudge H U.S.Courthouse . ~ 111S.TenthStreet,Suite17N  d St.Louis,Missouri63102  J 0  (314)2447630 0(#(# 0  (314)2447639(fax)  (#(# RogerDenton,Esq.   Schlichter,BogartandDenton x  100S.FourthStreet,Suite900 ^  St.Louis,Missouri63102 D  0  (314)6216115*z (#(# GaryT.Sacks,Esq. F GoldsteinandPrice,L.C. , OneN.MemorialDrive,Suite1000  St.Louis,Missouri63102  0  (314)4210710(#(# 0  (314)4212832(fax) t(#(# @  SubcommitteeonModelCivilJuryInstructions  @#EighthCircuit  @eeFederalEmployersLiabilityAct  | HonorableWilliamA.Knox(Chairman) H UnitedStatesMagistrateJudge . ~ 204U.S.Courthouse  d 131W.HighStreet  J JeffersonCity,Missouri65101  0 0  (573)6343418  (#(# 0  (573)6365208(fax)  (#(# K.PaulDay,Esq. x  КLathrop&GageL.C. ^  2345GrandBoulevard,Suite2800 D  KansasCity,Missouri641082684 *z  0  (816)2922000`(#(# 0  (816)2922001(fax)F(#(# ChristopherH.Leach,Esq.  Hubbell,Sawyer,Peak,_ONeal_Ԁ&Napier  UnionStation  30W.PershingRoad,Suite350 t KansasCity,Missouri641082463 Z 0  (816)2215666@(#(# 0  (816)2215259(fax) &v(#(# @$ INTRODUCTION     Thesemodelinstructionshavebeenpreparedtohelpjudgescommunicatemore | effectivelywithjuries.TheManualismeanttoprovidejudgesandlawyerswithmodelsof b clear,briefandsimpleinstructionscalculatedtomaximizejurorcomprehension.Theyarenot H intendedtobetreatedastheonlymethodofinstructingproperlyajury.SeeUnitedStatesv. . ~ Ridinger,805F.2d818,821(8thCir.1986). TheModelInstructions,...arenotbindingonthe  d districtcourtsofthiscircuit,butaremerelyhelpfulsuggestionstoassistthedistrictcourts.  J UnitedStatesv.Norton,846F.2d521,525(8thCir.1988).  0   EveryefforthasbeenmadetoassureconformitywithcurrentEighthCircuitlaw;    however,itcannotbeassumedthatallofthesemodelinstructionsintheformgivennecessarily   willbeappropriateunderthefactsofaparticularcase.TheManualcoversissuesonwhich x  instructionsaremostfrequentlygiven,butbecauseeachcaseturnsonuniquefacts,instructions ^  shouldbedraftedoradaptedtoconformtothefactsineachcase.Theseinstructions,proposed D  instructions,andinstructionsapprovedbutnotyetpublishedinpaperformatmaybefoundon *z  theInternetinbothWordPerfect,Word,andpdfformatsat ` XtXXXt4 O  5  http://www.juryinstructions.ca8.uscourts.gov/6UOU  7 U#XtXXXtU#XtXXXt F   Indraftinginstructions,theCommitteehasattemptedtousesimplelanguage,short  sentences,andtheactivevoiceandomitunnecessarywords.Wehavetriedtouseplain  languagebecausegivingthejurythestatutorylanguage,orlanguagefromappellatecourt  decisions,isoftenconfusing. t   Itisourpositionthatinstructionsshouldbeasbriefaspossibleandlimitedtowhatthe @ juryneedstoknowforthecase.Wealsorecommendsendingacopyoftheinstructionsasgiven &v tothejuryroom.  \   CounselareremindedofCivilRule51(c),whichrequiresaspecificobjection,onthe ( record,beforethejuryisinstructedifpossible,and(d),whichrequiresaproper,timelyobjection  ifinstructionerroristobepreservedforappeal,unlessitamountstoplainerror.    TheCommitteeexpressesitsappreciationtoallmembersofthesubcommittee,whose p!  diligentresearchandcommitmenttothisprojectareessentialincontinuingtorevisecurrent V"! instructionsanddraftnewones.Specialthanksmustgoto_Suzy_Ԁ_Flippen_,JudicialAssistantto <#" theHonorableBethM.Deere,whohastyped,retyped,corrected,editedandrevisedthedraftson "$r# numerousoccasions.Herdedicationtodetail,carefulscreeningofdrafts,andcomparisonof %X $ variousdraftshavebeenessentialintheproductionoftheseinstructions.  %>!% @  HOWTOUSETHESEINSTRUCTIONS     Theseciviljuryinstructionshavebeenarrangedwithanawarenessthatjudgesfollow | differentpracticeswhenitcomestojuryinstructions.Somejudgessendafullsetofwritten b instructionsintothejuryroomaftertheyhavebeenreadinopencourt.Otherjudgesalso H providejurorswithwrittencopiesoftheinstructionstofollowastheyarereadfromthebench. . ~ Stillotherjudgesprefernottoprovidethejurywithanywritteninstructions.Theseciviljury  d instructionshavebeenarrangedanddraftedtoaccommodateanyofthesevaryingpractices.  J   ModelInstruction1.01isageneralinstructionwhichisintendedtogivejurorsan    overviewoftheirdutiesandtrialproceduresduringthetrial.Itshouldbegivenatthe    commencementofthetrial(afterthejurorsareswornandbeforeopeningstatements).Model   Instruction1.01incorporatesmatterswhicharealsoaddressedinModelInstructions3.02 x  (Judge'sOpinion)and3.03(CredibilityofWitnesses).TheCommitteerecommendsthatthe ^  generalinstructionswhicharegivenattheoutsetofthetrial(ModelInstructions1.01-1.06)and D  thosegivenduringthemiddleoftrialshouldnotberepeatedatthetimethecaseissubmittedto *z  thejury.Thosegeneralmatterswhicharenecessarytothejury'sfinaldeliberationsareagain ` repeatedinModelInstructions2.01-2.11,and3.01-3.07. F   TheCommitteerecognizesthatvaryingburdenofproofformulationsareusedin  differentjurisdictions.Judgesandlawyersoftenareaccustomedtousingtheburdenofproof  instructionfoundinthepatternciviljuryinstructionsadoptedbytheirparticularstates.Model  Instruction3.04isaburdenofproofinstructionwhichisintendedtoaccommodatethevarious t formulations.However,theCommitteerecognizesthatajudgemayprefertousetheburdenof Z proofformulationwhichisacceptedinhisorherstate.Ifsuchaburdenofproofinstructionis @ used,theelement/issueinstructionsmustbemodifiedaccordingly. &v   TheCommitteerecommendsthatwritteninstructionswhicharetobesentintothejury B roomshouldbenumbered,intheordergiven,oraccuratelytitledwithoutnumbering.Ifa (  titlingmethodisused,thejudgeshouldbeawarethatthetitlesusedintheseinstructionswere  notdesignedforsuchuseandthatanappropriately neutralmethodofexpressionshouldbe  used.Suchinstructionsshouldalsobefreeofanyextraneousnotations:forexample,themodel   instructionnumber,theidentityofthesubmittingparty,committeenotes,anynotesbythecourt, p!  andothersuchnotations,shouldnotappearonthewritteninstructionsgiventothejury. V"!   TheseinstructionsmaybefoundontheInternetinbothWordPerfect,Word,andpdf "$r# formatsat#XtXXXtV#XtXXXt4 O  5  http://www.juryinstructions.ca8.uscourts.gov/6kOk  7 ck#XtXXXtk#  %X $ @" TABLEOFCONTENTS    _  Vm  Vmm0     1.PRELIMINARYINSTRUCTIONSFORUSEATCOMMENCEMENTOFTRIAL  |  IntroductoryComment #""J(#.#(#(##4tt"O  5  16mOnins  7tt(#=nVmm/m݌ b Ќ  !  !n0  0` (#(#    0.01INSTRUCTIONSBEFOREVOIRDIRE#""J(#.2` (#` (##4tt"O  5  26oOoins  7tt(#o!nn݌ H Ќ  !  !fp0  0` (#(#    0.02INSTRUCTIONSATENDOFVOIRDIRE#""J(#.5` (#` (##4tt"O  5  46qO(qins  7tt(#Vq!fpp݌ . ~ Ќ  !  !q0  0` (#(#    1.01GENERAL:NATUREOFCASE;BURDENOFPROOF;  d DUTYOFJURY;CAUTIONARY#""J(#.qq,` (#` (##4tt"O  5  56rOrins  7tt(#s!qr݌  J Ќ  !  !s0  0` (#(#    1.02EVIDENCE;LIMITATIONS#""J(#.""*` (#` (##4tt"O  5  76^tOrtins  7tt(#t!ss݌  0 Ќ  !  !>u0  0` (#(#    1.03BENCHCONFERENCESANDRECESSES#""J(#.3` (#` (##4tt"O  5  96uOuins  7tt(#,v!>uYu݌    Ќ  !  !v0  0` (#(#    1.04NOTRANSCRIPTAVAILABLE[NOTETAKING]#`"`"I(#.:` (#` (##4tt`"O  5  106}wOwins  7tt(#w!vv݌    Ќ  !  !^x0  0` (#(#    1.04AQUESTIONSBYJURORS#`"`"I(#.)` (#` (##4tt`"O  5  116yOyins  7tt(#By!^xyx݌   Ќ  !  !y0  0` (#(#    1.05.CONDUCTOFTHEJURY#`"`"I(#.)` (#` (##4tt`"O  5  126zOzins  7tt(#z!yy݌ x  Ќ  !  !d{0  0` (#(#    1.06OUTLINEOFTRIAL#`"`"I(#.%` (#` (##4tt`"O  5  156|O|ins  7tt(#D|!d{{݌ ^  Ќ  Vm  Vm|0     2.INSTRUCTIONSFORUSEDURINGTRIAL  *z   IntroductoryComment #`"`"I(#.#(#(##4 tt`"O  5  166}O}ins  7tt(#}Vm||݌ ` Ќ  !  !~0  0` (#(#    2.01DUTIESOFJURY:RECESSES#`"`"I(#.GG.` (#` (##4!tt`"O  5  176;OOins  7tt(#}!~~݌ F Ќ  !  !0  0` (#(#    2.02STIPULATEDTESTIMONY#`"`"I(#.77)` (#` (##4"`"O  5  186OҀ  7(#!7݌ , Ќ  !  !0  0` (#(#    2.03STIPULATEDFACTS#`"`"I(#.""%` (#` (##4#`"O  5  196=OQ  7(#!݌  Ќ  !  !0  0` (#(#    2.04JUDICIALNOTICE#`"`"I(#.[[$` (#` (##4$`"O  5  206Oσ  7(#!9݌  Ќ  !  !0  0` (#(#    2.05TRANSCRIPTOFTAPERECORDEDCONVERSATION#`"`"I(#.=` (#` (##4%`"O  5  216ROf  7(#!݌  Ќ  !  !30  0` (#(#    2.06PREVIOUSTRIAL#`"`"I(#.#` (#` (##4'`"O  5  226φO  7(#!3N݌ t Ќ  !  !0  0` (#(#    2.07CROSSEXAMINATIONOFPARTY'SCHARACTERWITNESS#`"`"I(#.C` (#` (##4(`"O  5  236lO  7(#!ˇ݌ Z Ќ  !  !M0  0` (#(#    2.08AEVIDENCEADMITTEDAGAINSTONLYONEPARTY#`"`"I(#.  >` (#` (##4)`"O  5  246O  7(#F!Mh݌ @ Ќ  !  !0  0` (#(#    2.08BEVIDENCEADMITTEDFORLIMITEDPURPOSE#`"`"I(#.66;` (#` (##4*`"O  5  256O  7(#ۋ!݌ &v Ќ  !  !z0  0` (#(#    2.09IMPEACHMENTOFWITNESS,PRIORCONVICTION#`"`"I(#.=` (#` (##4+`"O  5  2660OD  7(#r!z݌  \ Ќ  !  !0  0` (#(#    2.10ADEMONSTRATIVESUMMARIESNOTRECEIVEDASEVIDENCE#`"`"I(#.F` (#` (##4,`"O  5  276ЎO  7(#!,݌ B Ќ  !  !0  0` (#(#    2.10BRULE1006SUMMARIES#`"`"I(#.)` (#` (##4-`"O  5  286SOg  7(#!̏݌ ( Ќ  !  !40  0` (#(#    2.11WITHDRAWAL#`"`"I(#.@@` (#` (##4.`"O  5  306̑O  7(#!4O݌  Ќ  !  !0  0` (#(#    2.12DEPOSITIONEVIDENCEATTRIAL#`"`"I(#.441` (#` (##4/`"O  5  316WOk  7(#!Ȓ݌  Ќ  Vm  Vm80     3.INSTRUCTIONSFORUSEATCLOSEOFTRIAL  p!   IntroductoryComment #`"`"I(#.#(#(##40`"O  5  326 O!  7(#OVm8T݌ V"! Ќ  !  !0  0` (#(#    3.01EXPLANATORY#`"`"I(#. ` (#` (##41`"O  5  336O  7(#ɖ! ݌ <#" Ќ  !  !h0  0` (#(#    3.02JUDGE'SOPINION#`"`"I(#.<<$` (#` (##43`"O  5  346O  7(#G!h݌ "$r# Ќ  !  !0  0` (#(#    3.03CREDIBILITYOFWITNESSES#`"`"I(#.^^-` (#` (##44`"O  5  356O  7(#Ι!݌ %X $ Ќ  !  !m0  0` (#(#    3.04BURDENOFPROOF %>!% (OrdinaryCivilCase)#`"`"I(#.33)` (#` (##45`"O  5  3865OI  7(#w!m݌ &$"& Ќ  !  !0  0` (#(#    3.05WITHDRAWAL(OFCLAIMORDEFENSE)#`"`"I(#.5` (#` (##46`"O  5  396ĜO؜  7(#!1݌ ' #' Ќ  !  !0  0` (#(#    3.06ELECTIONOFFOREPERSON;DUTYTODELIBERATE;COMMUNICATIONS (#( WITHCOURT;CAUTIONARY;UNANIMOUSVERDICT;VERDICTFORM )$) #`"`"I(#.` ` ` (#` (##47`"O  5  406ОO  7(#!݌ l*%* Ќ  !  !0  0` (#(#    3.07 ALLENCHARGETOBEGIVENAFTEREXTENDEDDELIBERATION#`"`"I(#.j!j!K` (#` (##48!`"O  5  426{O  7!(#!̟݌ R+&+ Ќ  Vm 8,',   Vm\0     4.PRISONER/PRETRIALDETAINEECIVILRIGHTSCASES  IntroductoryComment #`"`"I(#.#(#(##49!`"O  5  456GO[  7!(#Vm\݌  Ќ  !  !(0  0` (#(#    4.10EXCESSIVEUSEOFFORCEARRESTOROTHERSEIZUREOF | PERSONBEFORECONFINEMENTFOURTHAMENDMENT#`"`"I(#.B` (#` (##4:!`"O  5  466.OB  7!(#p!(C݌ b Ќ  !  !0  0` (#(#    4.20EXCESSIVEUSEOFFORCEPRETRIALDETAINEES H FIFTHANDFOURTEENTHAMENDMENTS#`"`"I(#.nn3` (#` (##4;!`"O  5  506O  7!(#B!*݌ . ~ Ќ  !  !0  0` (#(#    4.30EXCESSIVEUSEOFFORCECONVICTEDPRISONERS  d EIGHTHAMENDMENT#`"`"I(#.$` (#` (##4<!`"O  5  546ħOا  7!(#!݌  J Ќ  !  !0  0` (#(#    4.31DENIALOFMEDICALCARE  0 CONVICTEDPRISONERSANDPRETRIALDETAINEES    (42U.S.C.1983)#`"`"I(#.RR&` (#` (##4>!`"O  5  576O̩  7!(#!݌    Ќ  !  !0  0` (#(#    4.32FAILURETOPROTECTFROMATTACKSPECIFICATTACK   CONVICTEDPRISONERSEIGHTHAMENDMENT x  (AndPretrialDetaineesFourteenthAmendment)#`"`"I(#.""C` (#` (##4?!`"O  5  606۫O  7!(#!݌ ^  Ќ  !  !0  0` (#(#    4.40DEFINITION:COLOROFSTATELAW(42U.S.C.1983)#`"`"I(#.ccG` (#` (##4@!`"O  5  626O  7!(#!׬݌ D  Ќ  !  !`0  0` (#(#    4.42DEFINITION:PERVASIVERISKOFHARMCONVICTEDPRISONERS *z  (42U.S.C.1983)#`"`"I(#.RR&` (#` (##4B!`"O  5  636SOg  7!(#!`{݌ ` Ќ  !  !40  0` (#(#    4.43DEFINITION:SERIOUSMEDICALNEEDCONVICTEDPRISONERS F (42U.S.C.1983)#`"`"I(#.RR&` (#` (##4E!`"O  5  646%O9  7!(#g!4O݌ , Ќ  !  !0  0` (#(#    4.44DEFINITION:DELIBERATEINDIFFERENCE  CONVICTEDPRISONERSANDPRETRIALDETAINEES  (42U.S.C.1983)#`"`"I(#.RR&` (#` (##4F!`"O  5  656'O;  7!(#i!!݌  Ќ  !  !0  0` (#(#    4.45DEFINITION:MALICIOUSLY#`"`"I(#.22-` (#` (##4G!`"O  5  666O´  7!(#!#݌ t Ќ  !  !0  0` (#(#    4.46DEFINITION:SADISTICALLY#`"`"I(#.ii.` (#` (##4H!`"O  5  6766OJ  7!(#x!݌ Z Ќ  !  !0  0` (#(#    4.50AACTUALDAMAGESPRISONERCIVILRIGHTS#`"`"I(#.FF<` (#` (##4I!`"O  5  686̷O  7!(#!2݌ @ Ќ  !  !0  0` (#(#    4.50BNOMINALDAMAGESPRISONERCIVILRIGHTS#`"`"I(#.=` (#` (##4J!`"O  5  706cOw  7!(#!ȸ݌ &v Ќ  !  !D0  0` (#(#    4.50CPUNITIVEDAMAGESCIVILRIGHTS#`"`"I(#.5` (#` (##4K!`"O  5  716O  7!(#4!D_݌  \ Ќ  !  !ӻ0  0` (#(#    4.60VERDICTFORMONEPLAINTIFF,TWODEFENDANTS, B ONEINJURYCASE#`"`"I(#.""#` (#` (##4L!`"O  5  756Oȼ  7!(#!ӻ݌ ( Ќ  Vm  Vm0     5.EMPLOYMENTCASES   Overview #`"`"I(#.? ? (#(##4M!`"O  5  776POd  7!(#Vm݌ p!  Ќ  !  !10  0` (#(#    5.01TITLEVIIELEMENTS#`"`"I(#.)` (#` (##4N.0`"O  5  806ӿOTIT  7.0(#!1L݌ V"! Ќ  !  !0  0` (#(#    5.01ATITLEVII"SAMEDECISION"#`"`"I(#.1` (#` (##4O.0`"O  5  826^OrTIT  7.0(#!݌ <#" Ќ  !  !?0  0` (#(#    5.02ATITLEVIIACTUALDAMAGES#`"`"I(#.0` (#` (##4P.0`"O  5  836OTIT  7.0(#*!?Z݌ "$r# Ќ  !  !0  0` (#(#    5.02BTITLEVIINOMINALDAMAGES#`"`"I(#.%%1` (#` (##4Q.0`"O  5  876sOTIT  7.0(#!݌ %X $ Ќ  !  !T0  0` (#(#    5.02CTITLEVIIPUNITIVEDAMAGES#`"`"I(#.2` (#` (##4R.0`"O  5  886OTIT  7.0(#A!To݌ %>!% Ќ  !  !0  0` (#(#    5.03TITLEVIIVERDICTFORM#`"`"I(#.-` (#` (##4S.0`"O  5  936OTIT  7.0(#!݌ &$"& Ќ  !  !g0  0` (#(#    5.10AGEDISCRIMINATIONINEMPLOYMENTACT ' #' ( ADEA)OF1967,ASAMENDEDIntroductoryComment#`"`"I(#.  G` (#` (##4U.0`"O  5  956iO}TIT  7.0(#!g݌ (#( Ќ  !  !J0  0` (#(#    5.11ADEAELEMENTS#`"`"I(#.$` (#` (##4V.0`"O  5  966OTIT  7.0(#)!Je݌ )$) Ќ  !  !0  0` (#(#    5.12AADEAACTUALDAMAGES#`"`"I(#.aa+` (#` (##4X.0`"O  5  986lOTIT  7.0(#!݌ l*%* Ќ  !  !M0  0` (#(#    5.12BADEANOMINALDAMAGES#!!H(#.,` (#` (##4Y.0!O  5  1006OTIT  7.0(#4!Mh݌ R+&+ Ќ  !  !0  0` (#(#    5.12CADEAWILLFULNESS#!!H(#.uu(` (#` (##4Z.0!O  5  1016uOTIT  7.0(#!݌ 8,', Ќ  _!  !g0  0` (#(#    5.13ADEAVERDICTFORM#!!H(#.dd(` (#` (##4\.0!O  5  1026OTIT  7.0(#J!g݌  Ќ  !  !0  0` (#(#    5.20RACEDISCRIMINATION(42U.S.C.1981)IntroductoryComment#!!H(#.R` (#` (##4].0!O  5  1036OTIT  7.0(#!݌  Ќ  !  !0  0` (#(#    5.21A(RACE)DISCRIMINATIONELEMENTS(MotivatingFactor) | (42U.S.C.1981)#!!H(#.RR&` (#` (##4^.0!O  5  1046OTIT  7.0(#!݌ b Ќ  !  !j0  0` (#(#    5.21B(RACE)ELEMENTS(DeterminingFactor)(42U.S.C.1981)#!!H(#.O` (#` (##4a.0!O  5  10665OITIT  7.0(#w!j݌ H Ќ  !  !0  0` (#(#    5.22ARACEDISCRIMINATIONACTUALDAMAGES(42U.S.C.1981)#!!H(#." " M` (#` (##4b.0!O  5  1076OTIT  7.0(#"!2݌ . ~ Ќ  !  !0  0` (#(#    5.22BRACEDISCRIMINATIONNOMINALDAMAGES(42U.S.C.1981)#!!H(#. N` (#` (##4d.0!O  5  1106OTIT  7.0(#!݌  d Ќ  !  !n0  0` (#(#    5.22CRACEDISCRIMINATIONPUNITIVEDAMAGES(42U.S.C.1981)#!!H(#. O` (#` (##4f.0!O  5  11169OMTIT  7.0(#{!n݌  J Ќ  !  !0  0` (#(#    5.23RACEDISCRIMINATIONVERDICTFORM(42U.S.C.1981)#!!H(#.%%J` (#` (##4g.0!O  5  1156OTIT  7.0(##!6݌  0 Ќ  !  !0  0` (#(#    5.25DISCRIMINATIONBYPUBLICEMPLOYERS(42U.S.C.1983)    IntroductoryComment#!!H(#.(` (#` (##4j.0!O  5  1176OTIT  7.0(#!݌    Ќ  !  !0  0` (#(#    5.26A(SEX)DISCRIMINATIONELEMENTS(MixedMotiveCase)   (42U.S.C.1983)#!!H(#.RR&` (#` (##4k !O  5  1186O   7 (#!݌ x  Ќ  !  !d0  0` (#(#    5.26B(SEX)DISCRIMINATIONELEMENTS(DeterminingFactor) ^  (42U.S.C.1983)#!!H(#.RR&` (#` (##4l !O  5  1206SOg   7 (#!d݌ D  Ќ  !  !50  0` (#(#    5.27AACTUALDAMAGES(42U.S.C.1983)#!!H(#.7` (#` (##4m !O  5  1216O   7 (#*!5P݌ *z  Ќ  !  !0  0` (#(#    5.27BNOMINALDAMAGES(42U.S.C.1983)#!!H(#.//8` (#` (##4n !O  5  1246~O   7 (#!݌ ` Ќ  !  !`0  0` (#(#    5.27CPUNITIVEDAMAGES(42U.S.C.1983)#!!H(#.9` (#` (##4o !O  5  1256O)   7 (#W!`{݌ F Ќ  !  !0  0` (#(#    5.28VERDICTFORM(42U.S.C.1983)#!!H(#.4` (#` (##4r !O  5  1296O   7 (#!݌ , Ќ  !  !0  0` (#(#    5.30EQUALPAYACT#!!H(#."` (#` (##4u !O  5  1316$O8   7 (#f!݌  Ќ  !  !0  0` (#(#    5.31EQUALPAYACT!ESSENTIALELEMENTS#!!H(#.&&7` (#` (##4v !O  5  1326O   7 (#!!݌  Ќ  !  !0  0` (#(#    5.32EQUALPAYACT!DEFINITION: SUBSTANTIALLYEQUAL#!!H(#.G` (#` (##4w !O  5  1346dOx   7 (#!݌  Ќ  !  !F0  0` (#(#    5.33EQUALPAYACT!AFFIRMATIVEDEFENSES#!!H(#.9` (#` (##4x !O  5  1356O   7 (#=!Fa݌ t Ќ  !  !0  0` (#(#    5.34EQUALPAYACT!ACTUALDAMAGES#!!H(#.3` (#` (##4y !O  5  1376O   7 (#!݌ Z Ќ  !  !n0  0` (#(#    5.35EQUALPAYACTVERDICTFORM#!!H(#.``1` (#` (##4{ !O  5  1396O,   7 (#Z!n݌ @ Ќ  !  !0  0` (#(#    5.40HARASSMENTCASESUNDERTITLEVII,SECTIONS1981AND1983, &v ADAANDADEAIntroductoryComment#!!H(#.''7` (#` (##4} !O  5  1416O   7 (#=!݌  \ Ќ  !  !0  0` (#(#    5.41HARASSMENT(BySupervisorWithTangibleEmploymentAction) B EssentialElements#!!H(#.PP&` (#` (##4~ !O  5  1446O   7 (#!݌ ( Ќ  !  !0  0` (#(#    5.42HARASSMENT(BySupervisorWithNoTangibleEmploymentAction)  EssentialElements#!!H(#.PP&` (#` (##4 !O  5  1486O   7 (#!݌  Ќ  !  !0  0` (#(#    5.42AAFFIRMATIVEDEFENSE   (ForUseinSupervisorCasesWithNoTangibleEmploymentAction)#!!H(#.AAT` (#` (##4 !O  5  1536}O   7 (#!݌ p!  Ќ  !  !_0  0` (#(#    5.43HARASSMENT(ByNonsupervisor)EssentialElements#!!H(#.F` (#` (##4 !O  5  1556O2   7 (#`!_z݌ V"! Ќ  !  !0  0` (#(#    5.44AHARASSMENTACTUALDAMAGESCommentary#!!H(#.==>` (#` (##4 !O  5  1586O   7 (#!݌ <#" Ќ  !  !0  0` (#(#    5.44BHARASSMENTNOMINALDAMAGESCommentary#!!H(#.?` (#` (##4 !O  5  1596QOe   7 (#!݌ "$r# Ќ  !  !30  0` (#(#    5.44CHARASSMENTPUNITIVEDAMAGESCommentary#!!H(#.@` (#` (##4!O  5  1606O  7(#.!3N݌ %X $ Ќ  !  !0  0` (#(#    5.50AMERICANSWITHDISABILITIESACT( ADA)(EmploymentCasesOnly) %>!% Introduction#!!H(#.? ? ` (#` (##4!O  5  1616O  7(#!݌ &$"& Ќ  !  !0  0` (#(#    5.51AADADISPARATETREATMENTELEMENTS(ActualDisability)#!!H(#.N` (#` (##4!O  5  1706mO  7(#!݌ ' #' Ќ  !  !O0  0` (#(#    5.51BADADISPARATETREATMENTELEMENTS(PerceivedDisability)#!!H(#. Q` (#` (##4!O  5  1736O-  7(#[!Oj݌ (#( Ќ  !  !0  0` (#(#    5.51A/B(1)ADADISPARATETREATMENT SAMEDECISION#!!H(#.rrD` (#` (##4!O  5  1766O  7(#!݌ )$) Ќ  !  !0  0` (#(#    5.51CADAREASONABLEACCOMMODATIONCASES l*%* (SpecificAccommodationIdentified)#!!H(#.7` (#` (##4!O  5  1776O  7(#!݌ R+&+ Ќ  !  !n 0  0` (#(#    5.52AADADEFINITION:DISABILITY#!!H(#.3` (#` (##4!O  5  1826 O.   7(#\ !n  ݌ 8,', Ќ  !  ! 0  0` (#(#    5.52BADADEFINITION:ESSENTIALFUNCTIONS#!!H(#.ii<` (#` (##4!O  5  1836 O   7(# !  ݌  Ќ  !  ! 0  0` (#(#    5.52CADADEFINITION:SUBSTANTIALLYLIMITS#!!H(#.=` (#` (##4!O  5  1856I O]   7(# !  ݌  Ќ  !  !+0  0` (#(#    5.53A UNDUEHARDSHIPSTATUTORYDEFENSE#!!H(#.:` (#` (##4!O  5  1866O  7(#&!+F݌ | Ќ  !  !0  0` (#(#    5.53B DIRECTTHREATSTATUTORYDEFENSE#!!H(#.9` (#` (##4!O  5  1886~O  7(#!݌ b Ќ  !  !`0  0` (#(#    5.54AACTUALDAMAGESADA#!!H(#.*` (#` (##4!O  5  1906O  7(#E!`{݌ H Ќ  !  !0  0` (#(#    5.54BNOMINALDAMAGESADA#!!H(#.bb+` (#` (##4!O  5  1946O  7(#!݌ . ~ Ќ  !  !k0  0` (#(#    5.54CPUNITIVEDAMAGESADA#!!H(#.LL,` (#` (##4!O  5  1956O$  7(#R!k݌  d Ќ  !  !0  0` (#(#    5.55 GOODFAITHDEFENSETOCOMPENSATORYANDPUNITIVE  J DAMAGES#!!H(#.; ; ` (#` (##4!O  5  2006O  7(#! ݌  0 Ќ  !  !0  0` (#(#    5.56BUSINESSJUDGMENT#!!H(#.&` (#` (##4!O  5  2016TOh  7(#!݌    Ќ  !  !60  0` (#(#    5.57CONSTRUCTIVEDISCHARGE#!!H(#.aa+` (#` (##4!O  5  2026O  7(#!6Q݌    Ќ  !  !0  0` (#(#    5.60RETALIATIONUNDEREMPLOYMENTDISCRIMINATIONSTATUTES   IntroductoryComment#!!H(#.(` (#` (##4!O  5  2036O  7(#!݌ x  Ќ  !  !0  0` (#(#    5.61RETALIATIONFORPARTICIPATIONIN ^  PROCEEDINGSUNDEREMPLOYMENTSTATUTES#!!H(#.UU9` (#` (##4!O  5  2066sO  7(#!݌ D  Ќ  !  !U0  0` (#(#    5.62RETALIATIONFOROPPOSITION *z  TOHARASSMENTORDISCRIMINATION#!!H(#.3` (#` (##4!O  5  20863OG  7(#u!Up݌ ` Ќ  Vm  Vm 0     5.63RETALIATIONTHIRDPARTYREPRISAL#!!H(#.OO2(#(##43!O  5  2106 O  (#`  73(# Vm 1 ݌ , Ќ  Vm  Vm!0     5.64RETALIATIONTHIRDPARTYREPRISALFOROPPOSITIONTOHARASSMENT  ORDISCRIMINATION#!!H(#. (#(##43!O  5  2136s"O" (#`  73(#"Vm!!݌  Ќ  !  !U#0  0` (#(#    5.70FIRSTAMENDMENTRETALIATION(42U.S.C.1983) t IntroductoryComment#!!H(#.(` (#` (##43!O  5  2166>$OR$ (#`  73(#$!U#p#݌ Z Ќ  !  ! %0  0` (#(#    5.71FIRSTAMENDMENTRETALIATIONELEMENTS(42U.S.C.1983)#!!H(#.q q N` (#` (##43!O  5  2176%O% (#`  73(#,&! %;%݌ @ Ќ  !  !&0  0` (#(#    5.71AFIRSTAMENDMENTRETALIATIONSPECIALINTERROGATORIES &v ЀREGARDING"PROTECTEDSPEECH"BALANCINGISSUES  \ (42U.S.C.1983)#!!H(#.RR&` (#` (##43!O  5  2236(O( (#`  73(#B(!&&݌ B Ќ  !  !(0  0` (#(#    5.72AFIRSTAMENDMENTRETALIATIONACTUALDAMAGES ( (42U.S.C.1983)#!!H(#.RR&` (#` (##43!O  5  2256)O) (#`  73(# *!((݌  Ќ  !  !*0  0` (#(#    5.72BFIRSTAMENDMENTRETALIATIONNOMINALDAMAGES  (42U.S.C.1983)#!!H(#.RR&` (#` (##43!O  5  2286+O+ (#`  73(#+!**݌   Ќ  !  !u,0  0` (#(#    5.72CFIRSTAMENDMENTRETALIATIONPUNITIVEDAMAGES p!  (42U.S.C.1983)#!!H(#.RR&` (#` (##43!O  5  2296]-Oq- (#`  73(#-!u,,݌ V"! Ќ  !  !?.0  0` (#(#    5.73FIRSTAMENDMENTRETALIATIONVERDICTFORM <#" (42U.S.C.1983)#!!H(#.RR&` (#` (##43!O  5  2336#/O7/ (#`  73(#e/!?.Z.݌ "$r# Ќ  !  !00  0` (#(#    5.73AFIRSTAMENDMENTRETALIATIONSPECIAL %X $ INTERROGATORIESON BALANCINGISSUES(42U.S.C.1983)#!!H(#.Y Y L` (#` (##43!O  5  23561O%1 (#`  73(#S1!0 0݌ %>!% Ќ  !  !10  0` (#(#    5.80FAMILYANDMEDICALLEAVEACT(FMLA)(29U.S.C.26012654) &$"& Introduction#!!H(#.? ? ` (#` (##43!O  5  23762O2 (#`  73(#)3!12݌ ' #' Ќ  !  !30  0` (#(#    5.81AFMLAWRONGFULTERMINATIONELEMENTS (#( (EmployeewithaSeriousHealthCondition)#!!H(#.YY>` (#` (##43!O  5  24564O4 (#`  73(#5!33݌ )$) Ќ  !  !50  0` (#(#    5.81BFMLAWRONGFULTERMINATIONELEMENTS l*%* (EmployeeNeededtoCareforSpouse,Parent,Son R+&+ orDaughterwithaSeriousHealthCondition#!!H(#.ii?` (#` (##43!O  5  24866O6 (#`  73(#7!55݌ 8,', Ќ  _!  !70  0` (#(#    5.81CFMLAWRONGFULTERMINATIONELEMENTS  (EmployeeLeaveforBirth,AdoptionorFosterCare)#!!H(#.G` (#` (##43!O  5  25268O8 (#`  73(#9!77݌  Ќ  !  !90  0` (#(#    5.81DFMLAWRONGFULTERMINATIONELEMENTS | (QualifyingExigencyLeaveRelatedtoCoveredMilitaryMember)#!!H(#.ddR` (#` (##43!O  5  2566:O: (#`  73(#:!99݌ b Ќ  !  !;0  0` (#(#    5.81EFMLAWRONGFULTERMINATIONELEMENTS H (EmployeeNeededtoCareforCoveredServicememberwithaSeriousInjuryor . ~ Illness)#!!H(#. ` (#` (##43!O  5  2606<O< (#`  73(#=!;;݌  d Ќ  !  !=0  0` (#(#    5.81FFMLAFAILURETOREINSTATEELEMENTS  J (EmployeewithaSeriousHealthCondition)#!!H(#.YY>` (#` (##43!O  5  2646>O> (#`  73(#>!==݌  0 Ќ  !  !?0  0` (#(#    5.81GFMLAFAILURETOREINSTATE!ELEMENTS    (EmployeeNeededtoCareforaSpouse,    SonorDaughterwithaSeriousHealthCondition)#!!H(#.D` (#` (##4?!O  5  2676@O@  7?(#A!??݌   Ќ  !  !A0  0` (#(#    5.81HFMLAFAILURETOREINSTATE!ELEMENTS x  (EmployeeLeaveforBirth,AdoptionorFosterCare)#!!H(#.G` (#` (##4?!O  5  2706BOB  7?(#B!AA݌ ^  Ќ  !  !C0  0` (#(#    5.81IFMLA!FAILURETOREINSTATEELEMENTS D  (QualifyingExigencyLeaveRelatedtoCoveredMilitaryMember)#!!H(#.ddR` (#` (##4?!O  5  2736DOD  7?(#D!CC݌ *z  Ќ  !  !tE0  0` (#(#    5.81JFMLA!FAILURETOREINSTATEELEMENTS ` (EmployeeNeededtoCareforCoveredServicemember F withaSeriousInjuryorIllness)#!!H(#.PP5` (#` (##4?!O  5  2766FOF  7?(#F!tEE݌ , Ќ  !  !G0  0` (#(#    5.82FMLA SAMEDECISION#!!H(#.OO+` (#` (##4?!O  5  27968HOLH  7?(#zH!GG݌  Ќ  !  !I0  0` (#(#    5.83AFMLADEFINITION: NEEDEDTOCAREFOR#!!H(#.<<>` (#` (##4?!O  5  2806IOI  7?(#J!I5I݌  Ќ  !  !J0  0` (#(#    5.83BFMLADEFINITION: SERIOUSHEALTHCONDITION#!!H(#.D` (#` (##4?!O  5  2826|KOK  7?(#K!JJ݌  Ќ  !  !^L0  0` (#(#    5.83CFMLADEFINITION: SERIOUSHEALTHCONDITION(alternate)#!!H(#.] ] P` (#` (##4?!O  5  2836-MOAM  7?(#oM!^LyL݌ t Ќ  !  !N0  0` (#(#    5.83DFMLADEFINITION: HEALTHCAREPROVIDER#!!H(#.bb@` (#` (##4?!O  5  2866NON  7?(#O!N*N݌ Z Ќ  !  !O0  0` (#(#    5.83EFMLADEFINITION: TIMELYNOTICELEAVEFORESEEABLE#!!H(#. M` (#` (##4?!O  5  2876|POP  7?(#P!OO݌ @ Ќ  !  !^Q0  0` (#(#    5.83FFMLADEFINITION: TIMELYNOTICELEAVEUNFORESEEABLE &v #!!H(#.` ` ` (#` (##4?!O  5  2886BROVR  7?(#R!^QyQ݌  \ Ќ  !  !$S0  0` (#(#    5.83GFMLADEFINITION: EQUIVALENTPOSITION#!!H(#.?` (#` (##4?!O  5  2896SOS  7?(#$T!$S?S݌ B Ќ  !  !T0  0` (#(#    5.83HFMLA!DEFINITION: QUALIFYINGEXIGENCY#!!H(#.?` (#` (##4?!O  5  2906UOU  7?(#U!TT݌ ( Ќ  !  !gV0  0` (#(#    5.83IFMLA!DEFINITION: NEXTOFKINFORLEAVETOCARE  FORACOVEREDSERVICEMEMBERWITHASERIOUSINJURYOR  ILLNESS#!!H(#.  ` (#` (##4?!O  5  2926WOW  7?(#W!gVV݌   Ќ  !  !{X0  0` (#(#    5.83JFMLA!DEFINITION: COVEREDSERVICEMEMBER p!  FORLEAVETOCAREFORACOVEREDSERVICEMEMBER V"! WITHASERIOUSINJURYORILLNESS#!!H(#...4` (#` (##4?!O  5  2936YOY  7?(#Y!{XX݌ <#" Ќ  !  !Z0  0` (#(#    5.83KFMLA!DEFINITION: SERIOUSINJURYORILLNESS "$r# FORLEAVETOCAREFORACOVEREDSERVICEMEMBER %X $ WITHASERIOUSINJURYORILLNESS#!!H(#...4` (#` (##4?!O  5  2946[O[  7?(#\!ZZ݌ %>!% Ќ  !  !\0  0` (#(#    5.83LFMLA!DEFINITION: CONTINGENCYOPERATION#!!H(#.@` (#` (##4?!O  5  2956]O]  7?(#]!\\݌ &$"& Ќ  !  !c^0  0` (#(#    5.83MFMLADEFINITION: ASSOONASPRACTICABLE#!!H(#.B` (#` (##4IT!O  5  2966$_O8_N:  7IT(#f_!c^~^݌ ' #' Ќ  !  !`0  0` (#(#    5.84FMLAEXCEPTIONTOJOBRESTORATION(KeyEmployee)#!!H(#.G` (#` (##4IT!O  5  2976`O`N:  7IT(#a!`!`݌ (#( Ќ  !  !a0  0` (#(#    5.84AFMLAEXCEPTIONTOJOBRESTORATION )$) (EmployeewouldnothavebeenEmployedatTimeofReinstatement)#!!H(#.MMT` (#` (##4IT!O  5  2986bObN:  7IT(#b!aa݌ l*%* Ќ  !  !c0  0` (#(#    5.85FMLAACTUALDAMAGES#!!H(#.*` (#` (##4IT!O  5  29965dOIdN:  7IT(#wd!cc݌ R+&+ Ќ  !  !e0  0` (#(#    5.87FMLAVERDICTFORM#!!H(#.ee(` (#` (##4IT!O  5  3026eOeN:  7IT(#e!e2e݌ 8,', Ќ  !  !f0  0` (#(#    5.90MISCELLANEOUSINSTRUCTIONS  ANDSPECIALINTERROGATORIES#!!H(#./` (#` (##4IT!O  5  3036tgOgN:  7IT(#g!ff݌  Ќ  !  !Vh0  0` (#(#    5.92SPECIALINTERROGATORIESTOELICITFINDINGS | INBORDERLINEPRETEXT/MIXEDMOTIVECASES#!!H(#.<` (#` (##4IT!O  5  3046MiOaiN:  7IT(#i!Vhqh݌ b Ќ  !  !/j0  0` (#(#    5.93CONSTRUCTIVEDISCHARGE#!!H(#.aa+` (#` (##4IT!O  5  3086jOjN:  7IT(#k!/jJj݌ H Ќ  !  !k0  0` (#(#    5.94BUSINESSJUDGMENTTITLEVIICASES#!!H(#.8` (#` (##4IT!O  5  3106flOzlN:  7IT(#l!kk݌ . ~ Ќ  !  !Hm0  0` (#(#    5.95PRETEXT#!!H(#.6 6 ` (#` (##4IT!O  5  3116mOmN:  7IT(#n!Hmcm݌  d Ќ  !  !n0  0` (#(#    5.96DEFINITIONOFMOTIVATINGFACTOR#!!H(#.4` (#` (##4IT!O  5  3136loOoN:  7IT(#o!nn݌  J Ќ  !  !Np0  0` (#(#    5.97AFTERACQUIREDEVIDENCE#!!H(#.,` (#` (##4IT!O  5  3146pOqN:  7IT(#5q!Npip݌  0 Ќ  !  !q0  0` (#(#    5.97AMODIFIEDVERDICTFORM    INAFTERACQUIREDEVIDENCECASES#!!H(#.4` (#` (##4IT!O  5  3166rOrN:  7IT(#r!qq݌    Ќ  Vm  Vms0     6.FRAUDCASES #!!H(#.  (#(##4IT!O  5  3196tO0tN:  7IT(#^tVmss݌ x  Ќ  !  !t0  0` (#(#    6.01FRAUDODOMETER#!!H(#.jj%` (#` (##4IT!O  5  3206uOuN:  7IT(#u!tu݌ ^  Ќ  !  !~v0  0` (#(#    6.51ODOMETERFRAUDDAMAGES#!!H(#.ww-` (#` (##4IT!O  5  3226$wO8wN:  7IT(#fw!~vv݌ D  Ќ  !  !x0  0` (#(#    6.51AODOMETERFRAUD! *z  VerdictForm#!!H(#. ` (#` (##4IT!O  5  3236xOxN:  7IT(# y!x!x݌ ` Ќ  Vm  Vmy0     7.FEDERALEMPLOYERSLIABILITYACT , Introduction #!!H(#.J J (#(##4IT!O  5  3246pzOzN:  7IT(#zVmyy݌  Ќ  !  !R{0  0` (#(#    7.01GENERALF.E.L.A.NEGLIGENCE#!!H(#.||0` (#` (##4IT!O  5  3286{O|N:  7IT(#=|!R{m{݌  Ќ  !  !|0  0` (#(#    7.02DEFENSETHEORYINSTRUCTIONSTHREEOPTIONS  IntroductionandCommitteeComments#!!H(#.7` (#` (##4IT!O  5  3336}O}N:  7IT(#~!||݌ t Ќ  !  !~0  0` (#(#    7.02AFAILUREOFPROOFONANYELEMENTOF Z THEPLAINTIFFSCASELISTEDINTHEELEMENTS#!!H(#.?` (#` (##4!O  5  3356OЌ  7(#!~~݌ @ Ќ  !  !0  0` (#(#    7.02BFAILURETOPROVEANYFACT &v ESSENTIALTOTHEPLAINTIFF'SRIGHTTORECOVER#!!H(#.A` (#` (##4!O  5  3376uOЌ  7(#!݌  \ Ќ  !  !W0  0` (#(#    7.02CDEFENSETHEORYINSTRUCTIONSAFFIRMATIVEDEFENSES#!!H(#.H` (#` (##4!O  5  3406O,Ќ  7(#Z!Wr݌ B Ќ  !  !0  0` (#(#    7.03F.E.L.A.CONTRIBUTORYNEGLIGENCE#!!H(#.5` (#` (##4!O  5  3416OЌ  7(#!݌ ( Ќ  !  !0  0` (#(#    7.04F.E.L.A.BOILERINSPECTIONACTVIOLATION#!!H(#.=` (#` (##4!O  5  3436@OTЌ  7(#!݌  Ќ  !  !"0  0` (#(#    7.05F.E.L.A.SAFETYAPPLIANCEACTVIOLATION#!!H(#.bb<` (#` (##4!O  5  3476ׇOЌ  7(#!"=݌  Ќ  !  !0  0` (#(#    7.06AF.E.L.A.DAMAGESINJURYTOEMPLOYEE#!!H(#.&&;` (#` (##4!O  5  3516mOЌ  7(#!Ԉ݌   Ќ  !  !O0  0` (#(#    7.06BF.E.L.A.DAMAGESDEATHOFEMPLOYEE#!!H(#.:` (#` (##4!O  5  3546OЌ  7(#D!Oj݌ p!  Ќ  !  !0  0` (#(#    7.06CF.E.L.A.DAMAGESPRESENTVALUEOFFUTURELOSS#!!H(#.zzE` (#` (##4!O  5  3576OЌ  7(#!݌ V"! Ќ  !  !0  0` (#(#    7.06DF.E.L.A.DAMAGESINCOMETAXEFFECTSOFAWARD#!!H(#.ppD` (#` (##4!O  5  3586AOUЌ  7(#!݌ <#" Ќ  !  !#0  0` (#(#    7.08FORMOFVERDICTCONTRIBUTORYNEGLIGENCESUBMITTED#!!H(#.Q Q H` (#` (##4!O  5  3596OЌ  7(#&!#>݌ "$r# Ќ  !  !Ɛ0  0` (#(#    7.08AFORMOFVERDICT %X $ CONTRIBUTORYNEGLIGENCENOTSUBMITTED#!!H(#.9` (#` (##4!O  5  3626OЌ  7(#!Ɛ݌ %>!% Ќ  !  !0  0` (#(#    7.09DEFINITIONOFTERM NEGLIGENTOR NEGLIGENCE#!!H(#...C` (#` (##4!O  5  3636LO`Ќ  7(#!݌ &$"& Ќ  !  !.0  0` (#(#    7.10DEFINITIONOFTHETERM ORDINARYCARE#!!H(#.;` (#` (##4!O  5  3646OЌ  7(#*!.I݌ ' #' Ќ  _!  !ڕ0  0` (#(#    7.11DEFINITIONSOFTHETERMS NEGLIGENT (#( OR NEGLIGENCEAND ORDINARYCARECOMBINED#!!H(#.@` (#` (##4!O  5  3656OЌ  7(##!ڕ݌ )$)   Vm l*%*   Vm͗0     8.ADMIRALTYINSTRUCTIONS   Introduction #!!H(#.J J (#(##4!O  5  3666OЌ  7(#Vm͗݌ |   !  !0  0` (#(#    8.10NEGLIGENCECLAIMUNDERTHEJONESACT#!!H(#.QQ9` (#` (##4!O  5  3756DOXЌ  7(#!݌ b Ќ  !  !&0  0` (#(#    8.10ANEGLIGENCECLAIMUNDERTHEJONESACTELEMENTS#!!H(#.zzD` (#` (##4!O  5  3766OЌ  7(#%!&A݌ H Ќ  !  !Ŝ0  0` (#(#    8.11JONESACT COURSEOFEMPLOYMENTDEFINED#!!H(#.>` (#` (##4!O  5  3786OЌ  7(#ĝ!Ŝ݌ . ~ Ќ  !  !d0  0` (#(#    8.12JONESACT NEGLIGENCEDEFINED#!!H(#.4` (#` (##4!O  5  3796O+  7(#Y!d݌  d Ќ  !  !0  0` (#(#    8.13JONESACTCAUSATION#!!H(#.)` (#` (##4!O  5  3806O  7(#ݠ!݌  J Ќ  !  !}0  0` (#(#    8.14JONESACTCONTRIBUTORYNEGLIGENCE  0 (COMPARATIVEFAULT)#!!H(#.=='` (#` (##4!O  5  3826WOk  7(#!}݌    Ќ  !  !90  0` (#(#    8.15 SEAMANDEFINED#!!H(#.OO%` (#` (##4!O  5  3856ݣO  7(#!9T݌    Ќ  !  !0  0` (#(#    8.16JONESACT VESSELDEFINED#!!H(#.~~0` (#` (##4!O  5  3876nO  7(#!ڤ݌   Ќ  !  !P0  0` (#(#    8.20UNSEAWORTHINESSCLAIMAGAINSTEMPLOYER#!!H(#.$$;` (#` (##4!O  5  3886O  7(#F!Pk݌ x  Ќ  !  !0  0` (#(#    8.21UNSEAWORTHINESSCLAIMAGAINSTEMPLOYERELEMENTS#!!H(#.E` (#` (##4!O  5  3896O  7(#!݌ ^  Ќ  !  !0  0` (#(#    8.22UNSEAWORTHINESSCLAIM!CAUSATION#!!H(#.4` (#` (##4!O  5  39066OJ  7(#x!݌ D  Ќ  !  !0  0` (#(#    8.30LONGSHOREANDHARBORWORKERS'COMPENSATIONACT *z  905(b)TURNOVERCLAIMNEGLIGENCESTANDARD#!!H(#.B` (#` (##4!O  5  3926O/  7(#]!3݌ ` Ќ  !  !0  0` (#(#    8.31LONGSHOREANDHARBORWORKERS'COMPENSATIONACT F 905(b)TURNOVERCLAIMELEMENTSOFCLAIM#!!H(#.II@` (#` (##4!O  5  3946O  7(#@!݌ , Ќ  !  !0  0` (#(#    8.32 MARITIMEEMPLOYMENTDEFINED#!!H(#.2` (#` (##4!O  5  3966O  7(#ӯ!݌  Ќ  !  !s0  0` (#(#    8.33LONGSHOREANDHARBORWORKERS'COMPENSATIONACT   COVEREDPLACEOFINJURYDEFINED#!!H(#.5` (#` (##4!O  5  3986mO  7(#!s݌  Ќ  !  !O0  0` (#(#    8.34 NAVIGABLEWATERSDEFINED#!!H(#./` (#` (##4!O  5  3996O  7(#?!Oj݌ t Ќ  !  !߳0  0` (#(#    8.35[DELETED]#!!H(#.h h !` (#` (##4!O  5  4006yO  7(#!߳݌ Z Ќ  !  ![0  0` (#(#    8.40GENERALMARITIMELAWNONEMPLOYEEINVITEE'S @ NEGLIGENCECLAIMELEMENTS#!!H(#..` (#` (##4!O  5  4016EOY  7(#![v݌ &v Ќ  !  !'0  0` (#(#    8.41GENERALMARITIMELAWNONEMPLOYEEINVITEE'SCLAIM  \ CONTRIBUTORYNEGLIGENCE(COMPARATIVEFAULT)#!!H(#.?` (#` (##4!O  5  4026)O=  7(#k!'B݌ B Ќ  !  ! 0  0` (#(#    8.81COMPENSATORYDAMAGES#!!H(#.55)` (#` (##4!O  5  4036O  7(#! &݌ ( Ќ  !  !0  0` (#(#    8.81ACOMPENSATORYDAMAGES  (COMPARATIVEFAULTALTERNATE)#!!H(#.1` (#` (##4 !O  5  4046fOz  7(#!݌  Ќ  !  !H0  0` (#(#    8.81BPUNITIVEDAMAGES#!!H(#.&` (#` (##4 !O  5  4056O  7(#)!Hc݌   Ќ  !  !ɽ0  0` (#(#    8.82PRESENTVALUEOFFUTUREDAMAGES#!!H(#.yy4` (#` (##4 !O  5  4076vO  7(#!ɽ݌ p!  Ќ  !  !X0  0` (#(#    8.84DUTYTOMINIMIZEDAMAGES#!!H(#.  -` (#` (##44!O  5  4106O  74(#@!Xs݌ V"! Ќ  !  !0  0` (#(#    8.85 MAINTENANCEAND CUREDEFINED#!!H(#.5` (#` (##44!O  5  4116O  74(#!݌ <#" Ќ  !  !|0  0` (#(#    8.86MAINTENANCEANDCURESUPPLEMENTAL#!!H(#.AA7` (#` (##44!O  5  4126,O@  74(#n!|݌ "$r# Ќ  !  !0  0` (#(#    8.90SPECIALINTERROGATORIES#!!H(#.bb,` (#` (##44!O  5  4136O  74(#!)݌ %X $ Ќ  Vm  Vm0     9.DEFINITIONS #!!H(#. (#(##44!O  5  4176O3  74(#aVm݌ &$"& Ќ  !  !0  0` (#(#    9.01AGENCY#!!H(#. ` (#` (##44!O  5  4186O  74(#!݌ ' #' Ќ  !  !w0  0` (#(#    9.02COLOROFSTATELAW(42U.S.C.1983)#!!H(#.[[:` (#` (##44!O  5  4196-OA  74(#o!w݌ (#( Ќ  !  !0  0` (#(#    9.03DELIBERATEINDIFFERENCECONVICTEDPRISONERS )$) (42U.S.C.1983)#!!H(#.RR&` (#` (##44!O  5  4206O   74(#8!*݌ l*%* Ќ  !  !0  0` (#(#    9.04MOTIVATINGFACTOR#!!H(#.  &` (#` (##44!O  5  4216wO  74(#!݌ R+&+ Ќ  Vm 8,',   VmY0     10.THEFAIRLABORSTANDARDSACT(FLSA)  Introduction #!!H(#.J J (#(##44!O  5  42462OF  74(#tVmY݌  Ќ  !  !0  0` (#(#    10.01FLSA!ELEMENTS#!!H(#.%` (#` (##44!O  5  4296O  74(#!/݌ | Ќ  !  !0  0` (#(#    10.02FLSA! HOURSWORKEDDEFINITION#!!H(#.pp6` (#` (##44!O  5  4306OOc  74(#!݌ b Ќ  !  !10  0` (#(#    10.03FLSA!DETERMININGHOURSWORKED#!!H(#.5` (#` (##44!O  5  4326O  74(#$!1L݌ H Ќ  !  !0  0` (#(#    10.04FLSA!MINIMUMWAGE#!!H(#.##)` (#` (##44!O  5  4336iO}  74(#!݌ . ~ Ќ  !  !K0  0` (#(#    10.05FLSA!MINIMUMWAGECREDITFORBOARDANDLODGING#!!H(#.iiF` (#` (##44!O  5  4346 O!  74(#O!Kf݌  d Ќ  !  !0  0` (#(#    10.06FLSA!OVERTIMECOMPENSATION#!!H(#.442` (#` (##4 4!O  5  4356O  74(#! ݌  J Ќ  !  !0  0` (#(#    10.07FLSA!WORKWEEKDEFINITION#!!H(#.0` (#` (##4!4!O  5  4366+O?  74(#m!݌  0 Ќ  !  ! 0  0` (#(#    10.20FLSA!EXECUTIVEEMPLOYEEEXEMPTION#!!H(#.MM9` (#` (##4"4!O  5  4376O  74(#! (݌    Ќ  !  !0  0` (#(#    10.21FLSA!ADMINISTRATIVEEMPLOYEEEXEMPTION#!!H(#.>` (#` (##4#4!O  5  4396^Or  74(#!݌    Ќ  !  !@0  0` (#(#    10.22FLSA!LEARNEDPROFESSIONALEXEMPTION#!!H(#.;` (#` (##4$4!O  5  4426O   74(#9!@[݌   Ќ  !  !0  0` (#(#    10.23FLSA!CREATIVEPROFESSIONALEXEMPTION#!!H(#.WW<` (#` (##4%!O  5  4446O  7(#!݌ x  Ќ  !  !s0  0` (#(#    10.24FLSA!COMPUTEREMPLOYEEEXEMPTION#!!H(#.,,8` (#` (##4&!O  5  4466'O;  7(#i!s݌ ^  Ќ  !  ! 0  0` (#(#    10.30FLSA!SALARYBASIS#!!H(#.dd)` (#` (##4'!O  5  4486O  7(#! $݌ D  Ќ  !  !0  0` (#(#    10.40FLSA!DAMAGES#!!H(#.$` (#` (##4(!O  5  45060OD  7(#r!݌ *z  Ќ  !  !0  0` (#(#    10.41FLSA!DAMAGES(ONLYHOURSWORKEDSUBMITTED!-݌`` (#` (# Ќ  !  !0  0` (#(#     ` TO_JURY)_#!!H(#.  ` (#` (##4)!O  5  4516O  7(#! ݌ F Ќ  !  !0  0` (#(#    10.42FLSA!WILLFULVIOLATION#!!H(#..` (#` (##4*!O  5  45268OL  7(#z!݌ , Ќ  !  !0  0` (#(#    10.43FLSAGENERALVERDICTFORM#!!H(#.[[1` (#` (##4+!O  5  4536O  7(#!5݌  Ќ  !  !0  0` (#(#    10.44FLSASPECIALINTERROGATORIES(DAMAGES)#!!H(#.>` (#` (##4,!O  5  4556]Oq  7(#!݌  Ќ  !  !?0  0` (#(#    10.45FLSASPECIALINTERROGATORIES(HOURSWORKED)#!!H(#.OOC` (#` (##4-!O  5  4596O  7(#=!?Z݌  Ќ  m0   ` _   `     h _  >!     D0  8t&XdXXd8@xx % .  1.PRELIMINARYINSTRUCTIONSFORUSEATCOMMENCEMENTOFTRIAL  0 @  IntroductoryComment 8"Ԉ     Thesepreliminaryinstructionsshouldbereadtothejuryatthecommencementoftrial. b Theyneednotbesubmittedinwrittenformevenifotherinstructionsaregiveninwrittenformat H thetimethecaseissubmittedtothejury. .     (InstructionNo.0.01shouldbereadtothejurypanelbeforevoirdireandInstructionNo.    0.02shouldbereadattheendofvoirdire.)  m   r8tXXd&Xd8 @/ /  % /  0.01INSTRUCTIONSBEFOREVOIRDIRE er  ^   MembersoftheJuryPanel,ifyouhaveacellphone,PDA,Blackberry,smartphone, * _iPhone_Ԁandanyotherwirelesscommunicationdevicewithyou,pleasetakeitoutnowandturnit  % off.Donotturnittovibrationorsilent;poweritdown.[Duringjuryselection,youmustleave  ~ itoff.](Pauseforthirtysecondstoallowthemtocomply,thentellthemthefollowing:) 5    Ifyouareselectedasajuror,(brieflyadvisejurorsofyourcourtsrulesconcerning  0  cellphones,camerasandanyrecordingdevices).     Iunderstandyoumaywanttotellyourfamily,closefriends,andotherpeopleaboutyour @  participationinthistrialsothatyoucanexplainwhenyouarerequiredtobeincourt,andyou ;  shouldwarnthemnottoaskyouaboutthiscase,tellyouanythingtheyknoworthinktheyknow   aboutit,ordiscussthiscaseinyourpresence.Youmustnotpostanyinformationonasocial K  network,orcommunicatewithanyone,abouttheparties,witnesses,participants,[claims] F [charges],evidence,oranythingelserelatedtothiscase,ortellanyoneanythingaboutthejurys  deliberationsinthiscaseuntilafterIacceptyourverdictoruntilIgiveyouspecificpermission V todoso.Ifyoudiscussthecasewithsomeoneotherthantheotherjurorsduringdeliberations, Q youmaybeinfluencedinyourverdictbytheiropinions.Thatwouldnotbefairtotheparties  anditwouldresultinaverdictthatisnotbasedontheevidenceandthelaw. a    Whileyouareinthecourthouseanduntilyouaredischargedinthiscase,donotprovide \" anyinformationtoanyonebyanymeansaboutthiscase.Thus,forexample,donottalk $ face-to-faceoruseanyelectronicdeviceormedia,suchasthetelephone,acellorsmartphone, l & camera,recordingdevice,Blackberry,PDA,computer,theInternet,anyInternetservice,any !g( textorinstantmessagingservice,anyInternetchatroom,blog,orWebsitesuchasFacebook, #* MySpace,YouTube,orTwitter,orinanyotherwaycommunicatetoanyoneanyinformation w$, aboutthiscaseuntilIacceptyourverdictoruntilyouhavebeenexcusedasajuror. %r.   DonotdoanyresearchontheInternet,inlibraries,inthenewspapers,orinanyother )' 0 wayormakeanyinvestigationaboutthiscaseonyourown.Donotvisitorviewanyplace ($"2 discussedinthiscaseanddonotuseInternetprogramsorotherdevicetosearchforortoview )}#4 anyplacediscussedinthetestimony.Also,donotresearchanyinformationaboutthiscase,the 4+$6 _law,orthepeopleinvolved,includingtheparties,thewitnesses,thelawyers,orthejudgeuntil ^ youhavebeenexcusedasjurors. Y   Thepartieshavearighttohavethiscasedecidedonlyonevidencetheyknowaboutand   thathasbeenpresentedhereincourt.Ifyoudosomeresearchorinvestigationorexperiment i  thatwedontknowabout,thenyourverdictmaybeinfluencedbyinaccurate,incompleteor  d misleadinginformationthathasnotbeentestedbythetrialprocess,includingtheoathtotellthe    truthandbycrossexamination.Eachofthepartiesisentitledtoafairtrial,renderedbyan t  impartialjury,andyoumustconductyourselfsoastomaintaintheintegrityofthetrialprocess. o  Ifyoudecideacasebasedoninformationnotpresentedincourt,youwillhavedeniedtheparties &  afairtrialinaccordancewiththerulesofthiscountryandyouwillhavedoneaninjustice.Itis !  veryimportantthatyouabidebytheserules.Failuretofollowtheseinstructionscouldresultin z  thecasehavingtoberetried. 1   [Arethereanyofyouwhocannotorwillnotabidebytheserulesconcerning , communicationwithothersduringthistrial?][Failuretofollowtheserulescanresultinyou  beingheldincontempt.](Andthencontinuewithothervoirdire.)  < r8tXdXXd8@  % 0  0.02INSTRUCTIONSATENDOFVOIRDIRE  l  ^   Duringthisrecess,andeveryotherrecess,donotdiscussthiscaseamongyourselvesor * withanyoneelse,includingyourfamilyandfriends.Donotallowanyonetodiscussthecase  % withyouorwithinyourhearing. Donotdiscussalsomeansdonotemail,sendtextmessages,  ~ blogorengageinanyotherformofwritten,oralorelectroniccommunication,asIinstructed 5  youbefore.  0    Donotreadanynewspaperorotherwrittenaccount,watchanytelevisedaccount,or   listentoanyradioprogramonthesubjectofthistrial.DonotconductanyInternetresearchor @  consultwithanyothersourcesaboutthiscase,thepeopleinvolvedinthecase,oritsgeneral ;  subjectmatter.Youmustkeepyourmindopenandfreeofoutsideinformation.Onlyinthis   waywillyoubeabletodecidethecasefairlybasedsolelyontheevidenceandmyinstructions K  onthelaw.Ifyoudecidethiscaseonanythingelse,youwillhavedoneaninjustice.Itisvery F importantthatyoufollowtheseinstructions.    Imaynotrepeatthesethingstoyoubeforeeveryrecess,butkeeptheminminduntilyou V aredischarged._  Q 8tXdXd8@) )  % 1  1.01GENERAL:NATUREOFCASE;BURDENOFPROOF; ^ @!!DUTYOFJURY;CAUTIONARY    D   LadiesandGentlemen:\XXtIamnowgoingtogiveyousomeinstructionsaboutthis   caseandaboutyourdutiesasjurors.AttheendofthetrialIwillgiveyoumore  ) instructions.Imayalsogiveyouinstructionsduringthetrial.Allinstructions-thoseI   giveyounowandthoseIgiveyoulater-[whethertheyareinwritingorgiventoyou u   orally]!areequallyimportantandyoumustfollowthemall.     [Describeyourcourtspolicy,suchas Youmustleaveyourcellphone,PDA, c  smartphone,_iPhone_,tabletcomputer,andanyotherwirelesscommunicationdevices]in |  thejuryroomduringthetrialandmayonlyusethemduringbreaks.However,youare Q  notallowedtohavethosedevicesinthejuryroomduringyourdeliberations.Youmay j givethemtothe[bailiff][deputyclerk][courtsecurityofficer]forsafekeepingjustbefore ? youstarttodeliberate.Theywillbereturnedtoyouwhenyourdeliberationsare X complete.] -   [Thisisacivilcasebroughtbytheplaintiff[s]againstthedefendant[s].[Describe F thepartiesclaimsanddefenses;counterclaimsanddefensestothecounterclaims.]Itwill  beyourdutytodecidefromtheevidence[whichpartyisentitledtoyourverdict[s]] 4 [whethertheplaintiff[s]is[are]entitledtoaverdictagainstthedefendant[s].]  !   Yourdutyistodecidewhatthefactsarefromtheevidence.Youareallowedto  "# considertheevidenceinthelightofyourownobservationsandexperiences.Afteryou !% havedecidedwhatthefactsare,youwillhavetoapplythosefactstothelaw,whichI n#' giveyouintheseandinmyotherinstructions.Thatishowyouwillreachyourverdict. $) Onlyyouwilldecidewhatthefactsare.However,youmustfollowmyinstructions, \&+ whetheryouagreewiththemornot.YouhavetakenanoathtofollowthelawthatIgive 'u!-  youinmyinstructions. J)"/ _  Indecidingwhatthefactsare,youmayhavetodecidewhattestimonyyoubelieve ^ andwhattestimonyyoudonotbelieve.Youmaybelieveallofwhatawitnesssays,or w onlypartofit,ornoneofit. L     Indecidingwhattestimonytobelieve,considerthewitnessesintelligence,their  e opportunitytohaveseenorheardthethingstheytestifyabout,theirmemories,any :  reasonstheymighthavetotestifyacertainway,howtheyactwhiletestifying,whether  S  theysaidsomethingdifferentatanothertime,whethertheirtestimonyisgenerally (  reasonable,andhowconsistenttheirtestimonyiswithotherevidencethatyoubelieve. A    Donotletsympathy,oryourownlikesordislikes,influenceyou.Thelaw   requiresyoutocometoajustverdictbasedonlyontheevidence,yourcommonsense, /  andthelawthatIgiveyouinmyinstructions,andnothingelse.    NothingIsayordoduringthistrialismeanttosuggestwhat[Ithinkofthe { evidenceor]Ithinkyourverdictshouldbe.#XtX\ #    i  @ % 2  1.02EVIDENCE;LIMITATIONS   ^ \XXt  WhenIusetheword evidence,Imeanthetestimonyofwitnesses;documents Y andotherthingsIreceiveasexhibits;factsthatItellyouthepartieshaveagreedaretrue; .  andanyotherfactsthatItellyoutoacceptastrue.  G   Somethingsarenotevidence.Iwilltellyounowwhatisnotevidence:     1.Lawyersstatements,arguments,questions,andcommentsarenotevidence.  5    2.Documentsorotherthingsthatmightbeincourtortalkedabout,butthatIdo    notreceiveasexhibits,arenotevidence. #    3.Objectionsarenotevidence.Lawyershavearight!andsometimesaduty!to   objectwhentheybelievesomethingshouldnotbeapartofthetrial.Donotbe o  influencedonewayortheotherbyobjections.IfIsustainalawyersobjectiontoa  questionoranexhibit,thatmeansthelawdoesnotallowyoutoconsiderthat ] information.Whenthathappens,youhavetoignorethequestionortheexhibit,andyou v mustnottrytoguesswhattheinformationmighthavebeen. K   4.TestimonyandexhibitsthatIstrikefromtherecord,ortellyoutodisregard, d arenotevidence,andyoumustnotconsiderthem. 9   5.Anythingyouseeorhearaboutthiscaseoutsidethecourtroomisnot R  evidence,andyoumustnotconsiderit[unlessIspecificallytellyouotherwise]. '"   Also,Imighttellyouthatyoucanconsiderapieceofevidenceforonepurpose  @$ only,andnotforanyotherpurpose.Ifthathappens,Iwilltellyouwhatpurposeyoucan "& considertheevidenceforandwhatyouarenotallowedtoconsideritfor.[Youneedto #.( paycloseattentionwhenIgiveaninstructionaboutevidencethatyoucanconsiderfor %* onlycertainpurposes,becauseyoumightnothavethatinstructioninwritinglaterinthe z& ,  juryroom.] '!.   [Someofyoumayhaveheardtheterms directevidenceand circumstantial ^ evidence.Youshouldnotbeconcernedwiththoseterms,sincethelawmakesno w distinctionbetweentheweighttobegiventodirectandcircumstantialevidence.]#XtX\+#Ԁ L    _   e   @  % 3  1.03BENCHCONFERENCESANDRECESSES f(  ^ \XXt  Duringthetrial,Iwillsometimesneedtotalkprivatelywiththelawyers.Imay * talkwiththemhereatthebenchwhileyouareinthecourtroom,orImaycallarecess  C andletyouleavethecourtroomwhileItalkwiththelawyers.Eitherway,please   understandthatwhileyouarewaiting,weareworking.Wehavetheseconferencesto  1 makesurethatthetrialisproceedingaccordingtothelawandtoavoidconfusionor   mistakes.Wewilldowhatwecantolimitthenumberoftheseconferencesandtokeep }  themasshortaspossible.#XtX\(#     Ѐ  k   @< <  % 4  1.04NOTRANSCRIPTAVAILABLE[NOTETAKING] 6,  ^ \XXt  Attheendofthetrial,youwillhavetomakeyourdecisionbasedonwhatyou * recalloftheevidence.Youwillnothaveawrittencopyofthetestimonytoreferto.  C Becauseofthis,youhavetopaycloseattentiontothetestimonyandotherevidenceasit   ispresentedhereinthecourtroom.  1   [Ifyouwish,however,youmaytakenotestohelpyourememberwhatwitnesses   say.Ifyoudotakenotes,donotshowthemtoanyoneuntilyouandyourfellowjurors }  gotothejuryroomtodecidethecaseafteryouhaveheardandseenalloftheevidence.   Anddonotlettakingnotesdistractyoufrompayingcloseattentiontotheevidenceasit k  ispresented.TheClerkwillprovideeachofyouwithapadofpaperandapenorpencil.   Ateachrecess,leavethem__________.] Y   [Whenyouleaveatnight,yournoteswillbelockedupandwillnotbereadby r anyone.]#XtX\ޭ,# `  G __   @00 % 5  1.04AQUESTIONSBY_JURORS 1 _Ԉ ^ \XXt  Whenthelawyershavefinishedaskingalloftheirquestionsofawitness,youwill   beallowedtoaskthewitnessquestions(describeproceduretobeusedhere).Iwilltell  ) youiftherulesofevidencedonotallowaparticularquestiontobeasked.Afterallof   yourquestions,ifthereareany,thelawyersmayaskmorequestions.[Donotbe u   concernedorembarrassedifyourquestionisnotasked;sometimeseventhelawyers   questionsarenotallowed.]#XtX\[2#   c  К  |   8tXXdXd8@GG % 6  1.05.CONDUCTOFTHEJURY ss5  ^ _\XXtJurors,tomakesurethistrialisfairto[both/all]parties,youmustfollowtheserules:     First,donottalkorcommunicateamongyourselvesaboutthiscase,orabout  ) anyoneinvolvedwithit,untiltheendofthecasewhenyougotothejuryroomto   consideryourverdict. u     Second,donottalkwithanyoneelseaboutthiscase,oraboutanyoneinvolved   withit,untilthetrialhasendedandyouhavebeendischargedasjurors. c    Third,whenyouareoutsidethecourtroom,donotletanyonetellyouanything |  aboutthecase,oraboutanyoneinvolvedwithit[untilthetrialhasendedandyour Q  verdicthasbeenacceptedbyme].Ifsomeonetriestotalktoyouaboutthecase[during j thetrial],pleasereportittothe[bailiff][deputyclerk].(Describeperson.) ?   Fourth,duringthetrial,donottalkwithorspeaktoanyoftheparties,lawyers,or X witnessesinthiscase!noteventopassthetimeofday.Itisimportantnotonlythatyou - dojusticeinthiscase,butalsothatyouactaccordingly.Ifapersonfromonesideofthe F lawsuitseesyoutalkingtoapersonfromtheotherside!evenifitisjustaboutthe  weather!thatmightraiseasuspicionaboutyourfairness.So,whenthelawyers,parties 4  andwitnessesdonotspeaktoyouinthehalls,ontheelevatororthelike,you[must]  " understandthattheyarenotbeingrude.Theyknowtheyarenotsupposedtotalktoyou  "$ whilethetrialisgoingon,andtheyarejustfollowingtherules. !&   Fifth,youmayneedtotellyourfamily,closefriends,andotherpeoplethatyou n#( areapartofthistrial.Youcantellthemwhenyouhavetobeincourt,andyoucanwarn $* themnottoaskyouaboutthiscase,tellyouanythingtheyknoworthinktheyknow \&, aboutthiscase,ortalkaboutthiscaseinfrontofyou.But,youmustnotcommunicate 'u!. withanyoneorpostinformationabouttheparties,witnesses,participants,[claims] J)"0 [charges],evidence,oranythingelserelatedtothiscase.Youmustnottellanyone *c$2 anythingaboutthejurysdeliberationsinthiscaseuntilafterIacceptyourverdictoruntil 8,%4 Igiveyouspecificpermissiontodoso.Ifyoutalkaboutthecasewithsomeonebesides ^ theotherjurorsduringdeliberations,itlooksasifyoumightalreadyhavedecidedthe w caseorthatyoumightbeinfluencedinyourverdictbytheiropinions.Thatwouldnotbe L  fairtotheparties,anditmightresultintheverdictbeingthrownoutandthecasehaving  e tobetriedoveragain.Duringthetrial,whileyouareinthecourthouseandafteryou :  leavefortheday,donotgiveanyinformationtoanyone,byanymeans,aboutthiscase.  S  Forexample,donottalkface-to-faceoruseanyelectronicdevice,suchasatelephone, (  cellphone,smartphone,Blackberry,PDA,computer,orcomputerlikedevice. A  Likewise,donotusetheInternetoranyInternetservice;donottextorsendinstant   messages;donotgoonanInternetchatroom,blog,orotherwebsitessuchasFacebook, /  MySpace,YouTube,orTwitter.Inotherwords,donotcommunicatewithanyoneabout  thiscase!exceptfortheotherjurorsduringdeliberations!untilIacceptyourverdict. {   Sixth,donotdoanyresearch--ontheInternet,inlibraries,newspapers,or  otherwise!anddonotinvestigatethiscaseonyourown.Donotvisitorviewanyplace i  discussedinthiscase,anddonotusetheInternetorothermeanstosearchfororview  anyplacediscussedinthetestimony.Also,donotlookupanyinformationaboutthis W case,thelaw,orthepeopleinvolved,includingtheparties,thewitnesses,thelawyers,or p  [thejudge/me/thecourt]. E"   Seventh,donotreadanynewsstoriesorInternetarticlesorblogsthatareabout  ^$ thecase,oraboutanyoneinvolvedwithit.Donotlistentoanyradioortelevisionreports 3"& aboutthecaseoraboutanyoneinvolvedwithit.[Infact,untilthetrialisoverIsuggest #L( thatyouavoidreadinganynewspapersornewsjournalsatall,andavoidlisteningtoany !%* televisionorradionewscastsatall.]Idonotknowwhethertherewillbenewsreports &: , aboutthiscase,butifthereare,youmightaccidentallyfindyourselfreadingorlistening (!. tosomethingaboutthecase.Ifyouwant,youcanhavesomeoneclipoutanystoriesand )(#0 setthemasidetogivetoyouafterthetrialisover.[Icanassureyou,however,thatby_the *$2 timeyouhaveheardalltheevidenceinthiscase,youwillknowwhatyouneedto[decide ^ it][returnajustverdict]. w   Thepartieshavearighttohaveyoudecidetheircasebasedonlyonevidence L  admittedhereincourt.Ifyouresearch,investigate,orexperimentonyourown,orget  e informationfromother[places][sources],yourverdictmightbeinfluencedby :  inaccurate,incomplete,ormisleadinginformation.Witnesseshereincourttakeanoath  S  totellthetruth,andtheaccuracyoftheirtestimonyistestedthroughcross-examination. (  Allofthepartiesareentitledtoafairtrialandanimpartialjury,andyouhavetoconduct A  yourselvesinawaythatassurestheintegrityofthetrialprocess.Ifyoudecideacase   basedoninformationnotadmittedincourt,youwilldenythepartiesafairtrial.Youwill /  denythemjustice.Remember,youhavetakenanoathtofollowtherules,andyoumust  doso.[Ifyoudonot,thecasemighthavetoberetried,andyoucouldbeheldin { contemptofcourtandpossiblypunished.]    Eighth,donotmakeupyourmindduringthetrialaboutwhatyourverdictshould i  be.Keepanopenminduntilafteryouandyourfellowjurorshavediscussedallthe  evidence.#XtX\5# `  W К  p  7 @FF % 8  1.06OUTLINEOFTRIAL ss)R  ^   \XXtThetrialwillproceedinthefollowingmanner: Y   First,theplaintiff[s][s]lawyermaymakeanopeningstatement.Next,the .  defendant[s][s]lawyermaymakeanopeningstatement.Anopeningstatementisnot  G evidence,butitisasummaryoftheevidencethelawyersexpectyouwillseeandhear   duringthetrial.  5    Afteropeningstatements,theplaintiff[s]willthenpresentevidence.The    defendant[s][s]lawyerwillhaveachancetocrossexaminetheplaintiff[s][s] #  _witness[es_].Aftertheplaintiff[s][has/have]finishedpresenting[his/her/their]case,the   defendant[s]maypresentevidence,andtheplaintiff[s][s]lawyerwillhaveachanceto o  cross-examine[his/her/their]_witness[es_].    [Afteryouhaveseenandheardalloftheevidencefrom[both/all]sides,the ] lawyerswillmakeclosingargumentsthatsummarizeandinterprettheevidence.Justas v withopeningstatements,closingargumentsarenotevidence.Aftertheclosing K arguments,Iwillinstructyoufurtheronthelaw,andyouwillgotothejuryroomto d deliberateanddecideonyourverdict.]#XtX\ބR# 9 D0&  $ 7 _0:  @ % 9  2.INSTRUCTIONSFORUSEDURINGTRIAL  0 @  IntroductoryComment ssDYԈ     Instructionscontainedinthissectionmaybereadtothejuryduringthecourseofthe ;  trial.Theyarenotgenerallyintendedforsubmissioninwrittenformattheconclusionofthe    case,althoughthereisnoparticularreasonwhy,inappropriatecircumstances,theycouldnotbe m  submittedtothejuryaspartofthewrittenpackage.Generally,theywillnotberereadtothejury  F  attheconclusionofthecase,althoughthecourthasdiscretiontodoso.    > @   % ;  2.01DUTIESOFJURY:RECESSES on_\  ^   Duringthisrecess,andeveryotherrecess,donotdiscussthiscaseamongyourselvesor   withanyoneelse,includingyourfamilyandfriends.Donotallowanyonetodiscussthecase i  withyouorwithinyourhearing. Donotdiscussalsomeansdonotemail,sendtextmessages,  d blogorengageinanyotherformofwritten,oralorelectroniccommunication,asIinstructed    youbefore. t    Donotreadanynewspaperorotherwrittenaccount,watchanytelevisedaccount,or o  listentoanyradioprogramonthesubjectofthistrial.DonotconductanyInternetresearchor &  consultwithanyothersourcesaboutthiscase,thepeopleinvolvedinthecase,oritsgeneral !  subjectmatter.Youmustkeepyourmindopenandfreeofoutsideinformation.Onlyinthis z  waywillyoubeabletodecidethecasefairlybasedsolelyontheevidenceandmyinstructions 1 onthelaw.Ifyoudecidethiscaseonanythingelse,youwillhavedoneaninjustice.Itisvery , importantthatyoufollowtheseinstructions.    Imaynotrepeatthesethingstoyoubeforeeveryrecess,butkeeptheminmind < throughoutthetrial.1 7  & ? @$ NotesonUse      1.'?xbThislanguagemaybeomittedforsubsequentbreaksduringtrial,butnotforovernight G" orweekendrecesses.  -# @> @ % <  2.02STIPULATEDTESTIMONY onc  ^   Theplaintiff[s]andthedefendant[s]havestipulated-thatis,theyhaveagreed-thatif * __________werecalledasawitness[(he)(she)]wouldtestifyinthewaycounselhavejust  % stated.Youshouldacceptthatasbeing__________'stestimony,justasifithadbeengivenhere  ~ incourtfromthewitnessstand. 5   & % @--! CommitteeComments   0    Thereis,ofcourse,adifferencebetweenstipulatingthatawitnesswouldgivecertain   '% etestimony,andstipulatingthatcertainfactsareestablished.UnitedStatesv.Lambert,604F.2d o  594,595(8thCir.1979).Astothelatterkindofstipulation,seeinfraModelInstruction2.03. U    See8thCir.Crim.JuryInstr.2.02(2008);FederalJudicialCenter,PatternCriminalJury    Instructions11(1988);9thCir.Crim.JuryInstr.2.3(2003);9thCir.Civ.JuryInstr.2.1(2007).   SeegenerallyWestKey#"Stipulations"1-21;"CriminalLaw"1172.1(2).  z  D@ @.. % =  2.03STIPULATEDFACTS oni  ^   Theplaintiff[s]andthedefendant[s]havestipulated-thatis,theyhaveagreed-that * certainfactsareascounselhavejuststated.Youshould,therefore,treatthosefactsashaving  % beenproved.  ~  & % @--! CommitteeComments  5    Thereis,ofcourse,adifferencebetweenstipulatingthatcertainfactsareestablished,and  0  '%5 )kstipulatingthatawitnesswouldgivecertaintestimony.UnitedStatesv.Lambert,604F.2d594, t  595(8thCir.1979).Astothelatterkindofstipulation,seeinfraModelInstruction2.02. Z    Whenpartiesenterintostipulationsastomaterialfacts,thosefactswillbedeemedto U  havebeenconclusivelyproved,andthejurymaybesoinstructed.UnitedStatesv.Houston,547 ;  F.2d104,107(9thCir.1976). !    See8thCir.Crim.JuryInstr.2.03(2008);FederalJudicialCenter,PatternCriminalJury z  Instructions12(1988);9thCir.Crim.JuryInstr.2.4(2003);9thCir.Civ.JuryInstr.2.2(2007). ` SeegenerallyWestKey#"Stipulations"1-21,"CriminalLaw"1172.1(2).  F D @  % ?  2.04JUDICIALNOTICE ono  ^   Ihavedecidedtoacceptasprovedthefollowingfact[s]:__________________. *   Youmustaccept[(this)(these)]fact[s]asproved.  %  &  @--! CommitteeComments   ~   Aninstructionregardingjudicialnoticeshouldbegivenatthetimenoticeistaken. 5  ' Cq  Fed.R.Evid.201(g),whilepermittingthejudgetodeterminethatafactissufficiently  0  undisputedtobejudiciallynoticed,alsorequiresthatthejurybeinstructedthatitmustacceptas t  conclusiveanyfactjudiciallynoticedinacivilcase. Z    See8thCir.Crim.JuryInstr.2.04(2008);KevinF.OMalley,etal.,3FEDERALJURY U  PRACTICEANDINSTRUCTIONS:Civil102.20(5th_ed._Ԁ2000);FederalJudicialCenter,Pattern ;  CriminalJuryInstructions7(1988);9thCir.Crim.JuryInstr.2.5(2003);9thCir.Civ.Jury !  Instr.2.3(2007).SeegenerallyFed.R.Evid.201;WestKey#"Evidence"1-52.  e   @   % A  2.05TRANSCRIPTOFTAPERECORDEDCONVERSATION u  ^   Asyouhave[also]heard,thereisatypewrittentranscriptofthetaperecording[Ijust * mentioned][youareabouttohear].Thattranscriptalsoundertakestoidentifythespeakers  % engagedintheconversation.  ~   Youarepermittedtohavethetranscriptforthelimitedpurposeofhelpingyoufollowthe 5  conversationasyoulistentothetaperecording,andalsotohelpyouidentifythespeakers.The  0  taperecordingisevidenceforyoutoconsider.Thetranscript,however,isnotevidence.     Youarespecificallyinstructedthatwhetherthetranscriptcorrectlyorincorrectlyreflects @  theconversationortheidentityofthespeakersisentirelyforyoutodecidebaseduponwhatyou ;  haveheardhereaboutthepreparationofthetranscript,anduponyourownexaminationofthe   transcriptinrelationtowhatyouhearonthetaperecording.Thetaperecordingitselfisthe K  primaryevidenceofitsowncontents.Ifyoudecidethatthetranscriptisinanyrespectincorrect F orunreliable,youshoulddisregardittothatextent.    Differencesbetweenwhatyouhearintherecordingandreadinthetranscriptmaybe V causedbysuchthingsastheinflectioninaspeaker'svoice,orbyinaccuraciesinthetranscript. Q Youshould,therefore,relyonwhatyouhearratherthanwhatyoureadwhenthereisa  difference. a   & % @--! CommitteeComments  \"   Thetranscript,absentstipulationoftheparties,shouldnotgotothejuryroom.See $ '%}UnitedStatesv.Kirk,534F.2d1262(8thCir.1976),cert.denied,430U.S.906(1977), % reversed,inpart,onothergrounds,723F.2d1379(8thCir.1983).  &   See8thCir.Crim.JuryInstr.2.06(2008);seegenerallyUnitedStatesv.McMillan,508 8"( F.2d101(8thCir.1974);UnitedStatesv.Bentley,706F.2d1498(8thCir.1983).  #) U @  % B  2.06PREVIOUSTRIAL ,  ^   Youhaveheardevidencethattherewasaprevioustrialofthiscase.Keepinmind, * however,thatyoumustdecidethiscasesolelyontheevidencepresentedtoyouinthistrial.The  % factofaprevioustrialshouldhavenobearingonyourdecisioninthiscase.1  ~  & ? @$ NotesonUse  5    1.Theinstructionshouldbemodifiediftheresultsofthepriortrialareintroduced.'?5   0  & ? @--! CommitteeComments      See8thCir.Crim.JuryInstr.2.20(2008);'?߂KevinF.OMalley,etal.,3FEDERALJURY @  PRACTICEANDINSTRUCTIONS:Civil102.42(5thed.2000);FederalJudicialCenter,Pattern &  CriminalJuryInstructions14(1988);9thCir.Crim.JuryInstr.2.14(2003).SeegenerallyWest    Key# Evidence575-83.Thisinstructionshouldnotbegivenunlessspecificallyrequested.    U @ % C  2.07CROSSEXAMINATIONOFPARTY'SCHARACTERWITNESS   ^   Thequestionsandanswersyouhavejustheardwerepermittedonlytohelpyoudecideif * thewitnessreallyknewabout__________'s1reputationfortruthfulness.2Theinformation  % developedonthatsubjectmaynotbeusedbyyouforanyotherpurpose.3  ~  &  @$ NotesonUse  5    1.Insertnameofpersonwhosecharacterisbeingchallenged.  0  '5   2.Fed.R.Evid.404(a)and608generallylimitcharacterevidenceincivilcasesto   reputationfortruthandveracity.Itmayinvolvecrossexaminationoncharactertraitswhich o  relatetotruthandveracity(gavefalseinformationtoalawenforcementofficer;falsified U  expenseaccountrecords). ;    3.Thisinstructionshouldbegivenifrequestedbythepartywhohasofferedthe   characterwitnessatthetimetheevidenceisintroduced. z  & ? @--! CommitteeComments  1   See8thCir.Crim.JuryInstr.2.10(2008);'?1ԚFederalJudicialCenter,PatternCriminalJury , Instructions52(1988).SeegenerallyFed.R.Evid.404,405;WestKey# CriminalLaw p 673(2),_ Witnesses_Ԁ274(1);andseealsoGrossv.UnitedStates,394F.2d216(8thCir.1968).  V  @ % E  2.08AEVIDENCEADMITTEDAGAINSTONLYONEPARTY   ^   Eachpartyisentitledtohavethecasedecidedsolelyontheevidencewhichappliesto * thatparty.Someoftheevidenceinthiscaseislimitedundertherulesofevidencetooneofthe  % parties,andcannotbeconsideredagainsttheothers.  ~   Theevidenceyou[areabouttohear][justheard]1canbeconsideredonlyinthecase 5  against__________.2  0   & % @$ NotesonUse      1.Ifdesired,thetrialjudgemaygiveabriefsummaryoftheevidencewhichisadmitted @  '%againstonlyoneoftheparties. &    2.Statenameofpartyorparties. !  & % @--! CommitteeComments  z    Thistypeofinstructionmaybeusedwhenevidencelimitedtooneormorepartiesis 1 '%admitted.Cf.UnitedStatesv.Kelly,349F.2d720,757(2dCir.1965),cert.denied,384U.S.  947(1966);butseeUnitedStatesv.Polizzi,500F.2d856,903(9thCir.1974)(noterrorto  refuseadefendant'srequestedinstructionthatnoevidenceintroducedbythecodefendantscould  beusedagainsthimorherwhereheorsherestedatcloseoftheplaintiff'scase). k   See8thCir.Crim.JuryInstr.2.14(2008);KevinF.OMalley,etal.,3FEDERALJURY " PRACTICEANDINSTRUCTIONS:Civil102.41(5th_ed._Ԁ2000);FederalJudicialCenter,Pattern  CriminalJuryInstructions19(1988);9thCir.Crim.JuryInstr.1.15(2003).SeegenerallyWest  Key# CriminalLaw673(4), Trial54(2). v   Fed.R.Evid.105requiressuchaninstructionifrequestedwhenevidenceisadmitted -  againstlessthanallparties.  !  @  % F  2.08BEVIDENCEADMITTEDFORLIMITEDPURPOSE   ^   Theevidence[(youareabouttohear)(youhavejustheard)]maybeconsideredbyyou * onlyonthe[(issue)(question)]__________.Itmaynotbeconsideredforanyotherpurpose.  %  & % @--! CommitteeComments   ~   Suchaninstructionisappropriateatthetimeevidenceadmittedforalimitedpurposeis 5  '% 9received;forexample,whenapriorinconsistentstatementisadmitted,orevidenceisadmitted    orpriorsimilarincidentstoprovenoticebythedefendantofadefect.     Withrespecttotheuseofpriorinconsistentstatements,Fed.R.Evid.105givesaparty Z  therighttorequirealimitinginstructionexplainingthattheuseofthisevidenceislimitedto @  credibility.Thisinstructionisappropriateforthatpurpose.Note,however,thatthelimiting &  instructionshouldnotbegivenifthepriorinconsistentstatementwasgivenunderoathinaprior    trial,hearingordeposition,becausesuchpriorsworntestimonyofawitnessisnothearsayand   maybeusedtoprovethetruthofthemattersasserted.Fed.R.Evid.801(d)(1)(A). z    SeeinfraModelInstruction3.03foradditionalcommentsoncredibility.See9thCir. 1 Crim.JuryInstr.1.5(2003).    @W W  % G  2.09IMPEACHMENTOFWITNESS,PRIORCONVICTION -  ^   Youhaveheardevidencethatwitness1__________hasbeenconvictedof[acrime] * [crimes].Youmayusethatevidenceonlytohelpyoudecidewhethertobelievethewitnessand  % howmuchweighttogive[(his)(her)]testimony.  ~  & % @$ NotesonUse  5    1.Ifthepartyinacivilcasehasaconvictionwhichisintroducedinevidence,itwould  0  be'%5 {appropriatetomodifyEighthCir.Crim.Inst.2.16andgivethefollowinginstruction,unless t  theevidenceisadmittedunderFed.R.Evid.404(b)toprovemotive,intent,plan,etc.Crim. Z  Inst.2.16,modifiedforcivilcasesisasfollows: @  0   ` You[areabouttohear][haveheard]evidencethat(name)waspreviously ;  convictedof[a]crime[s].Youmayusethatevidenceonlytohelpyoudecidewhetherto !  believe[(his)(her)]testimonyandhowmuchweighttogiveit.Thatevidencedoesnot e  meanthat[(he)(she)]engagedintheconductallegedhere,andyoumustnotusethat K  evidenceasanyproof[(he)(she)]engagedinthatconduct.1(#(# IftheevidenceisadmittedunderFed.R.Evid.404(b),Crim.Inst.2.08maybemodifiedand , used. p & % @--! CommitteeComments  k   Theadmissibilityofpriorconvictionstoimpeachawitness'credibilityisgovernedby " Fed.'%R.Evid.609.Iftheconvictioninvolvesdishonestyorfalsestatements,itmaybeadmitted  evenifnotafelony.Fed.R.Evid.609.Thereissubstantialdisputeabouthowmuch  informationmaybeinjectedconcerningthepriorconviction.Somejudgesdonotevenallow v evidenceofwhatcrime,orwhatpunishmentwasinvolved.Thejudgemayallowevidenceofthe \ specificcrimecommittedandthesentence.Rossv.Jones,888F.2d548,551(8thCir.1989). B Fed.R.Evid.105givesapartytherighttorequirealimitinginstructionexplainingthattheuse (  ofthisevidenceislimitedtocredibility. l !   See8thCir.Crim.JuryInstr.2.18(2008);KevinF.OMalley,etal.,3FEDERALJURY !g# PRACTICEANDINSTRUCTIONS:Civil102.44(5th_ed._Ԁ2000);FederalJudicialCenter,Pattern "M$ CriminalJuryInstructions30(1988);5thCir.Civ.JuryInstr.2.17(2006);9thCir.Crim.Jury #3% Instr.4.8(2003);9thCir.Civ.JuryInstr.2.8(2007).SeegenerallyFed.R.Evid.609,105; w$& WestKey# Witnesses344(1-5),345(1-4).  ]%'  @ % H  2.10ADEMONSTRATIVESUMMARIESNOTRECEIVEDASEVIDENCE -ת  ^   Certainchartsandsummarieshavebeenshowntoyouinordertohelpexplainthefacts * disclosedbythebooks,records,orotherunderlyingevidenceinthecase.Thosechartsor  % summariesareusedforconvenience.Theyarenotthemselvesevidenceorproofofanyfacts.If  ~ theydonotcorrectlyreflectthefactsshownbytheevidenceinthecase,youshoulddisregard 5  thesechartsandsummariesanddeterminethefactsfromthebooks,recordsorotherunderlying  0  evidence.    @--! CommitteeComments  @    See8thCir.Crim.JuryInstr.4.11(2008). ;    Thisinstructionshouldbegivenonlywherethechartorsummaryisusedsolelyas   demonstrativeevidence.WheresuchexhibitsareadmittedintoevidencepursuanttoFed.R. z  Evid.1006,donotgivethisinstruction.ForsummariesadmittedasevidencepursuanttoFed.R. ` Evid.1006,seeInstruction2.10B,infra. F   Sendingpurelydemonstrativechartstothejuryroomisdisfavored.Iftheyaresubmitted  limitinginstructionsarestronglysuggested.UnitedStatesv.Possick,849F.2d332,339(8th  Cir.1988).Thecourtmayadvisethejurythatdemonstrativeevidencewillnotbesentbackto k thejuryroom.  Q  @LL % I  2.10BRULE1006SUMMARIES se  ^   Youwillrememberthatcertain[schedules][summaries][charts]wereadmittedin * evidence.Youmayusethose[schedules][summaries][charts]asevidence,eventhoughthe  % underlyingdocumentsandrecordsarenothere.1[However,the[accuracy][authenticity]of  ~ those[schedules][summaries][charts]hasbeenchallenged.Itisforyoutodecidehowmuch 5  weight,ifany,youwillgivetothem.Inmakingthatdecision,youshouldconsiderallofthe  0  testimonyyouheardaboutthewayinwhichtheywereprepared.]2    & ~ @$ NotesonUse  @    1.Thisinstructionisnotnecessaryifastipulationinstructionhasbeengivenonthe ;  subject. !  '~@3  2.Thebracketedportionofthisinstructionshouldbegiveniftheaccuracyor z  authenticityhasbeenchallenged. ` & ? @--! CommitteeComments     See8thCir.Crim.JuryInstr.4.12(2008).SeegenerallyFed.R.Evid.1006,1008(c)'?˶. p   ThisinstructionisbasedonRule1006oftheFederalRulesofEvidence,whichpermits k summariestobeadmittedasevidencewithoutadmissionoftheunderlyingdocumentsaslongas Q theopposingpartyhashadanopportunitytoexamineandcopythedocumentsatareasonable 7 timeandplaceandifthoseunderlyingdocumentswouldbeadmissible.FordMotorCo.v.Auto { SupplyCo.,Inc.,661F.2d1171,1175-76(8thCir.1981).TheRulescontemplatethatthe a summarieswillnotbeadmitteduntilthecourthasmadeapreliminaryrulingastotheir G accuracy.SeeFed.R.Evid.104;UnitedStatesv.Robinson,774F.2d261,276(8thCir.1985). -    AsRule1008(c)makesclear,thetrialjudgemakesonlyapreliminarydetermination (" regardingaRule1006summary,theaccuracyofwhichischallenged.Theadmissioniswithin l # thesounddiscretionofthetrialjudge.UnitedStatesv.King,616F.2d1034,1041(8thCir. R!$ 1980).Ifthedeterminationistoadmitthesummary,thejuryremainsthefinalarbiterwith 8"% respecttohowmuchweightitwillbegivenandshouldbeinstructedaccordingly. #&   The voluminousrequirementofRule1006doesnotrequirethatitliterallybe w$( impossibletoexaminealltheunderlyingrecords,butonlythatin-courtexaminationwouldbean ]%) inconvenience.UnitedStatesv.Possick,849F.2d332,339(8thCir.1988). C&*   ChartsanddiagramsadmittedunderRule1006maybesenttothejuryatthedistrict '>!, court'sdiscretion.Possick,849F.2dat339;UnitedStatesv.Orlowski,808F.2d1283,1289(8th ($"-  Cir.1986);UnitedStatesv.Robinson,774F.2dat275. h) #.   Whenthistypeofexhibitissenttothejury,alimitinginstructionisappropriate,but ^ failuretogiveaninstructionontheuseofchartsisnotreversibleerror.Possick,849F.2dat D 340. *    Theremaybecasesinwhichavarietyofsummariesarebeforethejury,somebeing  % simplydemonstrativeevidence,somebeingunchallengedRule1006summaries,andsomebeing i  challengedRule1006summaries.Inthatsituation,oranyvariantthereof,itwillbenecessary O  forthetrialcourttodistinguishbetweenthevariousitems,probablybyexhibitnumber,andto 5  frameaninstructionwhichmakestheappropriatedistinctions.     @))" % J  2.11WITHDRAWAL -G  ^   Theclaimoftheplaintiff[s]thatthedefendant[s]___________1isnolongerbeforeyou * andwillnotbedecidedbyyou.  %  & % @$ NotesonUse   ~   1.Describebrieflytheclaimwhichisbeingwithdrawn.Ifadefendantisdismissed, 5  modify'% ~theinstructionasfollows:    0   ` Theclaimofplaintiffagainstdefendant______________isnolongerbeforeyou t  andwillnotbedecidedbyyou.Z (#(# ( Note: Ifacounterclaimisdismissed,transposethenamesoftheplaintiffandthedefendant.) U  & % @--! CommitteeComments       Thisisasimplifiedform.Anidenticalinstruction,ModelInstruction3.05,infra,has e  been'% includedinsection3foradvisingthejuryofthewithdrawalofaclaimattheendofthe K  trial.Thisinstructionisintendedforuseduringthetimeatwhichtheclaimiswithdrawnand 1 maybemodifiedandusedforthewithdrawalofcounterclaimsoraffirmativedefenses.Ifthis  instructionisgivenduringthecourseoftrial,itneednotbegivenwiththefinalinstructions.  Thejudgemaywishtodiscussthematterofwithdrawalofaclaimwiththelawyerstoobtainan  agreementastowhatthejurorsaretold. k   SeeKevinF.OMalley,etal.,3FEDERALJURYPRACTICEANDINSTRUCTIONS:Civil " 102.60(5th_ed._Ԁ2000).    @x x  % K  2.12DEPOSITIONEVIDENCEATTRIAL idW  ^   Testimonywillnowbepresentedtoyouintheformofadeposition.Adepositionisthe * recordedanswersawitnessmadeunderoathtoquestionsaskedbylawyersbeforetrial.The  % depositiontestimonytobeoffered[wasrecordedinwritingandnowwillbereadtoyou][was  ~ electronicallyvideotapedandthatrecordingnowwillbeplayedforyou].Youshouldconsider 5  thedepositiontestimony,andjudgeitscredibility,asyouwouldthatofanywitnesswhotestifies  0  hereinperson.[Youshouldnotplaceanysignificanceonthemannerortoneofvoiceusedto   readthewitness'sanswerstoyou.] @   @--! CommitteeComments  ;    Thisinstructionshouldbegivenwhendepositiontestimonyisofferedandallowedas   substantiveevidence.SeeFed.R.Evid.801(d)(2),804(b)(1);Fed.R.Civ.P.32(a).The z  Committeerecommendsthatthisinstructionbegivenimmediatelybeforeadepositionisreador ` electronicallyplayedtothejury.Ifasuccessivedepositionisofferedintoevidence,thecourt F mayremindthejuryofthisinstructioninsteadofrepeatingtheentireinstruction. ,   Thisinstructionshouldnotbeusedwhendepositiontestimonyisusedforimpeachment  purposesonly.Fed.R.Civ.P.32(a)(2)._0X    W0  : @ % L  3.INSTRUCTIONSFORUSEATCLOSEOFTRIAL  0 @  IntroductoryComment -Ԉ     Ifissue/elementinstructionsaresubmittedtothejuryinwriting,thenthesegeneral b instructionsshouldalsobesubmittedinwritingatthesametime.Theyareintendedasgeneral H instructionstobesubmittedafterallevidencehasbeenpresented.Theymaybegiveneither .   beforeorafterclosingarguments,ormaybegivenpartiallybeforeandpartiallyafterarguments.    Fed.R.Civ.P.51.  z    Theelementsinstructionsincludedhereinallhavewhatmightbecalledaconversetail; S  thatis,alastsentencewhichtellsthejurytheirverdictmustbeforthedefendantifanyofthe 9  elementshavenotbeenproved.Itwouldalsobeproperifthecourtorpartiesdesire,todelete   thatsentenceandhaveaseparateinstructionwhichtellsthejurytheirverdictmustbeforthe   defendantunlesstheyfindthatanyrequiredelementoftheplaintiff'scasehasnotbeenproved. k  SeeinfraModelInstruction7.02Afortheformattobeusedforsuchinstruction.Thisapproach Q hastheadvantageoflettingadefendant targetor_ focus_Ԁthecaseontheelementwhichis 7 mostcontested.Italsomayaidthejurytoknowwheretheirattentionshouldbefocused.   \ @  " % M  3.01EXPLANATORY    ^   \XXtMembersofthejury,theinstructionsIgaveatthebeginningofthetrialand * duringthetrialarestillineffect.NowIamgoingtogiveyousomeadditional  C instructions.     Youhavetofollowallofmyinstructions!theonesIgaveyouearlier,aswellas  1 thoseIgiveyounow.Donotsingleoutsomeinstructionsandignoreothers,because   theyareallimportant.[ThisistrueeventhoughIamnotgoingtorepeatsomeofthe }  instructionsIgaveyou[atthebeginningof][during]thetrial.]     1Youwillhavecopiesof[theinstructionsIamabouttogiveyounow][allofthe k  instructions]inthejuryroom.[Youwillhavecopiesofsomeoftheinstructionswith   youinthejuryroom;othersyouwillnothavecopiesof.Thisdoesnotmeansome Y instructionsaremoreimportantthanothers.]Remember,youhavetofollowall r instructions,nomatterwhenIgivethem,whetherornotyouhavewrittencopies. G   NotesonUse  `   1.Optionalforusewhenthefinalinstructionsaretobesenttothejuryroom 5 withthejury.TheCommitteerecommendsthatpractice. /   CommitteeComments  #     SeeKevinF._OMalley_,etal.,3FederalJuryPracticeandInstructions:  ! Civil103.01(5thed.2000).SeegenerallyWestKey# CriminalLaw887.#XtX\# !"    "# ^\@  % N  3.02JUDGE'SOPINION    ^ \XXt  IhavenotintendedtosuggestwhatIthinkyourverdict[s]shouldbebyanyofmy * rulingsorcommentsduringthetrial.  C   [DuringthistrialIhaveaskedsomequestionsofwitnesses.Donottrytoguess   myopinionaboutanyissuesinthecasebasedonthequestionsIasked.]1  1    NotesonUse        1.Useonlyifjudgehasaskedquestionsduringthecourseofthetrial.#XtX\#  }      `^@n n  % O  3.03CREDIBILITYOFWITNESSES    ^   _\XXtIndecidingwhatthefactsare,youmayhavetodecidewhattestimonyyoubelieve   andwhattestimonyyoudonotbelieve.Youmaybelieveallofwhatawitnesssaid,or  ) onlypartofit,ornoneofit.     Youmayconsiderawitnesssintelligence;theopportunitythewitnesshadtosee u   orhearthethingstestifiedabout;awitnesssmemory,knowledge,education,and   experience;anyreasonsawitnessmighthavefortestifyingacertainway,howawitness c  actedwhiletestifying,whetherawitnesssaidsomethingdifferentatanothertime,1 |  whetherawitnessstestimonysoundedreasonable,andwhetherortowhatextenta Q  witnessstestimonyisconsistentwithotherevidenceyoubelieve. j   [Indecidingwhethertobelieveawitness,rememberthatpeoplesometimeshear ? orseethingsdifferentlyandsometimesforgetthings.Youwillhavetodecidewhethera X contradictionisaninnocentmisrecollection,oralapseofmemory,oranintentional - falsehood;thatmaydependonwhetherithastodowithanimportantfactoronlyasmall F detail.]   #XtX\/#  NotesonUse  4    1.Withrespecttotheuseofpriorinconsistentstatements,Fed.R.Evid.105givesa " partytherighttorequirealimitinginstructionexplainingthattheuseofthisevidenceislimited s# tocredibility.Note,however,thatsuchalimitinginstructionshouldnotbegiveniftheprior  Y$ inconsistentstatementwasgivenunderoathinapriortrial,hearingordeposition,becausesuch !?% priorsworntestimonyofawitnessisnothearsayandmaybeusedtoprovethetruthofthe "%& mattersasserted.Fed.R.Evid.801(d)(1)(A). i# ' &  @--! CommitteeComments  5%)   Theformofcredibilityinstructiongiveniswithinthediscretionofthetrialcourt.Clark ' + v.'5%UnitedStates,391F.2d57,60(8thCir.1968);UnitedStatesv.Merrival,600F.2d717,719 '!, (8thCir.1979).InClarkthecourtheldthatthefollowinginstructiongivenbythetrialcourt (o"- correctlysetoutthefactorstobeconsideredbythejuryindeterminingthecredibilityofthe )U#.  witnesses:_ *;$/ 0   ` Youareinstructedthatyouarethesolejudgesofthecredibilityofthewitnesses ^  andoftheweightandvaluetobegiventotheirtestimony.Indeterminingsuch D credibilityandweightyouwilltakeintoconsiderationthecharacterofthewitness,hisor * herdemeanoronthestand,hisorherinterest,ifany,intheresultofthetrial,hisorher   relationtoorfeelingtowardthepartiestothetrial,theprobabilityorimprobabilityofhis   orherstatementsaswellasalltheotherfactsandcircumstancesgiveninevidence. ~(#(# 391F.2dat60.InMerrival,thecourtheldthatthefollowinggeneralcredibilityinstruction  J providedprotectionfortheaccused:  0 0   ` You,asjurors,arethesolejudgesofthetruthfulnessofthewitnessesandthe Z  weighttheirtestimonydeserves.@ (#(# 0   ` Youshouldcarefullystudyallthetestimonygiven,thecircumstancesunder    whicheachwitnesshastestified,andeverymatterinevidencewhichtendstoshow   whetherawitnessisworthyofbelief.Considereachwitness'sabilitytoobservethe z  mattersastowhichheorshehastestifiedandwhethereachwitnessiseithersupportedor ` contradictedbyotherevidenceinthecase.F(#(# 600F.2dat720n.2. p   ThegeneralcredibilityinstructiongiveninUnitedStatesv.Phillips,522F.2d388,391 < (8thCir.1975)coversotherdetails: " 0   ` Thejurorsarethesolejudgesoftheweightandcredibilityofthetestimonyandof  thevaluetobegiventoeachandanywitnesswhohastestifiedinthecase.Inreachinga v conclusionastowhatweightandvalueyououghttogivetothetestimonyofanywitness \ whohastestifiedinthecase,youarewarrantedintakingintoconsiderationtheinterest B ofthewitnessintheresultofthetrial;takeintoconsiderationhisorherrelationtoany ( partyininterest;hisorherdemeanoruponthewitnessstand;hisorhermannerof l  testifying;hisorhertendencytospeaktruthfullyorfalsely,asyoumaybelieve,the R! probabilityorimprobabilityofthetestimonygiven;hisorhersituationtoseeand 8" observe;andhisorherapparentcapacityandwillingnesstotruthfullyandaccuratelytell #  youwhatheorshesawandobserved;andifyoubelieveanywitnesstestifiedfalselyas $! toanymaterialissueinthiscase,thenyoumustrejectthatwhichyoubelievetobefalse, $" andyoumayrejectthewholeoranypartofthetestimonyofsuchwitness.(Emphasis %r# omitted.)&X $(#(#   Theinstructioninthetextisbasicallyaparaphraseof9thCir.Crim.JuryInstr.3.9 ($"& (2003)andKevinF._OMalley_,etal.,3FEDERALJURYPRACTICEANDINSTRUCTIONS:Civil h) #' 101.43(5th_ed._Ԁ2000),asapprovedinUnitedStatesv.Hastings,577F.2d38,42(8thCir. N*#( 1978).However,anyfactorssetoutinthePhillips,Clark,orMerrivalinstructionsmaybe 4+$) addedinasdeemedrelevanttothecase. ,%* Ї  Ageneralinstructiononthecredibilityofwitnessesisinmostcasessufficient.Whether ^ amorespecificcredibilityinstructionisrequiredwithrespecttoanyparticularwitnessorclass D ofwitnessesisgenerallywithinthediscretionofthetrialcourt. *   ThecredibilityofachildwitnessiscoveredinKevinF._OMalley_,etal.,3FEDERAL   JURYPRACTICEANDINSTRUCTIONS:Civil105.12(5thed.2000).NinthCircuitInstruction  ~ 4.15recommendsthatno childwitnessinstructionbegiven.ThisCommitteejoinsinthose  d comments.  J   ThetestimonyofpoliceofficersisaddressedinGolliherv.UnitedStates,362F.2d594, t  604(8thCir.1966). Z    Factorstobetakenintoaccountindeterminingwhetheraspecialinstructioniswarranted &  withrespecttoadruguserarediscussedinUnitedStatesv.Johnson,848F.2d904,905-06(8th    Cir.1988).     Whetherapartyisentitledtoamorespecificinstructiononwitnessbiasisalsogenerally ` lefttothediscretionofthetrialcourt.SeeUnitedStatesv.Ashford,530F.2d792,799(8thCir. F 1976). ,   See9thCir.Crim.JuryInstr.3.9(2003);KevinF._OMalley_,etal.,3FEDERALJURY V PRACTICEANDINSTRUCTIONS:Civil105.01(5th_ed._Ԁ2000);11thCir.Civ.JuryInstr.3(2005); < UnitedStatesv.Hastings,577F.2d38,42(8thCir.1978).SeegenerallyWestKey# Criminal " Law785(1-16).\XXt  #XtX\C#  v c` @KK  % P  3.04BURDENOFPROOF ^ @FF (OrdinaryCivilCase) un  D   ]c!\XXtYouwillhavetodecidewhethercertainfactshavebeenproved[bythegreater   weightoftheevidence].Afacthasbeenproved[bythegreaterweightoftheevidence],  ) ifyoufindthatitismorelikelytruethannottrue.Youdecidethatbyconsideringallof   theevidenceanddecidingwhatevidenceismorebelievable. u     Youhaveprobablyheardthephrase proofbeyondareasonabledoubt.Thatisa   stricterstandardthan morelikelytruethannottrue.Itappliesincriminalcases,butnot c  inthiscivilcase;soputitoutofyourmind. |   #XtX\ަ#  CommitteeComments  Q     Thephraseswhicharebracketedareoptional,dependinguponthepreferenceofthe L judge.TheCommitteerecognizesthatjudgesmaydesiretousetheburden-of-proofformulation 2 foundinthepatternjuryinstructionsadoptedbytheirparticularstates.Ifsuchaburden-of-proof v instructionisused,thisinstructionmustbemodifiedaccordingly.\XXt \ #XtX\ޱ #  ( e]"@= =  % Q  3.05WITHDRAWAL(OFCLAIMORDEFENSE) unU  ^   \XXtTheclaimoftheplaintiff[s]thatdefendant[s]___________1isnolongerapartof * thiscase,soyouwillnotdecidethatclaim.2  C   NotesonUse      1.Describebrieflytheclaimwhichisbeingwithdrawn.Ifadefendantis  1 dismissed,modifytheinstructionasfollows:  +  8   ` Theclaimoftheplaintiffagainstdefendant______________isno }  longerapartofthiscase,soyouwillnotconsiderit.w      2.Describebrieflythedefensewhichisbeingwithdrawn.Ifadefenseis k  withdrawn,modifytheinstructionasfollows: e    _8  _ ` Thedefenseof_______________isnolongerapartofthecase,so Y youwillnotconsiderit.S      `  #XtX\#  CommitteeComments  G =  Thisinstructionisintendedforuseduringthetimeatwhichtheclaimiswithdrawnand  maybemodifiedandusedforthewithdrawalofcounterclaimsoraffirmativedefenses.Ifthis  instructionisgivenduringthecourseoftrial,itneednotbegivenwiththefinalinstructions.  Thejudgemaywishtodiscussthematterofwithdrawalofaclaimwiththelawyerstoobtainan g agreementastowhatthejurorsaretold. M   SeeKevinF._OMalley_,etal.,3FEDERALJURYPRACTICEANDINSTRUCTIONS:Civil w 102.60(5thed.2000). ]    C! ge#0   % R  3.06ELECTIONOFFOREPERSON;DUTYTODELIBERATE;COMMUNICATIONS^(#(# @WITHCOURT;CAUTIONARY;UNANIMOUSVERDICT;VERDICTFORM un  D   \XXtTherearerulesyoumustfollowwhenyougotothejuryroomtodeliberateand   returnwithyourverdict.  )   First,youwillselectaforeperson.Thatpersonwillpresideoveryourdiscussions   andspeakforyouhereincourt. u     Second,itisyourduty,asjurors,todiscussthiscasewithoneanotherinthejury   room.Youshouldtrytoreachagreement,ifyoucandothiswithoutgoingagainstwhat c  youbelievetobethetruth,becausealljurorshavetoagreeontheverdict. |    Eachofyoumustcometoyourowndecision,butonlyafteryouhaveconsidered Q  alltheevidence,discussedtheevidencefullywithyourfellowjurors,andlistenedtothe j viewsofyourfellowjurors. ?   Donotbeafraidtochangeyourmindifthediscussionpersuadesyouthatyou X should.But,donotcometoadecisionjustbecauseotherjurorsthinkitisright,orjustto - reachaverdict.Rememberyouarenotfororagainstanyparty.Youarejudges!judges F ofthefacts.Youronlyjobistostudytheevidenceanddecidewhatistrue.    Third,ifyouneedtocommunicatewithmeduringyourdeliberations,sendmea 4 notesignedbyoneormoreofyou.Givethenotetothe[marshal][bailiff][courtsecurity  ! officer]andIwillansweryouassoonasIcan,eitherinwritingorhereincourt.While  "# youaredeliberating,donottellanyone-includingme-howmanyjurorsarevotingfor !% anyside. n#'   Fourth,yourverdicthastobebasedonlyontheevidenceandonthelawthatI $) havegiventoyouinmyinstructions.NothingIhavesaidordonewasmeanttosuggest \&+ whatIthinkyourverdictshouldbe.Theverdictisentirelyuptoyou.1 'u!-   Finally,theverdictformisyourwrittendecisioninthiscase.[Theformreads: J)"/ (readform)].Youwilltake[this][these]form[s]tothejuryroom,andwhenyouhaveall *c$1 agreedontheverdict[s],yourforepersonwillfillintheform[s],signanddate[it][them], 8,%3 andtellthe[marshal][bailiff][courtsecurityofficer]thatyouarereadytoreturntothe ^ courtroom. w   [Ifmorethanoneformwasfurnished,youwillbringtheunusedformsinwith L  you.]#XtX\#  e   NotesonUse  :   #  1.Thetrialjudgemaygiveafairsummaryoftheevidenceaslongasthecommentsdo  5  notrelievethejuryofitsdutytofindthateachpartyhasprovedthoseelementsofthecaseupon y  whichsuchpartyhastheburdenofproof.Judgesmay,inappropriatecases,focusthejuryon _  theprimarydisputedissues,butcautionshouldbeexercisedindoingso.SeeUnitedStatesv. E  Neumann,887F.2d880,88283(8thCir.1989)(enbanc). +  &  @--! CommitteeComments      Ifahungjuryispossible,useModelInstruction3.07,infra.'%\XXt e #XtX\D&#  1 ig$@    % S  3.07 ALLENCHARGETOBEGIVENAFTEREXTENDEDDELIBERATION st&  ^   \XXtAsItoldyouearlier,itisyourdutytoconsultwithoneanother,deliberate,andtry * toreachagreement,ifyoucandothatwithoutviolatingyourconscience.Ofcourse,you  C mustnotgiveupyourhonestbeliefsabouttheevidencejustbecauseofwhatotherjurors   believetobethetruth,orjustbecauseyouwanttoreachaverdict.Eachofyoumust  1 decidethecaseforyourself,butonlyafterconsideringanddiscussingtheevidencewith   yourfellowjurors. }    Whenyoudeliberate,youshouldbewillingtoreexamineyourownviewsand   changeyourmind,ifyoudecideyouweremistaken.Foralljurorstoagree,youwill k  havetoopenlyandfranklyexamineanddiscussthequestionsyouhavetodecide.Listen   totheopinionsofothersandbewillingtore-examineyourownviews. Y   Finally,rememberthatyouarenotrepresenting[either][any]side.Youare, r instead,judges-judgesofthefacts;judgesofthebelievabilityofthewitnesses;and G judgesoftheweightoftheevidence.Youronlyjobistofindthetruthfromthe ` evidence.Youmaytakeallthetimeyouneed. 5   Thereisnoreasontothinkthatthiscasewouldbetriedinabetterwayorthata N differentjurywouldbemorelikelytoreachadecision.Ifyoucannotagreeonaverdict, #  thecaseisleftopen,anditwillhavetoberetriedatsomelatertime.1 <"   [Youarereasonablepeople.Pleasegobacknowtocontinueyourdeliberations !$ usingyourbestjudgment.]2 "*&    `     h    #XtX\ނ'#NotesonUse  %c, 8/  1.AmoreexpandedversionofthisinstructionhasbeenapprovedbythisCircuit.See ' . UnitedStatesv.Smith,635F.2d716,722-23(8thCir.1980);UnitedStatesv.Singletary,562 (!/ F.2d1058,1060-61(8thCir.1977);UnitedStatesv.Hecht,705F.2d976,979(8thCir.1983). ("0    2.Usethissentencewhenthischargeisbeinggivenafterdeliberationshavebegun. *T$2 &   @--! CommitteeComments  D   Thisinstructionisamodificationof8thCir.Crim.'^1JuryInstr.10.02(2008).Seealsothe   CommitteeCommentsinthatinstruction.Thelanguageofthisinstructioncoverstheessential   pointsofthetraditional Allencharge,takenfromtheinstructionapprovedinUnitedStatesv.  ~ Smith,635F.2d716,72223(8thCir.1980).JudgeGibsonnotedinPotterv.UnitedStates,691  d F.2d1275,1277(8thCir.1982)that caution...dictates...thattrialcourtsshouldavoid  J substantialdeparturesfromtheformulationsofthechargethathavealreadyreceivedjudicial  0 approval. t    Itisnotnecessarilyreversibleerrorforthetrialcourttogiveasupplementalinstruction @  suasponteandevenwithoutdirectannouncementbythejuryofitsdifficulty.UnitedStatesv. &  Smith,635F.2d716,721(8thCir.1980).Thesafepractice,however,wouldbetogivesuchan    instructiononlyafterthejuryhasdirectlycommunicateditsdifficultyorthelengthoftimespent   indeliberations,comparedwiththenatureoftheissuesandlengthoftrial,andmakesitclear z  thatdifficultydoesexist.Aprematuresupplementalchargecertainlycould,inanappropriate ` case,besufficientcauseforreversal. F   Thetrialcourtmaymakereasonableinquiriestodetermineifajuryistrulydeadlocked, p butmaynotaskthejuryofthenatureandextentofitsdivision.Lowenfieldv.Phelps,484U.S. V 231(1988);Brasfieldv.UnitedStates,272U.S.448(1926);UnitedStatesv.Webb,816F.2d < 1263,1266(8thCir.1987).Thefactthatthecourtinadvertentlylearnsthedivisionofthejurors " doesnot,byitself,preventthegivingofasupplementalcharge.UnitedStatesv.Cook,663F.2d  808(8thCir.1981);Andersonv.UnitedStates,262F.2d764,77374(8thCir.1959).Suchan  instructioncanbecoercive,however,wherethesoledissentingjurorisawarethatthecourt v knowshisidentity.UnitedStatesv.SaeChua,725F.2d530(9thCir.1984). \   Inthiscircuitthedefendantisnotentitledtoanins_truction_Ԁthatthejuryhastherightto ( reachnodecision.UnitedStatesv.Arpan,887F.2d873(8thCir.enbanc1989). l    AcourtmaygiveanAllenchargewithoutconsentofthelawyers.Ithasbeenwidely 8" approvedbyfederalcourtsofappealasafairandreasonablewaytourgejurorstoreacha #  verdict.TheEighthCircuit,incriminalcases,hasconsistentlyupheldtheauthorityofthecourt $! togivetheAllenchargeafterextendedjurydeliberationwithouteitherrequestingorreceiving $" consentfromtheattorneysrepresentingtheparties.See,e.g.,UnitedStatesv.Singletary,562 %r# F.2d1058,1060(8thCir.1977);UnitedStatesv.Ringland,497F.2d1250,125253(8thCir. &X $ 1974). '>!%   TheThirdCircuithastotallybannedAllencharges,holdingthatsuchchargesareoverly h) #' coercive.UnitedStatesv.Fioravanti,412F.2d407(3dCir.1969).TheTenthCircuithas N*#(  cautionedthattheAllenchargeshouldbeincluded,ifatall,intheoriginalinstructionsduetothe 4+$)  inherentdangerinthistypeofinstructionwhengiventoanapparentlydeadlockedjury. ^ UnitedStatesv.Wynn,415F.2d135,137(10thCir.1969). D    WhiletheEighthCircuithas encourageddistrictcourtstoconsiderwithparticularcare   whetherasupplementalAlleninstructionisabsolutelynecessaryunderthecircumstances,   Potterv.UnitedStates,691F.2d1275,1277(8thCir.1982)(citingUnitedStatesv.Smith,635  ~ F.2dat722),theEighthCircuithasrefusedtoadopttheThirdCircuitbanonAllencharges.  d UnitedStatesv.Skillman,442F.2d542,558(8thCir.1971).  J   AlthoughAllenchargeshaveprimarilybeenconsideredincriminalcases,courtsincivil t  casesalsohaveauthoritytogiveAllencharges.SeeRailwayExpressAgencyv.Mackay,181 Z  F.2d257,26263(8thCir.1950);Hillv.WabashRy.Co.,1F.2d626,631(8thCir.1924).See @  also3Sand,Siffert,Reiss,SextonandThrope,ModernFederalJuryInstructions,Instruction &  78-4Comment,p.7812to7813(1990).Therefore,courtsinbothcriminalandcivilcaseshave    theauthoritytogiveAllenchargeswithouttheconsentofattorneysfortheparties.\XXt   #XtX\9G#W0Q   i%p0  @% T  4.PRISONER/PRETRIALDETAINEECIVILRIGHTSCASES 0 @ IntroductoryComment o,HԈ     Section4containsjuryinstructionsrelatingprimarilytoprisonercivilrightscases.This b sectionisorganizedasfollows: H 0  4.104.190 (#(#0 (# (#Instructionscoveringcasesfiledbyindividualswhoare  !  complainingofthemannerinwhichtheyweretreatedatthetime    theywerearrestedandbeforetheywereplacedinconfinement m   (governedgenerallybytheFourthAmendment);S (#(# 0  4.204.290 (#(#0 (# (#Instructionscoveringcomplaintsfiledbyindividualsaftertheyare  ,  placedinconfinementbutbeforetheyareconvicted(pretrial   detainees)(governedgenerallybytheFifthandFourteenth x  Amendmentsdueprocessclauseswhichrequirethatforcebe ^  reasonablyrelatedtolegitimateinstitutionalneeds);andD(#(# 0  4.304.390 (#(#0 (# (#Instructionscoveringcomplaintsfiledbyindividualsaftertheyare  sentenced(governedgenerallybytheEighthAmendment).(#(# 0  4.404.490 (#(#0 (# (#Definitions\(#(# 0  4.504.590 (#(#0 (# (#Damages5(#(# 0  4.604.690 (#(#0 (# (#VerdictForms #(#(# #n& @;;  % U  4.10EXCESSIVEUSEOFFORCEARRESTOROTHERSEIZUREOF ^ @PERSONBEFORECONFINEMENTFOURTHAMENDMENT  tO  D   _\XXtYourverdictmustbefortheplaintiff[andagainstdefendant__________]1[here   generallydescribetheclaim]2ifallthefollowingelementshavebeenproved3:  )   First,thedefendant[heredescribeanactsuchas struck,hit,kicked,orshot]4the   plaintiffwhen[arrestingorstopping]5[him][her],and u     Second,theforceusedwasexcessivebecauseitwasnotreasonablynecessaryto   [heredescribethepurposeforwhichforcewasusedsuchas arresttheplaintiff,or take c  theplaintiffintocustody,or stoptheplaintiffforinvestigation];and |    Third,asadirectresult,theplaintiffwasinjured;6and Q    [Fourth,thedefendantwasactingundercolorofstatelaw.]7 j   Indeterminingwhethertheforce,[ifany]8was excessive,youmustconsider: ? theneedfortheapplicationofforce;therelationshipbetweentheneedandtheamountof X forcethatwasusedtheextentoftheinjuryinflicted;andwhetherareasonableofficeron - thescene,withoutthebenefitofhindsight,wouldhaveusedthatmuchforceunder F similarcircumstances.[Youshouldkeepinmindthatthedecisionabouthowmuchforce  touseoftenmustbemadeincircumstancesthataretense,uncertainandrapidly 4 changing.]9[Deadlyforce10maybeusedonlyifitisreasonablybelievednecessaryto  ! [(apprehendadangerous,fleeingfelon)(preventasignificantthreatofdeathorserious  "# physicalharmtotheofficerorothers)].11Awarningmustbegiven,if[feasible] !% [possible],beforedeadlyforcemaybeused.]Youmust[decide][determine]whetherthe n#' officer'sactionswerereasonableinthelightofthefactsandcircumstancesconfronting $) theofficer[withoutregardtotheofficer'sownstateofmind,intentionormotivation].12 \&+   Ifanyoftheaboveelementshasnotbeenproved,thenyourverdictmustbefor 'u!- thedefendant. J)"/   [ Deadlyforceisforceintendedorreasonablylikelytocausedeathorserious *c$1 physical_injury.]13 8,%3  &  @$ NotesonUse  ^   1.Usethisphraseiftherearemultipledefendants. w '^[  2.Describetheclaimiftheplaintiffhasmorethanoneclaimagainstthis L  defendant. F    3.ModelInstruction3.04(BurdenofProof)tellsthejurythatsomethingis  _ provedonlyifthejuryfindsitismorelikelytruethannottrue.Thephrase greater  Y weightoftheevidenceisnotnecessaryhere.ItcanbeincludedinInstruction3.04if  S  desiredbythecourt. M    4.Theconductindicatedbytheplaintiff'sevidenceshouldbedescribedgenerally. "  Thisinstructionassumesthatprobablecauseforthearrestorstopisnotindispute.Ifitis   inissue,thatclaimshouldbesubmittedinaseparateinstruction.     5.Heredescribethenatureoftheseizureoftheplaintiffinwhichthedefendant /  wasengaged. )   6.Afindingthattheplaintiffsufferedsomeactualinjuryordamageisnecessary  beforeanawardofsubstantialcompensatorydamagesmaybemadeunder42U.S.C.  1983.Dawkinsv.Graham,50F.3d532,535(8thCir.1995).Specificlanguagewhich  describesthedamagetheplaintiffsufferedmaybeincludedhereandinthedamage  instruction.ModelInstruction4.50A,infra.    AnominaldamagesinstructionmayhavetobesubmittedunderCowansv. ] Wyrick,862F.2d697,700(8thCir.1988).SeeinfraModelInstruction4.50B. W   7.Usethislanguageifthereisanissueastowhetherthedefendantwasacting p undercolorofstatelaw,aprerequisitetoaclaimunder42U.S.C.1983.Typically,this j elementwillbeconcededbythedefendant.Ifso,itneednotbeincludedinthis d instruction.Colorofstatelawwillhavetobedefinedonthefactualissuespecifiedifthis  ^ paragraphisused.SeeinfraModelInstruction4.40. !X    8.Includethisphraseifthedefendantdeniestheuseofanyforce. -#"   9.Addthisphraseifappropriate.SeeGrahamv.Connor,490U.S.386(1989). $F$ Itshouldnotbeusedifrepetitious.SeeBillingsleyv.CityofOmaha,277F.3d990(8th %@% Cir.2002).Itneednotbeincludedifthedefendantd_enies_Ԁalluseofforce.Boesingv. &: & _Spiess_,540F.3d886(8thCir.2008). '4!'   10.Addthedefinitionofdeadlyforceifthephraseisusedintheinstruction.  )")   11.Addthisphraseorotherappropriatelanguageifdeadlyforceisused.See *"$+ Rahnv.Hawkins,464F.3d813(8thCir.2006);Tennesseev.Garner,471U.S.1(1985). z+%,   12.Addthisphraseifthereisevidenceofthedefendantofficersillwilltoward ^ theplaintiff.SeeGrahamv.Connor,490U.S.386(1989). X   13.Usethisoranotherdefinitionifdeadlyforcewasused,ormayhavebeen q used.SeeKuhav.CityofMinnetonka,365F.3d590,59798(8thCir.2004)(useof  k policedognotdeadlyforce);R#XtX\lP#8 XXtESTATEMENT#XtX 8j#Ԁ2d8 XXtOF#XtX 8ij#ԀT8 XXtORTS#XtX 8Яj#Ԁ131(1965);BlacksLaw  e Dictionary,718(9thed.2009)( violentactionknowntocreateasubstantialriskofcausing  _ deathorseriousbodilyharm).Thereareavarietyofformulations,allofwhicharesimilar.  E @--! CommitteeComments       Thisinstructionshouldbeusedonlyinconnectionwithclaimsthatexcessiveforcewas U  usedtoarrest,stopforinvestigation,orotherwiseseizeaplaintiff.InGrahamv.Connor,490 ;  U.S.386(1989),theSupremeCourtheldthata reasonablenessstandard,derivedfromthe !  FourthAmendment,appliedincasesinvolvingtheuseofforceinmakinganarrestoran   investigatorystoporotherseizure.Id.at39394.SeealsoAndrewsv.Neer,253F.3d1052,   1060(8thCir.2001)(ifthevictimisanarrestee,theFourthAmendments objective u  reasonablenessstandardcontrols).Colev.Bone,993F.2d1328,1333(8thCir.1993).This [ instructiondoesnotcovercasesinvolvinginjuriestopersonsotherthantothesuspect.Forthe A elementsinthatcircumstance,seeTerrellv.Larson,396F.3d975(8thCir.2005)(enbanc). '   InTennesseev.Garner,471U.S.1,1112(1985),theCourtheld: Wherethesuspect  posesnoimmediatethreattotheofficerandnothreattoothers,theharmresultingfromfailing f toapprehendhimdoesnotjustifytheuseofdeadlyforcetodoso.***Wheretheofficerhas L probablecausetobelievethatthesuspectposesathreatofseriousphysicalharm,eithertothe 2 officerortoothers,itisnotconstitutionallyunreasonabletopreventescapebyusingdeadly v force.Thus,ifthesuspectthreatenstheofficerwithaweaponorthereisprobablecauseto \ believethathehascommittedacrimeinvolvingtheinflictionorthreatenedinflictionofserious B physicalharm,deadlyforcemaybeusedifnecessarytopreventescape,andif,wherefeasible, ( somewarninghasbeengiven.SeealsoScottv.Harris,550U.S.372(2007)(highspeed  chase);Rahnv.Hawkins,464F.3d813(8thCir.2006).    Athreattousedeadlyforceisnotgenerallyconsideredadeadlyforce.See3.11(2), M!  ModelPenalCode;BlacksLawDictionary,718(9thed.2009). 3"!   Onceanindividualbecomesapretrialdetainee,theuseofforceismeasuredbya #.# substantivedueprocessstandardoftheFifthandFourteenthAmendments.JohnsonElv. r$$ Schoemehl,878F.2d1043,104849(8thCir.1989).Seegenerally,ModelInstruction4.20, X%% infra,foruseofexcessiveforceclaimsofpretrialdetainees.TheEighthCircuithasnotdecided >&& whentheperson'sstatuschangesfrom arresteeto pretrialdetainee.Andrewsv.Neer,253 $' ' F.3d1052,106061(8thCir.2001)(8thCircuithasnotdrawnbrightlinedividingtheendof  (!( arresteesstatus).However,areviewofEighthCircuitcaselawindicatesthatstatusaspretrial (") detaineebeginssometimeafterthearrestandcompletionofthebookingprocess.SeeWilsonv. )x#* Spain,209F.3d713,71516(8thCir.2000)(discussingthesplitofthefederalcircuitcourtson *^$+ thisissue,andhistoryofthe8thCircuitsholdings).SeealsoChambersv._Pennycook_,641F.3d +D%, 898(8thCir.2011).Theindividual'sstatusasapretrialdetaineecontinuesuntilheorshehas ^ beensentenced.WilliamsElv.Johnson,872F.2d224,22829(8thCir.1989)(aperson D convicted,notyetsentenced,isstillapretrialdetainee).SeealsoWilson,209F.3dat715. *   ToestablishaconstitutionalviolationundertheFourthAmendmentsrighttobefree  % fromexcessiveforce,thetestiswhethertheamountofforceusedwasobjectivelyreasonable i  undertheparticularcircumstances.Brownv.CityofGoldenValley,574F.3d491,496(8thCir. O  2009).Whilethedegreeofinjurysuffered iscertainlyrelevantinsofarasittendstoshowthe 5  amountandtypeofforceused,ade_minimis_Ԁinjurydoesnotforecloseanexcessiveforceclaim   broughtundertheFourthAmendment.Chambersv._Pennycook_,641F.3d898,906(8thCir.   2011).   ̚  ;  Кpn(@ rp) @@ % V  4.20EXCESSIVEUSEOFFORCE-PRETRIALDETAINEES ^ @  FIFTHANDFOURTEENTHAMENDMENTS F.  D Yourverdictmustbefortheplaintiff[andagainstdefendant__________]1[heregenerally   describetheclaim]2ifallthefollowingelementshavebeenproved3: i    First,thedefendant[heredescribeanactsuchas struck,hit,kicked,orshot]4the  d plaintiff,and      Second,theforceusedwasexcessivebecauseitwasnotreasonablynecessaryto[here t  describethepurposeforwhichforcewasusedsuchas restoreorder,or maintain o  discipline,]5,and &    Third,asadirectresult,theplaintiffwasinjured,6and !    [Fourth,thedefendantwasactingundercolorofstatelaw.]7 z    Indeterminingwhethertheforce[ifany]8wasexcessive,youmustconsider:theneed 1 fortheapplicationofforce;therelationshipbetweentheneedandtheamountofforcethatwas , used;theextentoftheinjuryinflicted;whetheritwasusedforpunishmentratherthanfora  legitimatepurposesuchasmaintainingorderorsecuritywithin[heredescribethefacilityin < whichtheplaintiffwasincarcerated];andwhetherareasonableofficeronthescenewouldhave 7 usedthesameforceundersimilarcircumstances.[Youshouldkeepinmindthatthedecision  abouthowmuchforcetouseoftenmustbemadeincircumstancesthataretense,uncertainand G! rapidlychanging.]9[Deadlyforce10maybeusedonlyifitisreasonablybelievednecessaryto B# [(apprehendadangerous,fleeingfelon)(preventasignificantthreatofdeathorseriousphysical % harmtotheofficerorothers)].11Awarningmustbegiven,if[_feasiblel_Ԁ[possible],beforedeadly R!' forcemaybeused.]Youmust[decide][determine]whethertheofficer'sactionswere "M) reasonableinthelightofthefactsandcircumstancesconfrontingtheofficer[withoutregardto $+ theofficer'sownstateofmind,intentionormotivation].12 ]%-   Ifanyoftheaboveelementshasnotbeenproved,thenyourverdictmustbeforthe &X / defendant. (!1   [ Deadlyforceisforceintendedorreasonablylikelytocausedeathorseriousphysical h) #3  injury.]13 *c$5  & ?  @$ NotesonUse  ^   1.Usethisphraseiftherearemultipledefendants.'?^ Y   2.Describetheclaimiftheplaintiffhasmorethanoneclaimagainstthisdefendant.     3.ModelInstruction3.04(BurdenofProof)tellsthejurythatsomethingisprovedonly i  ifthejuryfindsitismorelikelytruethannottrue.Thephrase greaterweightoftheevidence O  isnotnecessaryhere.ItcanbeincludedinInstruction3.04ifdesiredbythecourt. 5    4.Theconductindicatedbytheplaintiff'sevidenceshouldbedescribedgenerally.This  0  instructionassumesthatprobablecauseforthearrestorstopisnotindispute.Ifitisinissue, t  thatclaimshouldbesubmittedinaseparateinstruction. Z    5.SeeJohnsonElv.Schoemehl,878F.2d1043,1048(8thCir.1989),andAndrewsv. U  Neer,253F.3d1052,106061(8thCir.2001),forthestandardforthepretrialdetaineewhoisin ;  custody.Thisinstructionappliestopersonswhoarenotyetincustodyatthetimetheexcessive !  forceisallegedtohaveoccurred. e    6.Specificlanguagewhichdescribesthedamagetheplaintiffsufferedmaybeincluded ` here,andinthedamageinstruction,ModelInstruction4.50A,infra.Nominaldamageswillalso F havetobesubmittedunderCowansv.Wyrick,862F.2d697,700(8thCir.1988).Seeinfra , ModelInstruction4.50B. p   7.Usethislanguageifthereisanissueastowhetherthedefendantwasactingunder k colorofstatelaw,aprerequisitetoaclaimunder42U.S.C.1983.Typically,thiselementwill Q beconcededbythedefendant.Ifso,itneednotbeincludedinthisinstruction.Colorofstate 7 lawwillhavetobedefinedonthefactualissuespecifiedifthisparagraphisused.Seeinfra { ModelInstruction4.40. a   8.Includethisphraseifthedefendantdeniestheuseofanyforce. \   9.Addthisphraseorotherappropriatelanguageifdeadlyforceisused.SeeRahnv.   Hawkins,464F.3d813(8thCir.2006);Tennesseev.Garner,471U.S.1(1985).Itneednotbe ! includedifthedefendantdeniesalluseofforce.Boesingv._Spiess_,540F.3d886(8thCir.2008).  "   10.Addthedefinitionofdeadlyforceifthephraseisusedintheinstruction. 8"$   11.Addthisphraseorotherappropriatelanguageifdeadlyforceisused.SeeRahnv. #3& Hawkins,464F.3d813(8thCir.2006);Tennesseev.Garner,471U.S.1(1985). w$'   12.Addthisphraseifthereisevidenceofthedefendantofficersillwilltowardthe %r) plaintiff.SeeGrahamv.Connor,490U.S.386(1989). &X *   13.Usethisoranotherdefinitionifdeadlyforcewasused,ormayhavebeenused.See (!, Kuhav.CityofMinnetonka,365F.3d590,59798(8thCir.2004)(useofpolicedognotdeadly ("- force);BlacksLawDictionary,718(9th___ed._Ԁ2001)( violentactionknowntocreatea )}#. substantialriskofcausingdeathorseriousbodilyharm).Thereareavarietyofformulations, *c$/ allofwhicharesimilar. +I%0 & J @--! CommitteeComments  ^   Atthetimeofarrest,aperson'srighttobefreefromexcessiveforceisdeterminedunder Y theFourthAmendment.SeeinfraCommitteeCommentstoModelInstruction4.10.However, ? differentconstitutionalprotectionsmayapplyatdifferentjuncturesofthecustodialcontinuum  % runningthroughinitialarresttopostconvictionincarceration.SeeAndrewsv.Neer,253F.3d i  1052(8thCir.2001).Preciselywhenthestandardsshiftisthesubjectofdebate.SeeWilsonv. O  Spain,209F.3d713,715(8thCir.2000). 5    Onceanindividualbecomesapretrialdetainee,theuseofforceismeasuredbya  0  substantivedueprocessstandardoftheFifthandFourteenthAmendments.JohnsonElv. t  Schoemehl,878F.2d1043,104849(8thCir.1989).Seegenerally,ModelInstruction4.20, Z  infra,foruseofexcessiveforceclaimsofpretrialdetainees.TheEighthCircuithasnotdecided @  whentheperson'sstatuschangesfrom arresteeto pretrialdetainee.Andrewsv.Neer,253 &  F.3d1052,106061(8thCir.2001)(8thCircuithasnotdrawnbrightlinedividingtheendof    arresteesstatus).However,areviewofEighthCircuitcaselawappearstoindicatethatstatusas   pretrialdetaineebeginssometimeafterthearrestandcompletionofthebookingprocess.See z  Wilsonv.Spain,209F.3d713,71516(8thCir.2000)(discussingthesplitofthefederalcircuit ` courtsonthisissue,andhistoryofthe8thCircuitsholdings).SeealsoChambersv._Pennycook_, F 641F.3d898,905(8thCir.2011).Theindividual'sstatusasapretrialdetaineecontinuesuntil , heorshehasbeensentenced.WilliamsElv.Johnson,872F.2d224,22829(8thCir.1989)(a p personconvicted,notyetsentenced,isstillapretrialdetainee).SeealsoWilson,209F.3dat V 715. <   UndertheFourteenthAmendment,apretrialdetaineesconstitutionalrightsareviolated 7 ifthedetaineesconditionsofconfinementamounttopunishment.Morrisv._Zefferi_,601F.3d { 805,809(8thCir.2010).Thisisbecauseaninmatewhoisapretrialdetaineecannotbe a punishedpriortoanadjudicationofguilt.Id.SeealsoBellv.Wolfish,441U.S.520(1979). G Constitutionallyinfirmpracticesarethosethatarepunitiveinintent,thosethatarenotrationally - relatedtolegitimatepurposeorthosethatarerationallyrelatedbutareexcessiveinlightoftheir  purpose.JohnsonEl,878F.2dat1048.WhiletechnicallyundertheFourteenthAmendment,as  apracticalmatter,apretrialdetaineesrightsareanalyzedundertheEighthAmendmentthe   sameasaconvictedprisonersrights.Kahlev.Leonard,477F.3d544,550(8thCir.2007).See !g  alsoMorris,601F.3dat809. Pretrialdetaineesareentitledtoatleastasgreatprotectionunder "M! theFourteenthAmendmentasthataffordedconvictedprisonersundertheEighthAmendment. #3" Morris,601F.3dat809.SeealsoKahle,477F.3dat550.However,ithasbeensuggestedby w$# theEighthCircuitthattheburdenofshowingaconstitutionalviolationislighterforpretrial ]%$ detaineesundertheFourteenthAmendmentthanforpostconvictionprisonersundertheEighth C&% Amendment.Morris,601F.3dat809. )' &   _A_Ԁpretrialdetaineesexcessiveforceclaimalsoisgroundedinthedueprocessclauseof ($"( theFifthandFourteenthAmendments,ratherthantheFourthorEighthAmendments.However, h) #) theanalysisisthesameasonebroughtundertheFourthAmendment.Theuseofforcemustbe N*#* objectivelyreasonableinthelightofthesituationpresented.Andrewsv.Neer,253F.3d1052, 4+$+ 1060(8thCir.2001)(citingJohnson-Elv.Schoemehl,878F.2d1043,1048-49(8thCir.1989)). ,%, ?XtXXXt?pA X?XtWhenmakingthisdetermination,thecourtmustconsider:(1)theneedforapplying ^ force;(2)therelationshipbetweenthatneedandamountofforceused;(3)thethreat W reasonablyperceived;(4)theextentofinjuryinflicted;(5)whetherforcewasusedfor P punishmentorinsteadtoachievealegitimatepurposesuchasmaintainingorderor I  security;and(6)whetherareasonableofficeronthescenewouldhaveusedsuchforce B  undersimilarcircumstances.#pA  ?pAM#?pA  pAԀ#pA  ?pA#?pA  pAAndrews#pA  ?pA##?pA  pA,253F.3dat1061,n.7.#pA  ?pAo# ;    InevaluatinganexcessiveforceclaimundertheFourthAmendment,theEighth  R Circuitrecentlyobserved,thedegreeofinjurysufferedinan%  %excessive%  %forcecase is  K certainlyrelevantinsofarasittendstoshowtheamountandtypeofforceused. D  Chambersv._Pennycook_,641F.3d898,906(8thCir.2011);_Rohrbough_Ԁv.Hall,586F.3d =  582,586(8thCir.2009)( Acourtmayalsoevaluatetheextentofthe[plaintiffs] 6  injuries.).#XtX pAl#ԀpA XXtHowever,ade_minimis_ԀinjurydoesnotforecloseaFourthAmendment /  excessiveforceclaim.Chambers,641F.3dat906. (    Similarly,inevaluatinganexcessiveforceclaimundertheEighthAmendment,   theUnitedStatesSupremeCourtinWilkinsv._Gaddy_,___U.S.___,130_S.Ct_.1175,1178  (2010)(citingHudsonv.McMillian,503U.S.1,7,112_S.Ct_.995(1992)),statedthat  althoughtheextentofphysicalinjurymayberelevant,itisonlyonefactorthatmaybe  usedtodetermine whethertheuseofforcecouldplausiblyhavebeenthoughtnecessary  inaparticularsituation.(internalcitationomitted). z #XtX pA#  Casesinvolvingfood,clothing,shelter,medicalcareandreasonablesafetymustbe M decidedunderthedeliberateindifferencestandardforbothpretrialdetaineesandconvicted 3 prisoners.Butlerv.Fletcher,465F.3d340,345(8thCir.2006);Crowv.Montgomery,403F.3d  598(8thCir.2005);Whitnackv.DouglasCounty,16F.3d954(8thCir.1994).  '^o   S sr* @ % W  4.30EXCESSIVEUSEOFFORCE-CONVICTEDPRISONERS ^ @"EIGHTHAMENDMENT ap  D   Yourverdictmustbefortheplaintiff[andagainstdefendant__________]1[here   generallydescribetheclaim]2ifallthefollowingelementshavebeenproved3: i    First,thedefendant[heredescribeanactsuchas struck,hit,orkicked]4theplaintiff,  d and      Second,theforceusedwasexcessiveandappliedmaliciouslyandsadistically5forthe t  purposeofcausingharm;[andnotinagoodfaithefforttoachievealegitimatepurpose;]6and o    Third,asadirectresult,theplaintiffwasinjured,7and &    [Fourth,thedefendantwasactingundercolorofstatelaw.]8 !    Indeterminingwhethertheforce[,ifany]9wasexcessive,10youmustconsider:theneed z  fortheapplicationofforce;therelationshipbetweentheneedandtheamountofforcethatwas 1 used[;][and]theextentoftheinjuryinflicted[;andwhethertheforcewasusedtoachievea , legitimatepurposeormaliciouslyandsadisticallyforthepurposeofcausingharm].    Maliciouslymeansintentionallyinjuringanotherwithoutjustcauseorreason. <  Sadisticallymeansengaginginextremeorexcessivecrueltyordelightingincruelty. 7   Ifanyoftheaboveelementshasnotbeenproved,thenyourverdictmustbeforthe  defendant. G!  &  @$ NotesonUse  B#   1.Usethisphraseiftherearemultipledefendants. % '  2.Describetheclaimiftheplaintiffhasmorethanoneclaimagainstthisdefendant. R!'   3.ModelInstruction3.04(BurdenofProof)tellsthejurythatsomethingisprovedonly "M) ifthejuryfindsitismorelikelytruethannottrue.Thephrase greaterweightoftheevidence #3* isnotnecessaryhere.ItcanbeincludedinInstruction3.04ifdesiredbythecourt. w$+   4.Theconductindicatedbytheplaintiff'sevidenceshouldbedescribedgenerally. %r-   5.Theissueofthedefendant'sintentmustbeaddressedasanelementoftheclaim. )' / Howardv.Barnett,21F.3d868(8thCir.1994);Cummingsv.Malone,995F.2d817(8thCir. (!0 1993).Iftheplaintiffclaimsforcewasusedforanillegitimatepurpose,forexample,todeterhis ("1 accesstothecourts,thetrialjudgeshouldconsideramodificationofthisphrasetoreflectthat )}#2 improperpurpose.Ifnoforceatallwasappropriate,theterm excessivecouldbereplaced *c$3 with unnecessary.Ithasbeensuggestedthatthejuryshouldnotbedirectedtoconsider +I%4 whethertheforcewasappliedmaliciouslyifinstitutionalsecuritywasnotinvolved.SeeWyatt ^ v.Delaney,818F.2d21,23(8thCir.1987).However,thiselementrepeatedlyhasbeen D associatedwithEighthAmendmentviolationsinexcessiveforcecases.SeeGrahamv.Connor; * Whitleyv.Albers.SeealsoCowansv.Wyrick,862F.2d697(8thCir.1988).Thecases   frequentlyusethephrase maliciouslyandsadistically.TheEighthCircuithasindicatedthat   theterm sadisticallyisnecessarytoacorrectstatementofthelaw.Howardv.Barnett,21F.3d  ~ 868(8thCir.1994).InWilkinsv._Gaddy_,___U.S.___,130S.Ct.1175,1178(2010),theCourt  d statedthecorejudicialinquiryiswhetherforcewasappliedinagoodfaithefforttomaintain  J discipline,ormaliciouslyandsadisticallytocauseharm.Theterm sadistic,tosomepeople,  0 hassexualconnotations.TheCommittee,therefore,recommendsthatboth maliciouslyand t   sadisticallybedefined.SeeinfraModelInstructions4.45and4.46. Z    6.Usethisphraseifthedefendantacknowledgestheuseofforce,butassertsthatthe U  forcewasusedtoachievealegitimatepurpose. ;    7.Specificlanguagewhichdescribesthedamagetheplaintiffsufferedmaybeincluded   here,andinthedamageinstruction,ModelInstruction4.50A,infra.De_minimis_Ԁormodest z  natureofallegedinjurieswillnodoubtlimitthedamagesthatcanberecovered,butdonot ` precludeanexcessiveforceclaim.Wilkinsv._Gaddy_,___U.S.___,130S.Ct.1175(2010).The F jurymustawardnominaldamagesifitfindstheallegedinjuriestohavenomonetaryvalueor , areinsufficienttojustifywithreasonablecertaintyamoresubstantialmeasureofdamages.See p Howardv.Barnett,21F.3d868,873(8thCir.1994)(citingCowansv.Wyrick,862F.2d697, V 700(8thCir.1988)).SeealsoinfraModelInstruction4.50B. <   8.Usethislanguageifthereisanissueastowhetherthedefendantwasactingunder 7 colorofstatelaw,aprerequisitetoaclaimunder42U.S.C.1983.Typically,thiselementwill { beconcededbythedefendant.Ifso,itneednotbeincludedinthisinstruction.Colorofstate a lawwillhavetobedefinedonthefactualissuespecifiedifthisparagraphisused.Seeinfra G ModelInstruction4.40. -   9.Includethisphraseifthedefendantdeniestheuseofanyforce. (   10.Ifdeadlyforcewasused,itmaybeappropriatetomodifythisinstructiontotellthe    jurywhendeadlyforceisallowed.SeeRahnv.Hawkins,464F.3d813(8thCir.2006); !g! Tennesseev.Garner,471U.S.1(1985). "M" & % @--! CommitteeComments  $$   Thisinstructionshouldbeusedonlywhenaconvictedpersonclaimshisorher ]%& constitutional'%$rightswereviolatedbecauseoftheuseofforcebyastateofficial.Iftheplaintiff C&' wasaconvictedprisoneratthetimeoftheallegedviolation,theappropriatestandardderives )' ( fromtheEighthAmendment.Grahamv.Connor,490U.S.386(1989);Whitleyv.Albers,475 (!) U.S.312(1986);Hudsonv.McMillian,503U.S.1(1992). ("*   TheCommitteerecommendsthataninstructionnotbegivenonqualifiedimmunity N*#, basedondefendantsgoodfaith.Aseparateinstructionisunnecessarybecausethe 4+$- issue/elementsinstructionitselfrequiresthejurytoassessthedefendant'sintentinanEighth ,%. Amendmentcontext.SeeGrahamv.Connor.Furthermore,theissueofgoodfaithimmunityis ^ anissuethejudgemustdecide;itisnotajuryissue.Coffmanv.Trickey,884F.2d1057,1062 D 63(8thCir.1989).Theelementsinstructionshouldsetforthfactswhich,iffoundtobetrue, * entitletheplaintifftoaverdict.     Twophrasesfrequentlycomeupinthesecases.Oneis maliciouslyandsadisticallyfor i  theverypurposeofcausingharm,andtheotheris wantoninflictionofpain.TheEighth O  CircuitcasesofHowardv.Barnett,21F.3d868(8thCir.1994)andCummingsv.Malone,995 5  F.2d817(8thCir.1993)placesubstantialemphasisontheuseofthewords maliciousand    sadisticintheinstructionsthemselves.SeeWilkinsv._Gaddy_.___U.S.___,130S.Ct.1175   (2010).Thus,the wantoninflictionofpainclausehasbeeneliminated.     @  us+ @a a  % X  4.31DENIALOFMEDICALCARE- ^ @ CONVICTEDPRISONERSANDPRETRIALDETAINEES D @!(42U.S.C.1983) cl  *   Yourverdictmustbefortheplaintiff[andagainstdefendant__________]1[onthe   plaintiff'sclaimofdeliberateindifferenceto[(his)(her)]seriousmedicalneed]2ifallofthe O  followingelementshavebeenproved3:  J   First,theplaintiffhadaseriousneedfor[describetheplaintiff'smedicalneed,suchas    treatmentforabrokenlegor painmedication],and Z    Second,thedefendantwasawareoftheplaintiff'sseriousneedforthe[ medicalcareor U   painmedication],and      Third,thedefendant,4withdeliberateindifference,5failedto[ providethemedicalcare e  or directthatthemedicalcarebeprovidedor allowtheplaintifftoobtainthemedicalcare ` needed][withinareasonabletime],6and    Fourth,asadirectresult,theplaintiffwasinjured,7and p   [Fifth,thedefendantwasactingundercolorofstatelaw.]8 k   Ifanyoftheaboveelementshasnotbeenproved,thenyourverdictmustbeforthe " defendant. {  &  @$ NotesonUse  -"   1.Usethisphraseiftherearemultipledefendants. ($ '-T  2.Usethislanguagewhentheplaintiffhasmorethanoneclaim.  &   3.ModelInstruction3.04(BurdenofProof)tellsthejurythatsomethingisprovedonly 8"( ifthejuryfindsitismorelikelytruethannottrue.Thephrase greaterweightoftheevidence #) isnotnecessaryhere.ItcanbeincludedinInstruction3.04ifdesiredbythecourt. $*   4.Thisinstructionassumesthatthedefendanthadtheresponsibilitytoprovidecarefor ]%, theplaintiff'sseriousmedicalneeds.Ifthedefendanthasnoduty,thenadirectedverdictwould C&- beappropriate.Iftheexistenceofthedutyisdisputed,theissuemaybeaquestionoflawforthe )' . judgetodecide.Ifaspecificfactisdisputed,whichwillbedeterminativeofthedefendant's (!/ responsibility,thatfactshouldbesubmittedtothejury.Forexample,itmaybedisputed ("0 whetheracertainpersonwasworkingonacertainday.Thatquestionshouldbespecifically )}#1 submittedtothejury.Thelegalquestionwhetheradutyarisesfromaspecificsetoffactsisa *c$2 questionforthejudge. +I%3   5.InButlerv.Fletcher,465F.3d340(8thCir.2006),thecourtheldthat deliberate ^ indifferenceistheappropriatestandardofculpabilityforallclaimsthatprisonofficialsfailedto D providepretrialdetaineeswithadequatefood,clothing,shelter,medicalcareandreasonable * safety.Itisprobablybesttodefine deliberateindifference.SeeHowardv.Adkison,887F.2d   134(8thCir.1989);Duckworthv.Franzen,780F.2d645,654(7thCir.1985).     6.Addthisphraseifitisallegedthemedicalcarewasprovidedbutnotatareasonable O  time. 5    7.Cowansv.Wyrick,862F.2d697(8thCir.1988),suggeststhatactualdamagesare  0  requiredinEighthAmendmentcases.ButseeCareyv.Piphus,435U.S.247(1978)and t  MemphisCommunitySchoolDist.v.Stachura,477U.S.299(1986),whichstatedthatactual Z  damagesarenotrequiredinproceduraldueprocesscases.TheCommitteerecommends @  requiringthejurytofindthattheplaintiffsustaineddamageinallEighthAmendmentcases. &  ThemeasureofdamagesisaddressedinModelInstructions4.50Aand4.50B,infra.Nominal    damagesshouldbesubmittedinallEighthAmendmentcases,butmustbedefinedinaccordance   withCowansandModelInstruction4.50B,infra.SeealsoCommitteeComments,Model z  Instruction4.50A,infra. `   8.Usethislanguageiftheissueofwhetherthedefendantwasactingundercolorofstate  lawisstillinthecase.Colorofstatelawwillhavetobedefined.See42U.S.C.1983and  ModelInstruction4.40,infra.  & % @--! CommitteeComments  <   SeeinfraModelInstruction4.20foradiscussionofthestandardstobeappliedwhen 7 dealing'%<.withuseofforceonpretrialdetainees.Medicalclaimsofpretrialdetaineesaregoverned { bythesame deliberateindifferencestandardasusedforconvictedprisoners.Butlerv. a Fletcher,465F.3d340(8thCir.2006);Davisv.Hall,992F.2d151(8thCir.1993)isthe G controllingcase.The deliberateindifferencestandardusedinthisinstructionisanEighth - Amendmentstandardwhichisdesignedforuseinvolvingconvictedpersons.SeeWilsonv.  Seiter,501U.S.294(1991);Farmerv.Brennan,511U.S.825(1994),butmayalsobeusedin  pretrialdetaineecasesinvolvingfailuretoprovidefood,clothing,shelter,medicalcareand    reasonablesafety.Butler,465F.3dat345. !g!   ThisinstructionisderivedfromEstellev.Gamble,429U.S.97(1976),whichappliesthe ## EighthAmendmenttotheUnitedStatesConstitutiontomedicalclaimsandsetsthestandards. $$ Wilsondidnotchangethestandard,althoughitmadeitclearerthatthedeliberateindifference $% standardappliestoallconditionsofconfinementcasesofconvictedpersonsandthatnegligence %r& isnotsufficient. &X '   SeeGobertandCohen,RightsofPrisoners11.10. (!)   Thefollowingdefinitionof seriousmedicalneedshouldbeconsidered: h) #+   8 ` Aseriousmedicalneedisonethathasbeendiagnosedbya *c$- physicianasrequiringtreatmentoronethatissoobviousthateven +I%. alaypersonwouldeasilyrecognizethenecessityforadoctor's ^ attention.D` x` x _Schaub_Ԁv._VonWald_,638F.3d905,914(8thCir.2011).Whetheraninmatesconditionisa ? seriousmedicalneedisaquestionoffact._Schaub_at915.Ifamedicalneedwouldbeobviousto  % alayperson,verifyingmedicalevidenceisunnecessary.Id.at914. i    Deliberateindifferenceisequivalenttocriminallawrecklessness,whichismore  d blameworthythannegligence,yetlessblameworthythanpurposefullycausingorknowingly  J bringingaboutasubstantialriskofseriousharmtotheinmate.Id.at91415.Anofficialmay  0  beheldliableifheknowsthataninmatefacesasubstantialriskofseriousharmanddisregards t  thatriskbyfailingtotakereasonablemeasurestoabateit.Id.at916. Thefactual Z  determinationthatanofficialhadtherequisiteknowledgeofasubstantialriskmaybeinferred @  fromcircumstantialevidence,orfromfactthatriskwasobvious.Id.   &    !  wu, @ZZ % Y  4.32FAILURETOPROTECTFROMATTACKSPECIFICATTACK ^ @ CONVICTEDPRISONERSEIGHTHAMENDMENT D   (AndPretrialDetaineesFourteenthAmendment) ma  *   Yourverdictmustbefortheplaintiff[andagainstdefendant__________]1[here   generallydescribetheclaim]2ifallthefollowingelementshavebeenproved3: O    First,[heredescribetheattacker(s)suchas oneormore[inmates]][heredescribean  J actsuchas struck,hitorkicked]4theplaintiff,and     Second,thedefendantwasawareofthesubstantialriskofanattack;and Z    Third,thedefendant,withdeliberateindifferencetotheplaintiff'sneedtobeprotected U  from[suchattack],failedtoprotecttheplaintiff;and      Fourth,asadirectresult,theplaintiffwasinjured,5and e    [Fifth,thedefendantwasactingundercolorofstatelaw.]6 `   Ifanyoftheaboveelementshasnotbeenproved,thenyourverdictmustbeforthe  defendant. p  &  @$ NotesonUse  "   1.Usethisphraseiftherearemultipledefendants. { '"  2.Describetheclaimiftheplaintiffhasmorethanoneclaimagainstthisdefendant. v    3.ModelInstruction3.04(BurdenofProof)tellsthejurythatsomethingisprovedonly -" ifthejuryfindsitismorelikelytruethannottrue.Thephrase greaterweightoftheevidence # isnotnecessaryhere.ItcanbeincludedinInstruction3.04ifdesiredbythecourt. $   4.Theconductindicatedbytheplaintiff'sevidenceshouldbedescribedgenerally. R!&   5.Specificlanguagewhichdescribesthedamagetheplaintiffsufferedmaybeincluded "M( here,andinthedamageinstruction,ModelInstruction4.50A,infra.Theplaintiffmustshow #3) thathesufferedobjectivelyseriousharmasaresultofthedefendantsfailuretoprotect. w$* _Schoelch_,625F.3dat1047. ]%+   6.Usethislanguageifthereisanissueastowhetherthedefendantwasactingunder &X - colorofstatelaw,aprerequisitetoaclaimunder42U.S.C.1983.Typically,thiselementwill '>!. beconcededbythedefendant.Ifso,itneednotbeincludedinthisinstruction.Colorofstate ($"/ lawwillhavetobedefinedonthefactualissuespecifiedifthisparagraphisused.Seeinfra h) #0  ModelInstruction4.40. N*#1 &   @--! CommitteeComments  ^   Toproveunconstitutionalfailuretoprotectfromharm(plaintiff)mustshow(1)an Y objectivelysufficientdeprivation,meaningthathewasincarceratedunderconditionsposinga ? substantialriskofseriousharm,and(2)thatdefendantwasdeliberatelyindifferenttothe  % substantialriskofharm._Schoelch_at1046.Negligenceisnotsufficient.SeeAmbrosev. i  Young,474'^ F.3d1070,1077(8thCir.2007). O    AlthoughpretrialdetaineeclaimisanalyzedundertheFourteenthAmendmentDue  J ProcessClauseratherthantheEighthAmendment,thismakeslittledifferenceasapractical  0  matterbecausepretrialdetaineesareentitledto(atleast)thesameprotectionsunderthe t  FourteenthAmendmentasimprisonedconvictsreceiveundertheEighthAmendment._Schoelch_ Z  v.Mitchell,625F.3d1041,1046(8thCir.2010);Kahlev.Leonard,477F.3d544,550(8thCir. @  2007).SeealsoMorrisv._Zefferi_,601F.3d805(8thCir.2010). &    !  yw- @ % Z  4.40DEFINITION:COLOROFSTATELAW(42U.S.C.1983) ma  ^   Actsaredoneundercoloroflawwhenapersonactsor[falselyappears][falselyclaims] * [purports]toactintheperformanceofofficialdutiesunderanystate,countyormunicipallaw,  % ordinanceorregulation.  ~  & ? @--! CommitteeComments  5    SeeMonroev.Pape,365U.S.'?5 Z167(1961),overruledinpart,Monellv.Departmentof  0  SocialServices,436U.S.658(1978);Screwsv.UnitedStates,325U.S.91(1945);UnitedStates t  v.Classic,313U.S.299(1941).SeealsoNeighborhoodEnterprises,Inc.v.CityofSt.Louis, Z  540F.3d882,885(8thCir.2008)(discussingdefinitionasrequiredina1983case).Thecourt @  should,ifpossible,ruleontherecordwhethertheconductofthedefendant,ifitoccurredas &  claimedbytheplaintiff,constitutesactingundercolorofstate(county,municipal)lawand    shouldnotinstructthejuryonthisissue.Inmostcases,thecolorofstatelawissueisnot   challengedandthejuryneednotbeinstructedonit.Ifitmustbeinstructed,thisinstruction z  shouldnormallybesufficient. h  `    {y. @  % [  4.42DEFINITION:PERVASIVERISKOFHARM-CONVICTEDPRISONERS ^ @!(42U.S.C.1983) ma#  D   Apervasiveriskofharmexistswhen(violentacts)(sexualassaults)occurwithsufficient   frequencythataprisonerorprisonersareputinreasonablefearfortheirsafety,andprison i  officialsareawareoftheproblemandtheneedforprotectivemeasures.  d  @--! CommitteeComments       InFallsv.Nesbitt,966F.2d375(8thCir.1992),thecourtstated: t  0  [A] pervasiveriskofharmmaynotordinarilybeshownbypointingtoasingleincident o  orisolatedincidents,butitmaybeestablishedbymuchlessthanproofofareignof U  violenceandterrorintheparticularinstruction....Itisenoughthatviolenceandsexual ;  assaultsoccur...withsufficientfrequencythatprisoners...areputinreasonablefear !  fortheirsafetyandtoreasonablyappriseprisonofficialsoftheexistenceoftheproblem e  andtheneedforprotectivemeasures....K (#(# Id.at378(quotingAndrewsv.Siegel,929F.2dat1330). p  F    {/ @XX  % \  4.43DEFINITION:SERIOUSMEDICALNEED-CONVICTEDPRISONERS ^ @!(42U.S.C.1983) ma[   D   Aseriousmedicalneedisonethathasbeendiagnosedbyaphysicianasrequiring   treatmentoronethatissoobviousthatevenalaypersonwouldeasilyrecognizethenecessity i  foradoctor'sattention.1  d  & ? @$ NotesonUse       1.'? k"Ԁ_Schaub_Ԁv._VonWald_,638F.3d905,914(8thCir.2011). t     &  0 @i i  % ]  4.44DEFINITION:DELIBERATEINDIFFERENCE- ^ @ CONVICTEDPRISONERSANDPRETRIALDETAINEES D @!(42U.S.C.1983) ma#  *   Deliberateindifferenceisestablishedonlyifthereisactualknowledgeofasubstantial   riskthattheplaintiff(describeseriousmedicalproblemorotherseriousharmthatthedefendant O  isexpectedtoprevent)andifthedefendantdisregardsthatriskbyintentionallyrefusingor  J intentionallyfailingtotakereasonablemeasurestodealwiththeproblem.Negligenceor   inadvertencedoesnotconstitutedeliberateindifference. Z   & ? @--! CommitteeComments  U    SeeFarmerv.Brennan,511U.S.825(1994)(clearlylimiting'?%'deliberateindifferenceto    intentional,knowingorrecklessnessinthecriminallawcontextwhichrequiresactual   knowledgeofaseriousrisk).Wilsonv.Seiter,501U.S.294(1991).ThecourtislimitingEighth z  Amendmentclaimstothoseinwhichtheplaintiffcanshowactualsubjectiveintentratherthan ` justrecklessnessinthetortsense.InWilson,thecourtcharacterizedasEighthAmendment F violationsonlyactswhichare deliberateact[s]intendedtochastiseordeter(emphasisadded) , or punishment[which]hasbeendeliberatelyadministeredforapenalordisciplinarypurpose p (emphasisadded).Wilson,501U.S.at300.Thecourt,continuingtofollowthedeliberate V indifferencestandard,clearlystatedthatnegligencewasnotsufficient. <   Seealso_Schaub_Ԁv._VonWald_,638F.3d905(8thCir.2011).The_Schaub_casediscusses 7 standardstobeappliedtoinmatesclaimsofdeliberateindifferencetomedicalneeds.Seesupra { ModelInstruction4.31. a   InButlerv.Fletcher,465F.3d340,345(8thCir.2006),thecourt,indiscussingtheright \ tofood,clothing,shelter,medicalcareandreasonablesafety,statedthat [p]retrialdetaineesand B convictedinmates,likeallpersonsincustody,havethesamerighttothesebasicneeds.Thus, (  thesamestandardofcareisappropriate.Thecourtthenheldthatthedeliberateindifference l ! standardisthestandardtobeapplied. R!"   TheCommitteebelievesthephrase deliberateindifferenceshouldbedefinedinmost "M$ cases,althoughEighthCircuitcaselawdoesnotrequireit. #3%   $' 1 @  % ^  4.45DEFINITION:MALICIOUSLY  0  ^     Maliciouslymeansintentionallyinjuringanotherwithoutjustcause. *  @--! CommitteeComments   %   SeeHowardv.Barnett,21F.3d868(8thCir.1994).SeealsoBlacksLawDictionary  ~ (9thed.2009)( Substantiallycertaintocauseinjury.Withoutjustcauseorexcuse.)  d      2 @n n  % _  4.46DEFINITION:SADISTICALLY  G3  ^   Sadisticallymeansengagingin extremeorexcessivecrueltyordelightingin_cruelty._Ԁ  %  & ? @--! CommitteeComments   ~   SeeHowardv.Barnett,21F.3d868(8thCir.1994).'? 4  5  3 @  % `  4.50AACTUALDAMAGES-PRISONERCIVILRIGHTS  5  ^   Ifyoufindinfavoroftheplaintiff,youmustaward[him][her]anamountofmoneythat * willfairlycompensate[him][her]for[anydamages]1youfind[he][she]sustained[andis  % reasonablycertaintosustaininthefuture]2asadirectresultof[insertappropriatelanguagesuch  ~ as theconductofthedefendantassubmittedinInstruction_____or thefailuretoprovidethe 5  plaintiffwithmedicalcareor theviolationoftheplaintiff'sconstitutionalrights.]3[You  0  shouldconsiderthefollowingelementsofdamages:   0   ` 1.Thephysicalpainand(mental)(emotional)sufferingtheplaintiffhas @  experienced(andisreasonablycertaintoexperienceinthefuture);thenatureandextent ;  oftheinjury,whethertheinjuryistemporaryorpermanent(andwhetheranyresulting   disabilityispartialortotal)(andanyaggravationofapreexistingcondition);K (#(# 0   ` 2.Thereasonablevalueofthemedical(hospital,nursing,andsimilar)careand F suppliesreasonablyneededbyandactuallyprovidedtotheplaintiff(andreasonably  certaintobeneededandprovidedinthefuture);V(#(# 0   ` 3.The(wages,salary,profits,reasonablevalueoftheworkingtime)theplaintiff Q haslost[andthereasonablevalueoftheearningcapacitytheplaintiffisreasonably  certaintoloseinthefuture]becauseof[(his)(her)][(inability)(diminishedability)]to a  work.]\"(#(#   [Remember,throughoutyourdeliberationsyoumustnotengageinspeculation,guess,or $ conjecture,andyoumustnotawardanydamagesunderthisInstructionbywayofpunishmentor l & throughsympathy.] !g(  & % @$ NotesonUse  #*   1.Asummaryofthespecifictypesofdamageorinjurieswhicharesupportedbythe w$, '%#q>evidencecanbedescribedhereinlieuofthephrase anydamages. ]%-   2.Usethislanguageifpermanentinjuriesareinvolved. &X /   3.Itisimportanttouselanguagethatlimitsthedamagesrecoveredtothoseattributable (!1 totheimproperconductofthedefendant.SeeMemphisCommunityDist.v.Stachura,477U.S. ("2  299,30910(1986). )}#3 & %  @--! CommitteeComments  ^   Damagesthatmayberecoveredunder42U.S.C.1983,are:actualorcompensatory, Y nominalandpunitive.MemphisCommunitySchoolDist.v.Stachura,477U.S.299'%^'A(1986). ? Actualorcompensatorydamagesareto compensatepersonsforinjuriesthatarecausedbythe  % deprivationofconstitutionalrights,andnot undefinablevalueofinfringedrightor i   presumeddamages.Id.at307and309.SeealsoCorpusv.Bennett,430F.3d912,916(8th O  Cir.2005);Careyv.Piphus,435U.S.247(1978).Actualdamagesincludecompensationfor 5  outofpocketloss,othermonetarylossesandforimpairmentofreputation,personalhumiliation,   mentalanguishandsuffering.MemphisCommunitySchoolDist.v.Stachura.     Cowansv.Wyrick,862F.2d697(8thCir.1988),suggeststhatactualdamagesare Z  requiredinEighthAmendmentcases.ButseeCareyv.Piphus,435U.S.247(1978)and @  MemphisCommunitySchoolDist.v.Stachura,477U.S.299(1986),whichstatedthatactual &  damagesarenotrequiredinproceduraldueprocesscases.TheCommitteerecommends    requiringthejurytofindthattheplaintiffsustaineddamageinallEighthAmendmentcases.   ThemeasureofdamagesisalsoaddressedinModelInstruction4.50A,infra.Nominaldamages z  shouldbesubmittedinallEighthAmendmentcases,butmustbedefinedinaccordancewith ` CowansandModelInstruction4.50B,infra. F     4@  % a  4.50BNOMINALDAMAGES-PRISONERCIVILRIGHTS   I  ^   IfyoufindinfavoroftheplaintiffunderInstruction_____,1butyoufindthatthe * plaintiff'sdamageshavenomonetaryvalue,2thenyoumustreturnaverdictfortheplaintiffin  % thenominalamountofOneDollar($1.00).3  ~  &  @$ NotesonUse  5    1.Insertthenumberortitleofthe essentialelementsinstructionhere.  0  '5 J  2.Cowansv.Wyrick,862F.2d697(8thCir.1988),aprisonercivilrightscase,usedthe   language unabletoplaceamonetaryvalueontheplaintiff'sdamagesastheproperstandardfor o  whennominaldamagesareappropriate.Thatlanguagemaymisleadajurytobelievethat U  nominaldamagesshouldbeawardediftheyarehavingadifficulttimeagreeinguponor ;  decidingtheamountwhichshouldbeawardedtocompensateforsuchelementsofdamageas !  suffering,humiliation,pain,etc.SeealsoCorpusv.Bennett,430F.3d912,916(8thCir.2005) e  (wherejuryfoundnodirectinjury,nominaldamageswereappropriatemeanstovindicate K  constitutionalrightswhosedeprivationhadnotcausedanactualprovableinjury). 1   3.OneDollar($1.00)isarguablytherequiredamountincasesinwhichnominal , damagesareappropriate.Nominaldamagesmaybeappropriatewhenthejuryisunabletoplace p amonetaryvalueontheharmthattheplaintiffsufferedfromtheviolationofhisrights.Cf. V Cowansv.Wyrick,862F.2d697(8thCir.1988)(inprisonercivilrightsaction,nominaldamages < areappropriatewherethejurycannotplaceamonetaryvalueontheharmsufferedbythe " plaintiff);Haleyv.Wyrick,740F.2d12(8thCir.1984).SeeCommitteeComments.  & % @--! CommitteeComments  a   ThisinstructionisderivedfromKevinF._OMalley_,etal.,3FEDERALJURYPRACTICE \ ANDINSTRUCTIONS:Civil'%aR128.82(5thed.2000).Ithasbeenmodifiedslightly. B   Incertaincases,nominaldamagesmayberecoveredwhenthereisaviolationof ! constitutionalrights.SeeMemphisCommunitySchoolDist.v.Stachura,477U.S.299(1986);  " Careyv.Piphus,435U.S.247(1978);Tatumv.Houser,642F.2d253(8thCir.1981);Cowans !g# v.Wyrick,862F.2d697(8thCir.1988).Careydiscussestheamountofnominaldamagesat "M$ page267. #3%   TheCommitteerecommendsrequiringthejurytofindthattheplaintiffsuffereddamage $' inmostcases,unlessitisclearthatrecoveryispermittedwithoutashowingofanydamageor %r( injury.SeeMemphisandCarey.InclassicEighthAmendmentcases,damagesmustbe &X ) establishedandtheelementsinstructionshouldrequirethejurytofindthattheplaintiffsustained '>!* damage.However,nominaldamagesmuststillbesubmittedinEighthAmendmentcasesif ($"+ requested.Thedefinitioncontainedinthisinstructionistheonethatshouldbeused. h) #,   *c$. 5 @  % b  4.50CPUNITIVEDAMAGES-CIVILRIGHTS  X  ^   Inadditiontothedamagesmentionedinotherinstructions,thelawpermitsthejuryunder * certaincircumstancestoawardpunitivedamages.  %   IfyoufindinfavoroftheplaintiffunderInstruction(s)_____andifithasbeenproved1  ~ thattheconductofthatdefendantassubmittedinInstruction_____2wasmaliciousorrecklessly 5  indifferenttotheplaintiff's(specify,e.g.,medicalneeds),3thenyoumay,butarenotrequiredto,  0  awardtheplaintiffanadditionalamountofmoneyaspunitivedamagesforthepurposesof   punishingthedefendantforengaginginmisconductand[deterring][discouraging]the @  defendantandothersfromengaginginsimilarmisconductinthefuture.Youshouldpresume ;  thataplaintiffhasbeenmadewholefor[his,her,its]injuriesbythedamagesawardedunder   Instruction_____.4 K    Ifyoudecidetoawardpunitivedamages,youshouldconsiderthefollowingindeciding F theamountofpunitivedamagestoaward:    1.Howreprehensiblethedefendantsconductwas.5Inthisregard,youmayconsider V [whethertheharmsufferedbytheplaintiffwasphysicaloreconomicorboth;whethertherewas Q violence,deceit,intentionalmalice,recklessdisregardforhumanhealthorsafety;whetherthe  defendantsconductthatharmedtheplaintiffalsoposedariskofharmtoothers;whetherthere a  wasanyrepetitionofthewrongfulconductandpastconductofthesortthatharmedthe \" plaintiff].6 $   2.Howmuchharmthedefendantswrongfulconductcausedtheplaintiff[andcould l & causetheplaintiffinthefuture].7[Youmaynotconsiderharmtoothersindecidingtheamount !g( ofpunitivedamagestoaward.]8 #*   3.Whatamountofpunitivedamages,inadditiontotheotherdamagesalreadyawarded, w$, isneeded,consideringthedefendantsfinancialcondition,topunishthedefendantfor[his,her, %r. its]wrongfulconducttowardtheplaintiffandto[deter][discourage]thedefendantandothers )' 0 fromsimilarwrongfulconductinthefuture. ($"2    4.[Theamountoffinesandcivilpenaltiesapplicabletosimilarconduct].9 )}#4   Theamountofanypunitivedamagesawardshouldbearareasonablerelationshiptothe ^  harmcausedtotheplaintiff.10 Y   [Youmay[assess][award]punitivedamagesagainstanyoralldefendantsoryoumay   refuseto[impose][award]punitivedamages.Ifpunitivedamagesare[assessed][awarded] i  againstmorethanonedefendant,theamounts[assessed][awarded]againstthosedefendants  d maybethesameortheymaybedifferent.]11      [Youmaynotawardpunitivedamagesagainstthedefendant[s]forconductinother t  states.]12 o   @$ NotesonUse  &    1.ModelInstruction3.04(BurdenofProof)tellsthejurythatsomethingisprovedonly !  ifthejuryfindsitismorelikelytruethannottrue.Thephrase greaterweightoftheevidence e  isnotnecessaryhere.ItcanbeincludedinInstruction3.04ifdesiredbythecourt. K    2.Useifmorethanoneelementinstruction. F   3.Punitivedamagesareallowedeventhoughthethresholdforliabilityrequiresreckless  conduct.Ifthethresholdfortheunderlyingtortliabilityislessthan reckless,thebracketed  languagecorrectlystatesthestandardforpunitivedamagesunder42U.S.C.1983.Smithv. k Wade,461U.S.30(1983)(punitivedamagesmaybeawarded whenthedefendantsconduct Q involvesrecklessorcallousindifferencetotheplaintiffsfederallyprotectedrights,aswellas 7 whenitismotivatedbyevilmotiveorintent.).See_Schaub_Ԁv._VonWald_,638F.3d905,92224 { (8thCir.2011)(thethresholdinquiryforawardofpunitivedamagesiswhethertheevidence a supportsthattheconductinvolvedwasrecklessorcallousindifference).SeealsoKolstadv. G AmericanDentalAssn,527U.S.526,535,536(1999),andCannyv.Dr.Pepper/SevenUp -  BottlingGroup,Inc.,439F.3d894,903(8thCir.2006),discussingthemeaningof maliceand !  recklessindifference.Ifthethresholdforliabilityis maliceor recklessindifferenceor " somethingmoreculpable,noadditionalfindingshouldbenecessarybecausethelanguageinthe  # issue/elementinstructionrequiresthejurytofindtheculpabilitynecessaryforimposingpunitive !g$ damages.However,itisrecommendedthatthepunitivedamagesinstructionincludesuch "M% languagetobesurethejuryfocusesonthatissue. #3&   4.Fillinthenumberortitleoftheactualdamagesornominaldamagesinstructionhere. $(   5.Theword reprehensibleisusedinthesamesenseasitisusedincommonparlance. C&* КTheSupremeCourt,inStateFarmMut.Auto.Ins.Co.v.Campbell,538U.S.408,419(2003), )' + stated: Itshouldbepresumedaplaintiffhasbeenmadewholeforhisinjuriesbycompensatory (!, damages,sopunitivedamagesshouldonlybeawardedifthedefendantsculpability,after ("- havingpaidcompensatorydamages,issoreprehensibleastowarranttheimpositionoffurther )}#. sanctionstoachievepunishmentordeterrence.InPhilipMorrisUSAv.Williams,549U.S. *c$/ 346,355,127S.Ct.1057,_106465_Ԁ(2007),theSupremeCourtheldthat,whileharmtopersons +I%0 otherthantheplaintiffmaybeconsideredindeterminingreprehensibility,ajurymaynotpunish ^ fortheharmcausedtopersonsotherthantheplaintiff.TheCourtstatedthatprocedureswere D necessarytoassure thatjuriesarenotaskingthewrongquestion,i.e.,seeking,notsimplyto * determinereprehensibility,butalsotopunishforharmcausedstrangers.Id.at355.     6.Anyitemnotsupportedbytheevidence,ofcourse,shouldbeexcluded. i    7.Thissentencemaybeusedifthereisevidenceoffutureharmtotheplaintiff.  d   8.Aparagraphinstructingthejurythatanypunitivedamagesawardshouldnotinclude    anamountforharmsufferedbypersonswhoarenotpartiestothecasemaybenecessaryif   evidenceconcerningharmsufferedbynonpartieshasbeenintroduced.SeePhilipMorrisUSAv.   Williams,549U.S.at355;StateFarmMut.Auto.Ins.Co.v.Campbell,538U.S.408,42224 o  (2003);Williamsv.ConAgraPoultryCo.,378F.3d790,79798(8thCir.2004). U    9.Insertthisphraseonlyifevidencehasbeenintroduced,orthecourthastakenjudicial    notice,offinesandpenaltiesforsimilarconduct.SeeBMWofNorthAmerica,Inc.v.Gore,517   U.S.559,575(1996),noting civilpenaltiesauthorizedincomparablecasesasaguidepostto z  beconsidered.SeealsoStateFarmMut.Auto.Ins.Co.v.Campbell,538U.S.408,428(2003). `   10.SeeStateFarmMut.Auto.Ins.Co.v.Campbell,538U.S.408,425(2003)(stating  that inpractice,fewawardsexceedingasingledigitratiobetweenpunitiveandcompensatory  damages,toasignificantdegree,willsatisfydueprocessandobservingthat: Singledigit  multipliersaremorelikelytocomportwithdueprocess,whilestillachievingtheStatesgoalsof k deterrenceandretribution,thanawardswithratiosinrangeof500to1[citingBMWofNorth Q America,Inc.v.Gore,517U.S.559,582(1996)]or,inthiscase,of145to1.). 7   11.Thebracketedlanguageisavailableforuseifpunitivedamagesclaimsaresubmitted  againstmorethanonedefendant. v   12.Ifevidencehasbeenintroducedconcerningconductbythedefendantthatwaslegal - inthestatewhereitwascommitted,thejurymustbetoldthattheycannotawardpunitive  damagesagainstthedefendantforsuchconduct.SeeStateFarmMut.Auto.Inc.Co.v.   Campbell,538U.S.408,422(2003);BMWofNorthAmerica,Inc.v.Gore,517U.S.559,572  ! 73(1996);Williamsv.ConAgraPoultryCo.,378F.3d790,79798(8thCir.2004).Thisissue !g" normallywillnotcomeupincasesunderfederallaw.Inanycaseinwhichevidenceisadmitted "M# forsomepurposesbutmaynotbeconsideredbythejuryinawardingpunitivedamages,the #3$ courtshouldgiveanappropriatelimitinginstruction. w$%  @--!CommitteeComments  %r'   Thisinstructionattemptstoincorporatetheconstitutionallyrelevantprinciplessetforth )' ) bytheSupremeCourtinPhilipMorrisUSAv.Williams,549U.S.346(2007);StateFarmMut. (!* Auto.Ins.Co.v.Campbell,538U.S.408(2003),BMWofNorthAmerica,Inc.v.Gore,517U.S. ("+ 559(1996),HondaMotorCo.v.Oberg,512U.S.415(1994),andTXOProductionCorp.v. )}#, AllianceResourcesCorp.,509U.S.443,45962(1993).InStateFarm,538U.S.at417,the *c$- Courtobserved: Wehaveadmonishedthat[p]unitivedamagesposeanacutedangerof +I%. arbitrarydeprivationofproperty.Juryinstructionstypicallyleavethejurywithwidediscretion ^ inchoosingamounts,andthepresentationofevidenceofadefendantsnetworthcreatesthe D potentialthatjurieswillusetheirverdictstoexpressbiasesagainstbigbusinesses,particularly * thosewithoutstronglocalpresences.(quotingHondaMotor,512U.S.at432).SeeBakerv.   JohnMorrell&Co.,266F.Supp.2d909,961(N.D.Iowa2003),affd,382F.3d816(8thCir.   2004),andInReExxonValdez,296F.Supp.2d1071,1080(D.Alaska2004),forexamplesof  ~ punitivedamagesinstructionsinwhichthecourtattemptedtoincorporateconstitutional  d standards.  J К  ThelastparagraphisbasedonStateFarm,538U.S.at421,inwhichtheCourtheldthat:    Astatecannotpunishadefendantforconductthatmayhavebeenlawfulwhereit   occurred....Nor,asageneralrule,doesaStatehavealegitimateconcerninimposingpunitive o  damagestopunishadefendantforunlawfulactscommittedoutsideoftheStatesjurisdiction. U  TheCourtspecificallymandatedthat: Ajurymustbeinstructed,furthermore,thatitmaynot ;  useevidenceofoutofstateconducttopunishadefendantforactionthatwaslawfulinthe !  jurisdictionwhereitoccurred.StateFarm,538U.S.at422. e    `  6@ % c  4.60VERDICTFORMONEPLAINTIFF,TWODEFENDANTS, ^ @__#ONEINJURYCASE    D VERDICT    Note: 0  0` (#(#Completethisformbywritinginthenamesrequiredbyyourverdict. ~` (#` (#   Onplaintiff(name)'sclaimagainstdefendant(name),assubmittedinInstructionNo.  J _____,wefindinfavorof   ______________________________________________________________________________ @  @ (Plaintiff(name))or(Defendant(name)) &    Onplaintiff(name)'sclaimagainstdefendant(name),assubmittedinInstructionNo.   _____,wefindinfavorof K  ______________________________________________________________________________  @ (Plaintiff(name))or(Defendant(name))   Note: 0  0` (#(#Completethefollowingparagraphsonlyifoneormoreoftheabovefindingsisin Q favoroftheplaintiff.7` (#` (#   Wefindplaintiff(name)'sdamagestobe: a 0  0` (#(#$__________(statetheamountor,ifnone,writetheword none)1(statingthe  amount,orifyoufindthattheplaintiff'sdamageshavenomonetaryvalue,state l ! thenominalamountof$1.00).2!g#` (#` (#  Note: 0  0` (#(#Youmaynotawardpunitivedamagesagainstanydefendantunlessyouhavefirst w$' foundagainstthatdefendantandawardedtheplaintiffnominaloractualdamages.]%(` (#` (#   Weassesspunitivedamagesagainstdefendant(name)asfollows: )' * 0  8` (#(#$__________(statetheamountor,ifnone,writetheword none).($",` `    )}#. &     Weassesspunitivedamagesagainstdefendant(nameofotherdefendant)asfollows: ^ 8  8`   $__________(statetheamountor,ifnone,writetheword Y  none). ` x` x    `     h     _______________________________ 5     `     h      p   Foreperson    '^Dated:___________________    &  @$ NotesonUse  U    1.Usethisphraseifthejuryhasnotbeeninstructedonnominaldamages.    'T  2.Includethisparagraphifthejuryhasbeeninstructedonnominaldamages. e     `   C&-  '+7p0G0  @33 % d  5.EMPLOYMENTCASES `   Overview Sh |,    Section5containsmodelinstructionsforemploymentdiscrimination,retaliation,and H  harassmentcasesarisingunderTitleVIIoftheCivilRightsActof1964,42U.S.C.2000eet  Q  seq.;theAgeDiscriminationinEmploymentAct(ADEA),29U.S.C.621,etseq.;42U.S.C.   1981;42U.S.C.1983;theEqualPayAct,29U.S.C.206(d);theAmericanswith S   DisabilitiesAct(ADA),42U.S.C.12101,etseq.;andtheFamilyMedicalLeaveAct(FMLA),  \  29U.S.C.2601,etseq.Itbearsemphasisthatthesearemodelinstructionsandthatthe  instructionsforaparticularcasemustbetailoredtothefactsandissuespresented.Thiscaveat ^ appliestoissuessuchasdamagesandaffirmativedefenses,anditappliesmostimportantlyto g theidentificationoftheproperstandardforliabilityunderthespecificstatuteinquestion.  @% Background  i   Whenthisprojectcommencedin1987,jurytrialswerenotavailableinTitleVIIcases, r  theADAandFMLAdidnotexist,andthestandardforliabilityinADEAcaseswaswhetherthe " plaintiffsagewasa determiningfactorinthechallengedemploymentdecision.E.g.,Grebin t$$ v.SiouxFallsIndep.Sch.Dist.No.49-5,779F.2d18,20n.1(8thCir.1985).Overtheyears,a }& numberofdevelopmentshavechangedthelegallandscape,including:   &( 0  1.0` (#(#TheUnitedStatesSupremeCourtsdistinctionbetween directevidenceand /*  pretextcasesinPriceWaterhousev.Hopkins,490U.S.228(1989),andthe , correspondingburden-shiftingapproachin directevidencecases;1.` (#` (# 0  2.0` (#(#ThepassageoftheADA,theCivilRightsActof1991,andtheFMLA; : 0` (#` (# 0  3.0` (#(#TheSupremeCourtsdecisioninDesertPalace,Inc.v.Costa,539U.S.90 !!2 (2003),whichruledthatthestandardforliabilityinTitleVIIdiscrimination <#"4 casesunder42U.S.C.2000e-2(m)iswhethertheplaintiffsprotectedstatuswas $E$6 a motivatingfactorinthechallengedemploymentdecision,regardlessof %%8 whethertheplaintiffisrelyingondirectorcircumstantialevidence;G'&:` (#` (# 0  4.0` (#(#TheSupremeCourtsdecisioninGrossv.FBLFinancialServices,Inc.557U.S. (P(< 167,129S.Ct.2343(2009),whichruledthatmixed-motiveinstructionsarenever ))> properinADEAcasesandthatthestandardforliabilityinADEAcasesis R++@  whethertheplaintiffsagewasa but-forcauseofthechallengedemployment ^ decision.Y` (#` (#   InlightofCostaandGross,thestandardsforliabilityinADEAandTitleVII   discriminationcasesareclear.However,incasesarisingunderotherstatutes!suchas42 i  U.S.C.1981,42U.S.C.1983,andtheanti-retaliationprovisionofTitleVII(42U.S.C.  d 2000e-3(a))!thedirectevidence/pretextdistinctionmaystillbeviable.Inturn,thedecision    whethertousea determiningfactorinstruction(whichplacestheburdenontheplaintiffto t  show butforcausation)ora motivatingfactor/samedecisioninstruction(whichplacesthe o  burdenonthedefendanttoshowthatitwouldhavemadethe samedecisionregardlessofthe &  plaintiffsprotectedstatus)willbeimportantbecauseofthepotentially_dispositive_Ԁdifferencein !  theburdenofpersuasion.Accordingly,trialcourtsandlawyersshouldbecarefultoconsiderthe z  correctapproachdependingontheparticularfactsofthecaseandthestatute(s)atissue. 1 & d @  RecommendedApproach  ,   A.FollowingGross,the but-forinstructionalformatshouldbeusedinallADEA  cases.SeeModelInstruction5.11. < 'd  B.FollowingCosta,amotivatingfactor/samedecisionformatshouldbeusedinallTitle 7 VIIdiscriminationcasesbroughtunder42U.S.C.2000e-2(m).SeeModelInstructions5.01,   5.01A. G"   C.FollowingtheEighthCircuitsdecisioninPedigov.P.A.M.Transport,Inc.,60F.3d B$ 1300,1301(8thCir.1995),themotivatingfactor/samedecisionformatisrecommendedfor & discriminationcasesarisingundertheAmericanswithDisabilitiesAct.SeeModelInstructions R!( 5.50etseq. "M*   D.FollowingtheEighthCircuitsdecisioninPrejeanv.Warren,301F.3d893,900-01 $, (8thCir.2002),themotivatingfactor/samedecisionformatisrecommendedforTitleVII ]%. retaliationcases.SeeModelInstructions5.60etseq. &X 0   E.FollowingMt.HealthyCityBd.ofEd.v.Doyle,429U.S.274(1977),themotivating (!2 factor/samedecisionformatisrecommendedforFirstAmendmentretaliationcases.SeeModel h) #4  Instructions5.70etseq. *c$6   F.Withrespecttootherfederalemploymentstatutes!suchas42U.S.C.1981(see ^  ModelInstructions5.20etseq.);42U.S.C.1983(seeModelInstructions5.25etseq.);and Y FMLAcases(seeModelInstructions5.80etseq.)!thetrialcourtshouldseekagreement   betweenthepartiesastowhichformattouseand,ifthepartiesareunabletoagree,thetrial i  courtcancoverallbasesbyelicitingfindingsunderthe determiningfactorand motivating  d factor/samedecisionstandardswiththesetofspecialinterrogatoriessetforthatModel    Instruction5.92.SeeHartleyv.D_illard_s,Inc.,310F.3d1054,1059-60(8thCir.2002) t  (approvinguseof5.92specialinterrogatories).\XXt o   % > %> #XtX\ޭ#  &  8+9@ % e  5.01TITLEVIIELEMENTS    ^   Yourverdictmustbefortheplaintiff[andagainstdefendant___________]1[onthe   plaintiff's(sex)2discriminationclaim]3ifallthefollowingelementshavebeenproved4: i    First,thedefendant[discharged]5theplaintiff;and  d   Second,theplaintiff's(sex)[wasamotivatingfactor]6[playedapart]7inthedefendant's    decision. t    Ifeitheroftheaboveelementshasnotbeenproved,yourverdictmustbeforthe o  defendantandyouneednotproceedfurtherinconsideringthisclaim.[Youmayfindthatthe &  plaintiff's(sex)[wasamotivatingfactor][playedapart]inthedefendant's(decision)8ifithas !  beenprovedthatthedefendant'sstatedreason(s)forits(decision)[(is)(are)]apretexttohide z  (sex)discrimination.]9 1  @$ NotesonUse  ,   1.Usethisphraseiftherearemultipledefendants.    2.Thisinstructionisdesignedforuseinagenderdiscriminationcase.Itmustbe < modifiediftheplaintiffisclaimingdiscriminationonthebasisofrace,religion,orsomeother " prohibitedfactor.    3.Thebracketedlanguageshouldbeinsertedwhentheplaintiffsubmitsmorethanone a  claimtothejury. G!   4.ModelInstruction3.04(BurdenofProof)tellsthejurythatsomethingisprovedonly B# ifthejuryfindsitismorelikelytruethannottrue.Thephrase greaterweightoftheevidence ($ isnotnecessaryhere.ItcanbeincludedinInstruction3.04ifdesiredbythecourt. l %   5.Thisinstructionisdesignedforuseinadischargecase.Ina"failuretohire,""failure !g' topromote,"or"demotion"case,theinstructionmustbemodified.Wheretheplaintiffresigned "M( butclaimsa"constructivedischarge,"thisinstructionshouldbemodified.SeeinfraModel #3) Instruction5.93. w$*   6.TheCommitteebelievesthatthephrase"motivatingfactor"shouldbedefined.See %r, infraModelInstruction5.96.ItappearstobeanopenquestionafterCostawhetheraplaintiff &X - maychosetosubmitundersection2000e2(a)(1)usingthedeterminingfactor/McDonnell '>!. Douglasformat.ThoseinstructionsmaybefoundatModelInstructions5.10etseq. ($"/   7.SeeinfraModelInstruction5.96,whichdefines motivatingfactorintermsof )}#1 whetherthecharacteristic playedapartoraroleinthedefendantsdecision.Thephrase *c$2  motivatingfactorneednotbedefinedifthedefinitionitselfisusedintheelementinstruction. +I%3   8.Thisinstructionmakesreferencestothedefendant's decision.Itmaybemodifiedif ^ anothertermsuchas actionsor conductwouldbemoreappropriate. D   9.Thissentencemaybeadded,ifappropriate.SeeModelInstruction5.95,infra,and ? Moorev.RobertsonFireProtectionDist.,249F.3d786,790n.9(8thCir.2001),whichstates  %  [w]edonotexpressanyviewastowhetheriteverwouldbereversibleerrorforatrialcourtto i  failtogiveapretextinstruction,thoughwetendtodoubtit. O  & % @--! CommitteeComments   J   Thisinstructionisdesignedtosubmittheissueofliabilityin disparatetreatment   '% uTitleVIIcasesthataresubjecttotheamendmentssetforthintheCivilRightsActof1991.   Priortotheseamendments,TitleVIIcaseswerenotjurytriable,Harmonv.MayBroadcasting o  Co.,583F.2d410(8thCir.1978),andtheliabilitystandardsdependeduponwhetherthecase U  wasclassifiedasa pretextcaseora mixedmotivecase.SeePriceWaterhousev.Hopkins, ;  490U.S.228(1989).UndertheCivilRightsActof1991,thesecaseswillbetriabletoajury, !  seeCRAof91,102(codifiedat42U.S.C.1981a(c)(1994)),and,moreimportantly,the e  plaintiffprevailsontheissueofliabilityifheorsheshowsthatdiscriminationwasa"motivating K  factor"inthechallengedemploymentdecision.SeeCRAof91,107(codifiedat42U.S.C. 1 2000e2(m)(1994)(pretextcases)).Plaintiffswhoprevailontheissueofliabilitywillbe  eligibleforadeclaratoryjudgmentandattorneyfees;however,theycannotrecoveractualor  punitivedamagesifthedefendantshowsthatitwouldhavemadethesameemploymentdecision  irrespectiveofanydiscriminatorymotivation.SeeCRAof91,107(codifiedat42U.S.C. k 2000e5(g)(2)(B)(1994));seeinfraModelInstruction5.01A("samedecision"instruction). Q   Itisunnecessaryandinadvisabletoinstructthejuryregardingthethreestepanalysisof  McDonnellDouglasCorporationv.Green,411U.S.792(1973).SeeGrebinv.SiouxFalls  Indep.SchoolDist.No.49-5,779F.2d18,2021(8thCir.1985)(ADEAcase).Seegenerally v Gilkersonv.Toastmaster,Inc.,770F.2d133,135(8thCir.1985)(afteralloftheevidencehas \ beenpresented,inquiryshouldfocusonultimateissueofintentionaldiscrimination,notonany B particularstepintheMcDonnellDouglasparadigm).Accordingly,thisinstructionisfocusedon ( theultimateissueofwhethertheplaintiff'sprotectedcharacteristicwasa motivatingfactorin l  thedefendant'semploymentdecision.  R!  ; @  % f  5.01ATITLEVII"SAMEDECISION"  H  ^   IfyoufindinfavoroftheplaintiffunderInstruction____,1thenyoumustanswerthe * followingquestionintheverdictform[s]:Hasitbeenproved2thatthedefendant[wouldhave  % discharged]3theplaintiffregardlessof[(his)(her)][sex]4?  ~ &  @$ NotesonUse  5    1.Fillinthenumberortitleoftheessentialelementsinstructionhere.  0  '5 /  2.ModelInstruction3.04(BurdenofProof)tellsthejurythatsomethingisprovedonly   ifthejuryfindsitismorelikelytruethannottrue.Thephrase greaterweightoftheevidence o  isnotnecessaryhere.ItcanbeincludedinInstruction3.04ifdesiredbythecourt. U    3.Thisinstructionisdesignedforuseinadischargecase.Ina failuretohire, failure    topromoteor demotioncase,thelanguagewithinthebracketsmustbemodified.     4.Thisinstructionisdesignedforuseinagenderdiscriminationcase.Thelanguage K  withinthebracketsmustbemodifiedifotherformsofdiscriminationarealleged.Thepractical 1 effectofadecisioninfavoroftheplaintiffunderModelInstruction5.01,supra,butinfavorof  thedefendantonthisquestionunderTitleVII,isajudgmentfortheplaintiffandeligibilityfor  anawardofattorneyfeesbutnoactualdamages.TheCommitteetakesnopositiononwhether  thejudgeshouldadvisethejuryorallowtheattorneystoarguetothejurytheeffectofadecision k infavorofthedefendantonthequestionsetoutinthisinstruction. Q & % @--! CommitteeComments     Ifaplaintiffprevailsontheissueofliabilitybyshowingthatdiscriminationwasa a '% motivatingfactor,thedefendantneverthelessmayavoidanawardofdamagesorreinstatement G byshowingthatitwouldhavetakenthesameaction intheabsenceoftheimpermissible - motivatingfactor.SeeCRAof91,107(codifiedat42U.S.C.2000e5(g)(2)(B)(1994)).   Thisinstructionisdesignedtosubmitthis samedecisionissuetothejury.  ! < @  % g  5.02ATITLEVIIACTUALDAMAGES in  ^   IfyoufindinfavoroftheplaintiffunderInstruction____1andifyouanswer noin * responsetoInstruction____2,thenyoumustawardtheplaintiffsuchsumasyoufindwillfairly  % andjustlycompensatetheplaintiffforanydamagesyoufindtheplaintiffsustainedasadirect  ~ resultof[describethedefendant'sdecision-e.g., thedefendant'sdecisiontodischargethe 5  plaintiff].Theplaintiff'sclaimfordamagesincludesthreedistincttypesofdamagesandyou  0  mustconsiderthemseparately:     First,youmustdeterminetheamountofanywagesandfringebenefits3theplaintiff @  wouldhaveearnedin[(his)(her)]employmentwiththedefendantif[(he)(she)]hadnotbeen ;  dischargedon[fillindateofdischarge]throughthedateofyourverdict,4,5,6minustheamountof   earningsandbenefitsthattheplaintiffreceivedfromotheremploymentduringthattime. K    Second,youmustdeterminetheamountofanyotherdamagessustainedbytheplaintiff, F suchas[listdamagessupportedbytheevidence].7Youmustenterseparateamountsforeach  typeofdamagesintheverdictformandmustnotincludethesameitemsinmorethanone V category. Q     [Youarealsoinstructedthattheplaintiffhasadutyunderthelawto mitigate[(his)  (her)]damages-thatis,toexercisereasonablediligenceunderthecircumstancestominimize a  [(his)(her)]damages.Therefore,ifyoufindthattheplaintifffailedtoseekoutortake \" advantageofanopportunitythatwasreasonablyavailableto[(him)(her)],youmustreduce $ [(his)(her)]damagesbytheamount[(he)(she)]reasonablycouldhaveavoidedif[(he)(she)] l & hadsoughtoutortakenadvantageofsuchanopportunity.]8 !g(   [Remember,throughoutyourdeliberations,youmustnotengageinanyspeculation, #* guess,orconjectureandyoumustnotawarddamagesunderthisInstructionbywayof w$, punishmentorthroughsympathy.]9 %r.  &  @$ NotesonUse  )' 0   1.Fillinthenumberortitleoftheessentialelementsinstructionhere. ($"2 ')'  2.Fillinthenumberortitleofthe"samedecision"instructionhere. )}#4   3.Whencertainbenefits,suchasemployersubsidizedhealthinsurance,arerecoverable 4+$6 undertheevidence,thisinstructionmaybemodifiedtoexplaintothejurythemannerinwhich ,%7 recoveryforthosebenefitsistobecalculated.Claimsforlostbenefitsoftenpresentdifficult ^ issuesastothepropermeasureofrecovery.SeeTolanv.LeviStrauss&Co.,867F.2d467,470 D (8thCir.1989)(discussingdifferentapproaches).Somecourtsdenyrecoveryforlostbenefits * unlesstheemployeepurchasedsubstitutecoverage,inwhichcasethemeasureofdamagesisthe   employee'soutofpocketexpenses.Syvockv.MilwaukeeBoilerMfg.Co.,665F.2d149,16162   (7thCir.1981);Pearcev.CarrierCorp.,966F.2d958(5thCir.1992).Othercourtspermitthe  ~ recoveryoftheamounttheemployerwouldhavepaidaspremiumsontheemployee'sbehalf.  d SeeFarissv.LynchburgFoundry,769F.2d958,96465(4thCir.1985).TheCommittee  J expressesnoviewastowhichapproachisproper.Thisinstructionalsomaybemodifiedto  0 excludecertainitemswhichwerementionedduringtrialbutarenotrecoverablebecauseofan t  insufficiencyofevidenceorasamatteroflaw. Z    4.Insomecases,thedefendantwillassertsomeindependentpostdischargereason- U  suchasaplantclosingorsweepingreductioninforce-astowhytheplaintiffwouldhavebeen ;  terminatedinanyeventbeforetrial.See,e.g.,Cleverlyv.WesternElec.Co.,450F.Supp.507, !  511(W.D.Mo.1978),aff'd,594F.2d638(8thCir.1979).Inthosecases,thisinstructionmust e  bemodifiedtosubmitthisissueforthejury'sdetermination. K    5.Thetrialcourtmaydecidetosetatimelimitbeyondwhichanawardoffuture F damageswouldbeimpermissiblyspeculative.SeeHybertv.HearstCorp.,900F.2d1050,1056 , 57(7thCir.1990);Snowv.PillsburyCo.,650F.Supp.299,30001(D.Minn.1986)(ADEA p caseinwhichfrontpaywaslimitedtothreeyears);seealsoBrooksv.WoodlineMotorFreight, V Inc.,852F.2d1061,1062(8thCir.1988)(districtcourtawardedfrontpayinlieuof < reinstatement;theamountoffrontpayawardedwasdeterminedbythedistrictcourtandwas " nearlyidenticaltoamountofbackpay).Butcf.Neufeldv.SearleLab.,884F.2d335,341(8th  Cir.1989)(inagediscriminationcases,ifreinstatementisdeemedbythecourtinitsequitable  powerstobeinappropriate,theplaintiffispresumptivelyentitledtofrontpaythroughnormal v retirementageunlessemployerprovesevidencetothecontrary). \   6.Frontpayisessentiallyanequitableremedy inlieuofreinstatementandisanissue  forthecourt,notthejury.ExcelCorp.v.Bosley,165F.3d635(8thCir.1999).Iftheissueof  frontpayissubmittedtothejury,thejurysdeterminationmaybebinding.SeeDoynev.Union   Elec.Co.,953F.2d447,451(8thCir.1992).Iffrontpayisawarded,itshouldbeexcludedfrom !g  thestatutorylimitoncompensatorydamagesprovidedforin42U.S.C.1981a(b)(3).See "M! Kramerv.LoganCountySch.Dist.No.R1,157F.3d620,62526(8thCir.1998). #3"   7.Underthe1991amendmentstoTitleVII,aprevailingplaintiffmayrecoverdamages $$ formentalanguishandotherpersonalinjuries.Thetypesofdamagesmentionedin102ofthe %r% CivilRightsActof1991include futurepecuniarylosses,emotionalpain,suffering, &X & inconvenience,mentalanguish,lossofenjoymentoflife,andothernonpecuniarylosses.CRA '>!' of91,102(codifiedat42U.S.C.1981a(b)(3)(1994)). ($"(   8.Thisparagraphisdesignedtosubmittheissueof mitigationof_damages_Ԁin )}#* appropriatecases.SeeColemanv.CityofOmaha,714F.2d804,808(8thCir.1983);Fieldlerv. *c$+ IndianheadTruckLine,Inc.,670F.2d806,80809(8thCir.1982). +I%,   9.Thisparagraphmaybegivenatthetrialcourt'sdiscretion. ^ & % @--! CommitteeComments  Y   TheCivilRightsActof1991makesthreesignificantchangesinthelawregardingthe   '%recoveryofdamagesinTitleVIIcases.First,theplaintiffprevailsontheissueofliabilityby   showingthatunlawfuldiscriminationwasa motivatingfactorintherelevantemployment  ~ decision;however,theplaintiffcannotrecoveranyactualdamagesiftheemployershowsthatit  d wouldhavemadethesameemploymentdecisionevenintheabsenceofanydiscriminatory  J intent.SeeCRAof91,107(codifiedat42U.S.C.2000e2(g)(2)(B)(1994)).Second,the  0  CivilRightsActpermitstheplaintifftorecovergeneralcompensatorydamagesinadditiontothe t  traditionalemploymentdiscriminationremedyofbackpayandlostbenefits.SeeCRAof91, Z  102(codifiedat42U.S.C.1981a(a)(1994)).Third,theActexpresslylimitstherecoveryof @  generalcompensatorydamagestocertaindollaramounts,rangingfrom$50,000to$300,000 &  dependinguponthesizeoftheemployer.SeeCRAof91,102(codifiedat42U.S.C.    1981a(b)(1994)).     Thisinstructionisdesignedtosubmitthestandardbackpayformulaoflostwagesand K  benefitsreducedbyinterimearningsandbenefits.SeeFiedlerv.IndianheadTruckLine,Inc., 1 670F.2d806,80809(8thCir.1982).Thisinstructionmaybemodifiedtoarticulatethetypesof  interimearningswhichshouldbeoffsetagainsttheplaintiff'sbackpay.Forexample,severance  payandwagesfromotheremploymentordinarilyareoffsetagainstabackpayaward.See  Krausev.DresserIndus.,910F.2d674,680(10thCir.1990);Cornettav.UnitedStates,851 k F.2d1372,1381(Fed.Cir.1988);Farissv.LynchburgFoundry,769F.2d958,966(4thCir. Q 1985).Unemploymentcompensation,SocialSecuritybenefits,andpensionbenefitsordinarily 7 arenotoffsetagainstabackpayaward.SeeDoynev.UnionElectricCo.,953F.2d447,45152 { (8thCir.1992)(holdingthatpensionbenefitsarea collateralsourcebenefit);Dreyerv.Arco a Chem.Co.,801F.2d651,653n.1(3dCir.1986)(SocialSecurityandpensionbenefitsnot G deductible);Protosv.VolkswagenofAm.,Inc.,797F.2d129,13839(3dCir.1986) - (unemploymentbenefitsnotdeductible),overruledonothergroundsbyHazenPaperCo.v.  Biggins,507U.S.604,615(1993);Rasimasv.MichiganDeptofMentalHealth,714F.2d614,  62627(6thCir.1983)(same).Butcf.Toledov.NobelSysco,Inc.,892F.2d1481,1493(10th   Cir.1989)(deductibilityofunemploymentcompensationiswithintrialcourt'sdiscretion); !g  EEOCv.EnterpriseAss'nSteamfittersLocalNo.638,542F.2d579,592(2dCir.1976)(same). "M! However,becauseTitleVII,asamendedbytheCivilRightsActof1991,nolongerlimits #3" recoveryofdamages,theinstructionpermitstherecoveryofgeneraldamagesforpain,suffering, w$# humiliation,andthelike. ]%$   Becausethelawimposesalimitongeneralcompensatorydamagesbutdoesnotlimitthe &X & recoveryofbackpayandlostbenefits,theCommitteebelievesthatthesetypesofdamagesmust '>!' beconsideredandassessedseparatelybythejury.Otherwise,ifthejuryawardedasingledollar ($"( amount,itwouldbeimpossibletoidentifytheportionoftheawardthatwasattributabletoback h) #) payandtheportionthatwasattributableto generaldamages.Asaresult,thetrialcourtwould N*#* notbeabletodeterminewhetherthejury'sawardexceededthestatutorylimit. 4+$+   Insomecases,adiscriminationplaintiffmaybeeligibleforfrontpay.Becausefrontpay ^ isessentiallyanequitableremedy inlieuofreinstatement,thisremedytraditionallyhasbeen D viewedasanissueforthecourt,notthejury.ExcelCorp.v.Bosley,165F.3d635(8thCir. * 1999).SeeMacDissiv.ValmontIndus.,Inc.,856F.2d1054,1060(8thCir.1988);Newhousev.   McCormick&Co.,110F.3d635,641(8thCir.1997).Ifthetrialcourtsubmitstheissueoffront   paytothejury,thejurysdeterminationmaybebinding.SeeDoynev.UnionElec.Co.,953  ~ F.2d447,451(8thCir.1992)(ADEAcase).  d   InKramerv.LoganCountySch.Dist.No.R1,157F.3d620(8thCir.1998),thecourt   ruledthat frontpayisanequitableremedyexcludedfromthestatutorylimitoncompensatory   damagesprovidedforin[42U.S.C.]1981a(b)(3).Id.at626.     AlthoughtheCivilRightsActof1991expresslylimitstheamountofcompensatoryand @  punitivedamagesdependinguponthesizeoftheemployer,section102oftheActexpressly &  statesthatthejuryshallnotbeadvisedonanysuchlimitation.Instead,thetrialcourtwill    simplyreducetheverdictbytheamountofanyexcess.    = @  % h  5.02BTITLEVIINOMINALDAMAGES agW  ^   IfyoufindinfavoroftheplaintiffunderInstruction____1andifyouanswer noin * responsetoInstruction____2,butyoufindthattheplaintiff'sdamageshavenomonetaryvalue,  % thenyoumustreturnaverdictfortheplaintiffinthenominalamountofOneDollar($1.00).3  ~ & k @$ NotesonUse  5    1.Fillinthenumberortitleoftheessentialelementsinstruction(5.01)here.  0    2.Fillinthenumberortitleofthe samedecisioninstruction(5.01A)here.     3.OneDollar($1.00)arguablyistherequiredamountincasesinwhichnominal @  damagesareappropriate.Nominaldamagesareappropriatewhenthejuryisunabletoplacea &  monetaryvalueontheharmthattheplaintiffsufferedfromtheviolationofhisrights.SeeDean    v.Civiletti,670F.2d99,101(8thCir.1982)(TitleVII);cf.Cowansv.Wyrick,862F.2d69799   (8thCir.1988)(inprisonercivilrightsaction,nominaldamagesareappropriatewherethejury z  cannotplaceamonetaryvalueontheharmsufferedbytheplaintiff);Haleyv.Wyrick,740F.2d ` 12(8thCir.1984). F @--! CommitteeComments     Mostemploymentdiscriminationcasesinvolvelostwagesandbenefits.Insomecases, V however,thejurymaybepermittedtoreturnaverdictforonlynominaldamages.Forexample, < iftheplaintiffwasgivenseverancepayandwasabletosecureabetterpayingjob,theevidence " maynotsupportanawardofbackpay,butmaysupportanawardofcompensatorydamages.  Similarly,inasexualharassmentcaseinwhichtheplaintiffdoesnotsufferanylostwagesor  benefits,thejurymayfindfortheplaintiffbutawardnoactualdamages.Thisinstructionis v designedtosubmittheissueofnominaldamagesinappropriatecases.'k5 O  \ > @  % i  5.02CTITLEVIIPUNITIVEDAMAGES th7  ^   Inadditiontothedamagesmentionedinotherinstructions,thelawpermitsthejuryunder * certaincircumstancestoawardpunitivedamages.  %   IfyoufindinfavoroftheplaintiffunderInstruction(s)_______,1andifyouanswer no  ~ inresponsetoInstruction_____,2thenyoumustdecidewhetherthedefendantactedwithmalice 5  orrecklessindifferencetotheplaintiffsrightnottobediscriminatedagainst3onthebasisof  0  [(his)(her)](sex).4Thedefendantactedwithmaliceorrecklessindifferenceif:   0  ithasbeenproved5that[insertthename(s)ofthedefendantormanager6whoterminated6 @  theplaintiff]knewthatthe(termination)7wasinviolationofthelawprohibiting(sex) ;  discrimination,oractedwithrecklessdisregardofthatlaw.8 (#(# [However,youmaynotawardpunitivedamagesifithasbeenprovedthatthedefendantmadea K  goodfaithefforttocomplywiththelawprohibiting(sex)4discrimination]9. F   Ifyoufindthatthedefendantactedwithmaliceorrecklessindifferencetotheplaintiffs  rights[anddidnotmakeagoodfaithefforttocomplywiththelaw],then,inadditiontoany V otherdamagestowhichyoufindtheplaintiffentitled,youmay,butarenotrequiredto,award Q theplaintiffanadditionalamountaspunitivedamagesforthepurposesofpunishingthe  defendantforengaginginsuchmisconductanddeterringthedefendantandothersfrom a  engaginginsuchmisconductinthefuture.Youshouldpresumethataplaintiffhasbeenmade \" wholefor[his,her,its]injuriesbythedamagesawardedunderInstruction____.10 $   Ifyoudecidetoawardpunitivedamages,youshouldconsiderthefollowingindeciding l & theamountofpunitivedamagestoaward: !g(   1.Howreprehensiblethedefendantsconductwas.11Inthisregard,youmayconsider #* [whethertheharmsufferedbytheplaintiffwasphysicaloreconomicorboth;whethertherewas w$, violence,deceit,intentionalmalice,recklessdisregardforhumanhealthorsafety;whetherthe %r. defendantsconductthatharmedtheplaintiffalsoposedariskofharmtoothers;whetherthere )' 0 wasanyrepetitionofthewrongfulconductandpastconductofthesortthatharmedthe ($"2  plaintiff].12 )}#4   2.Howmuchharmthedefendantswrongfulconductcausedtheplaintiff[andcould ^  causetheplaintiffinthefuture].13[Youmaynotconsiderharmtoothersindecidingtheamount Y ofpunitivedamagestoaward.]14     3.Whatamountofpunitivedamages,inadditiontotheotherdamagesalreadyawarded, i  isneeded,consideringthedefendantsfinancialcondition,topunishthedefendantfor[his,her,  d its]wrongfulconducttowardtheplaintiffandtodeterthedefendantandothersfromsimilar    wrongfulconductinthefuture. t    4.[Theamountoffinesandcivilpenaltiesapplicabletosimilarconduct].15 o    Theamountofanypunitivedamagesawardshouldbearareasonablerelationshiptothe &  harmcausedtotheplaintiff.16 !    [Youmayassesspunitivedamagesagainstanyoralldefendantsoryoumayrefuseto z  imposepunitivedamages.Ifpunitivedamagesareassessedagainstmorethanonedefendant, 1 theamountsassessedagainstsuchdefendantsmaybethesameortheymaybedifferent.]17 ,   [Youmaynotawardpunitivedamagesagainstthedefendant[s]forconductinother  states.]18 <  @$ NotesonUse  7   1.Fillinthenumberortitleoftheessentialelementsinstructionhere.     2.Fillinthenumberortitleofthe samedecisioninstructionifapplicable. G"   3.Althoughafindingofdiscriminationordinarilysubsumesafindingofintentional B$ misconduct,thislanguageisincludedtoemphasizethethresholdforrecoveryofpunitive (% damages.UndertheCivilRightsActof1991,thestandardforpunitivedamagesiswhetherthe l & defendantacted withmaliceorwithrecklessindifferencetothe[plaintiffs]federallyprotected R!' rights.CRAof91,102(codifiedat42U.S.C.1981a(b)(1)). 8"(   4.Thisinstructionisdesignedforuseinagenderdiscriminationcase.Itmustbe #3* modifiedifotherformsofdiscriminationarealleged. w$+   5.ModelInstruction3.04(BurdenofProof)tellsthejurythatsomethingisprovedonly %r- ifthejuryfindsitismorelikelytruethannottrue.Thephrase greaterweightoftheevidence &X . isnotnecessaryhere.ItcanbeincludedinInstruction3.04ifdesiredbythecourt. '>!/   6.Usethenameofthedefendant,themanagerwhotooktheaction,orotherdescriptive ("1 phrasesuchas themanagerwhofiredtheplaintiff. )}#2   7.Thislanguageisdesignedforuseinadischargecase.Ina failuretohire, failureto 4+$4 promote, demotion,or constructivedischargecase,thelanguagemustbemodified. ,%5   8.SeeKolstadv.AmericanDentalAssn,527U.S.526,535,536(1999)(holdingthat ^  maliceorrecklessindifferencepertaintotheemployersknowledgethatitmaybeactingin D violationoffederallaw,notitsawarenessthatitisengagingindiscriminationandthat an * employermustatleastdiscriminateinthefaceofaperceivedriskthatitsactionswillviolate   federallawtobeliableinpunitivedamages);Cannyv.Dr.Pepper/SevenUpBottlingGroup,   Inc.,439F.3d894,903(citingKolstadandobservingthatanawardofpunitivedamagesmaybe  ~ inappropriatewhentheunderlyingtheoryofdiscriminationisnovelorpoorlyrecognizedor  d  whentheemployer(1)isunawarefederallawprohibitstherelevantconduct,(2)believesthe  J discriminatoryconductislawful,or(3)reasonablybelievesthereisabonafideoccupational  0 qualificationdefenseforthediscriminatoryconduct). t    9.Usethisphraseonlyifthegoodfaithofthedefendantistobepresentedtothejury. o  ThistwoparttestwasarticulatedbytheUnitedStatesSupremeCourtinKolstadv.American U  DentalAssn,527U.S.526(1999).Foradiscussionofthecase,seetheCommitteeComments. ;  Itisnotclearfromthecasewhobearstheriskofnonpersuasiononthegoodfaithissue.The !  Committeepredictsthatcaselawwillplacetheburdenonthedefendanttoraisetheissueand e  proveit. K    10.Fillinthenumberortitleoftheactualdamagesornominaldamagesinstructionhere. F   11.Theword reprehensibleisusedinthesamesenseasitisusedincommonparlance.  TheSupremeCourt,inStateFarmMut.Auto.Ins.Co.v.Campbell,538U.S.408,419(2003),  stated: Itshouldbepresumedaplaintiffhasbeenmadewholeforhisinjuriesbycompensatory k damages,sopunitivedamagesshouldonlybeawardedifthedefendantsculpability,after Q havingpaidcompensatorydamages,issoreprehensibleastowarranttheimpositionoffurther 7 sanctionstoachievepunishmentordeterrence.InPhilipMorrisUSAv.Williams,549U.S. { 346,355,_____127_ԀS.Ct.1057,106465(2007),theSupremeCourtheldthat,whileharmtopersons a otherthantheplaintiffmaybeconsideredindeterminingreprehensibility,ajurymaynotpunish G fortheharmcausedtopersonsotherthantheplaintiff.TheCourtstatedthatprocedureswere - necessarytoassure thatjuriesarenotaskingthewrongquestion,i.e.,seeking,notsimplyto  determinereprehensibility,butalsotopunishforharmcausedstrangers.Id.at355.    12.Anyitemnotsupportedbytheevidence,ofcourse,shouldbeexcluded. R!    13.Thissentencemaybeusedifthereisevidenceoffutureharmtotheplaintiff. "M" К  14.Aparagraphinstructingthejurythatanypunitivedamagesawardshouldnotinclude $$ anamountforharmsufferedbypersonswhoarenotpartiestothecasemaybenecessaryif $% evidenceconcerningharmsufferedbynonpartieshasbeenintroduced.SeePhilipMorrisUSAv. %r& Williams,549U.S.at355;StateFarmMut.Auto.Ins.Co.v.Campbell,538U.S.408,42224 &X ' (2003);Williamsv.ConAgraPoultryCo.,378F.3d790,79798(8thCir.2004). '>!(   15.Insertthisphraseonlyifevidencehasbeenintroduced,orthecourthastakenjudicial ("* notice,offinesandpenaltiesforsimilarconduct.SeeBMWofNorthAmerica,Inc.v.Gore,517 )}#+ U.S.559,575(1996),noting civilpenaltiesauthorizedincomparablecasesasaguidepostto *c$, beconsidered.SeealsoStateFarmMut.Auto.Ins.Co.v.Campbell,538U.S.408,428(2003). +I%-   16.SeeStateFarmMut.Auto.Ins.Co.v.Campbell,538U.S.408,425(2003)(stating ^ that inpractice,fewawardsexceedingasingledigitratiobetweenpunitiveandcompensatory D damages,toasignificantdegree,willsatisfydueprocessandobservingthat: Singledigit * multipliersaremorelikelytocomportwithdueprocess,whilestillachievingtheStatesgoalsof   deterrenceandretribution,thanawardswithratiosinrangeof500to1[citingBMWofNorth   America,Inc.v.Gore,517U.S.559,582(1996)]or,inthiscase,of145to1.).  ~   17.Thebracketedlanguageisavailableforuseifpunitivedamagesclaimsaresubmitted 5  againstmorethanonedefendant.     18.Ifevidencehasbeenintroducedconcerningconductbythedefendantthatwaslegal t  inthestatewhereitwascommitted,thejurymustbetoldthattheycannotawardpunitive Z  damagesagainstthedefendantforsuchconduct.SeeStateFarmMut.Auto.Inc.Co.v. @  Campbell,538U.S.408,422(2003);BMWofNorthAmerica,Inc.v.Gore,517U.S.559,572 &  73(1996);Williamsv.ConAgraPoultryCo.,378F.3d790,79798(8thCir.2004).Thisissue    normallywillnotcomeupincasesunderfederallaw.Inanycaseinwhichevidenceisadmitted   forsomepurposesbutmaynotbeconsideredbythejuryinawardingpunitivedamages,the z  courtshouldgiveanappropriatelimitinginstruction. ` &   @--! CommitteeComments     UndertheCivilRightsActof1991,aTitleVIItheplaintiffmayrecoverdamagesby p showingthatthedefendantengagedindiscrimination withmaliceorwithrecklessindifference V ' ?Oto[hisorher]federallyprotectedrights.See42U.S.C.1981a(b)(1).SeealsoModel < Instruction4.50C,supra,onpunitivedamagesandPacificMut.LifeIns.Co.v.Haslip,499U.S. " 1(1991).In1999,theUnitedStatesSupremeCourtexplainedthattheterms maliceand   recklessultimatelyfocusontheactorsstateofmind.Kolstadv.AmericanDentalAssn,527  U.S.526,535(1999).TheCourtaddedthatthetermspertaintotheemployersknowledgethat v itmaybeactinginviolationoffederallaw,notitsawarenessthatitisengagingin \ discrimination.Id.Tobeliableforpunitivedamages,theemployermustatleastdiscriminatein B thefaceofaperceivedriskthatitsactionswillviolatefederallaw.Id.at536.Rejectingthe ( conclusionofthelowercourtthatpunitivedamageswerelimitedtocasesinvolvingintentional l  discriminationofan egregiousnature,theCourtheldthataplaintiffisnotrequiredtoshow R!  egregiousoroutrageousdiscriminationindependentoftheemployersstateofmind.Id.at546. 8"!   TheKolstadcasealsoestablishedagoodfaithdefensetoplacelimitsonanemployers #3# vicariousliabilityforpunitivedamages.RecognizingthatTitleVIIandtheADAareboth w$$ effortstopromotepreventionofdiscriminationaswellasremediation,theCourtheldthatan ]%% employermaynotbevicariouslyliableforthediscriminatorydecisionsofmanagerialagents C&& wherethosedecisionsarecontrarytotheemployersgoodfaitheffortstocomplywithTitleVII )' ' ortheADA.Id.at545.TheCourtdoesnotclarifywhichpartyhastheburdenofproofonthe (!( issueofgoodfaith. (")   Thisinstructionattemptstoincorporatetheconstitutionallyrelevantprinciplessetforth N*#+ bytheSupremeCourtinPhilipMorrisUSAv.Williams,549U.S.346(2007);StateFarmMut. 4+$, Auto.Ins.Co.v.Campbell,538U.S.408(2003),BMWofNorthAmerica,Inc.v.Gore,517U.S. ,%- 559(1996),HondaMotorCo.v.Oberg,512U.S.415(1994),andTXOProductionCorp.v. ^ AllianceResourcesCorp.,509U.S.443,45962(1993).InStateFarm,538U.S.at417,the D Courtobserved: Wehaveadmonishedthat[p]unitivedamagesposeanacutedangerof * arbitrarydeprivationofproperty.Juryinstructionstypicallyleavethejurywithwidediscretion   inchoosingamounts,andthepresentationofevidenceofadefendantsnetworthcreatesthe   potentialthatjurieswillusetheirverdictstoexpressbiasesagainstbigbusinesses,particularly  ~ thosewithoutstronglocalpresences.(quotingHondaMotor,512U.S.at432).SeeBakerv.  d JohnMorrell&Co.,266F.Supp.2d909,961(N.D.Iowa2003),affd,382F.3d816(8thCir.  J 2004),andInReExxonValdez,296F.Supp.2d1071,1080(D.Alaska2004),forexamplesof  0 punitivedamagesinstructionsinwhichthecourtattemptedtoincorporateconstitutional t  standards. Z    ThelastparagraphisbasedonStateFarm,538U.S.at421,inwhichtheCourtheldthat: U   Astatecannotpunishadefendantforconductthatmayhavebeenlawfulwhereit ;  occurred....Nor,asageneralrule,doesaStatehavealegitimateconcerninimposingpunitive !  damagestopunishadefendantforunlawfulactscommittedoutsideoftheStatesjurisdiction. e  TheCourtspecificallymandatedthat: Ajurymustbeinstructed,furthermore,thatitmaynot K  useevidenceofoutofstateconducttopunishadefendantforactionthatwaslawfulinthe 1 jurisdictionwhereitoccurred.StateFarm,538U.S.at422.    ?@  % j  5.03TITLEVIIVERDICTFORM edb  ^ @<<'VERDICT *  Note: 0  0` (#(#Completethefollowingparagraphbywritinginthenamerequiredbyyour   verdict. ~` (#` (#   Onthe[(sex)1discrimination]2claimofplaintiff[JaneDoe],[assubmittedinInstruction  J ____]3,wefindinfavorof:   _____________________________________________________________________________ Z  @  (PlaintiffJaneDoe)or(DefendantXYZ,Inc.) @   Note: 0  0` (#(#Answerthenextquestiononlyiftheabovefindingisinfavoroftheplaintiff.If    theabovefindingisinfavorofthedefendant,haveyourforepersonsignanddate   thisformbecauseyouhavecompletedyourdeliberationsonthisclaim.z ` (#` (#   Hasitbeenproved4thatthedefendantwouldhavedischargedtheplaintiffregardlessof F [(his)(her)](sex)?5  @YY______Yes_______No V @ (Markan"X"intheappropriatespace) <  Note: 0  0` (#(#Completethefollowingparagraphsonlyifyouranswertotheprecedingquestion  is"no."Ifyouanswered"yes"totheprecedingquestion,haveyourforeperson  signanddatethisformbecauseyouhavecompletedyourdeliberationsonthis v claim.\` (#` (#   Wefindtheplaintiff'slostwagesandbenefitsthroughthedateofthisverdicttobe: ( 0  0` (#(#$_________(statingtheamountor,ifnone,writetheword"none").  ` (#` (#   Wefindtheplaintiff'sotherdamages,excludinglostwagesandbenefits,tobe: #3$ 0  0` (#(#$_________(statingtheamount[or,ifyoufindthattheplaintiff'sdamagesdonot $& haveamonetaryvalue,writeinthenominalamountofOneDollar($1.00)]).C&(` (#` (#   '>!* &     [Weassesspunitivedamagesagainstthedefendant,assubmittedinInstruction____,as ^ follows: Y 0  0` (#(#$_________(statingtheamountor,ifnone,writetheword"none").]6 ` (#` (# '^:l   `     h   __________________________________________ 5     `     h   Foreperson    Dated:________________________   & % @$ NotesonUse  U    1.Thisverdictformisdesignedforuseinagenderdiscriminationcase.Itmustbe    modifiediftheplaintiffisclaiming'%ndiscriminationbasedonrace,religion,orsomeother   prohibitedfactor. z    2.Thebracketedphraseshouldbesubmittedwhentheplaintiffsubmitsmultipleclaims 1 tothejury.    3.Thenumberortitleofthe"essentialelements"instructionmaybeinsertedhere.See p infraModelInstruction5.01. V   4.ModelInstruction3.04(BurdenofProof)tellsthejurythatsomethingisprovedonly Q ifthejuryfindsitismorelikelytruethannottrue.Thephrase greaterweightoftheevidence 7 isnotnecessaryhere.ItcanbeincludedinInstruction3.04ifdesiredbythecourt. {   5.Thisquestionsubmitsthe"samedecision"issuetothejury.SeeinfraModel v Instruction5.01A. \   6.Thisparagraphshouldbeincludediftheevidenceissufficienttosupportanawardof   punitivedamages.SeeinfraModelInstruction5.02C.  ! :  @ @  % k  5.10AGEDISCRIMINATIONINEMPLOYMENTACT  @ _( ADEA)_ԀOF1967,ASAMENDEDIntroductoryComment at     ThefollowinginstructionsaredesignedforuseinjurytrialsundertheADEA.  b B@ss  % l  5.11ADEA-ELEMENTS aSv  ^   Yourverdictmustbefortheplaintiff[andagainstdefendant__________]1[onthe * plaintiff'sagediscriminationclaim]2ifallthefollowingelementshavebeenproved3:  %   First,thedefendant[discharged]4theplaintiff;and  ~   Second,thedefendantwouldnothave[discharged]4theplaintiffbutfor5theplaintiffs 5  age.  0    Ifanyoftheaboveelementshasnotbeenproved,yourverdictmustbeforthedefendant.     Butfordoesnotrequirethatagewastheonlyreasonforthedecisionmadebythe @  defendant.[Youmayfindthedefendantwouldnothavedischargedtheplaintiff butforthe ;  plaintiffsageifithasbeenprovedthatthedefendant'sstatedreason(s)foritsdecision(s)[(is)   (are)]nottherealreason(s),but[(is)(are)]apretexttohideagediscrimination].6 K   @$ NotesonUse  F   1.Usethisphraseiftherearemultipledefendants.    2.Thebracketedlanguageshouldbeinsertedwhentheplaintiffsubmitsmorethanone V claimtothejury. <   3.ModelInstruction3.04(BurdenofProof)tellsthejurythatsomethingisprovedonly 7 ifthejuryfindsitismorelikelytruethannottrue.Thephrase greaterweightoftheevidence { isnotnecessaryhere.ItcanbeincludedinInstruction3.04ifdesiredbythecourt. a   4.Thisfirstelementisdesignedforuseinadischargecase.Ina failuretohire, \!  failuretopromote,or demotioncase,theinstructionmustbemodified.Wheretheplaintiff B" resignedbutclaimsa"constructivedischarge,"thisinstructionshouldbemodified.Seeinfra (# ModelInstruction5.93. l $   5. ToestablishadisparatetreatmentclaimundertheplainlanguageoftheADEA,...a !g& plaintiffmustprovethatagewasthebutforcauseoftheemployersadversedecision.Gross "M' v.FBLFinancialServices,Inc.,557U.S.167,__,129S.Ct.2343,2350(2009);seealsoGross #3( v.FBLFinancialServices,Inc.,588F.3d614(8thCir.2009). Mixedmotiveburdenshifting w$) instructionsareunavailableinADEAcases.Id. ]%*   6.Thissentencemaybeadded,ifappropriate.SeeinfraModelInstruction5.95and &X , Moorev.RobertsonFireProtectionDist.,249F.3d786,790n.9(8thCir.2001),whichstates '>!-  [w]edonotexpressanyviewastowhetheriteverwouldbereversibleerrorforatrialcourtto ($".  failtogiveapretextinstruction,thoughwetendtodoubtit. h) #/ &    @--! CommitteeComments  ^   InReevesv.SandersonPlumbingProducts,Inc.,530U.S.133(2000),theSupreme Y Courtheldthatanagediscriminationplaintiffmaycreateasubmissibleissuebyshowingthat ? the' ^defendantsstatedreasonforitsdecisionwaspretextual.   % C @  % m  5.12AADEA-ACTUALDAMAGES   ^   Ifyoufindinfavoroftheplaintiff[underInstruction_____,]1thenyoumustawardthe * plaintiffsuchsumasyoufindwillfairlyandjustlycompensatetheplaintiffforanywagesand  % fringebenefitsyoufindtheplaintiffwouldhaveearnedin[(his)(her)]employmentwiththe  ~ defendantif[(he)(she)]hadnotbeendischargedon[fillindateofdischarge],throughthedate 5  ofyourverdict,minustheamountofearningsandbenefitsfromotheremploymentreceivedby  0  theplaintiffduringthattime.2     [Youarealsoinstructedthattheplaintiffhasadutyunderthelawtousereasonable @  effortstominimize[(his)(her)]damages.Ifithasbeenproved3thattheplaintifffailedtoseek ;  outortakeadvantageofanopportunitythatwasreasonablyavailableto[(him)(her)],youmust   reduce[(his)(her)]damagesbytheamountofthewagesandfringebenefits[(he)(she)] K  reasonablywouldhaveearnedif[(he)(she)]hadsoughtoutortakenadvantageofsuchan F opportunity.]4    [Remember,throughoutyourdeliberations,youmustnotengageinanyspeculation, V guess,orconjectureandyoumustnotawarddamagesunderthisInstructionbywayof Q punishmentorthroughsympathy.]5  &  @$ NotesonUse  a    1.Insertthenumberortitleofthe essentialelementsinstructionhere. \" 'a  2.Theformulafor backpayis thedifferencebetweenthevalueofcompensationthe $ plaintiffwouldhavebeenentitledtohadheremainedemployedbythedefendantandwhatever % wagesheearnedduringtherelevantperiod.Hartleyv.Dillards,Inc.,310F.3d1054,1062  & (8thCir.2002).Thevalueoflostbenefits,suchasemployersubsidizedhealth,life,disability !g' andotherformsofinsurance,contributionstoretirement,accruedvacation,etc.arerecoverable "M( undertheADEA.Hartley,310F.3dat1062(collectingcases);Gaworskiv.ITTCommercial #3) FinanceCorp.,17F.3d1104,111014(8thCir.1994)(allowinginsurancereplacementcosts, w$* lost401(K)contributions).Thisinstructionalsomaybemodifiedtoexcludecertainitemswhich ]%+ werementionedduringtrialbutarenotrecoverablebecauseofaninsufficiencyofevidenceoras C&, amatteroflaw. )' -   3.ModelInstruction3.04(BurdenofProof)tellsthejurythatsomethingisprovedonly ($"/ ifthejuryfindsitismorelikelytruethannottrue.Thephrase greaterweightoftheevidence h) #0  isnotnecessaryhere.ItcanbeincludedinInstruction3.04ifdesiredbythecourt. N*#1   4.Thisparagraphisdesignedtosubmittheissueof mitigationof_damages_Ԁin ^  appropriatecases.SeeHartleyv.Dillards,Inc.,310F.3d1054,106162(8thCir.2002).The D burdenisontheemployertopleadandprovetheplaintiffsfailuretomitigate.Id. *   5.Thisparagraphmaybegivenatthetrialcourt'sdiscretion.  % @--! CommitteeComments   ~   Thegoalofadamagesawardinanagediscriminationcaseistoputtheplaintiffinthe 5  sameeconomicpositionheorshewouldhavebeeninbutfortheunlawfulemploymentdecision.    Thisinstructionisdesignedtosubmitthestandardbackpayformulaoflostwagesandbenefits   minusinterimearningsandbenefitsthroughthedateofverdict.SeeHartleyv.Dillards,Inc.,   310F.3d1054,106162(8thCir.2002)(theplaintiffentitledto mostcompletereliefpossible); o  Gaworskiv.ITTCommercialFinanceCorp.,17F.3d1104,111014(8thCir.1994). U    Thisinstructionmaybemodifiedtoarticulatethetypesofinterimearningswhichshould    beoffsetagainsttheplaintiff'sbackpay.Forexample,severancepayandwagesfromother   employmentordinarilyareoffsetagainstabackpayaward.Gaworski,17F.3dat111014. z  However,unemploymentcompensation,SocialSecuritybenefits,andpensionbenefitsreceived ` bytheplaintiffareconsidered collateralsourcebenefitsthatarenotoffsetagainstabackpay F award.SeeHartley,310F.3dat1062;Doynev.UnionElectricCo.,953F.2d447,45152(8th , Cir.1992)(holdingthatpensionbenefitsarea"collateralsourcebenefit");Gaworskiv.ITT p CommercialFinanceCorp.,17F.3d1104,111014(8thCir.1994)(unemploymentbenefits, V moonlightingincomealsonotdeductible). <   Insomecases,adiscriminationplaintiffmaybeeligibleforfuturelostincomeand 7 benefits( frontpay).Hartley,310F.3d106263.Becausefrontpayisessentiallyanequitable { remedy inlieuofreinstatement,frontpayisanissueforthecourt,notthejury.ExcelCorp.v. a Bosley,165F.3d635(8thCir.1999).Newhousev.McCormick&Co.,110F.3d635,641(8th G Cir.1997)(frontpayisanissueforthecourt,notthejury,inADEAcases).  - D @U U  % n  5.12BADEANOMINALDAMAGES   ^   [NominaldamagesnormallyarenotappropriateinADEAcases.]1 *  @$ NotesonUse   %   1.Ifanominaldamagesinstructionisdeemedappropriate,seesupraModelInstruction  ~ 5.02B.  d & % @--! CommitteeComments       RecoverabledamagesinADEAcasesnormallyarelimitedtolostwagesandbenefitsand t  inmost'% KADEAcases,itwillbeundisputedthattheplaintiffhassomeactualdamages.Although Z  caselawdoesnotclearlyauthorizethisremedyinagediscriminationcases,anominaldamage @  instructionmaybeconsideredinappropriatecases,andModelInstruction5.02B,supra,should &  beused.Mostcasesthatallownominaldamagesjustassumetheyarepermissiblewithoutmuch    discussionoftheissue.Seee.g.,Drezv.E.R.Squibb&Sons,Inc.,674F.Supp.1432,1438(D.   Kan.1987)(ADEA);Graefenhainv.PabstBrewingCo.,670F.Supp.1415,1416(E.D.Wis. z  1987)(ADEA).  ` E @ % o  5.12CADEA-WILLFULNESS coM  ^   IfyoufindinfavoroftheplaintiffunderInstruction_____,1thenyoumustdecide * whethertheconductofthedefendantwas"willful."Youmustfindthedefendant'sconductwas  % willfulifithasbeenproved2that,whenthedefendant[discharged]3theplaintiff,thedefendant  ~ knew[thedischarge]wasinviolationofthefederallawprohibitingagediscrimination,oracted 5  withrecklessdisregardofthatlaw.  0  & ? @$ NotesonUse    '?  1.Insertthenumberortitleofthe essentialelementsinstructionhere. @    2.ModelInstruction3.04(BurdenofProof)tellsthejurythatsomethingisprovedonly ;  ifthejuryfindsitismorelikelytruethannottrue.Thephrase greaterweightoftheevidence !  isnotnecessaryhere.ItcanbeincludedinInstruction3.04ifdesiredbythecourt. e    3.Thisinstructionisdesignedforuseinadischargecase.Ina failuretohire, failure ` topromote,or demotioncase,orwheretheplaintiffresignedbutclaimsheorshewas F  constructivelydischarged,theinstructionmustbemodified. , @--! CommitteeComments     ThestandardsetforthintheinstructionisconsistentwiththatmandatedbyHazenPaper < Co.v.Biggins,507U.S.604(1993).SeealsoSpencerv.StuartHallCo.,Inc.,173F.3d1124 " (8thCir.1999).Foradiscussionoftheevidencenecessarytojustifyasubmissionontheissue  ofwilfulness,seeMaschkav.GenuinePartsCo.,122F.3d566(8thCir.1997);Spencerv.Stuart  HallCo.,Inc.,173F.3d1124(8thCir.1999);Hartleyv.Dillards,Inc.,310F.3d1054(8thCir. v 2002).  \ F @ % p  5.13ADEA-VERDICTFORM co  ^ @<<'VERDICT *  Note: 0  0` (#(#Completethisformbywritinginthenamesrequiredbyyourverdict. ` (#` (#   Onthe[agediscrimination]1claimofplaintiff[JohnDoe],[assubmittedinInstruction  d _____]2,wefindinfavorof   ____________________________________________________________________________ t  @(PlaintiffJohnDoe)or(DefendantXYZ,Inc.) Z   Note: 0  0` (#(#Completethefollowingparagraphsonlyiftheabovefindingisinfavorofthe &  plaintiff.Iftheabovefindingisinfavorofthedefendant,haveyourforeperson    signanddatethisformbecauseyouhavecompletedyourdeliberationonthis   claim.z ` (#` (#   Wefindtheplaintiff'sdamagestobe: F 0  0` (#(#$__________(statingtheamountor,ifnone,writetheword none).3` (#` (#   Wasthedefendant'sconduct willfulasthattermisdefinedinInstruction_____?4 Q @ Yes_______________No_______________ a @ (Placean"X"intheappropriatespace.) G    `    `     h   _______________________________________      `     h   Foreperson  ! Dated:_______________ !g"  & % @$ NotesonUse  #3$   1.Thebracketedlanguageshouldbeincludedwhentheplaintiffsubmitsmultipleclaims $& to'%#thejury. %r'   2.Thenumberortitleofthe essentialelementsinstructionshouldbeinsertedhere. )' )   3.Thisparagraphmustbemodifiediftheissueofnominaldamagesissubmitted.But ($"+ seesupraCommitteeComments,ModelInstruction5.12A. h) #,   4.Thenumberortitleoftheinstructiondefining willfulnessshouldbeinserted.See *c$. supraModelInstruction5.12C.  +I%/ .A a G @  % q  5.20RACEDISCRIMINATION(42U.S.C.1981)IntroductoryComment er      Section1981ofTitle42,UnitedStatesCode,whichprohibitsracediscriminationinthe | makingandenforcementofcontracts,providesacauseofactionforracediscriminationin b employmentclaims.Johnsonv.RailwayExpressAgency,Inc.,421U.S.454(1975);seealso H Swapshirev.Baer,865F.2d948(8thCir.1989).Racediscriminationclaimantsoftenjoin . ~ claimsunder1981withclaimsunderTitleVIIbecause1981,unlikeTitleVII,doesnotlimit  d therecoveryofcompensatoryandpunitivedamages.Iftheplaintiffjoinsajury-triableclaim  J underTitleVIIwitha1981claim,theCommitteerecommendstheuseofthe5.01seriesof  0 instructionsandaccompanyingverdictform.AlthoughthereisadistinctionbetweenTitleVII    and1981intermsofthethresholdforliability,the5.01seriesofinstructionswillyieldallof    therequiredfindingsfora1981case.     Thefollowinginstructionsaredesignedforuseinallcasesbroughtpursuantto42U.S.C. ;  1981.Intheinterestsofsimplicityanduniformity,themodelinstructionontheissueof !  liabilityutilizesamotivatingfactor/samedecisionformatforallcases.Nevertheless,ifthetrial   courtbelievesitisappropriatetodistinguishbetweenamixedmotivecaseandapretextcase,   ModelInstruction5.21B,infra,containsasampledeterminingfactorinstruction.Moreover,if  thetrialcourtisinclinedtoadheretoapretext/mixedmotivedistinctionbutcannotdetermine i howtocategorizeaparticularcase,ModelInstruction5.92,infra,containsasetofspecial O interrogatoriesdesignedtoelicitacompletesetoffindingsforposttrialanalysis.  5 I @  % r  5.21A(RACE)DISCRIMINATION-ELEMENTS(MotivatingFactor) ^ @!(42U.S.C.1981) s.  D   Yourverdictmustbefortheplaintiff[andagainstdefendant__________]1[onthe   plaintiff's(race)discriminationclaim]2ifallthefollowingelementshavebeenproved3: i    First,thedefendant[failedtohire]4theplaintiff;and  d   Second,theplaintiff's(race)[wasamotivatingfactor]5[playedapart]6inthedefendant's    decision. t    However,yourverdictmustbeforthedefendantifanyoftheaboveelementshasnot o  beenproved,orifithasbeenprovedthatthedefendantwouldhavedecidednotto[hire]the &  plaintiffregardlessof[(his)(her)](race).[Youmayfindthattheplaintiff's(race)[wasa !  motivatingfactor][playedapart]inthedefendant's(decision)7ifithasbeenprovedthatthe z  defendant'sstatedreason(s)forits(decision)[(is)(are)]nottherealreason(s),but[(is)(are)]a 1 pretexttohide(race)discrimination.]8 ,  &  @$ NotesonUse     1.Usethisphraseiftherearemultipledefendants. < 's  2.Thebracketedlanguageshouldbeinsertedwhentheplaintiffsubmitsmorethanone 7 claimtothejury. {   3.ModelInstruction3.04(BurdenofProof)tellsthejurythatsomethingisprovedonly v  ifthejuryfindsitismorelikelytruethannottrue.Thephrase greaterweightoftheevidence \! isnotnecessaryhere.ItcanbeincludedinInstruction3.04ifdesiredbythecourt. B"   4.Thisinstructionisdesignedforuseina"failuretohire"case.Inadischargeor $  failuretopromotecase,theinstructionmustbemodified.In_ constructive_Ԁ_discharge_Ԁcases,  % seeinfraModelInstruction5.93. !g&   5.Theappropriatestandardinasection1981caseisnotclearlyresolved._ Motivating_ #( _factor_ԀwasusedpreviouslyintheseinstructionsandthesecaseshavemanysimilaritiestoTitle $) VIIcases.Thephrase_ motivating_Ԁ_factor_Ԁshouldbedefined,ifused.SeeinfraModel $* Instruction5.96.Ifthecourtdecides_ determining_Ԁ_factor_Ԁisappropriate,useinfraModel %r+ Instruction5.21B.Ifthecourtisuncertainastowhichstandardshouldbeusedinaparticular &X , case,theSpecialInterrogatoriesinModelInstruction5.92,infra,maybeused. '>!-   6.SeesupraModelInstruction5.96,whichdefines motivatingfactorintermsof ("/ whetherthecharacteristic playedapartoraroleinthedefendantsdecision.Thephrase )}#0  motivatingfactorneednotbedefinedifthedefinitionitselfisusedintheelementinstruction. *c$1   7.Thisinstructionmakesreferencestothedefendant's_ decision._ԀItmaybemodifiedif ^  anothertermsuchas_ actions_Ԁor_ conduct_wouldbemoreappropriate. D   8.Thissentencemaybeadded,ifappropriate.SeeinfraModelInstruction5.95and ? Moorev.RobertsonFireProtectionDist.,249F.3d786,790n.9_(8th_ԀCir.2001),whichstates  %  [w]edonotexpressanyviewastowhetheriteverwouldbereversibleerrorforatrialcourtto i  failtogiveapretextinstruction,thoughwetendtodoubtit.  O   J@**  % s  5.21B(RACE)-ELEMENTS(DeterminingFactor)(42U.S.C.1981) @  ^   Yourverdictmustbefortheplaintiff[andagainstdefendant__________]1[onthe * plaintiff's(race)discriminationclaim]2ifallthefollowingelementshavebeenproved3:  %   First,thedefendant[discharged]4theplaintiff;and  ~   Second,theplaintiff's(race)wasadeterminingfactorinthedefendant'sdecision. 5    Yourverdictmustbeforthedefendantifanyoftheaboveelementshasnotbeenproved.  0    _ (Race)_Ԁwasadetermining_factor_Ԁonlyifthedefendantwouldnothavedischargedthe   plaintiffbutfortheplaintiff's(race);itdoesnotrequirethat(race)wastheonlyreasonforthe @  decisionmadebythedefendant.5[Youmayfind(race)wasadeterminingfactorifithasbeen ;  provedthatthedefendant'sstatedreason(s)foritsdecision(s)[(is)(are)]nottherealreason(s),   but[(is)(are)]apretexttohide(race)discrimination].6 K   &  @$ NotesonUse  F   1.Usethisphraseiftherearemultipledefendants.  '  2.Thebracketedlanguageshouldbeinsertedwhentheplaintiffsubmitsmorethanone V claimtothejury. <   3.ModelInstruction3.04(BurdenofProof)tellsthejurythatsomethingisprovedonly 7 ifthejuryfindsitismorelikelytruethannottrue.Thephrase greaterweightoftheevidence { isnotnecessaryhere.ItcanbeincludedinInstruction3.04ifdesiredbythecourt. a   4.Thisinstructionisdesignedforuseinadischargecase.Ina_ failure_Ԁto_hire,_Ԁ_ failure_ \! to_promote,_Ԁor_ demotion_Ԁcase,theinstructionmustbemodified.Wheretheplaintiffresigned B" butclaimsa_ constructive_Ԁ_discharge,_Ԁthisinstructionshouldbemodified.SeeinfraModel (# Instruction5.93. l $   5.Thisdefinitionofthephrase_ (___)_Ԁwasadetermining_factor_ԀisbasedonGrebinv. !g& SiouxFallsIndep.SchoolDist.No.49-5,779F.2d18,20n.1(8thCir.1985). "M'   6.Thissentencemaybeadded,ifappropriate.SeeinfraModelInstruction5.95and $) Moorev.RobertsonFireProtectionDist.,249F.3d786,790n.9(8th___Cir._Ԁ2001),whichstates $*  [w]edonotexpressanyviewastowhetheriteverwouldbereversibleerrorforatrialcourtto %r+ failtogiveapretextinstruction,thoughwetendtodoubtit. &X , & ? @--! CommitteeComments  (!.   SeesupraNoteonUse5toModelInstruction5.21A.'?(4  h) #0  K@  % t  5.22ARACEDISCRIMINATION-ACTUALDAMAGES(42U.S.C.1981) it8  ^   Ifyoufindinfavoroftheplaintiff[underInstruction_____]1,thenyoumustawardthe * plaintiffsuchsumasyoufindwillfairlyandjustlycompensate[(him)(her)]fordamagesyou  % find[(he)(she)]sustainedasadirectresultofthedefendant'sconductasdescribedinInstruction  ~ _____.1Damagesincludewagesorfringebenefitsyoufindtheplaintiffwouldhaveearnedin 5  [(his)(her)]employmentwiththedefendantif[(he)(she)]hadnotbeendischargedon(fillin  0  dateofdischarge),throughthedateofyourverdict,minustheamountofearningsandbenefits   fromotheremploymentreceivedbytheplaintiffduringthattime.]2Damagesalsomayinclude @  [listdamagessupportedbytheevidence].3 ;    [Youarealsoinstructedthattheplaintiffhasadutyunderthelawto mitigate[(his)   (her)]damagesthatis,toexercisereasonablediligenceunderthecircumstancestominimize K  [(his)(her)]damages.Therefore,ifyoufindthattheplaintifffailedtoseekoutortake F advantageofanopportunitythatwasreasonablyavailableto[(him)(her)],youmustreduce  [(his)(her)]damagesbytheamountofthewagesandfringebenefitstheplaintiffreasonably V couldhaveearnedif[(he)(she)]hadsoughtoutortakenadvantageofsuchanopportunity.]4 Q   [Remember,throughoutyourdeliberations,youmustnotengageinanyspeculation,  guess,orconjectureandyoumustnotawardanydamagesbywayofpunishmentorthrough a  sympathy.]5 \"  &  @$ NotesonUse  $   1.Insertthenumberortitleofthe essentialelementsinstructionhere. l & '<  2.Whencertainbenefits,suchasemployersubsidizedhealthinsurancebenefits,are !g( recoverableundertheevidence,thisinstructionmaybemodifiedtoexplaintothejurythe "M) mannerinwhichrecoveryforthosebenefitsistobecalculated.Claimsforlostbenefitsoften #3* presentdifficultissuesastothepropermeasureofrecovery.SeeTolanv.LeviStrauss&Co., w$+ 867F.2d467,470(8thCir.1989)(discussingdifferentapproaches).Somecourtsdenyrecovery ]%, forlostbenefitsunlesstheemployeepurchasessubstitutecoverage,inwhichcasethemeasureof C&- damagesistheemployee'soutofpocketexpenses.Syvockv.MilwaukeeBoilerMfg.Co.,665 )' . F.2d149,161(7thCir.1981),overruledonothergrounds,860F.2d834(7thCir.1988);Pearce (!/ v.CarrierCorp.,966F.2d958(5thCir.1992).Othercourtspermittherecoveryoftheamount ("0 theemployerwouldhavepaidaspremiumsontheemployee'sbehalf.Fariss,769F.2dat964 )}#1  65.TheCommitteeexpressesnoviewastowhichapproachisproper.Thisinstructionalsomay *c$2 bemodifiedtoexcludecertainitemswhichwerementionedduringtrialbutarenotrecoverable ^ becauseofaninsufficiencyofevidenceorasamatteroflaw. D    3.Insection1981cases,aprevailingplaintiffmayrecoverdamagesformentalanguish, ? damagetoreputation,orotherpersonalinjuries.SeeWilmingtonv.J.I.CaseCo.,793F.2d909,  % 921(8thCir.1986).Thespecificelementsofdamagessetforthinthisinstructionaresimilarto i  thosefoundintheCivilRightsActof1991.See42U.S.C.1977A(b)(3).SeesupraModel O  Instruction5.02An.8. 5    4.Thisparagraphisdesignedtosubmittheissueof_ mitigation_Ԁof_damages_Ԁin  0  appropriatecases.SeeColemanv.CityofOmaha,714F.2d804,808(8thCir.1983). t    5.Thisparagraphmaybegivenatthetrialcourt'sdiscretion. o  & % @--! CommitteeComments  &    Thisinstructionisdesignedtosubmitthestandardbackpayformulaoflostwagesand !  '%&benefitsminusinterimearningsandbenefits.SeeFiedlerv.IndianheadTruckLine,Inc.,670 e  F.2d806,808(8thCir.1982).Moreover,because1981isopenendedinthetypesofdamages K  whichmayberecovered,thisinstructionalsopermitstherecoveryofgeneraldamagesforpain, 1 suffering,humiliation,andthelike.SeePattersonv.McLeanCreditUnion,491U.S.164,182  n.4(1989).UnlikeTitleVIIcasesundertheCivilRightsActof1991,thereisno_ cap_Ԁon  damagesundersection1981.    Insomecases,adiscriminationplaintiffmaybeeligibleforfrontpay.Becausefrontpay < isessentiallyanequitableremedy inlieuofreinstatement,frontpayisanissueforthecourt, " notthejury.ExcelCorp.v.Bosley,165F.3d635(8thCir.1999).SeeMacDissiv.Valmont  Indus.,856F.2d1054,1060(8thCir.1988);Newhousev.McCormick&Co.,110F.3d635,641  (8thCir.1997)(frontpayisanissueforthecourt,notthejury,inADEAcases).Ifthetrialcourt v submitstheissueoffrontpaytothejury,thejurysdeterminationmaybebinding.SeeDoynev. \ UnionElectricCo.,953F.2d447,451_(8th_ԀCir.1992)(ADEAcase). B   Thisinstructionmaybemodifiedtoarticulatethetypesofinterimearningswhichshould   beoffsetagainsttheplaintiff'sbackpay.Forexample,severancepayandwagesfromother  ! employmentordinarilyareoffsetagainstabackpayaward.SeeKrausev.DresserIndus.,910 !g" F.2d674,680(10thCir.1990);Cornettav.UnitedStates,851F.2d1372,1381(Fed.Cir.1988); "M# Farissv.LynchburgFoundry,769F.2d958,966(4thCir.1985).Unemploymentcompensation, #3$ SocialSecuritybenefitsorpensionbenefitsordinarilyarenotoffsetagainstabackpayaward. w$% SeeDoynev.UnionElectricCo.,953F.2d447,451(8thCir.1992)(holdingthatpension ]%& benefitsarea_ collateral_Ԁsource_benefit);_ԀDreyerv.ArcoChemicalCo.,801F.2d651,653n.1 C&' (3dCir.1986)(SocialSecurityandpensionbenefitsnotdeductible);Protosv.Volkswagenof )' ( America,Inc.,797F.2d129,13839(3dCir.1986)(unemploymentbenefitsnotdeductible); (!) Rasimasv.MichiganDeptofMentalHealth,714F.2d614,626(6thCir.1983)(same).Butcf. ("* Blumv.WitcoChemicalCorp.,829F.2d367,374(3dCir.1987)(pensionbenefitsreceivedasa )}#+ resultofsubsequentemploymentconsideredinoffsettingdamagesaward);Toledov.Nobel *c$, Sysco,Inc.,892F.2d1481,1493(10thCir.1989)(deductibilityofunemploymentcompensation +I%- iswithintrialcourt'sdiscretion);Hornv.DukeHomes,755F.2d599,607n.12(7thCir.1985) ^ (same);EEOCv.EnterpriseAss'nSteamfittersLocalNo.638,542F.2d579,592(2dCir.1976) D (same). *   Thisinstructionisdesignedtoencompassasituationwherethedefendantassertssome  % independentpostdischargereasonsuchasaplantclosingorsweepingreductioninforcewhy i  theplaintiffwouldhavebeenterminatedinanyeventbeforetrial.See,e.g.,Cleverlyv.Western O  Elec.Co.,450F.Supp.507(W.D.Mo.1978),aff'd,594F.2d638(8thCir.1979).Nevertheless, 5  thetrialcourtmaygiveaseparateinstructionwhichsubmitsthisissueinmoredirectterms.     L@  % u  5.22BRACEDISCRIMINATION-NOMINALDAMAGES(42U.S.C.1981) n<  ^   IfyoufindinfavoroftheplaintiffunderInstruction_____1,butyoudonotfindthatthe * plaintiff'sdamageshavemonetaryvalue,thenyoumustreturnaverdictfortheplaintiffinthe  % nominalamountofOneDollar($1.00).2  ~  &  @$ NotesonUse  5    1.Insertthenumberortitleofthe_ essential_Ԁ_elements_Ԁinstructionhere.  0  '5 )   2.OneDollar($1.00)arguablyistherequiredamountincasesinwhichnominal   damagesareappropriate.Nominaldamagesareappropriatewhenthejuryisunabletoplacea o  monetaryvalueontheharmthattheplaintiffsufferedfromtheviolationofhisrights.Cf. U  Cowansv.Wyrick,862F.2d697(8thCir.1988)(inprisonercivilrightsaction,nominaldamages ;  areappropriatewherethejurycannotplaceamonetaryvalueontheharmsufferedbythe !  plaintiff);Haleyv.Wyrick,740F.2d12(8thCir.1984). e  & % @--! CommitteeComments  `   Mostemploymentdiscriminationcasesinvolvelostwagesandbenefits.Insomecases,  '% however,thejurymaybepermittedtoreturnaverdictforonlynominaldamages.Forexample,  iftheplaintiffwasgivenseverancepayandwasabletosecureabetterpayingjob,theevidence  maynotsupportanawardofbackpay,butmaysupportanawardofcompensatorydamages. k Thisinstructionisdesignedtosubmittheissueofnominaldamagesinappropriatecases. Q   Ifnominaldamagesaresubmitted,theverdictformmustcontainalinewherethejury  canmakethatfinding.    Anawardofnominaldamagescansupportapunitivedamageaward.SeeGoodwinv. G CircuitCourtofSt.LouisCounty,729F.2d541,548(8thCir.1984)(1983case).  - M @  % v  5.22CRACEDISCRIMINATION-PUNITIVEDAMAGES(42U.S.C.1981) n:  ^   Inadditiontothedamagesmentionedinotherinstructions,thelawpermitsthejuryunder * certaincircumstancestoawardpunitivedamages.  %   Ifyoufindinfavoroftheplaintiffandagainstdefendant[name],[andifithasbeen  ~ proved1thattheplaintiff'sfiringwasmotivatedbyevilmotiveorintent,orthatthedefendant 5  wasrecklesslyindifferenttotheplaintiff'srights,]2then,inadditiontoanyotherdamagesto  0  whichyoufindtheplaintiffentitled,youmay,butarenotrequiredto,awardtheplaintiffan   additionalamountaspunitivedamagesforthepurposesofpunishingthedefendantforengaging @  insuchmisconductanddeterringthedefendantandothersfromengaginginsuchmisconductin ;  thefuture.     [However,youmaynotawardpunitivedamagesifithasbeenproved1[thatthedefendant K  madeagoodfaithefforttocomplywiththelawprohibitingracediscrimination]3.Youshould F presumethataplaintiffhasbeenmadewholefor[his,her,its]injuriesbythedamagesawarded  underInstruction_____.4 V   Ifyoudecidetoawardpunitivedamages,youshouldconsiderthefollowingindeciding Q theamountofpunitivedamagestoaward:    1.Howreprehensiblethedefendantsconductwas.5Inthisregard,youmayconsider a  [whethertheharmsufferedbytheplaintiffwasphysicaloreconomicorboth;whethertherewas \" violence,deceit,intentionalmalice,recklessdisregardforhumanhealthorsafety;whetherthe $ defendantsconductthatharmedtheplaintiffalsoposedariskofharmtoothers;whetherthere l & wasanyrepetitionofthewrongfulconductandpastconductofthesortthatharmedthe !g( plaintiff].6 #*   2.Howmuchharmthedefendantswrongfulconductcausedtheplaintiff[andcould w$, causetheplaintiffinthefuture].7[Youmaynotconsiderharmtoothersindecidingtheamount %r. ofpunitivedamagestoaward.]8 )' 0   3.Whatamountofpunitivedamages,inadditiontotheotherdamagesalreadyawarded, ($"2  isneeded,consideringthedefendantsfinancialcondition,topunishthedefendantfor[his,her, )}#4 its]wrongfulconducttowardtheplaintiffandtodeterthedefendantandothersfromsimilar ^ wrongfulconductinthefuture. Y    4.[Theamountoffinesandcivilpenaltiesapplicabletosimilarconduct].9     Theamountofanypunitivedamagesawardshouldbearareasonablerelationshiptothe i  harmcausedtotheplaintiff.10  d   [Youmayassesspunitivedamagesagainstanyoralldefendantsoryoumayrefuseto    imposepunitivedamages.Ifpunitivedamagesareassessedagainstmorethanonedefendant, t  theamountsassessedagainstthosedefendantsmaybethesameortheymaybedifferent.]11 o    [Youmaynotawardpunitivedamagesagainstthedefendant[s]forconductinother &  states.]12 !   @$ NotesonUse  z    1.ModelInstruction3.04(BurdenofProof)tellsthejurythatsomethingisprovedonly 1 ifthejuryfindsitismorelikelytruethannottrue.Thephrase greaterweightoftheevidence  isnotnecessaryhere.ItcanbeincludedinInstruction3.04ifdesiredbythecourt.    2.Useifmorethanoneelementinstruction. V   3.Punitivedamagesareallowedeventhoughthethresholdforliabilityrequiresreckless Q conduct.Ifthethresholdfortheunderlyingtortliabilityislessthan reckless,thebracketed 7 languagecorrectlystatesthestandardforpunitivedamagesunder42U.S.C.1983.Smithv. { Wade,461U.S.30(1983).SeeKolstadv.AmericanDentalAssn,527U.S.526,535,536 a (1999),andCannyv.Dr.Pepper/SevenUpBottlingGroup,Inc.,439F.3d894,903(8thCir. G  2006),discussingthemeaningof maliceand recklessindifference.Ifthethresholdfor -! liabilityis maliceor recklessindifferenceorsomethingmoreculpable,noadditionalfinding " shouldbenecessarybecausethelanguageintheissue/elementinstructionrequiresthejuryto # findtheculpabilitynecessaryforimposingpunitivedamages.However,itisrecommendedthat  $ thepunitivedamagesinstructionincludesuchlanguagetobesurethejuryfocusesonthatissue. !g%   4.Fillinthenumberortitleoftheactualdamagesornominaldamagesinstructionhere. #'   5.Theword reprehensibleisusedinthesamesenseasitisusedincommonparlance. w$) КTheSupremeCourt,inStateFarmMut.Auto.Ins.Co.v.Campbell,538U.S.408,419(2003), ]%* stated: Itshouldbepresumedaplaintiffhasbeenmadewholeforhisinjuriesbycompensatory C&+ damages,sopunitivedamagesshouldonlybeawardedifthedefendantsculpability,after )' , havingpaidcompensatorydamages,issoreprehensibleastowarranttheimpositionoffurther (!- sanctionstoachievepunishmentordeterrence.InPhilipMorrisUSAv.Williams,549U.S. (". 346,355,127S.Ct.1057,106465(2007),theSupremeCourtheldthat,whileharmtopersons )}#/ otherthantheplaintiffmaybeconsideredindeterminingreprehensibility,ajurymaynotpunish *c$0 fortheharmcausedtopersonsotherthantheplaintiff.TheCourtstatedthatprocedureswere +I%1 necessarytoassure thatjuriesarenotaskingthewrongquestion,i.e.,seeking,notsimplyto ^ determinereprehensibility,butalsotopunishforharmcausedstrangers.Id.at355. D   6.Anyitemnotsupportedbytheevidence,ofcourse,shouldbeexcluded. ?   7.Thissentencemaybeusedifthereisevidenceoffutureharmtotheplaintiff.     8.Aparagraphinstructingthejurythatanypunitivedamagesawardshouldnotinclude O  anamountforharmsufferedbypersonswhoarenotpartiestothecasemaybenecessaryif 5  evidenceconcerningharmsufferedbynonpartieshasbeenintroduced.SeePhilipMorrisUSAv.    Williams,549U.S.at355,127S.Ct.at106465;StateFarmMut.Auto.Ins.Co.v.Campbell,   538U.S.408,42224(2003);Williamsv.ConAgraPoultryCo.,378F.3d790,79798(8thCir.   2004). o    9.Insertthisphraseonlyifevidencehasbeenintroduced,orthecourthastakenjudicial &  notice,offinesandpenaltiesforsimilarconduct.SeeBMWofNorthAmerica,Inc.v.Gore,517    U.S.559,575(1996),noting civilpenaltiesauthorizedincomparablecasesasaguidepostto   beconsidered.SeealsoStateFarmMut.Auto.Ins.Co.v.Campbell,538U.S.408,428(2003). z    10.SeeStateFarmMut.Auto.Ins.Co.v.Campbell,538U.S.408,425(2003)(stating 1 that inpractice,fewawardsexceedingasingledigitratiobetweenpunitiveandcompensatory  damages,toasignificantdegree,willsatisfydueprocessandobservingthat: Singledigit  multipliersaremorelikelytocomportwithdueprocess,whilestillachievingtheStatesgoalsof  deterrenceandretribution,thanawardswithratiosinrangeof500to1[citingBMWofNorth k America,Inc.v.Gore,517U.S.559,582(1996)]or,inthiscase,of145to1.). Q   11.Thebracketedlanguageisavailableforuseifpunitivedamagesclaimsaresubmitted  againstmorethanonedefendant.    12.Ifevidencehasbeenintroducedconcerningconductbythedefendantthatwaslegal G inthestatewhereitwascommitted,thejurymustbetoldthattheycannotawardpunitive - damagesagainstthedefendantforsuchconduct.SeeStateFarmMut.Auto.Inc.Co.v.  Campbell,538U.S.408,422(2003);BMWofNorthAmerica,Inc.v.Gore,517U.S.559,572   73(1996);Williamsv.ConAgraPoultryCo.,378F.3d790,79798(8thCir.2004).Thisissue  ! normallywillnotcomeupincasesunderfederallaw.Inanycaseinwhichevidenceisadmitted !g" forsomepurposesbutmaynotbeconsideredbythejuryinawardingpunitivedamages,the "M# courtshouldgiveanappropriatelimitinginstruction. #3$  @--!CommitteeComments  $&   Thisinstructionattemptstoincorporatetheconstitutionallyrelevantprinciplessetforth C&( bytheSupremeCourtinPhilipMorrisUSAv.Williams,549U.S.346(2007);StateFarmMut. )' ) Auto.Ins.Co.v.Campbell,538U.S.408(2003),BMWofNorthAmerica,Inc.v.Gore,517U.S. (!* 559(1996),HondaMotorCo.v.Oberg,512U.S.415(1994),andTXOProductionCorp.v. ("+ AllianceResourcesCorp.,509U.S.443,45962(1993).InStateFarm,538U.S.at417,the )}#, courtobserved: Wehaveadmonishedthat[p]unitivedamagesposeanacutedangerof *c$- arbitrarydeprivationofproperty.Juryinstructionstypicallyleavethejurywithwidediscretion +I%. inchoosingamounts,andthepresentationofevidenceofadefendantsnetworthcreatesthe ^ potentialthatjurieswillusetheirverdictstoexpressbiasesagainstbigbusinesses,particularly D thosewithoutstronglocalpresences.(quotingHondaMotor,512U.S.at432).SeeBakerv. * JohnMorrell&Co.,266F.Supp.2d909,961(N.D.Iowa2003),affd,382F.3d816(8thCir.   2004),andInReExxonValdez,296F.Supp.2d1071,1080(D.Alaska2004),forexamplesof   punitivedamagesinstructionsinwhichthecourtattemptedtoincorporateconstitutional  ~ standards.  d К  ThelastparagraphisbasedonStateFarm,538U.S.at421,inwhichthecourtheldthat:    Astatecannotpunishadefendantforconductthatmayhavebeenlawfulwhereit   occurred....Nor,asageneralrule,doesaStatehavealegitimateconcerninimposingpunitive   damagestopunishadefendantforunlawfulactscommittedoutsideoftheStatesjurisdiction. o  Thecourtspecificallymandatedthat: Ajurymustbeinstructed,furthermore,thatitmaynot U  useevidenceofoutofstateconducttopunishadefendantforactionthatwaslawfulinthe ;  jurisdictionwhereitoccurred.StateFarm,538U.S.at422.  !  N @  % w  5.23RACEDISCRIMINATION-VERDICTFORM(42U.S.C.1981) ouB  ^ @<<'VERDICT *  Note: 0  0` (#(#Completethisformbywritinginthenamesrequiredbyyourverdict. ` (#` (#   Onthe[racediscrimination]1claimofplaintiff[JohnDoe],assubmittedinInstruction  d _____2,wefindinfavorof   ______________________________________________________________________________ t  @  (PlaintiffJaneDoe)or(DefendantXYZ,Inc.) Z   Note: 0  0` (#(#Completethefollowingparagraphsonlyiftheabovefindingisinfavorofthe &  plaintiff.Iftheabovefindingisinfavorofthedefendant,haveyourforeperson    signanddatethisformbecauseyouhavecompletedyourdeliberationonthis   claim.z ` (#` (#   Wefindtheplaintiff'sdamagesasdefinedinInstruction_____3tobe: F 8  0`   $__________(statingtheamountor,ifnone,writetheword none)4  (statingtheamount,orifyoufindthattheplaintiff'sdamageshaveno V monetaryvalue,setforthanominalamountsuchas$1.00).5Q` `    Weassesspunitivedamagesagainstdefendant(name),assubmittedinInstruction a _____,6asfollows: \ 8  0`   $__________(statingtheamountor,ifnone,writetheword none).l "` `     `     h   _______________________________ $'    `     h   Foreperson $( Dated:_______________ &X *  & % @$ NotesonUse  ($",   1.Thebracketedlanguageshouldbeincludedwhentheplaintiffsubmitsmultipleclaims )}#. to'%(>Kthejury. *c$/   2.Thenumberortitleofthe essentialelementsinstructionshouldbeinsertedhere. ,%1   3.Thenumberortitleofthe actualdamagesinstructionshouldbeinsertedhere. ^   4.Usethisphraseifthejuryhasnotbeeninstructedonnominaldamages. Y   5.Includethisparagraphifthejuryisinstructedonnominaldamages.     6.Thenumberortitleofthe punitivedamagesinstructionshouldbeinsertedhere.  i  2.H 9 O @  % x  5.25DISCRIMINATIONBYPUBLICEMPLOYERS(42U.S.C.1983)  @ IntroductoryComment ,N      Discriminationclaimsagainstpublicemployersareoftenbroughtunder42U.S.C. b 1983aswellasTitleVII.E.g.,Tylerv.HotSpringsSch.Dist.No.6,827F.2d1227(8thCir. H 1987);Herveyv.CityofLittleRock,787F.2d1223(8thCir.1986).Section1983historically . ~ includedthreecomponentswhichTitleVIIdidnotcontain:(1)therighttoajurytrial;(2)the  d availabilityofgeneraldamagesforhumiliation,lossofreputation,andthelike;and(3)the  J availabilityofpunitivedamagesagainstindividualdefendants.AlthoughtheCivilRightsActof  0 1991haseliminatedthesedifferences,section1983claimswillremaindistinctiveintwo    respects:(1)section1983doesnotrequireexhaustionoftheEEOCadministrativeprocess;and    (2)section1983doesnotplaceacaponcompensatoryandpunitivedamages.Thetheoryof   liabilityinasection1983discriminationclaimisthatdiscriminationonthebasisofrace,gender, x  orreligionconstitutesadeprivationofequalprotectionand,thus,violatestheFourteenth ^  Amendment.TheCommitteeexpressesnopositionontheissueofwhetherdiscriminationon D  thebasisofageordisabilityiswithinthepurviewofsection1983. *z    Thefollowinginstructionsaredesignedforuseinalldiscriminationcasesbrought  pursuantto42U.S.C.1983.Intheinterestsofsimplicityanduniformity,themodelinstruction i ontheissueofliabilityutilizesamotivatingfactor/samedecisionformatforallcases.Seeinfra O ModelInstruction5.26A.Nevertheless,ifthetrialcourtbelievesitisappropriatetodistinguish 5 betweenamixedmotivecaseandapretextcase,ModelInstruction5.26B,infra,containsa k samplepretextinstruction.Moreover,ifthetrialcourtisinclinedtoadheretoapretext/mixed Q motivedistinctionbutcannotdeterminehowtocategorizeaparticularcase,ModelInstruction 7 5.92,infra,containsasetofspecialinterrogatoriesdesignedtoelicitacompletesetoffindings  forposttrialanalysis.   Q 8tXdXXd8@  % y  5.26A(SEX)DISCRIMINATIONELEMENTS(MixedMotiveCase) ^ @!(42U.S.C.1983) MZ  D   Yourverdictmustbefortheplaintiff[andagainstdefendant__________]1[onthe   plaintiff's(sex)2discriminationclaim]3ifbothofthefollowingelementshavebeenproved4: i    First,thedefendant[discharged]5theplaintiff;and  d   Second,theplaintiff's(sex)[wasamotivatingfactor]6[playedapart]7inthedefendant's    decision[;and t    Third,thedefendantwasactingundercolorofstatelaw].8 o    However,yourverdictmustbeforthedefendantifanyoftheaboveelementshasnot &  beenproved,orifithasbeenprovedthatthedefendantwouldhave[discharged]theplaintiff !  regardlessof[(his)(her)](sex).[Youmayfindthattheplaintiff's(sex)[wasamotivatingfactor] z  [playapart]inthedefendant's(decision)9ifithasbeenprovedthatthedefendant'sstated 1 reason(s)forits(decision)[(is)(are)]nottherealreason(s),but[(is)(are)]apretexttohide(sex) , discrimination.]10󚚀   &  @$ NotesonUse  <   1.Usethisphraseiftherearemultipledefendants. 7 '<_  2.Thisinstructionisdesignedforuseinagenderdiscriminationcase.Itmustbe  modifiediftheplaintiffisclaimingdiscriminationonthebasisofrace,religion,orother v  unlawfulbasis. \!   3.Thebracketedlanguageshouldbeinsertedwhentheplaintiffsubmitsmorethanone # claimtothejury. $   4.ModelInstruction3.04(BurdenofProof)tellsthejurythatsomethingisprovedonly R!& ifthejuryfindsitismorelikelytruethannottrue.Thephrase greaterweightoftheevidence 8"' isnotnecessaryhere.ItcanbeincludedinInstruction3.04ifdesiredbythecourt. #(   5.Thisinstructionisdesignedforuseinadischargecase.Ina failuretohire failure w$* topromote,or demotioncase,theinstructionmustbemodified.Wheretheplaintiffresigned ]%+ butclaimsa constructivedischarge,thisinstructionshouldbemodified.SeeinfraModel C&, Instruction5.93. )' -   6.Theappropriatestandardinasection1983caseisnotclearlyresolved. Motivating ($"/ factorwasusedpreviouslyintheseinstructionsandthesecaseshavemanysimilaritiestoTitle h) #0 VIIcases.Thephrase motivatingfactorshouldbedefined,ifused.SeeinfraModel N*#1  Instruction5.96.Ifthecourtdecides determiningfactorisappropriate,useinfraModel 4+$2 Instruction5.26B.Ifthecourtisuncertainastowhichstandardshouldbeusedinaparticular ^ case,theSpecialInterrogatoriesinModelInstruction5.92,infra,maybeused. D    7.SeeinfraModelInstruction5.96,whichdefines motivatingfactorintermsof ? whetherthecharacteristic playedapartoraroleinthedefendantsdecision.Thephrase  %  motivatingfactorneednotbedefinedifthedefinitionitselfisusedintheelementinstruction. i    8.Usethislanguageiftheissueofwhetherthedefendantwasactingundercolorofstate  d law,aprerequisitetoaclaimunder42U.S.C.1983.Typically,thiselementwillbeconceded  J bythedefendant.Ifso,itneednotbeincludedinthisinstruction.  0    9.Thisinstructionmakesreferencestothedefendant's decision.Itmaybemodifiedif   anothertermsuchas actionsor conductwouldbemoreappropriate. o    10.Thissentencemaybeadded,ifappropriate.SeeinfraModelInstruction5.95and &  Moorev.RobertsonFireProtectionDist.,249F.3d786,790n.9(8thCir.2001),whichstates     [w]edonotexpressanyviewastowhetheriteverwouldbereversibleerrorforatrialcourtto   failtogiveapretextinstruction,thoughwetendtodoubtit. z  К& % @--! CommitteeComments  1   Toprevailonasection1983discriminationclaim,theplaintiffmustproveintentional , '%1mdiscrimination.Washingtonv.Davis,426U.S.229,240(1976).Thisintenttodiscriminate p mustbeacausalfactorinthedefendant'semploymentdecision.Tylerv.HotSpringsSchool V Dist.No.6,827F.2d1227,123031(8thCir.1987).  <  R8tXXdXd8@  % z  5.26B(SEX)DISCRIMINATIONELEMENTS(DeterminingFactor) ^ @!(42U.S.C.1983) ]p  D   Yourverdictmustbefortheplaintiff[andagainstdefendant__________]1[onthe   plaintiff's(sex)discriminationclaim]2ifallthefollowingelementshavebeenproved3: i    First,thedefendant[discharged]4theplaintiff;and  d   Second,theplaintiff's(sex)wasadeterminingfactorinthedefendant'sdecision.      Yourverdictmustbeforthedefendantifanyoftheaboveelementshasnotbeenproved. t    (Sex)wasadeterminingfactoronlyifthedefendantwouldnothavedischargedthe o  plaintiffbutfortheplaintiff's(sex);itdoesnotrequirethat(sex)wastheonlyreasonforthe &  decisionmadebythedefendant.5[Youmayfind(sex)wasadeterminingfactorifithasbeen !  provedthatthedefendant'sstatedreason(s)foritsdecision(s)[(is)(are)]nottherealreason(s), z  but[(is)(are)]apretexttohide(sex)discrimination].6 1  &  @$ NotesonUse  ,   1.Usethisphraseiftherearemultipledefendants.  'u  2.Thebracketedlanguageshouldbeinsertedwhentheplaintiffsubmitsmorethanone < claimtothejury. "   3.ModelInstruction3.04(BurdenofProof)tellsthejurythatsomethingisprovedonly { ifthejuryfindsitismorelikelytruethannottrue.Thephrase greaterweightoftheevidence a isnotnecessaryhere.ItcanbeincludedinInstruction3.04ifdesiredbythecourt. G    4.Thisinstructionisdesignedforuseinadischargecase.Ina failuretohire, failure B" topromote,or demotioncase,theinstructionmustbemodified.Wheretheplaintiffresigned (# butclaimsa constructivedischarge,thisinstructionshouldbemodified.SeeinfraModel l $ Instruction5.93. R!%   5.Thisdefinitionofthephrase (___)wasadeterminingfactorisbasedonGrebinv. "M' SiouxFallsIndep.SchoolDist.No.49-5,779F.2d18,20n.1(8thCir.1985). #3(   6.Thissentencemaybeadded,ifappropriate.SeeinfraModelInstruction5.95and $* Moorev.RobertsonFireProtectionDist.,249F.3d786,790n.9(8thCir.2001),whichstates %r+  [w]edonotexpressanyviewastowhetheriteverwouldbereversibleerrorforatrialcourtto &X , failtogiveapretextinstruction,thoughwetendtodoubtit. '>!- & ? @--! CommitteeComments  ("/   SeesupraNoteonUse6toModelInstruction5.26A.'?(|  N*#1  S@  % {  5.27AACTUALDAMAGES(42U.S.C.1983) r}  ^   IfyoufindinfavoroftheplaintiffunderInstruction_____,1thenyoumustawardthe * plaintiffsuchsumasyoufindwillfairlyandjustlycompensatetheplaintiffforanyactual  % damagesyoufindtheplaintiffsustainedasadirectresultofthedefendant'sconductassubmitted  ~ inInstruction_____.2Actualdamagesincludeanywagesorfringebenefitsyoufindtheplaintiff 5  wouldhaveearnedin[(his)(her)]employmentwiththedefendantif[(he)(she)]hadnotbeen  0  dischargedon[fillindateofdischarge],throughthedateofyourverdict,minustheamountof   earningsandbenefitsfromotheremploymentreceivedbytheplaintiffduringthattime.3Actual @  damagesalsomayinclude[listdamagessupportedbytheevidence].4 ;    [Youarealsoinstructedthattheplaintiffhasadutyunderthelawto mitigate[(his)   (her)]damagesthatis,toexercisereasonablediligenceunderthecircumstancestominimize K  [(his)(her)]damages.Therefore,ifithasbeenproved5thattheplaintifffailedtoseekoutortake F advantageofanopportunitythatwasreasonablyavailableto[(him)(her)],youmustreduce  [(his)(her)]damagesbytheamount[(he)(she)]reasonablycouldhaveavoidedif[(he)(she)] V hadsoughtoutortakenadvantageofsuchanopportunity.]6[Remember,throughoutyour Q deliberations,youmustnotengageinanyspeculation,guess,orconjectureandyoumustnot  awardanydamagesbywayofpunishmentorthroughsympathy.]7 a   &  @$ NotesonUse  \"   1.Insertthenumberortitleofthe essentialelementsinstructionhere. $ '  2.Whencertainbenefits,suchasemployersubsidizedhealthinsurancebenefits,are l & recoverableundertheevidence,thisinstructionmaybemodifiedtoexplaintothejurythe R!' mannerinwhichrecoveryforthosebenefitsistobecalculated.Claimsforlostbenefitsoften 8"( presentdifficultissuesastothepropermeasureofrecovery.SeeTolanv.LeviStrauss&Co., #) 867F.2d467,470(8thCir.1989)(discussingdifferentapproaches).Somecourtsdenyrecovery $* forlostbenefitsunlesstheemployeepurchasessubstitutecoverage,inwhichcasethemeasureof $+ damagesistheemployee'soutofpocketexpenses.Syvockv.MilwaukeeBoilerMfg.Co.,665 %r, F.2d149,161(7thCir.1981);Pearcev.CarrierCorp.,966F.2d958(5thCir.1992).Other &X - courtspermittherecoveryoftheamounttheemployerwouldhavepaidaspremiumsonthe '>!. employee'sbehalf.Farissv.LynchburgFoundry,769F.2d958,96465(4thCir.1985).The ($"/ Committeeexpressesnoviewastowhichapproachisproper.Thisinstructionalsomaybe h) #0 modifiedtoexcludecertainitemswhichwerementionedduringtrialbutarenotrecoverable N*#1 becauseofaninsufficiencyofevidenceorasamatteroflaw. 4+$2   3.Thissentenceshouldbeusedtoguidethejuryincalculatingtheplaintiff'seconomic ^ damages.Insection1983cases,however,aprevailingplaintiffmayrecoveractualdamagesfor D emotionaldistressandotherpersonalinjuries.SeeCareyv.Piphus,435U.S.247(1978). *   4.Insection1983cases,aprevailingplaintiffmayrecoverdamagesformentalanguish  % andotherpersonalinjuries.Thespecificelementsofdamagesthatmaybesetforthinthis i  instructionaresimilartothosefoundintheCivilRightsActof1991.See42U.S.C. O  1981a(b)(3).SeesupraModelInstruction5.02An.8. 5    5.ModelInstruction3.04(BurdenofProof)tellsthejurythatsomethingisprovedonly  0  ifthejuryfindsitismorelikelytruethannottrue.Thephrase greaterweightoftheevidence t  isnotnecessaryhere.ItcanbeincludedinInstruction3.04ifdesiredbythecourt. Z    6.Thisparagraphisdesignedtosubmittheissueof mitigationofdamagesin U  appropriatecases.SeeColemanv.CityofOmaha,714F.2d804,808(8thCir.1983). ;    7.Thisparagraphmaybegivenatthetrialcourt'sdiscretion.   & % @--! CommitteeComments  K    Thisinstructionisdesignedtosubmitthestandardbackpayformulaoflostwagesand F '%K!benefitsreducedbyinterimearningsandbenefits.SeeFiedlerv.IndianheadTruckLine,Inc., , 670F.2d806,808(8thCir.1982).Moreover,becausesection1983damagesarenotlimitedto p backpay,theinstructionalsopermitstherecoveryofgeneraldamagesforpain,suffering, V humiliation,andthelike. <   Insomecases,adiscriminationplaintiffmaybeeligibleforfrontpay.Becausefrontpay 7 isessentiallyanequitableremedy inlieuofreinstatement,frontpayisanissueforthecourt, { notthejury.ExcelCorp.v.Bosley,165F.3d635(8thCir.1999).SeeMacDissiv.Valmont a Indus.,856F.2d1054,1060(8thCir.1988);Newhousev.McCormick&Co.,110F.3d635,641 G (8thCir.1997)(frontpayisanissueforthecourt,notthejury,inADEAcases).Ifthetrialcourt - submitstheissueoffrontpaytothejury,thejurysdeterminationmaybebinding.SeeDoynev.  UnionElectricCo.,953F.2d447,451(8thCir.1992)(ADEAcase).     Thisinstructionmaybemodifiedtoarticulatethetypesofinterimearningswhichshould R!" beoffsetagainsttheplaintiff'sbackpay.Forexample,severancepayandwagesfromother 8"# employmentordinarilyareoffsetagainstabackpayaward.SeeKrausev.DresserIndus.,910 #$ F.2d674,680(10thCir.1990);Cornettav.UnitedStates,851F.2d1372,1381(Fed.Cir.1988); $% Farissv.LynchburgFoundry,769F.2d958,966(4thCir.1985).Unemploymentcompensation, $& SocialSecuritybenefitsorpensionbenefitsordinarilyarenotoffsetagainstabackpayaward. %r' SeeDoynev.UnionElec.Co.,953F.2d447,451(8thCir.1992)(holdingthatpensionbenefits &X ( area collateralsourcebenefit);Dreyerv.ArcoChem.Co.,801F.2d651,653n.1(3dCir. '>!) 1986)(SocialSecurityandpensionbenefitsnotdeductible);Protosv.VolkswagenofAmerica, ($"* Inc.,797F.2d129,13839(3dCir.1986)(unemploymentbenefitsnotdeductible);Rasimasv. h) #+ MichiganDeptofMentalHealth,714F.2d614,626(6thCir.1983)(same).Butcf.Blumv. N*#, WitcoChem.Corp.,829F.2d367,374(3dCir.1987)(pensionbenefitsreceivedasaresultof 4+$- subsequentemploymentconsideredinoffsettingdamagesaward);Toledov.NobelSysco,Inc., ,%. 892F.2d1481,1493(10thCir.1989)(deductibilityofunemploymentcompensationiswithin ^ trialcourt'sdiscretion);Hornv.DukeHomes,755F.2d599,607n.12(7thCir.1985)(same); D EEOCv.EnterpriseAss'nSteamfittersLocalNo.638,542F.2d579,592(2dCir.1976)(same). *   Thisinstructionisdesignedtoencompassasituationwherethedefendantassertssome  % independentpostdischargereasonsuchasaplantclosingorsweepingreductioninforcewhy i  theplaintiffwouldhavebeenterminatedinanyeventbeforetrial.See,e.g.,Cleverlyv.Western O  Elec.Co.,450F.Supp.507(W.D.Mo.1978),aff'd,594F.2d638(8thCir.1979).Nevertheless, 5  thetrialcourtmaygiveaseparateinstructionwhichsubmitsthisissueinmoredirectterms.     T@  % |  5.27BNOMINALDAMAGES(42U.S.C.1983) NT  ^   IfyoufindinfavoroftheplaintiffunderInstruction_____1,butyoudonotfindthatthe * plaintiff'sdamageshavemonetaryvalue,thenyoumustreturnaverdictfortheplaintiffinthe  % nominalamountofOneDollar($1.00).2  ~  &  @$ NotesonUse  5    1.Insertthenumberortitleofthe_ essential_Ԁ_elements_Ԁinstructionhere.  0  '5   2.OneDollar($1.00)arguablyistherequiredamountincasesinwhichnominal   damagesareappropriate.Nominaldamagesareappropriatewhenthejuryisunabletoplacea o  monetaryvalueontheharmthattheplaintiffsufferedfromtheviolationofhisorherrights.Cf. U  Cowansv.Wyrick,862F.2d697(8thCir.1988)(inprisonercivilrightsaction,nominaldamages ;  areappropriatewherethejurycannotplaceamonetaryvalueontheharmsufferedbythe !  plaintiff);Haleyv.Wyrick,740F.2d12(8thCir.1984). e  & % @--! CommitteeComments  `   Mostemploymentdiscriminationcasesinvolvelostwagesandbenefits.Nevertheless,a  '%nominaldamageinstructionshouldbegiveninappropriatecases,suchaswhereaplaintiff  claimingadiscriminatoryharassmentdidnotsustainanylossofearnings.Goodwinv.Circuit  CourtofSt.LouisCounty,729F.2d541,54243,548(8thCir.1984). k   Anawardofnominaldamagescansupportapunitivedamageaward.SeeGoodwin,729 " F.2dat548.    Ifnominaldamagesaresubmitted,theverdictformmustcontainalinewherethejury a canmakethatfinding.  G U @  % }  5.27CPUNITIVEDAMAGES(42U.S.C.1983) e7  ^   Inadditiontothedamagesmentionedinotherinstructions,thelawpermitsthejuryunder * certaincircumstancestoawardpunitivedamages.  %   Ifyoufindinfavoroftheplaintiffandagainstdefendant[name]1,[andifithasbeen  ~ proved2thattheplaintiff'sfiringwasmotivatedbyevilmotiveorintent,orthatthedefendant 5  wasrecklesslyindifferenttotheplaintiff'srights]3,theninadditiontoanyotherdamagesto  0  whichyoufindtheplaintiffentitled,youmay,butarenotrequiredto,awardtheplaintiffan   additionalamountaspunitivedamagesforthepurposesofpunishingthedefendantforengaging @  insuchmisconductanddeterringthedefendantandothersfromengaginginsuchmisconductin ;  thefuture.Youshouldpresumethataplaintiffhasbeenmadewholefor[his,her,its]injuriesby   thedamagesawardedunderInstruction_____.4 K    Ifyoudecidetoawardpunitivedamages,youshouldconsiderthefollowingindeciding F theamountofpunitivedamagestoaward:    1.Howreprehensiblethedefendantsconductwas.5Inthisregard,youmayconsider V [whethertheharmsufferedbytheplaintiffwasphysicaloreconomicorboth;whethertherewas Q violence,deceit,intentionalmalice,recklessdisregardforhumanhealthorsafety;whetherthe  defendantsconductthatharmedtheplaintiffalsoposedariskofharmtoothers;whetherthere a  wasanyrepetitionofthewrongfulconductandpastconductofthesortthatharmedthe \" plaintiff].6 $   2.Howmuchharmthedefendantswrongfulconductcausedtheplaintiff[andcould l & causetheplaintiffinthefuture].7[Youmaynotconsiderharmtoothersindecidingtheamount !g( ofpunitivedamagestoaward.]8 #*   3.Whatamountofpunitivedamages,inadditiontotheotherdamagesalreadyawarded, w$, isneeded,consideringthedefendantsfinancialcondition,topunishthedefendantfor[his,her, %r. its]wrongfulconducttowardtheplaintiffandtodeterthedefendantandothersfromsimilar )' 0 wrongfulconductinthefuture. ($"2    4.[Theamountoffinesandcivilpenaltiesapplicabletosimilarconduct].9 )}#4   Theamountofanypunitivedamagesawardshouldbearareasonablerelationshiptothe ^  harmcausedtotheplaintiff.10 Y   [Youmayassesspunitivedamagesagainstanyoralldefendantsoryoumayrefuseto   imposepunitivedamages.Ifpunitivedamagesareassessedagainstmorethanonedefendant, i  theamountsassessedagainstthosedefendantsmaybethesameortheymaybedifferent.]11  d   [Youmaynotawardpunitivedamagesagainstthedefendant[s]forconductinother    states.]12 t   @$ NotesonUse  o    1.ModelInstruction3.04(BurdenofProof)tellsthejurythatsomethingisprovedonly &  ifthejuryfindsitismorelikelytruethannottrue.Thephrase greaterweightoftheevidence    isnotnecessaryhere.ItcanbeincludedinInstruction3.04ifdesiredbythecourt.     2.Useifmorethanoneelementinstruction. K    3.Punitivedamagesareallowedeventhoughthethresholdforliabilityrequiresreckless F conduct.Ifthethresholdfortheunderlyingtortliabilityislessthan reckless,thebracketed , languagecorrectlystatesthestandardforpunitivedamagesunder42U.S.C.1983.Smithv. p Wade,461U.S.30(1983).SeeKolstadv.AmericanDentalAssn,527U.S.526,535,536 V (1999),andCannyv.Dr.Pepper/SevenUpBottlingGroup,Inc.,439F.3d894,903(8thCir. < 2006),discussingthemeaningof maliceand recklessindifference.Ifthethresholdfor " liabilityis maliceor recklessindifferenceorsomethingmoreculpable,noadditionalfinding  shouldbenecessarybecausethelanguageintheissue/elementinstructionrequiresthejuryto  findtheculpabilitynecessaryforimposingpunitivedamages.However,itisrecommendedthat v thepunitivedamagesinstructionincludesuchlanguagetobesurethejuryfocusesonthatissue. \   4.Fillinthenumberortitleoftheactualdamagesornominaldamagesinstructionhere. !   5.Theword reprehensibleisusedinthesamesenseasitisusedincommonparlance. l # КTheSupremeCourt,inStateFarmMut.Auto.Ins.Co.v.Campbell,538U.S.408,419(2003), R!$ stated: Itshouldbepresumedaplaintiffhasbeenmadewholeforhisinjuriesbycompensatory 8"% damages,sopunitivedamagesshouldonlybeawardedifthedefendantsculpability,after #& havingpaidcompensatorydamages,issoreprehensibleastowarranttheimpositionoffurther $' sanctionstoachievepunishmentordeterrence.InPhilipMorrisUSAv.Williams,549U.S. $( 346,355,_____127_ԀS.Ct.1057,106465(2007),theSupremeCourtheldthat,whileharmtopersons %r) otherthantheplaintiffmaybeconsideredindeterminingreprehensibility,ajurymaynotpunish &X * fortheharmcausedtopersonsotherthantheplaintiff.TheCourtstatedthatprocedureswere '>!+ necessarytoassure thatjuriesarenotaskingthewrongquestion,i.e.,seeking,notsimplyto ($", determinereprehensibility,butalsotopunishforharmcausedstrangers.Id.at355. h) #-   6.Anyitemnotsupportedbytheevidence,ofcourse,shouldbeexcluded. *c$/   7.Thissentencemaybeusedifthereisevidenceoffutureharmtotheplaintiff. ,%1   8.Aparagraphinstructingthejurythatanypunitivedamagesawardshouldnotinclude ^ anamountforharmsufferedbypersonswhoarenotpartiestothecasemaybenecessaryif D evidenceconcerningharmsufferedbynonpartieshasbeenintroduced.SeePhilipMorrisUSAv. * Williams,549U.S.at355,127S.Ct.at106465;StateFarmMut.Auto.Ins.Co.v.Campbell,   538U.S.408,42224(2003);Williamsv.ConAgraPoultryCo.,378F.3d790,79798(8thCir.   2004).  ~   9.Insertthisphraseonlyifevidencehasbeenintroduced,orthecourthastakenjudicial 5  notice,offinesandpenaltiesforsimilarconduct.SeeBMWofNorthAmerica,Inc.v.Gore,517   U.S.559,575(1996),noting civilpenaltiesauthorizedincomparablecasesasaguidepostto   beconsidered.SeealsoStateFarmMut.Auto.Ins.Co.v.Campbell,538U.S.408,428(2003).     10.SeeStateFarmMut.Auto.Ins.Co.v.Campbell,538U.S.408,425(2003)(stating @  that inpractice,fewawardsexceedingasingledigitratiobetweenpunitiveandcompensatory &  damages,toasignificantdegree,willsatisfydueprocessandobservingthat: Singledigit    multipliersaremorelikelytocomportwithdueprocess,whilestillachievingtheStatesgoalsof   deterrenceandretribution,thanawardswithratiosinrangeof500to1[citingBMWofNorth z  America,Inc.v.Gore,517U.S.559,582(1996)]or,inthiscase,of145to1.). `   11.Thebracketedlanguageisavailableforuseifpunitivedamagesclaimsaresubmitted  againstmorethanonedefendant.    12.Ifevidencehasbeenintroducedconcerningconductbythedefendantthatwaslegal V inthestatewhereitwascommitted,thejurymustbetoldthattheycannotawardpunitive < damagesagainstthedefendantforsuchconduct.SeeStateFarmMut.Auto.Inc.Co.v. " Campbell,538U.S.408,422(2003);BMWofNorthAmerica,Inc.v.Gore,517U.S.559,572  73(1996);Williamsv.ConAgraPoultryCo.,378F.3d790,79798(8thCir.2004).Thisissue  normallywillnotcomeupincasesunderfederallaw.Inanycaseinwhichevidenceisadmitted v forsomepurposesbutmaynotbeconsideredbythejuryinawardingpunitivedamages,the \ courtshouldgiveanappropriatelimitinginstruction. B  @--!CommitteeComments     Thisinstructionattemptstoincorporatetheconstitutionallyrelevantprinciplessetforth R!! bytheSupremeCourtinPhilipMorrisUSAv.Williams,549U.S.346(2007);StateFarmMut. 8"" Auto.Ins.Co.v.Campbell,538U.S.408(2003),BMWofNorthAmerica,Inc.v.Gore,517U.S. ## 559(1996),HondaMotorCo.v.Oberg,512U.S.415(1994),andTXOProductionCorp.v. $$ AllianceResourcesCorp.,509U.S.443,45962(1993).InStateFarm,538U.S.at417,the $% Courtobserved: Wehaveadmonishedthat[p]unitivedamagesposeanacutedangerof %r& arbitrarydeprivationofproperty.Juryinstructionstypicallyleavethejurywithwidediscretion &X ' inchoosingamounts,andthepresentationofevidenceofadefendantsnetworthcreatesthe '>!( potentialthatjurieswillusetheirverdictstoexpressbiasesagainstbigbusinesses,particularly ($") thosewithoutstronglocalpresences.(quotingHondaMotor,512U.S.at432).SeeBakerv. h) #* JohnMorrell&Co.,266F.Supp.2d909,961(N.D.Iowa2003),affd,382F.3d816(8thCir. N*#+  2004),andInReExxonValdez,296F.Supp.2d1071,1080(D.Alaska2004),forexamplesof 4+$, punitivedamagesinstructionsinwhichthecourtattemptedtoincorporateconstitutional ^ standards. D    ThelastparagraphisbasedonStateFarm,538U.S.at421,inwhichtheCourtheldthat: ?  Astatecannotpunishadefendantforconductthatmayhavebeenlawfulwhereit  % occurred....Nor,asageneralrule,doesaStatehavealegitimateconcerninimposingpunitive i  damagestopunishadefendantforunlawfulactscommittedoutsideoftheStatesjurisdiction. O  TheCourtspecificallymandatedthat: Ajurymustbeinstructed,furthermore,thatitmaynot 5  useevidenceofoutofstateconducttopunishadefendantforactionthatwaslawfulinthe   jurisdictionwhereitoccurred.StateFarm,538U.S.at422.    V @  % ~  5.28VERDICTFORM(42U.S.C.1983) NT  ^ @<<'VERDICT *  Note: 0  0` (#(#Completethisformbywritinginthenamesrequiredbyyourverdict. ` (#` (#   Onthe[(sex)1discrimination]2claimofplaintiff[JohnDoe],assubmittedinInstruction  d _____3,wefindinfavorof   ______________________________________________________________________________ o  @(PlaintiffJohnDoe)or(DefendantSamSmith) U   Note: 0  0` (#(#Completethefollowingparagraphsonlyiftheabovefindingisinfavorofthe !  plaintiff.Iftheabovefindingisinfavorofthedefendant,haveyourforeperson e  signanddatethisformbecauseyouhavecompletedyourdeliberationonthis K  claim.1` (#` (#   Wefindplaintiff's(name)damagesasdefinedinInstruction____4tobe:  8  0`   $__________(statingtheamountor,ifnone,writetheword none)5 Q (statingtheamount,orifyoufindthattheplaintiff'sdamageshaveno  monetaryvalue,setforthanominalamountsuchas$1.00).6a` `    Weassesspunitivedamagesagainstdefendant(name),assubmittedin   Instruction_____,7asfollows: l " 8  0`   $__________(statingtheamountor,ifnone,writetheword none).#&` `     `     h   ___________________________________ &X +    `     h   Foreperson '>!, Dated:_______________ h) #.   N*#/  & %    @$ NotesonUse  ^   1.Thisverdictformisdesignedforuseinagenderdiscriminationclaim.Itmustbe Y '%^modifiediftheplaintiffisclaimingadifferentformofdiscrimination. ?   2.Thebracketedlanguageshouldbeincludedwhentheplaintiffsubmitsmultipleclaims   tothejury.  ~   3.Thenumberortitleofthe essentialelementsinstructionshouldbeinsertedhere. 5    4.Thenumberortitleofthe actualdamagesinstructionshouldbeinsertedhere.  0    5.Usethisphraseifthejuryhasnotbeeninstructedonnominaldamages.     6.Includethisparagraphifthejuryisinstructedonnominaldamages. @    7.Thenumberortitleofthe punitivedamagesinstructionshouldbeinsertedhere.  ;  32P  W@! %   5.30EQUALPAYACT in]   @  IntroductoryComment      TheEqualPayAct,29U.S.C.206(d),withcertainexceptions,prohibitsemployers b fromdiscriminatingagainstemployeesonthebasisofsexwithrespecttowagespaidforequal H workperformedundersimilarworkingconditions.TheEqualPayAct,whichispartoftheFair . ~ LaborStandardsAct,29U.S.C.201219,provides:  d 0  Noemployerhavingemployeessubjectto[theminimumwageprovisionsoftheFair m  LaborStandardsAct]shalldiscriminate,withinanyestablishmentinwhichsuch S   employeesareemployed,betweenemployeesonthebasisofsexbypayingwagesto 9   employeesinsuchestablishmentataratelessthantherateatwhichhepayswagesto o  employeesoftheoppositesexinsuchestablishmentforequalworkonjobsthe U  performanceofwhichrequiresequalskill,effort,andresponsibility,andwhichare ;  performedundersimilarworkingconditions,exceptwheresuchpaymentismade !  pursuantto(i)asenioritysystem;(ii)ameritsystem;(iii)asystemwhichmeasures   earningsbyquantityorqualityofproduction;or(iv)adifferentialbasedonanyother   factorotherthansex....(#(# 29U.S.C.206(d)(1). ,   ThefollowinginstructionsaredesignedforuseincasesbroughtpursuanttotheEqual 5 PayAct.Itisimportanttonotethataplaintiffmaybringafederalclaimforwagediscrimination k onthebasisofsexundereithertheEqualPayActorTitleVIIoftheCivilRightsActof1964(as Q amended),42U.S.C.2000eetseq.SeeSimmonsv.NewPub.Sch.Dist.No.8,251F.3d1210, 7 1215(8thCir.2001);EEOCv.DelightWholesaleCo.,973F.2d664,669(8thCir.1992).Ifthe  plaintiffisclaimingwagediscriminationunderTitleVIIandnottheEqualPayAct,these  instructionsshouldnotbeused.    Y@  %   5.31EQUALPAYACT!ESSENTIALELEMENTS in#  ^   Yourverdictmustbefortheplaintiff[andagainstdefendant_______]1[ontheplaintiffs * EqualPayActclaim]2ifallofthefollowingelementshavebeenproved3:  %   First,thedefendantemployedtheplaintiffandoneormoremembersoftheoppositesex  ~ inpositionsrequiringsubstantiallyequalskill,effort,andresponsibility;and 5    Second,theplaintiffandoneormoremembersoftheoppositesexperformedtheir  0  positionsundersimilarworkingconditions;and     Third,theplaintiffwaspaidalowerwagethan[the]4member[s]4oftheoppositesexwho @  [(was)(were)]4performingsubstantiallyequalworkundersimilarworkingconditions. ;    Ifanyoftheaboveelementshasnotbeenproved,orifithasbeenprovedthatthe   differenceinpaywasbasedon(describeaffirmativedefense(s)raisedbytheevidence)in K  Instruction___,5yourverdictmustbeforthedefendantandyouneednotproceedfurtherin F consideringthisclaim.   @$ NotesonUse  V   1.Usethisphraseiftherearemultipledefendants. Q   2.Usethisphraseiftherearemultipleclaims.    3.ModelInstruction3.04(BurdenofProof)tellsthejurythatsomethingisprovedonly a  ifthejuryfindsitismorelikelytruethannottrue.Thephrase greaterweightoftheevidence G! isnotnecessaryhere.ItcanbeincludedinInstruction3.04ifdesiredbythecourt. -"   4.Selectthepropersingularorpluralform. ($   5.InsertnumberforInstruction5.33.  & @--! CommitteeComments  8"(   ToestablishaviolationundertheAct,aplaintiffmustprovethatthedefendantpaid #3* differentwagestoemployeesofdifferentsexesfor equalworkonjobstheperformanceof w$+ whichrequiresequalskill,effortandresponsibility,andwhichareperformedundersimilar ]%, workingconditions.EEOCv.DelightWholesaleCo.,973F.2d664,669(8thCir.1992) C&- (quotingCorningGlassWorksv.Brennan,417U.S.188,195(1974));seeHuntv.Nebraska )' . Pub.PowerDist.,282F.3d1021,1029(8thCir.2002)(holdingtheplaintiffmustprovethat(1) (!/ heorshewaspaidlessthanoneormoremembersoftheoppositesexemployedinthesame ("0 establishment,(2)forequalworkonjobsrequiringequalskill,effort,andresponsibility,(3) )}#1  whichwereperformedundersimilarworkingconditions). *c$2   Oncetheplaintiffhasmethisorherburden,theemployermayavoidliabilityonlyby ^  provingthatthedisparityinpaywasbasedonabonafidesenioritysystem,ameritsystem,a D systemwhichmeasuresearningsbyquantityorqualityofproduction,anyotherfactorotherthan * sex.SeeHutchinsv.IntlBhd.ofTeamsters,177F.3d1076,1081(8thCir.1999).     Z@ %   5.32EQUALPAYACT!DEFINITION: SUBSTANTIALLYEQUAL la  ^   Substantiallyequalmeansequalornearlyequalintheessentialaspectsofthejob.In * consideringwhethertwojobsaresubstantiallyequal,youshouldcomparetheskill,effort,and  % responsibilityrequiredinperformingthejobs.Youshouldconsidertheactualjobrequirements,  ~ asopposedtojobclassifications,jobdescriptions,orjobtitles.Inaddition,youshouldconsider 5  thejobsoverall,asopposedtoindividualsegmentsofthejobs.Youmaydisregardany  0  superficialdifferencesrequiredtoperformthejobs.    @--! CommitteeComments  @    Determiningwhethertwojobsaresubstantiallyequalrequires practicaljudgmentonthe ;  basisofallthefactsandcircumstancesofaparticularcase.Buettnerv.ArchCoalSalesCo., !  Inc.,216F.3d707,719(8thCir.2000).Aplaintiffisnotrequiredtoshowthatthejobsare e  identical.SeeRidgwayv.UnitedHospitalsMillerDivision,563F.2d923,926(8thCir.1977); K  Orahoodv.BoardofTrusteesoftheUniv.ofArkansas,645F.2d651,654(8thCir.1981). 1 Comparability,however,isnotenough.SeeChristopherv.Iowa,559F.2d1135,1138(8thCir.  1977).Theinquirycentersaround whethertheperformanceofthejobsrequiressubstantially  equalskill,effortandresponsibilityundersimilarworkingconditions.Orahood,645F.2dat  654.Thismayinvolveacomparisonoftheseniorityandbackgroundexperienceofthe k employeesperformingthejobs,seeBuettner,216F.3dat719,andacomparisonofthe Q predecessorandsuccessoremployeestothejobs(bothimmediateandnonimmediate),see 7 Broadusv.O.K.Indus.,226F.3d937,942(8thCir.2000).Theactualjobrequirementsand { performance,asopposedtothejobclassificationsortitles,aretobeconsidered.SeeHuntv. a NebraskaPub.PowerDist.,282F.3d1021,1029(8thCir.2002)(citingOrahood,645F.2dat G 654).Moreover,theoveralljobs,andnotmerelytheindividualsegmentsofthejobs,aretobe - considered.SeeBroadus,226F.3dat942.Twojobsrequiringaninsubstantialorminor  differenceinthedegreeoramountofskill,oreffort,orresponsibilitymaybe substantially   equal.SeeHunt,282F.3dat1030.   !  [@m m  %   5.33EQUALPAYACT!AFFIRMATIVEDEFENSES o  1 ^   Yourverdictmustbeforthedefendantifithasbeenproved2thatthedifferenceinpay * wastheresultof:  %   (1) ` abonafidesenioritysystem;or  ~   (2) ` ameritsystem;or 5    (3) ` asystemthatmeasuresearningsbyquantityorqualityofproduction;or  0    (4) ` [anyfactorotherthansex].3    @$ NotesonUse  @    1.Thisinstructionshouldbeusedwhenthedefendantissubmittinganaffirmative ;  defense.Itshouldbetailoredtoincludeonlythoseaffirmativedefensesasserted. !    2.ModelInstruction3.04(BurdenofProof)tellsthejurythatsomethingisprovedonly z  ifthejuryfindsitismorelikelytruethannottrue.Thephrase greaterweightoftheevidence ` isnotnecessaryhere.ItcanbeincludedinInstruction3.04ifdesiredbythecourt. F   3.Insertlanguagethatdescribesthefactorotherthansexuponwhichthedefendant  relies(e.g., jobperformance, education,or experience).  @--! CommitteeComments  <   TheEqualPayActspecificallyprovidesthatadefendantisnotliableundertheActwhen 7 adisparityinpaybetweenmalesandfemalesisbasedon(1)asenioritysystem;(2)amerit { system;(3)asystemwhichmeasuresearningsbyquantityorqualityofproduction;or(4)a a differentialbasedonanyfactorotherthansex.See29U.S.C.206(d)(1). G   Senioritysystem. Abonafidesenioritysystemisavaliddefensetotheapplicationof B! differentstandardsofcompensation.Woodv.SouthwesternBell,637F.2d1188,1193(8thCir. (" 1981)(TitleVIIcase).Itispropertogiveajuryinstructiondefiningavalidsenioritysystemas l # simplya bonafidesenioritysystem,asopposedtodefiningthespecificsenioritysystem R!$ involved.SeeBjerkev.NashFinchCo.,No.Civ.A398134,2000WL33146937,at*3(D. 8"% N.D.Dec.4,2000). #&   Meritsystem.Ifaplaintiffssalaryismarginallydifferentfromcomparableemployees w$( andlegitimatefactorsareusedtobasesalarydifferentialsafterevaluations,thereisnoviolation ]%) oftheEqualPayAct.SeeBrousardNorcrossv.AugustanaCollegeAssn,935F.2d974,979 C&* (8thCir.1991). )' +   Systemwhichmeasuresearningsbyquantityorqualityofproduction. Thereisno ($"- discriminationiftwoemployeesreceivethesamepayrate,butonereceivesmoretotal h) #. compensationbecauseheorsheproducesmore.Bencev.DetroitHealthCorp.,712F.2d1024, N*#/ 1029(6thCir.1983).Similarly,anemployeewhogeneratesmoreprofitsfortheemployercan 4+$0 bepaidmorethananemployeeoftheoppositesex.See,e.g.,Hodgsonv.RobertHallClothes, ,%1 Inc.,473F.2d589,597(3rdCir.1973)(employerdemonstratedsalespersonsinmensclothing ^ departmentgeneratedmoreprofitsthanthoseinwomensclothingdepartment). D   Factorotherthansex.TheEqualPayActsbroadexemptionforemployerswhopay ? differentwagestodifferentsexesbaseduponany factorotherthansexindicatesthattheActis  % intendedtoaddressthesamekindof purposefulgenderdiscriminationprohibitedbythe i  Constitution.SeeVarnerv.IllinoisStateUniv.,226F.3d927,934(7thCir.2000).Thebroad O  exemptionallowsanemployertoprovideaneutralexplanationforadisparityinpay.Seeid. 5    Adifferenceinthejobperformancebetweenamaleandfemaleemployeeinthesame  0  positioncanbea factorotherthansexsufficienttojustifyadisparityinpay.SeeEEOCv. t  CherryBurrellCorp.,35F.3d356,362(8thCir.1994)( [P]erformingsimilardutiesdoesnot Z  bringaboutaninferencethatallBuyersdididenticalworkoreventhatobjectivelymeasured, @  theyperformedtheBuyersroleequally.).Educationorexperiencemaybefactorssufficientto &  justifyadisparityinpay.SeeHutchinsv.IntlBhd.ofTeamsters,177F.3d1076,1081(8thCir.    1999);Clymorev.FarMarCo.,Inc.,709F.2d499,503(8thCir.1983).Anemployerssalary   retentionpolicy,maintainingaskilledemployeessalaryupontemporarychangeofposition, z  maybeafactor otherthansexthatjustifiesasalarydifferential.Taylorv.White,321F.3d ` 710,720(8thCir.2003).Relianceonpriorsalarymaybeafactor otherthansexunder F appropriatecircumstances.Id.Cf.Drumv.LessonElec.Corp.,565F.3d1071(8thCir.2009) , (priorsalarymustnotbebasedonprohibited marketforcetheory). p   Paymentofdifferentwagesbecauseanemployeeofonesexismorelikelytoenterinto k  managementtrainingprograms,however,isnotavalidjustification,wheresuchprograms Q appeartobeavailabletoonlyonesex.SeeHodgsonv.SecurityNationalBankofSiouxCity, 7 460F.2d57,61(8thCir.1972).Unequalwagesduetoallegedemployee flexibility { necessitatesaninquiryintothefrequencyandthemannerinwhichtheadditionalflexibilityis a actuallyutilized.SeePeltierv.CityofFargo,533F.2d374,377(8thCir.1976). G   Ifanemployerhasalegitimatefiscalreason,suchaslettinganemployeeworkovertime B insteadofcallinginanewemployeetocompletetheadditionalduties,awagedifferentialto ( compensatefortheovertimeworkedisjustifiable.SeeFyfev.FortWayne,241F.3d597,600 l  01(7thCir.2001).Additionally,payinganemployeemoreinordertoavoidharmingthepublic, R!  suchaspayinganemployeeovertimeforsprayingagreenhousewithharmfulpesticidesafter 8"! hoursinsteadofduringnormalworkinghours,isallowable.Seeid.  #"  \@  %   5.34EQUALPAYACT!ACTUALDAMAGES .,+  ^   IfyoufindinfavoroftheplaintiffunderInstruction___,1[andyoufindagainstthe * defendantinInstruction___,2]3youmustawardtheplaintiffsuchsumasyoufindwill  % compensatetheplaintiffforthedifferencebetweenwhattheplaintiffwaspaidandwhat[the]4  ~ member[s]4oftheoppositesex[(was)(were)]4paid. 5    Theverdictformwillgiveyoufurtherguidanceonthisissue.[Remember,throughout  0  yourdeliberations,youmustnotengageinanyspeculation,guess,orconjecture,andyoumust   notawarddamagesbywayofpunishmentorthroughsympathy.]5 @   @$ NotesonUse  ;    1.InsertthenumberoftheInstructionsettingforththeessentialelementsforthe   plaintiffsclaim. z    2.InsertthenumberoftheInstructionsettingforththeaffirmativedefenses. 1   3.Thislanguageshouldbeusedwhenthedefendantissubmittinganaffirmative , defense. p   4.Selectthepropersingularorpluralform. k   6.Thisparagraphmaybegivenatthetrialcourtsdiscretion. " @--! CommitteeComments  {   EmployeeswhobringasuccessfulEqualPayActclaimareentitledtocompensatory v  damages,usuallycomposedofbackwagesandliquidateddamages.SeeBroadusv.O.K.Indus., \! 226F.3d937,943(8thCir.2000).Theterm liquidateddamagesis somethingofa B" misnomerbecauseitisnotasumcertainamountdeterminedinadvance,ratheritisameansof (# compensatingemployeesforlossestheymightsufferbyreasonofnotreceivingtheirlawful l $ wageatthetimeitwasdue.Id.(quotingReichv.SouthernNewEnglandTelecommunications, R!% 121F.3d58,70n.4(2dCir.1997)).Liquidateddamagesareawardedinanamountequaltothe 8"& amountofbackwages,see29U.S.C.216(b),unlessthecourtfindsinitsdiscretionthatthe #' employeracted ingoodfaithandhadreasonablegroundsforbelievingthathisactoromission $( wasinviolationofthe[FLSA].29U.S.C.260.Wherethecourtfindstheemployeractedin $) goodfaith,itmay awardnoliquidateddamagesorawardanyamountthereofnottoexceedthe %r* amountspecifiedin[29U.S.C.216].Id.Thereisnoneedtoinstructthejuryontheissueof &X + liquidateddamages,astheamountissimplydoubletheamountawardedforunpaidwages. The '>!, burdenisontheemployertoshowthattheviolationwasingoodfaith.SeeBroadus,226F.3d ($"- at944. h) #.   Backwagesarenormallylimitedtotwoyearsbutmaybeextendedtothreeyearsfora *c$0 willfulviolation.See29U.S.C.255(a);seealsoRedmanv.U.S.WestBus.Res.,Inc.,153F.3d +I%1 691,695(8thCir.1998)( [A]llclaimsforviolationsoftheFLSAmustbecommencedwithin ^ twoyearsafterthecauseofactionaccrued,unlesstheviolationwaswillful.)(quoting29 D U.S.C.255(a));Clarkv.EagleFoodCtrs.,Inc.,No.953459,105F.3d662,1997WL6145at * *2(8thCir.Jan.9,1997)( EqualPayActprovidestwoyearlimitationsperiodfromfilingof   complaintorthreeyearlimitationsperiodifwillfulviolationproven.).Theword willful   generallyreferstoconductthatisnotmerelynegligent.SeeMcLaughlinv.RichlandShoeCo.,  ~ 486U.S.128,133(1988).Willfulnessisestablishediftheemployereitherkneworshowed  d recklessdisregardforthematterofwhetheritsconductwasprohibitedbythestatute.Id.The  J questionofwillfulnessisaquestionforthejury.SeeBroadus,226F.3dat944.Thejurys  0 decisionon willfulnessisdistinctfromthedistrictjudgesdecisiontoawardliquidated t  damages.Seeid. Z    TitleVIIawardsmaysubsumepartorallofEqualPayActclaims.SeeEEOCv.Cherry U  BurrellCorp.,35F.3d356,358(8thCir.1994). [Aplaintiff]isentitledonlytoone ;  compensatorydamageawardifliabilityisfoundonanyorallofthetheoriesinvolved.Id. !  (quotingGreenwoodRanches,Inc.v.SkieConstr.Co.,629F.2d518,521(8thCir.1980)).  e   ]@m m  %   5.35EQUALPAYACTVERDICTFORM .j@  ^ @<<'VERDICT *  Note: 0  0` (#(#Completethefollowingparagraphbywritinginthenamerequiredbyyour   verdict. ~` (#` (#   1. ` Onthe[EqualPayAct]1claimofplaintiff[______]2againstdefendant[_____],3  J wefindinfavorof:   ____________________________________________________________________________ U  @ (PlaintiffJaneDoe)or(DefendantXYZ,Inc.) ;   Note :0  0` (#(#Answerquestion2onlyiftheabovefindingisinfavorofplaintiff[______]2.If e  theabovefindingisinfavorofdefendant[_____],3haveyourforepersonsign K  anddatetheformbecauseyouhavecompletedyourdeliberationsonthisclaim.1` (#` (#   [2. ` Hasitbeenproved4thatthedefendanteitherknewitwasviolatingtheEqualPay  ActoractedwithrecklessdisregardoftheEqualPayAct? V    `    _______Yes    _______No   Note: 0  0` (#(#Ifyouansweredyestoquestion2,youshouldawarddamagesbasedonthewages v theplaintiffearnedfrom[____to_____].5Ifyouanswerednotoquestion2,you \ shouldawarddamagesbasedonthewagestheplaintiffearnedfrom[____to B _____].6]7(` (#` (#   3. ` Wefindthattheplaintiffshouldbeawardeddamagesintheamountof: R!!    `     h $_____________________. $&    `     h   ________________________________ '>!)   0 ` 0 ` (#` (#0 (# (#0h(#(#0h(#h(#Foreperson($"*(#(# Dated:_____________________ N*#,   4+$- &   @$ NotesonUse  ^   1.Thisphraseshouldbeusedwhentheplaintiffsubmitsmultipleclaimstothejury. Y '^2J  2.Insertthenameoftheplaintiff.     3.Insertthenameofthedefendant. i    4.ModelInstruction3.04(BurdenofProof)tellsthejurythatsomethingisprovedonly  d ifthejuryfindsitismorelikelytruethannottrue.Thephrase greaterweightoftheevidence  J  isnotnecessaryhere.ItcanbeincludedinInstruction3.04ifdesiredbythecourt.  0    5.Insertthedateonwhichtheplaintiffscauseofactionaccrued,orthedatethreeyears   priortothedateonwhichtheplaintifffiledhisorhercomplaint,whicheverislater.Insertthe o  datetheinstructionsaresubmittedtothejuryasthefinaldate. U    6.Insertthedateonwhichtheplaintiffscauseofactionaccrued,orthedatetwoyears    priortothedateonwhichtheplaintifffiledhisorhercomplaint,whicheverislater.Insertthe   datetheinstructionsaresubmittedtothejuryasthefinaldate. z    7.Thisquestionisusedwhenthepartiesdisputethe wilfulnessofthedefendants 1 actions.Whenthepartiesdonotdispute wilfulness,question2maybeeliminated.Question3  shouldbecomequestion2withthefollowingrecommendedlanguage:  0  Basedonthewagestheplaintiffearnedfrom______to______,wefindthattheplaintiff V shouldbeawardeddamagesintheamountof:<(#(#    `     h $_____________________.   7 43X  8tXXdXXd8^@ll  %   5.40HARASSMENTCASESUNDERTITLEVII,@@  SECTIONS1981AND1983,  @ ADAANDADEAIntroductoryComment  R      Thefollowinginstructionsaredesignedforuseinharassmentcases.InMeritorSavings b Bankv.Vinson,477U.S.57,65(1986),theUnitedStatesSupremeCourtheldthatsexual H harassmentis aformofsexdiscriminationprohibitedbyTitleVII.Harrisv.ForkliftSys., . ~ Inc.,510U.S.17(1993).SeealsoBurlingtonIndus.,Inc.v.Ellerth,524U.S.742(1998)and  d Faragherv.CityofBocaRaton,524U.S.775(1998);Tugglev.Mangan,348F.3d714_(8th_ԀCir.  J 2003);Duncanv.GeneralMotorsCorp.,300F.3d928_(8th_ԀCir.2002).Same-sexsexual  0 harassmentisalsoactionableunderTitleVII.Oncalev.SundownerOffshoreServs.,Inc.,523    U.S.75(1998).Harassmentonthebasisofrace,color,nationalorigin,religion,ageand    disabilityisactionableifitinvolvesahostileworkingenvironment.Harassmentonthebasisof   sex,race,color,nationaloriginorreligionisprohibitedbyTitleVIIoftheCivilRightsActof x  1964,42U.S.C.2000e2(a)(1).See,e.g.,Schmeddingv.TnemecCo.,Inc.,187F.3d862_(8th_ ^  Cir.1999)(TitleVII).HarassmentonthebasisofageisprohibitedbytheAgeDiscriminationin D  EmploymentAct(ADEA),29U.S.C.623(a)(1),631(a).See,e.g.,Williamsv.CityofKansas *z  City,MO,223F.3d749_(8th_ԀCir.2000);Breedingv.ArthurJ.GallagherandCo.,164F.3d1151 ` _(8th_ԀCir.1999)(ADEA).Harassmentcasescanalsobebroughtunder42U.S.C.1981,Rossv. F KansasCityPower&LightCo.,293F.3d1041_(8th_ԀCir.2002)(raceand1981);andunder42 , U.S.C.1983,Moringv.ArkansasDeptofCorr.,243F.3d452_(8th_ԀCir.2001(sexand1983).  HarassmentonthebasisofdisabilityundertheAmericanswithDisabilitiesAct(ADA)is  actionable.Shaverv.IndependentStaveCo.,350F.3d716_(8th_ԀCir.2003).    AccordingtoguidelinespromulgatedbytheEqualEmploymentOpportunity 7 Commission(EEOC),sexualharassmentincludes [u]nwelcomesexualadvances,requestsfor  sexualfavors,andotherverbalorphysicalconductofasexualnature.29C.F.R.1604.11(a).  Twotheoriesofsexualharassmenthavebeenrecognizedbythecourts quidproquoand   hostileworkenvironmentharassment.Thosecasesinwhichtheplaintiffclaimsthatatangible  employmentactionresultedfromarefusaltosubmittoasupervisor'ssexualdemandsare e generallyreferredtoas quidproquocases,asdistinguishedfromcasesbasedon bothersome K attentionsorsexualremarksthataresufficientlysevereorpervasivetocreateahostilework 1 environment.SeeBurlingtonIndus.,524U.S.at751.  g   TheSupremeCourthasstatedthatthe quidproquoand hostileworkenvironment p!! labelsarenotcontrollingforpurposesofestablishingemployerliability.However,thetermsto V"" theextenttheyillustratethedistinctionbetweencasesinvolvingathreatwhichiscarriedoutand <## offensiveconductingeneralarerelevantwhenthereisathresholdquestionwhetheraplaintiff "$r$ canprovediscriminationinviolationofTitleVII.SeeBurlingtonIndus.,524U.S.at752; %X % accordNewtonv.CadwellLab.,156F.3d880,883(8thCir.1998)(recognizingSupremeCourt's %>!& statementthat quidproquoand hostileworkenvironmentlabelsarenolongercontrolling &$"' forpurposesofestablishingemployerliability). ' #(   InFaragherandBurlingtonIndustries,theSupremeCourtheldthatemployersare )c$* vicariouslyliableforthediscriminatoryactionsoftheirsupervisorypersonnel.Faragher,524 )I%+ U.S.at77778;BurlingtonIndus.,524U.S.at744;accordRoriev.UnitedParcelServ.,Inc., */&, 151F.3d757,762_(8th_ԀCir.1998)(citingFaragherandBurlingtonIndustries).Toestablish +'- liability,however,theSupremeCourtdifferentiatedbetweencasesinwhichanemployeesuffers ^ anadverse tangibleemploymentactionasaresultofthesupervisor'sharassmentandthose D casesinwhichanemployeedoesnotsufferatangibleemploymentaction,butsuffersthe * intangibleharmflowingfromtheindignityandhumiliationofsexualharassment.SeeNewton,   156F.3dat883(recognizingdistinctionbetweencasesinwhichharassmentresultsinatangible   employmentactionandcasesinwhichnotangibleemploymentactionoccurs).  ~   Whenanemployeesuffersatangibleemploymentactionresultingfromasupervisor's 5  harassmenttheemployer'sliabilityisestablishedbyproofofharassmentandtheresulting   adversetangibleemploymentactiontakenbythesupervisor.SeeFaragher,524U.S.at80507;   BurlingtonIndus.,524U.S.at763.SeealsoNewton,156F.3dat883.Noaffirmativedefense,   asdescribedbelow,isavailabletotheemployerinthosecases.SeePhillipsv.TacoBellCorp., o  156F.3d884,889n.6(8thCir.1998)(citingFaragher,524U.S.775;BurlingtonIndus.,524 U  U.S.at763.Aconstructivedischargeisatangibleemploymentaction.PennsylvaniaState ;  Policev.Suders,542U.S.129(2004). !    Incaseswherenotangibleemploymentactionhasbeentakenbythesupervisor,the z  defendingemployermayinterposeanaffirmativedefensetodefeatliabilityordamages.That ` affirmativedefense comprisestwonecessaryelements:(a)thattheemployerexercised F reasonablecaretopreventandcorrectpromptlyanyillegalharassingbehavior,and(b)thatthe , plaintiffemployeeunreasonablyfailedtotakeadvantageofanypreventiveorcorrective p opportunitiesprovidedbytheemployerortoavoidharmotherwise.Faragher,524U.S.at807; V BurlingtonIndus.,524U.S.at765,118S.Ct.at2270.SeealsoTacoBell,156F.3dat88788 < (quotingFaragherandBurlingtonIndustries);Rorie,151F.3dat762(quotingsame).Both " elementsmaynotalwaysberequired.SeeMcCurdyv.ArkansasStatePolice,375F.3d762(8th  Cir.2004).ThisTitleVIIanalysishasgenerallybeenappliedinotherareas.See,e.g.,Knutson  v.Brownstein,87F.E.P.C.,1771,2001WL1661929(S.D.N.Y.Dec.27,2001)(ADEA v harassmentaffirmativedefense.) \   Whetheranindividualisa supervisorforpurposesofvicariousliabilityunder  FaragherandBurlingtonIndustriesmaybeacontestedissue.See,e.g.,Weyersv.Lear  OperationsCorp.,359F.3d1049,1057(8thCir.2004)(supervisor musthavehadthepower   (notnecessarilyexercised)totaketangibleemploymentactionagainstthevictim,suchasthe !g  authoritytohire,fire,promote,orreassigntosignificantlydifferentduties).SeealsoJoensv. "M! JohnMorrell&Co.,354F.3d938(8thCir.2004). #3"   InlightofthenewguidancefromtheSupremeCourt,theCommitteehasdrafted $$ instructionsforuseinthreetypesofcases:(1)thosecasesinwhichtheplaintiffallegesthathe %r% orshesufferedatangibleemploymentactionresultingfromarefusaltosubmittoasupervisor's &X & sexualdemands(ModelInstruction5.41,infra);(2)thosecasesinwhichtheplaintiffdidnot '>!' sufferanytangibleemploymentaction,butclaimsthatheorshewassubjectedtoillegal ($"( harassmentbyasupervisorsufficientlysevereorpervasivetocreateahostileworking h) #) environment(ModelInstruction5.42,infra);and(3)thosecasesinwhichtheplaintiffdidnot N*#*  sufferanytangibleemploymentaction,butclaimsthatheorshewassubjectedtoillegal 4+$+ harassmentbynonsupervisorssufficientlysevereorpervasivetocreateahostileworking ^ environment(ModelInstruction5.43,infra).  D  `8tXXdXXd8 @  %   5.41HARASSMENT(BySupervisorWithTangibleEmploymentAction) ^ @!EssentialElements  Mz  D   Yourverdictmustbefortheplaintiff[andagainstdefendant_______]1ontheplaintiff's   claimofsexualharassmentifallofthefollowingelementshavebeenproved2: i    First,theplaintiffwassubjectedto(describeallegedconductgivingrisetotheplaintiff's  d claim)3;and      Second,suchconductwasunwelcome4;and t    Third,suchconductwasbasedontheplaintiff's[(sex)(gender)]5;and o    Fourth,thedefendant(specifyaction(s)takenwithrespecttotheplaintiff)6;and &    Fifth,theplaintiff's[(rejectionof)(failuretosubmitto)]7suchconduct[wasamotivating !  factor]8[playedapart]9inthedecisionto(specifyaction(s)takenwithrespecttotheplaintiff). z    Ifanyoftheaboveelementshasnotbeenproved,yourverdictmustbeforthedefendant 1 andyouneednotproceedfurtherinconsideringthisclaim.10󀀚[Youmayfindthattheplaintiff's , [(rejectionof)(failuretosubmitto)]suchconduct[wasamotivatingfactor][playedapart]inthe  defendant's(decision)11ifithasbeenprovedthedefendant'sstatedreason(s)forits(decision) < [(is)(are)]apretexttohidediscrimination.]12󚚀 7  @$ NotesonUse     1.Usethisphraseiftherearemultipledefendants. G!   2.ModelInstruction3.04(BurdenofProof)tellsthejurythatsomethingisprovedonly B# ifthejuryfindsitismorelikelytruethannottrue.Thephrase greaterweightoftheevidence ($ isnotnecessaryhere.ItcanbeincludedinInstruction3.04ifdesiredbythecourt. l %   3.Theconductorconditionsformingthebasisfortheplaintiff'ssexualharassmentclaim !g' (e.g.,requestsforsexualrelationsbyhisorhersupervisor)shouldbedescribedhere.Excessive "M( detailisneithernecessarynordesirableandmaybeinterpretedbytheappellatecourtasa #3) commentontheevidence.SeeCavinessv.NucorYamatoSteelCo.,105F.3d1216(8thCir. w$* 1997).Itisappropriatetofocusthejury'sattentionontheessentialorultimatefactswhichthe ]%+ plaintiffcontendsconstitutestheconditionswhichmaketheenvironmenthostile.Openended C&, wordssuchas etc.shouldbeavoided.Commentingontheevidence,forexample,bytelling )' - thejurythatcertainevidenceshouldbeconsideredwithcaution,orsuggestingthejudgedoes (!. believeordoesnotbelieve,orisskepticalaboutsomeevidenceisinadvisable.Abrieflistingof ("/ theessentialfactsorcircumstanceswhichtheplaintiffmustproveisnotnormallydeemedtobe )}#0  acommentontheevidence.Placingundueemphasisonaparticulartheoryoftheplaintiff'sor *c$1 thedefendant'scaseshouldalsobeavoided.SeeTylerv.HotSpringsSch.Dist.No.6,827F.2d ^ 1227,1231(8thCir.1987). D    4.Ifthecourtwantstodefinethisterm,thefollowingshouldbeconsidered: Conductis ? 'unwelcome'iftheplaintiffdidnotsolicitorinvitetheconductandregardedtheconductas  % undesirableoroffensive.ThisdefinitionistakenfromMoylanv.MariesCounty,792F.2d746, i  749(8thCir.1986). O    5.Becausequidproquoharassmentusuallyinvolvesconductthatisclearlysexualin  J nature,thiselementordinarilymaybeomittedfromtheinstruction.Ifitisbasedonsomething  0  else,thissentencemustbemodified. t    6.Inserttheappropriatelanguagedependingonthenatureofthecase(e.g., o   discharged, failedtohire, failedtopromote,or demoted).Wheretheplaintiffresigned U  butclaimsa constructivedischarge,thisinstructionshouldbemodified.SeeinfraModel ;  Instruction5.93. !    7.Thisinstructionisdesignedforuseinsexualharassmentcaseswheretheplaintiff z  allegesthatheorshesufferedatangibleemploymentactionresultingfromarefusaltosubmitto ` asupervisor'ssexualdemands.Iftheplaintiffsubmittedtothesupervisor'ssexualadvances,and F thecourtallowstheplaintifftopursuesuchaclaimunderthisinstructionratherthanrequiring , theplaintifftosubmitsuchaclaimunderModelInstruction5.42,infra,thisinstructionmustbe p modifiedor,alternatively,thetrialcourtmayusespecialinterrogatoriestobuildarecordonall V ofthepotentiallydispositiveissues.See,e.g.,Karibianv.ColumbiaUniversity,14F.3d773, < 778(2dCir.1994). "   8.Most,ifnotallofthesecaseswillariseunderTitleVII. Motivatingfactoristhe { correctphrasetouseinallTitleVIIharassmentcases.DesertPalace,Inc.v.Costa,539U.S.90 a (2003).Thesubstantivelawinotherareasshouldbeconsultedconcerningthepropertermtobe G usedinsuchcases.TheCommitteerecommendsthatthedefinitionof motivatingfactorset - forthinModelInstruction5.96,infra,begiven.    9.SeeinfraModelInstruction5.96,whichdefines motivatingfactorintermsof l   whetherthecharacteristic playedapartoraroleinthedefendantsdecision.Thephrase R!!  motivatingfactorneednotbedefinedifthedefinitionitselfisusedintheelementinstruction. 8""   10.Becausethisinstructionisdesignedforuseincasesinwhichtangibleemployment #3$ actionhasbeentaken,theplaintiff'sclaimmaybeanalyzedunderthe motivatingfactor/same w$% decisionformatusedinotherTitleVIIcases.SeesupraModelInstruction5.01A.For ]%& damagesinstructionsandaverdictform,ModelInstructions5.02Athrough5.03,supra,maybe C&' used. )' (   11.Thisinstructionmakesreferencestothedefendant's decision.Itmaybemodified ($"* ifanothertermsuchas actionsor conductwouldbemoreappropriate. h) #+   12.Thissentencemaybeadded,ifappropriate.SeeinfraModelInstruction5.95and *c$- Moorev.RobertsonFireProtectionDist.,249F.3d786,790n.9(8thCir.2001),whichstates +I%.  [w]edonotexpressanyviewastowhetheriteverwouldbereversibleerrorforatrialcourtto ^ failtogiveapretextinstruction,thoughwetendtodoubtit. D @--! CommitteeComments  ?   Thisinstructionisdesignedprimarilyforuseinsexualharassmentcaseswherethe   plaintiffallegesthatheorshesufferedatangibleemploymentactionresultingfromarefusalto  ~ submittoasupervisor'ssexualdemands.Whenaplaintiffprovesthatatangibleemployment  d actionresultedfromarefusaltosubmittoasupervisor'ssexualdemands,heorsheestablishes  J thattheemploymentdecisionitselfconstitutesachangeinthetermsorconditionsof  0  employmentthatisactionableunderTitleVII.BurlingtonIndus.,Inc.v.Ellerth,524U.S.742, t  753(1998).Thesecases(i.e.,casesbasedonthreatswhicharecarriedout)are referredtooften Z  asquidproquocases,asdistinctfrombothersomeattentionsorsexualremarksthatare @  sufficientlysevereorpervasivetocreateahostileworkenvironment.Id.at751. &  &   @The UnwelcomeRequirement !    Insexualharassmentcases,theoffendingconductmustbe unwelcome.Meritor z  SavingsBankv.Vinson,477U.S.57,68(1986).IntheEighthCircuit, conductmustbe ` ' Ν'unwelcome'inthesensethattheemployeedidnotsolicitorinviteit,andtheemployeeregarded F theconductasundesirableoroffensive.Moylanv.MariesCounty,792F.2d746,749(8thCir. , 1986);seealsoBurnsv.McGregorElec.Indus.,Inc.[BurnsI],955F.2d559,565(8thCir. p 1992).Inthetypicalquidproquocase,wheretheplaintiffassertsacausalconnectionbetweena V refusaltosubmittosexualadvancesandatangibleemploymentaction,the unwelcome < requirementwillbemetifthejuryfindsthattheplaintiffinfactrefusedtosubmittoa " supervisor'ssexualadvances.However,ifthecourtallowsaplaintifftopursueaquidproquo  claimdespitehisorhersubmissiontothesupervisor'ssexualadvances,the unwelcome  elementislikelytobedisputedandmustbeincluded. v @`` ConductBasedonSex -   Ingeneral,theplaintiffmustestablishthatharassmentwas basedonsexinorderto ( prevailonasexualharassmentclaim.See,e.g.,Burnsv.McGregorElec.Indus.,Inc.[BurnsII], l   989F.2d959,964(8thCir.1993).Becausequidproquoharassmentinvolvesbehaviorthatis R!! sexualinnature,theretypicallywillnotbeadisputeastowhethertheobjectionablebehavior 8"" wasbasedonsex.AstheEighthCircuithasstated, sexualbehaviordirectedatawomanraises ## theinferencethattheharassmentisbasedonhersex.BurnsI,955F.2d559,564(8thCir. $$ 1992). $%   TheSupremeCourthasruledthatsame-sexsexualharassmentisactionableunderTitle C&' VII.SeeOncalev.SundownerOffshoreServs.,Inc.,523U.S.75(1998);accordKinmanv. )' ( OmahaPub.Sch.Dist.,94F.3d463(8thCir.1996);Quickv.DonaldsonCo.,90F.3d1372(8th (!)  Cir.1996). ("* &      @!EmployerLiability ^   AsnotedintheIntroductoryComment,theSupremeCourthasheldthatanemployeris Y  vicariouslyliablewhenitssupervisor'sdiscriminatoryactresultsinatangibleemployment ? ' ^action.BurlingtonIndus.,Inc.v.Ellerth,524U.S.742,761,118S.Ct.2257,2269(1998)( A  % tangibleemploymentactiontakenbythesupervisorbecomesforTitleVIIpurposestheactofthe i  employer.).Noaffirmativedefenseisavailableissuchcases.Id.at2270. O  @@@TangibleEmploymentAction  J   AccordingtotheSupremeCourt,a tangibleemploymentactionforpurposesofthe   vicariousliabilityissuemeans asignificantchangeinemploymentstatus,suchashiring,firing,   failingtopromote,reassignmentwithsignificantlydifferentresponsibilities,oradecision o  causingasignificantchangeinbenefits.BurlingtonIndus.,Inc.v.Ellerth,524U.S.742,761 U  (1998)(citationsomitted).Inmostcases,atangibleemploymentaction inflictsdirect ;  economicharm.Id.at762.  !   a@  %   5.42HARASSMENT(BySupervisorWithNoTangibleEmploymentAction) ^ @!EssentialElements eϭ  D   Yourverdictmustbefortheplaintiff[andagainstdefendant_______]1ontheplaintiff's   claimof[sex/gender][racial][color][nationalorigin][religious][age][disability]harassmentif i  allofthefollowingelementshavebeenproved2:  d   First,theplaintiffwassubjectedto(describeallegedconductorconditionsgivingriseto    theplaintiff'sclaim)3;and t    Second,suchconductwasunwelcome4;and o    Third,suchconductwasbasedontheplaintiff's[(sex/gender)(race)(color)(national &  origin)(religion)(age)(disability)]5;and !    Fourth,suchconductwassufficientlysevereorpervasivethatareasonablepersoninthe z  plaintiff'spositionwouldfindtheplaintiff'sworkenvironmenttobe[(hostile)(abusive)]6;and 1   Fifth,atthetimesuchconductoccurredandasaresultofsuchconduct,theplaintiff , believed[(his)(her)]workenvironmenttobe[(hostile)(abusive)].    Ifanyoftheaboveelementshasnotbeenproved,[orifthedefendantisentitledtoa < verdictunderInstruction____,]7yourverdictmustbeforthedefendantandyouneednot 7 proceedfurtherinconsideringthisclaim.   @$ NotesonUse  G!   1.Usethisphraseiftherearemultipledefendants. B#   2.ModelInstruction3.04(BurdenofProof)tellsthejurythatsomethingisprovedonly % ifthejuryfindsitismorelikelytruethannottrue.Thephrase greaterweightoftheevidence  & isnotnecessaryhere.ItcanbeincludedinInstruction3.04ifdesiredbythecourt. !g'   3.Theconductorconditionsformingthebasisfortheplaintiff'sharassmentclaim #) shouldbedescribedhere.Excessivedetailisneithernecessarynordesirableandmaybe $* interpretedbytheappellatecourtasacommentontheevidence.SeeCavinessv.NucorYamato $+ SteelCo.,105F.3d1216(8thCir.1997).Itisappropriatetofocusthejury'sattentiononthe %r, essentialorultimatefactswhichtheplaintiffcontendsconstitutestheconditionswhichmakethe &X - environmenthostile.Openendedwordssuchas etc.shouldbeavoided.Commentingonthe '>!. evidence,forexample,bytellingthejurythatcertainevidenceshouldbeconsideredwith ($"/ caution,orsuggestingthejudgedoesbelieveordoesnotbelieve,orisskepticalaboutsome h) #0 evidenceisinadvisable.Abrieflistingoftheessentialfactsorcircumstanceswhichtheplaintiff N*#1  mustproveisnotnormallydeemedtobeacommentontheevidence.Placingundueemphasis 4+$2 onaparticulartheoryoftheplaintiff'sorthedefendant'scaseshouldalsobeavoided.SeeTyler ^ v.HotSpringsSch.Dist.No.6,827F.2d1227,1231(8thCir.1987). D    4.Theterm unwelcomemaybeofsuchcommonusagethatitneednotbedefined.If ? thecourtwantstodefinethisterm,thefollowingshouldbeconsidered: Conductis  % 'unwelcome'iftheplaintiffdidnotsolicitorinvitetheconductandregardedtheconductas i  undesirableoroffensive.ThisdefinitionistakenfromMoylanv.MariesCounty,792F.2d746, O  749(8thCir.1986). 5    5.AsnotedintheCommitteeComments,thereareanumberofsubsidiaryissueswhich  0  canariseinconnectionwiththerequirementthatactionableharassmentmustbe basedonsex t  orotherprohibitedcategory.Iftheallegedlyoffensiveconductclearlywasdirectedatthe Z  plaintiffbecauseofhisorhergender,ageorrace,itisnotnecessarytoincludethiselement. @  However,ifthereisadisputeastowhethertheoffensiveconductwasdiscriminatoryfor &  example,iftheoffendingconductmayhavebeenequallyabusivetobothmenandwomenorif    menandwomenparticipatedequallyincreatinga raunchyworkplaceitmaybenecessaryto   modifythiselementtoproperlyframetheissue. z    6.Selectthewordwhichbestdescribestheplaintiff'stheory.Bothwordsmaybe 1 appropriate.Thiselementsetsforththe objectivetestforahostileworkenvironment.As  discussedintheCommitteeComments,itistheCommittee'spositionthattheappropriate  perspectiveisthatofa reasonableperson.Inaddition,itmaybeappropriatetoincludethe  factorssetforthinHarrisv.ForkliftSys.,Inc.,510U.S.17,23(1993),andreiteratedin k Faragherv.CityofBocaRaton,524U.S.775,78788,118S.Ct.2275,2283(1998),toaidin Q determiningwhetheraplaintiff'sworkenvironmentwashostileorabusive.Forexample: 7 0   ` Indeterminingwhetherareasonablepersonintheplaintiff'scircumstanceswould  findtheplaintiff'sworkenvironmenttobehostileorabusive,youmustlookatallthe v circumstances.Thecircumstancesmayincludethefrequencyoftheconductcomplained \ of;itsseverity;whetheritwasphysicallythreateningorhumiliating,ormerelyoffensive; B whetheritunreasonablyinterferedwiththeplaintiff'sworkperformance;andtheeffect ( ontheplaintiff'spsychologicalwellbeing.Nosinglefactorisrequiredinordertofinda l  workenvironmenthostileorabusive.R! (#(#   7.Becausethisinstructionisdesignedforcasesinwhichnotangibleemploymentaction "M" istaken,thedefendantmaydefendagainstliabilityordamagesbyprovinganaffirmative #3# defense ofreasonableoversightandoftheemployee'sunreasonablefailuretotakeadvantageof w$$ correctiveopportunities.Nicholsv.AmericanNat'lIns.Co.,154F.3d875,887(8thCir.1998) ]%% (citingFaragher,524U.S.at807;BurlingtonIndus.,524U.S.at765,118S.Ct.at2270).The C&& bracketedlanguageshouldbeusedwhenthedefendantissubmittingtheaffirmativedefense. )' '  SeeinfraModelInstruction5.42A. (!( &     @--! CommitteeComments  ^   Thisinstructionisdesignedforuseinharassmentcaseswheretheplaintiffdidnotsuffer Y any tangibleemploymentactionsuchasdischargeordemotion,butrathersuffered ?  ' ^ intangibleharmflowingfromasupervisor'sharassmentthatis sufficientlysevereor  % pervasivetocreateahostileworkenvironment.SeeBurlingtonIndus.,Inc.v.Ellerth,524U.S. i  742,751(1998). O    Itisimpossibletocompileanexhaustivelistofthetypesofconductthatmaygiveriseto  J ahostileenvironmentharassmentclaimunderTitleVIIandotherstatutes.Someexamplesof  0  thiskindofconductinclude:verbalabuseofasexual,racialorreligiousnature;graphicverbal t  commentariesaboutanindividual'sbody,sexualprowess,orsexualdeficiencies;orage; Z  sexuallydegradingorvulgarwordstodescribeanindividual;pinching,groping,andfondling; @  suggestive,insulting,orobscenecommentsorgestures;thedisplayintheworkplaceofsexually &  suggestiveobjects,pictures,postersorcartoons;askingquestionsaboutsexualconduct;and    unwelcomesexualadvances.SeeHarrisv.ForkliftSys.,Inc.,510U.S.17(1993);Meritor   SavingsBankv.Vinson,477U.S.57(1986);Stacksv.SouthwesternBellYellowPages,Inc.,27 z  F.3d1316(8thCir.1994);Hukkanenv.InternationalUnionofOperatingEngrsLocalNo.101, ` 3F.3d281(8thCir.1993);Burnsv.McGregorElec.Indus.,Inc.[BurnsII],989F.2d959(8th F Cir.1993);Burnsv.McGregorElec.Indus.,Inc.[BurnsI],955F.2d559(8thCir.1992);Jones , v.WescoInvs.,Inc.,846F.2d1154(8thCir.1988);Hallv.GusConstr.Co.,842F.2d1010(8th p Cir.1988). V @ConductBasedonSexorGender Q   Ingeneral,inasexdiscriminationcase,theplaintiffmustestablishthatthealleged  offensiveconductwas basedonsex.BurnsII,989F.2dat964.Despiteitsapparent  simplicity,thisrequirementraisesahostofinterestingissues.Forexample,inanhistorically v male-dominatedworkenvironment,itmaybecommonplacetohavesexuallysuggestive \ calendarsondisplayandprovocativebanteramongthemaleemployees.Whilethecontinuation B ofthisconductmaynotbedirectedatanewfemaleemployee,itneverthelessmaybeactionable ( onthetheorythatsexualbehavioratworkraisesaninferenceofdiscriminationagainstwomen. l  SeeBurnsI,955F.2dat564;seealsoStacksv.SouthwesternBell,27F.3d1316(8thCir.1994) R!  (sexualconductdirectedbymaleemployeestowardwomenotherthantheplaintiffwas 8"! consideredpartofahostileworkenvironment). #"   TheEighthCircuitalsohasindicatedthatconductwhichisnotsexualinnaturebutis w$$ directedatawomanbecauseofhergendercanformthebasisofahostileenvironmentclaim. ]%% See,e.g.,Gillmingv.SimmonsIndus.,91F.3d1168,1171(8thCir.1996)(juryinstructionneed C&& notrequireafindingthatactswereexplicitlysexualinnature);Hallv.GusConstr.Co.,842F.2d )' ' 1010,1014(8thCir.1988)(callingafemaleemployee herpesandurinatinginhergastank, (!( althoughnotconductofanexplicitsexualnature,wasproperlyconsideredindeterminingifa (") hostileworkenvironmentexisted);seealsoStacks,27F.3dat1326(differentialtreatmentbased )}#* ongenderinconnectionwithdisciplinaryactionsupportedafemaleemployee'shostilework *c$+ environmentclaim);Shopev.BoardofSuprs,14F.3d596(table),1993WL525598(4thCir. +I%, Dec.20,1993)(rude,disparaging,and almostphysicallyabusiveconductbasedongender ^ supportedahostileenvironmentclaim). D   TheEighthCircuithasnotdirectlyaddressedtheissueofwhethervulgarorabusive ? conductthatisdirectedequallytowardmenandwomencanconstituteaviolationofTitleVII.  % Becausesexualharassmentisavarietyofsexdiscrimination,somecourtshavesuggestedthatit i  isnotaviolationofTitleVIIifamanagerisequallyabusivetomaleandfemaleemployees.For O  example,inRabiduev.OsceolaRefiningCo.,805F.2d611,620(6thCir.1986),cert.denied, 5  481U.S.1041(1987),abrogatedonothergrounds,510U.S.178(1993),thecourtsuggested   thatsexualharassmentofallemployeesbyabisexualsupervisorwouldnotviolateTitleVII.In   asimilarvein,thedistrictcourtinKoppv.SamaritanHealthSystem,Inc.,13F.3d264(8thCir.   1993),grantedtheemployer'smotionforsummaryjudgmentonthetheorythattheoffending o  supervisorwasabusivetowardallemployees.AlthoughtheEighthCircuitreversedbecausethe U  plaintiffhadofferedevidencethattheabusedirectedtowardfemaleemployeeswasmore ;  frequentandmoreseverethantheabusedirectedatmaleemployees,Koppsuggeststhatthe !   equalopportunityharassmentdefensecanpresentaquestionoffactforthejury.Butsee e  Chiapuziov.BLTOperatingCorp.,826F.Supp.1334(D.Wyo.1993)(holdingthat equal K  opportunityharassmentofemployeesofbothgenderscanviolateTitleVII). 1   TheSupremeCourthasruledthatsame-sexsexualharassmentisactionableunderTitle , VII.SeeOncalev.SundownerOffshoreServs.,Inc.,523U.S.75(1998);accordKinmanv. p OmahaPub.Sch.Dist.,94F.3d463(8thCir.1996);Quickv.DonaldsonCo.,90F.3d1372(8th V Cir.1996).SeePedrozav.CintasCorporationNo.2,397F.3d1063(8thCir.2005),fora < discussionofthepossibleevidentiaryroutesforprovingsexualharassmentinsamesexcases. " &   @HostileorAbusiveEnvironment {   Inorderforhostileenvironmentharassmenttobeactionable,itmustbe so'severeor v pervasive'asto'altertheconditionsof[thevictim's]employmentandcreateanabusiveworking \ ' {Oenvironment.'Faragherv.CityofBocaRaton,524U.S.775,786(1998)(quotingMeritor B SavingsBankv.Vinson,477U.S.at67(quotingHensonv.CityofDundee,682F.2d897,904 ( (11thCir.1982)));accordPartonv.GTENorth,Inc.,971F.2d150,154(8thCir.1992);Burns l  v.McGregorElec.Indus.,Inc.[BurnsI],955F.2d559,564(8thCir.1992);Statonv.Maries R!  County,868F.2d996,998(8thCir.1989);Minteerv.Auger,844F.2d569(8thCir.1988).In 8"! Moylanv.MariesCounty,792F.2d746(8thCir.1986),thecourtexplained: #" 0   ` Theharassmentmustbe sufficientlypervasivesoastoaltertheconditionsof w$$ employmentandcreateanabusiveworkingenvironment.Hensonv.CityofDundee, ]%% 682F.2dat904.Theplaintiffmustshowapracticeorpatternofharassmentagainsther C&& orhim;asingleincidentorisolatedincidentsgenerallywillnotbesufficient.The )' ' plaintiffmustgenerallyshowthattheharassmentissustainedandnontrivial.(!((#(# Id.at74950;seeFaragher,524U.S.at788( [S]impleteasing,offhandcomments,and h) #* isolatedincidents(unlessextremelyserious)willnotamounttodiscriminatorychangesinthe N*#+ 'termsandconditionsofemployment.').CompareHenthornv.CapitolCommunications,Inc., 4+$, No.031018(8thCir.Mar.5,2004)andDuncanv.GeneralMotorsCo.,300F.3d928,933(8th ,%- Cir.2002)withEichv.BoardofRegentsforCentralMissouriStateUniversity,850F.3d752 ^ (8thCir.2004). D   [I]nassessingthehostilityofanenvironment,acourtmustlooktothetotalityofthe ? circumstances.Stacks,27F.3dat1327(citationomitted).InHarrisv.ForkliftSys.,Inc.,510  % U.S.17,22(1993),theCourtheldthatahostileenvironmentclaimmaybeactionablewithouta i  showingthattheplaintiffsufferedpsychologicalinjury.Indeterminingwhetheranenvironment O  ishostileorabusive,therelevantfactorsincludethefrequencyofthediscriminatoryconduct;its 5  severity;whetheritisphysicallythreateningorhumiliating,oramereoffensiveutterance;and   whetheritunreasonablyinterfereswithanemployee'sworkperformance.Harris,510U.S.at   23.SeealsoFaragher,524U.S.at78788,118S.Ct.at2283(reiteratingrelevantfactorsset   forthinHarris);accordPhillipsv.TacoBellCorp.,156F.3d884,889(8thCir.1998)(citing o  Harris). U    Thesesamefactorshavegenerallybeenrequiredinalltypesofharassment/hostile    environmentcases.Seesuprathecasescitedinsection5.40.   &   @ ObjectiveandSubjectiveRequirement K    InHarris,theSupremeCourtexplainedthat asexuallyobjectionableenvironmentmust F bebothobjectivelyandsubjectivelyoffensive,onethatareasonablepersonwouldfindhostileor , ' Ktabusive,andonethatthevictiminfactdidperceivetobeso.Faragher,524U.S.at787(citing p Harrisv.ForkliftSys.,Inc.,510U.S.17,2122(1993)( [I]fthevictimdoesnotsubjectively V perceivetheenvironmenttobeabusive,theconducthasnotactuallyalteredtheconditionsofthe < victim'semployment,andthereisnoTitleVIIviolation.));accordRoriev.UnitedParcelServ., " Inc.,151F.3d757,761(8thCir.1998).  @!EmployerLiability a   AsnotedintheIntroductoryComment,theSupremeCourthasheldthatanemployeris \  subjecttovicariousliabilitytoavictimizedemployeeforanactionablehostileenvironment B createdbyasupervisorwithimmediate(orsuccessivelyhigher)authorityovertheemployee. ( BurlingtonIndus.,Inc.v.Ellerth,524U.S.742,765(1998).Unlikethosecasesinwhichthe l   plaintiffsuffersatangibleemploymentaction,however,incaseswherenotangibleemployment R!! actionhasbeentakenbythesupervisor,theemployermayraiseanaffirmativedefenseto 8"" liabilityordamages.Id.SeeinfraModelInstruction5.42AandCommitteeComments.  ## Кb @  %   5.42AAFFIRMATIVEDEFENSE ^ @gg (ForUseinSupervisorCasesWithNoTangibleEmploymentAction) sm  D   Yourverdictmustbeforthedefendantontheplaintiff'sclaimofharassmentifithas   beenproved1that(a)defendantexercisedreasonablecaretopreventandcorrectpromptlyany i  harassingbehavior;and(b)thattheplaintiffunreasonablyfailedtotakeadvantageof(specify  d thepreventiveorcorrectiveopportunitiesprovidedbythedefendantofwhichtheplaintiff    allegedlyfailedtotakeadvantageorhowtheplaintiffallegedlyfailedtoavoidharmotherwise).2 t   @$ NotesonUse  o    1.ModelInstruction3.04(BurdenofProof)tellsthejurythatsomethingisprovedonly &  ifthejuryfindsitismorelikelytruethannottrue.Thephrase greaterweightoftheevidence    isnotnecessaryhere.ItcanbeincludedinInstruction3.04ifdesiredbythecourt.     2.AccordingtotheSupremeCourt,adefendantassertingthisaffirmativedefensemust K  provenotonlythatitexercisedreasonablecaretopreventandcorrectpromptlyanysexually 1 harassingbehavior,butalsothat theplaintiffunreasonablyfailedtotakeadvantageofany  preventiveorcorrectiveopportunitiesprovidedbydefendantortoavoidharmotherwise.  Faragher,524U.S.at807;BurlingtonIndus.,524U.S.at763.Forpurposesofinstructingthe  jury,however,theCommitteerecommendsthatthespecificpreventiveorcorrective k opportunitiesofwhichtheplaintiffallegedlyfailedtotakeadvantageortheparticularmannerin Q whichtheplaintiffallegedlyfailedtoavoidharmbeidentified. 7 @--! CommitteeComments     TheUnitedStatesSupremeCourtheldthat [a]nemployerissubjecttovicariousliability G toavictimizedemployeeforanactionablehostileenvironmentcreatedby[theemployee's] - supervisor.Roriev.UnitedParcelServ.,Inc.,151F.3d757,762(8thCir.1998)(quoting   BurlingtonIndus.,Inc.v.Ellerth,524U.S.742,745(1998);Faragherv.CityofBocaRaton,524 ! U.S.775,777(1998)).When notangibleemploymentaction,suchasdischarge,demotion,or  " undesirablereassignmentistaken,however,anemployermaydefendagainstliabilityor !g# damages byprovinganaffirmativedefenseofreasonableoversightandoftheemployee's "M$ unreasonablefailuretotakeadvantageofcorrectiveopportunities.Nicholsv.AmericanNat'l #3% Ins.Co.,154F.3d875,887(8thCir.1998)(citingFaragher,524U.S.at807;BurlingtonIndus., w$& 524U.S.at763);accordPhillipsv.TacoBellCorp.,156F.3d884,888(8thCir.1998)(citing ]%' same);Newtonv.CadwellLaboratories,156F.3d880,883(8thCir.1998)(citingsame).The C&( languageoftheaffirmativedefenseistakenverbatimfromtheSupremeCourt'sdecisionsin )' ) BurlingtonIndustriesandFaragher.Bothelementsmaynotalwaysberequired.SeeMcCurdy (!* v.ArkansasStatePolice,375F.3d762(8thCir.2004).AlthoughnoEighthCircuitcasesso ("+ hold,thisaffirmativedefensehasbeenheldapplicabletoharassmentclaimsmadeunderADEA, )}#, Lacherv.West,147F.Supp.2d538(N.D.Tex.2001);claimsundertheADA,Silkv.Cityof *c$- Chicago,194F.3d788(7thCir.1999)(assumesharassmentactionableundertheADA);under +I%. 42U.S.C.1983;Molnarv.Booth,229F.3d593(7thCir.2000);andunder42U.S.C.1981, ^ Jacksonv.QuanexCorp.,191F.3d647(6thCir.1999).  D Кc @  %   5.43HARASSMENT(ByNonsupervisor)EssentialElements sm   ^   Yourverdictmustbefortheplaintiff[andagainstdefendant_______]1ontheplaintiff's * claimof[sex/gender][racial][color][nationalorigin][religious][age][disability]harassmentif  % allofthefollowingelementshavebeenproved2:  ~   First,theplaintiffwassubjectedto(describeallegedconductorconditionsgivingriseto 5  theplaintiff'sclaim)3;and  0    Second,suchconductwasunwelcome4;and     Third,suchconductwasbasedontheplaintiff's[(sex/gender)(race)(color)(national @  origin)(religion)(age)(disability)]5;and ;    Fourth,suchconductwassufficientlysevereorpervasivethatareasonablepersoninthe   plaintiff'spositionwouldfindtheplaintiff'sworkenvironmenttobe[(hostile)(abusive)]6;and K    Fifth,atthetimesuchconductoccurredandasaresultofsuchconduct,theplaintiff F believed[(his)(her)]workenvironmenttobe[(hostile)(abusive)];and    Sixth,thedefendantkneworshouldhaveknownofthe(describeallegedconductor V conditionsgivingrisetotheplaintiff'sclaim)7;and Q   Seventh,thedefendantfailedtotakepromptandappropriatecorrectiveactiontoendthe  harassment.8 a    Ifanyoftheaboveelementshasnotbeenproved,yourverdictmustbeforthedefendant \" andyouneednotproceedfurtherinconsideringthisclaim.9 $ &  @$ NotesonUse  l &   1.Usethisphraseiftherearemultipledefendants. !g( 'l U  2.ModelInstruction3.04(BurdenofProof)tellsthejurythatsomethingisprovedonly #* ifthejuryfindsitismorelikelytruethannottrue.Thephrase greaterweightoftheevidence $+ isnotnecessaryhere.ItcanbeincludedinInstruction3.04ifdesiredbythecourt. $,   3.Theconductorconditionsformingthebasisfortheplaintiff'sharassmentclaim C&. shouldbedescribedhere.Excessivedetailisneithernecessarynordesirableandmaybe )' / interpretedbytheappellatecourtasacommentontheevidence.SeeCavinessv.NucorYamato (!0 SteelCo.,105F.3d1216,1222(8thCir.1997).Itisappropriatetofocusthejury'sattentionon ("1 theessentialorultimatefactswhichtheplaintiffcontendsconstitutestheconditionswhichmake )}#2 theenvironmenthostile.Openendedwordssuchas etc.shouldbeavoided.Commentingon *c$3 theevidence,forexample,bytellingthejurythatcertainevidenceshouldbeconsideredwith +I%4 caution,orsuggestingthejudgedoesbelieveordoesnotbelieve,orisskepticalaboutsome ^ evidenceisinadvisable.Abrieflistingoftheessentialfactsorcircumstanceswhichtheplaintiff D mustproveisnotnormallydeemedtobeacommentontheevidence.Placingundueemphasis * onaparticulartheoryoftheplaintiff'sorthedefendant'scaseshouldalsobeavoided.SeeTyler   v.HotSpringsSch.Dist.No.6,827F.2d1227,1231(8thCir.1987).     4.Theterm unwelcomemaybeofsuchcommonusagethatitneednotbedefined.If O  thecourtwantstodefinethisterm,thefollowingshouldbeconsidered: [Conductis 5  'unwelcome']iftheemployeedidnotsolicitorinviteitandtheemployeeregardedtheconduct   asundesirableoroffensive.ThisdefinitionistakenfromMoylanv.MariesCounty,792F.2d   746,749(8thCir.1986).     5.AsnotedintheCommitteeComments,thereareanumberofsubsidiaryissueswhich @  canariseinconnectionwiththerequirementthatactionableharassmentmustbe basedonsex &  orotherprohibitedcategory.Iftheallegedlyoffensiveconductclearlywasdirectedatthe    plaintiffbecauseofhisorhergender,ageorrace,itisnotnecessarytoincludethiselement.   However,ifthereisadisputeastowhethertheoffensiveconductwasdiscriminatoryfor z  example,iftheoffendingconductmayhavebeenequallyabusivetobothmenandwomenorif ` menandwomenparticipatedequallyincreatinga raunchyworkplaceitmaybenecessaryto F modifythiselementtoproperlyframetheissue. ,   6.Selectthewordwhichbestdescribestheplaintiff'stheory.Bothwordsmaybe  appropriate.Thiselementsetsforththe objectivetestforahostileworkenvironment.As k discussedintheCommitteeComments,itistheCommittee'spositionthattheappropriate Q perspectiveisthatofa reasonableperson.Inaddition,itmaybeappropriatetoincludethe 7 factorssetforthinHarrisv.ForkliftSys.,Inc.,510U.S.17,23(1993),andreiteratedin { Faragherv.CityofBocaRaton,524U.S.775,786(1998),toaidindeterminingwhethera a plaintiff'sworkenvironmentwashostileorabusive.Forexample: G 0   ` Indeterminingwhetherareasonablepersonintheplaintiff'scircumstanceswould B findtheplaintiff'sworkenvironmenttobehostileorabusive,youmustlookatallthe ( circumstances.Thecircumstancesmayincludethefrequencyoftheconductcomplained l  of;itsseverity;whetheritwasphysicallythreateningorhumiliating,ormerelyoffensive; R!  whetheritunreasonablyinterferedwiththeplaintiff'sworkperformance;andtheeffect 8"! onplaintiff'spsychologicalwellbeing.Nosinglefactorisrequiredinordertofinda #" workenvironmenthostileorabusive.$#(#(#   7.AsnotedintheCommitteeComments,therearegenerallytworequirementsfor ]%% establishingemployerliabilityinsexualharassmentcaseswheretheplaintiffclaimsharassment C&& byhisorhercoworkersratherthanbysupervisorypersonnel:(1)theplaintiffmustshowthat )' ' theemployerkneworshouldhaveknownoftheharassment;and(2)theplaintiffmustshowthat (!( theemployerfailedtotakeappropriateactiontoendtheharassment.Thiselementsetsforththe (") firsthalfofthetest.Asapracticalmatter,itisunlikelythatthedefendantwillseriouslycontest )}#*  bothissues:iftheemployerclaimsitneverknewoftheharassment,thequestionofwhetherits *c$+ responsewasappropriatewouldbemoot;conversely,iftheemployer'sprimarydefenseisthatit ^ tookappropriateremedialaction,the kneworshouldhaveknownelementmaybemoot. D    8.AsdiscussedintheIntroductoryComment,theSupremeCourt'sopinionswithrespect ? toemployerliabilityinsexualharassmentcasesaddressonlythosesituationsinwhicha  % supervisor(asopposedtoanonsupervisor)sexuallyharassesasubordinate.Incasesinwhich i  theplaintiffallegessexualharassmentbyanonsupervisor,theissueofwhethercourtswillleave O  theburdenontheplaintifftoprovethatthedefendantfailedtotakepromptandappropriate 5  correctiveactionorwhethercourtswillplacetheburdenonthedefendanttoprovean   affirmativedefensethatittookpromptandappropriatecorrectiveactionasinFaragherand   BurlingtonIndustriesisanopenquestion.See,e.g.,Coatesv.SundorBrands,Inc.,164F.3d   1361,1366(11thCir.1999)(Barkett,concurring). o    9.Becausethisinstructionisdesignedforuseincasesinwhichnotangibleemployment &  actionhasbeentaken,theplaintiff'sclaimshouldnotbeanalyzedunderthe motivating    factor/samedecisionformatusedinotherTitleVIIcases.SeeStacksv.SouthwesternBell,27   F.3d1316(8thCir.1994).Fordamagesinstructionsandaverdictform,ModelInstructions z  5.02Athrough5.03,supra,shouldbeusedinamodifiedformat.Forasampleconstructive ` dischargeinstruction,seeinfraModelInstruction5.93. F @--! CommitteeComments     Thisinstructionisdesignedforuseincaseswheretheplaintiffdidnotsufferanytangible V employmentaction,butclaimsthatheorshewassubjectedtosexualorotherharassmentby < nonsupervisors(asopposedtosupervisorypersonnel)sufficientlysevereorpervasivetocreate " ahostileworkingenvironment.Insuchcases(i.e.,casesnotinvolvingvicariousliability),   [e]mployeeshavesomeobligationtoinformtheiremployers,eitherdirectlyorotherwise,of  behaviorthattheyfindobjectionablebeforeemployercanbeheldresponsibleforfailingto v correctthatbehavior,atleastordinarily.Whitmorev.O'ConnorManagement,Inc.,156F.3d \ 796,800(8thCir.1998)(decidedaftertheSupremeCourt'sopinionsinBurlingtonIndustries B andFaragher).AlthoughnoEighthCircuitcasesclearlydecidethisissue,theCommittee ( believesitislikelythecourtwillfollowthisapproachinallharassmentclaims,notjustinTitle l  VIIcases.  R!  К d@h h  %   5.44AHARASSMENTACTUALDAMAGESCommentary Fu8  ^    Actualdamagesforharassmentaregenerallygovernedbythesamestatutewhich * prohibitsthediscriminationitself.Thus,   0  5.02Ashouldbereviewedfordraftinganinstructiondealingwithactualdamagesin i  sexualharassmentorotherharassmentcasesunderTitleVII;O (#(# 0  5.12Ashouldbereviewedfordraftinganinstructiondealingwithactualdamagesinage  J harassmentcasesundertheADEA; 0 (#(# 0  5.22Ashouldbereviewedfordraftinganinstructiondealingwithactualdamagesin   harassmentcasesunder42U.S.C.1981;o (#(# 0  5.27Ashouldbereviewedfordraftinganinstructiondealingwithactualdamagesin &  harassmentcasesunder42U.S.C.1983;  (#(# 0  5.54Ashouldbereviewedfordraftinganinstructiondealingwithactualdamagesin e  harassmentcasesundertheADA. K (#(#  e@% %  %   5.44BHARASSMENTNOMINALDAMAGESCommentary F=  ^    Nominaldamagesforharassmentaregenerallygovernedbythesamestatutewhich * prohibitsthediscriminationitself.Thus,   0  5.02Bshouldbereviewedfordraftinganinstructiondealingwithnominaldamagesin i  sexualharassmentorotherharassmentcasesunderTitleVII;O (#(# 0  5.12Bshouldbereviewedfordraftinganinstructiondealingwithnominaldamagesin  J ageharassmentcasesundertheADEA; 0 (#(# 0  5.22Bshouldbereviewedfordraftinganinstructiondealingwithnominaldamagesin   harassmentcasesunder42U.S.C.1981;o (#(# 0  5.27Bshouldbereviewedfordraftinganinstructiondealingwithnominaldamagesin &  harassmentcasesunder42U.S.C.1983;  (#(# 0  5.54Bshouldbereviewedfordraftinganinstructiondealingwithnominaldamagesin e  harassmentcasesundertheADA. K (#(# f @% %  %   5.44CHARASSMENTPUNITIVEDAMAGESCommentary FB  ^    Punitivedamagesforharassmentaregenerallygovernedbythesamestatutewhich * prohibitsthediscriminationitself.Thus,   0  5.02Cshouldbereviewedfordraftinganinstructiondealingwithpunitivedamagesin i  sexualharassmentorotherharassmentcasesunderTitleVII;O (#(# 0  5.12Cshouldbereviewedfordraftinganinstructiondealingwithliquidateddamagesin  J ageharassmentcasesundertheADEA; 0 (#(# 0  5.22Cshouldbereviewedfordraftinganinstructiondealingwithpunitivedamagesin   harassmentcasesunder42U.S.C.1981;o (#(# 0  5.27Cshouldbereviewedfordraftinganinstructiondealingwithpunitivedamagesin &  harassmentcasesunder42U.S.C.1983;  (#(# 0  5.54Cshouldbereviewedfordraftinganinstructiondealingwithpunitivedamagesin e  harassmentcasesundertheADA.0$ K(#(# `4_  20g@ %   5.50AMERICANSWITHDISABILITIESACT( ADA)(EmploymentCasesOnly) 0 @$Introduction bH      ThefollowinginstructionsaredesignedforuseindisabilitycasesundertheAmericans b withDisabilitiesAct( ADA),42U.S.C.12101etseq. H   Theseinstructionsarenotintendedtocovercaseswithrespecttopublicaccommodations  !  orpublicservicesundertheADA.Rather,theseinstructionsareintendedtocoveronlythose    casesarisingundertheemploymentprovisionsoftheADA.TheADAwasamended m   significantly,effectiveJanuary1,2009,bytheADAAmendmentsActof2008.Becausethe S  amendmentsarenotretroactive,itmaybenecessarytoconsultthepriorversionofthese 9  instructions,includedintheappendix,ifacaseinvolvesclaimsarisingpriortoJanuary1,2009.     ToestablishaprimafaciecaseundertheADA,anaggrievedemployeemustestablish x  thatheorshehasadisabilityasdefinedin42U.S.C.12102(2);thatheorsheisqualifiedto ^  performtheessentialfunctionsofthejob,withorwithoutreasonableaccommodation;andthat D heorshehassufferedadverseemploymentactiononthebasisofdisability.42U.S.C. * 12112(a).  &   @A DisabilityUndertheADA  i   UndertheADA,a disabilityisdefinedas (A)aphysicalormentalimpairmentthat B substantiallylimitsoneormoreofthemajorlifeactivitiesofsuchindividual;(B)arecordof ( ' iNsuchanimpairment;or(C)beingregardedashavingsuchanimpairment.42U.S.C.  12102(1).Thisdefinition shallbeconstruedinfavorofbroadcoverageofindividualsunder t thisAct,tothemaximumextentpermittedbythetermsofthisAct.42U.S.C.12102(4)(A). Z   Asamended,effectiveJanuary1,2009,theADAdefines majorlifeactivitiesas 3 including,butnotlimitedto,caringforoneself,performingmanualtasks,seeing,hearing,   eating,sleeping,walking,standing,lifting,bending,speaking,breathing,learning,reading, ! concentrating,thinking,communicatingandworking.42U.S.C.12102(2)(A).A majorlife e" activityalsoincludestheoperationofamajorbodilyfunction,includingbutnotlimitedto, K# functionsoftheimmunesystem,normalcellgrowth,digestive,bowel,bladder,neurological, 1$ brain,respiratory,circulatory,endocrineandreproductivefunctions.42U.S.C.12102(2)(B).  % &    PhysicalorMentalImpairment p!'   Animpairmentthatsubstantiallylimitsonemajorlifeactivityneednotlimitothermajor "I ) lifeactivitiesinordertobeconsideredadisability.42U.S.C.12102(4)(C).Animpairment #/!* ' p!Tthatisepisodicorinremissionisadisabilityifitwouldsubstantiallylimitamajorlifeactivity $"+ whenactive.42U.S.C.12102(4)(D).TheADAspecificallydirectsthatthedeterminationof {%", whetheranimpairmentsubstantiallylimitsamajorlifeactivityshallbemadewithoutregardto a&#- theameliorativeeffectsofmitigatingmeasures,suchas: G'$.  0(93   ` "!3"  !33X2  I  .3  0   medication,medicalsupplies,equipment,orappliances,lowvision ( &0 devices(whichdonotincludeordinaryeyeglassesorcontactlenses), )'1 prostheticsincludinglimbsanddevices,hearingaidsandcochlear l*'2 implantsorotherimplantablehearingdevices,mobilitydevices,or R+(3 oxygentherapyequipmentandsupplies;!33X`X݌#8,)4 (# (# #Ќ  "!3"     ` !3Z2  II  .3  0   useofassistivetechnology;!3ZZ݌^ (# (# Ќ  "!3"     ` !3[2  III  .3  0   reasonableaccommodationsorauxiliaryaidsorservices(e.g., Y interpreters,readers,oracquisitionormodificationofdevices);!3[[݌? (# (# Ќ  "!3"     ` !3\2  IV  .3  0   learnedbehavioraloradaptiveneurologicalmodifications.!3\A]݌  (# (# Ќ   (#390W42U.S.C.12102(4)(E)(I). O  &    BeingRegardedasHavingSuchanImpairment  J    Anindividualmeetstherequirementofbeingregardedashavingsuchanimpairment if   theindividualestablishesthatheorshehasbeensubjectedtoanactionprohibitedunderthisAct   '  ^becauseofanactualorperceivedphysicalormentalimpairment,whetherornottheimpairment o  limitsorisperceivedtolimitamajorlifeactivity.42U.S.C.12102(3)(A).However,42 U  U.S.C.12102(1)(C),theprovisionthatincludes beingregardedashavingsuchan ;  impairmentinthedefinitionofdisability,doesnotapplytoimpairmentsthataretransitory !  (havinganactualorexpecteddurationof6monthsorless)andminor.42U.S.C.12102(3)(B). e  &   KnowledgeoftheDisability `   Unlikeotherdiscriminationcases,theprotectedcharacteristicoftheemployeeina  disabilitydiscriminationcasemaynotalwaysbeimmediatelyobvioustotheemployer.Asthe  SeventhCircuit' wbhasstated, Itistruethatanemployerwillautomaticallyknowofmany  disabilities.Forexample,anemployerwouldknowthatapersoninawheelchair,orwithsome k otherobviousphysicallimitation,hadadisability.Hedbergv.IndianaBellTele.Co.,47F.3d Q 928,932(7thCir.1995).Furthermore,itmaybethatsomesymptomsaresoobviously 7 manifestationsofanunderlyingdisabilitythatitwouldbereasonabletoinferthatanemployer { actuallyknewofthedisability(e.g.,anemployeewhosuffersfrequentseizuresatworklikely a hassomedisability).Id.at934.Finally,anemployermayactuallyknowofdisabilitiesthatare G notimmediatelyobvious,suchaswhenanemployeeasksforanaccommodationundertheADA - andsubmitssupportingmedicaldocumentation.Seeid.at932.    Anemployer'smereknowledgeofthedisability'seffects,farremovedfromthedisability l ! itselfandwithnoobviouslinktothedisability,isgenerallyinsufficienttocreateliability.As R!" onecourthasaptlystated, [t]heADAdoesnotrequireclairvoyance.Seeid.at934. 8"#   AnumberofEighthCircuitdecisionssuggestthatanemployermusthaveactual #3% knowledgeofanemployee'sdisabilitybeforetheemployermaybeexposedtoliability.See, w$& e.g.,Millerv.NationalCasualtyCo.,61F.3d627,629-30(8thCir.1995)(employees ]%' complaintsofstressinsufficienttoputemployeronnoticeofanydisabilitywhenithadnotbeen C&( informedaboutadiagnosisofmanicdepression;toextentsymptomswereknown,theywerenot )' )  soobviouslymanifestationsofanunderlyingdisabilitythatitwouldbereasonabletoinferthat (!* [her]employeractuallyknewofthedisability(quotingHedberg,47F.3dat934));Webbv. ("+ MercyHosp.,102F.3d958,960(8thCir.1996)(holdingthattheemployerdidnotviolatethe )}#, ADAwhenitdischargedanursewhohadahistoryofhospitalizationfordepressionbecause *c$- therewasnoevidencethattheemployerknewofherdiagnosis);Hopperv.HallmarkCards, +I%. Inc.,87F.3d983,990(8thCir.1996)(upholdingsummaryjudgmentfortheemployerwherethe ^ plaintiffconcealedtheseverityofhisdisablingconditioneventhoughtheemployerhadsome D awarenessoftheplaintiffshealthproblems). * &  @  A QualifiedIndividualwithaDisability   %   InordertobeprotectedbytheADA,anindividualmustbea qualifiedindividualwitha  ~ disability.Tobeaqualifiedindividual,onemustbeabletoperformtheessentialfunctionsof  d thejobwithorwithoutreasonableaccommodations.42U.S.C.12111(8);seealsoCravensv.  J BlueCross&BlueShieldofKansasCity,214F.3d1011,1016(8thCir.2000)(determinationof  0  ' nqualificationinvolvestwo-foldinquiry--whetherthepersonmeetsthenecessaryprerequisitesfor t  thejob,suchaseducation,experienceandtraining,andwhethertheindividualcanperformthe Z  essentialjobfunctionswithorwithoutreasonableaccommodation);Treanorv.MCI @  TelecommunicationsCorp.,200F.3d570,574-76(8thCir.2000)(inorderforcourttoassess &  whethertheplaintiffis qualifiedwithinthemeaningoftheADA,theplaintiffmustidentify    particularjobsoughtordesired).   &   EssentialFunctionsoftheJob K    Thephrase essentialfunctionsmeansthefundamentaljobdutiesoftheemployment F positiontheplaintiffholdsorforwhichtheplaintiffhasapplied.Moritzv.FrontierAirlines, , ' KsInc.,147F.3d784,787(8thCir.1998). Essentialfunctionsdoesnotincludethemarginal p functionsoftheposition.Id.(citing29C.F.R.1630.2(n)(1)).TheEEOCregulationssuggest V thefollowingmaybeconsideredindeterminingtheessentialfunctionsofanemployment < position:(1)Theemployer'sjudgmentastowhichfunctionsofthejobareessential;(2)written " jobdescriptionspreparedforadvertisingorusedwheninterviewingapplicantsforthejob;(3)  theamountoftimespentonthejobperformingthefunctioninquestion;(4)consequencesofnot  requiringthepersontoperformthefunction;(5)thetermsofacollectivebargainingagreement v ifoneexists;(6)theworkexperienceofpersonswhohaveheldthejob;and/or(7)thecurrent \ workexperienceofpersonsinsimilarjobs.29C.F.R.1630.2(n)(3);Moritz,147F.3dat787. B SeealsoNesserv.TransWorldAirlines,Inc.,160F.3d442,445-46(8thCir.1998)( An ( employer'sidentificationofaposition's essentialfunctionsisgivensomedeferenceunderthe l  ADA.);Bensonv.NorthwestAirlines,Inc.,62F.3d1108,1113-14(8thCir.1995)(discussing R!   essentialfunctionsandrelevantEEOCregulations);Spanglerv.FederalHomeLoanBankof 8"! DesMoines,278F.3d847,850(8thCir.2002)(employeesabsenteeismpreventedherfrom #" performingessentialfunctionsofjob);Dropinskiv.DouglasCounty,298F.3d704,708-09 $# (8thCir.2002)(employeewhocouldnotperformseveralofthefunctionsofthewrittenjob $$ descriptionforanautomaticequipmentoperator,includingtasksentailingbending,twisting, %r% squattingandliftingoverfiftypounds,couldnotperformessentialfunctionsofthejob); &X & Alexanderv.TheNorthlandInn,321F.3d723,727(8thCir.2003)(vacuumingwasanessential '>!' functionofhousekeepingsupervisorposition;theplaintiff,whosephysiciansaidshecoulddono ($"( vacuuming,wasnotaqualifiedindividual);Rehrsv.TheIamsCo.,486F.3d353,357(8thCir. h) #) 2007)(shiftrotationwasanessentialfunctionofplaintiffsjob,wherealltechnicianpositions N*#* wereonrotatingshifts).Atemporaryaccommodationexemptinganemployeefromcertainjob 4+$+ requirementsdoesnotdemonstratethatthosejobfunctionsarenonessential.Id.at358. ,%,   Resolvingaconflictamongthecourtsofappeals,theUnitedStatesSupremeCourtheld ^ thatanADAplaintiff'sapplicationfororreceiptofbenefitsundertheSocialSecurityDisability D InsuranceprogramneitherautomaticallyestopstheplaintifffrompursuinghisorherADAclaim * norerectsastrongpresumptionagainsttheplaintiff'ssuccessundertheADA.Clevelandv.   PolicyManagementSystemsCorp.,526U.S.795,797(1999).Nonetheless,tosurviveamotion   forsummaryjudgment,theplaintiffmustexplainwhyhisorherclaimfordisabilitybenefitsis  ~ consistentwiththeclaimthatheorshecouldperformtheessentialfunctionsofhisorher  d previousjobwithorwithoutreasonableaccommodation.Id.;accordHillv.KansasCityArea  J TransportationAuthority,181F.3d891,893(8thCir.1999).SeealsoLloydv.HardinCounty,  0 Iowa,207F.3d1080,1084-85(8thCir.2000)(affirminggrantofsummaryjudgmentto t  employerinpartbecausetheplaintifffailedtoovercomepresumption,createdbyprior Z  allegationoftotaldisability,thatheorsheisnotaqualifiedindividualwithinthemeaningofthe @  ADA);Gilmorev.AT&T,319F.3d1042(8thCir.2003)(affirmingsummaryjudgmentfor &  employerwheretheplaintifffailedtoprovideanyevidencetoreconcileherADAclaimwithher    assertion,inapplicationforSocialSecurityDisability,thatshewasunabletoperformessential   functionsofherjob). z  &   ReasonableAccommodation 1   TheADArequiresemployerstomakereasonableaccommodationstoallowdisabled , individualstoperformtheessentialfunctionsoftheirpositions.Kielv.SelectArtificials,Inc., p ' 1 169F.3d1131,1136(8thCir.1999).Arefusaltoprovideareasonableaccommodationcan V amounttoaconstructivedemotion.SeeFenneyv.Dakota,Minnesota&EasternRailroadCo., < 327F.3d707,717-18(8thCir.2003). "   Althoughthereisnoprecisetestfordeterminingwhatconstitutesareasonable { accommodation,theADAdoesnotrequireanaccommodation thatwouldcauseother a employeestoworkharder,longer,orbedeprivedofopportunities.Rehrs,486F.3dat357.An G accommodationisunreasonableifitimposesunduefinancialoradministrativeburdensorifit - otherwiseimposesanunduehardshipontheoperationoftheemployersbusiness.42U.S.C.  12112(b)(5)(A);Bucklesv.FirstDataResources,Inc.,176F.3d1098,1101(8thCir.1999).  The unduehardshipdefenseisdiscussedbelow.     TheADAprovidesthattheconceptof reasonableaccommodationmayinclude: (A) 8"! makingexistingfacilitiesusedbyemployeesreadilyaccessibletoandusablebyindividualswith #" disabilities;and(B)jobrestructuring,part-timeormodifiedworkschedules,reassignmenttoa $# vacantposition,acquisitionormodificationofequipmentordevices,appropriateadjustmentor $$ modificationsorexaminations,trainingmaterialsorpolicies,theprovisionofqualifiedreaders %r% orinterpreters,andothersimilaraccommodationsforindividualswithdisabilities.42U.S.C. &X & 12111(9).SeealsoBensonv.NorthwestAirlines,Inc.,62F.3d1108,1112-14(8thCir.1995) '>!' (discussing reasonableaccommodationsandrelevantEEOCregulations). ($"(   Althoughpart-timeworkandjobrestructuringmaybeconsideredreasonable )}#* accommodations, [t]hisdoesnotmeananemployerisrequiredtoofferthoseaccommodations *c$+ ineverycase.Treanor,200F.3dat575.Moreover,althoughjobrestructuringisapossible +I%, accommodationundertheADA,anemployerneednotreallocatetheessentialfunctionsofajob. ^ Id.;Fjellestadv.PizzaHutofAm.,Inc.,188F.3d944,950(8thCir.1999);Lloyd,207F.3dat D 1084;Moritzv.FrontierAirlines,Inc.,147F.3d784,788(8thCir.1998);Benson,62F.3dat * 1112-13(citing42U.S.C.12111(9)(B);29C.F.R.1630.2(o)(2)(ii)).Inaddition,an   employerisnotobligatedtohireadditionalemployeesorreassignexistingworkerstoassistan   employee.Fjellestad,188F.3dat950(citingMoritz,124F.3dat788).  ~   ReassignmenttoavacantpositionisanotherpossibleaccommodationundertheADA. 5  Benson,62F.3dat1114(citing42U.S.C.12111(9)(B));29C.F.R.1630.2(o)(2)(ii));seealso   Fjellestad,188F.3dat950-51(theplaintiffcreatedgenuineissueofmaterialfactastowhether   employercouldhavereassignedhertoaspecific,vacantposition).Infact,theEighthCircuit   hasrecognizedthat,incertaincircumstances,reassignmenttoavacantpositionmaybe o   necessaryasareasonableaccommodation.SeeCravens,214F.3dat1018.Thescopeofthe U  reassignmentdutyislimited,however.Id.at1019.Forexample,reassignmentisan ;  accommodationof lastresort;thatis,the veryprospectofreassignmentdoesnotevenarise !  unlessaccommodationwithintheindividualscurrentpositionwouldposeanunduehardship. e  Id.Moreover,theADAdoesnotrequireanemployertocreateanewpositionasan K  accommodation.Id.;seealsoTreanor,200F.3dat575( [T]heADAdoesnotrequirean 1 employertocreateanewpart-timepositionwherenonepreviouslyexisted.);Fjellestad,188  F.3dat950(employernotrequiredtocreatenewpositionortocreatepermanentpositionoutof  atemporaryone).Anemployerwhohasanestablishedpolicyoffillingvacantpositionswith  themostqualifiedapplicantisnotrequiredtoassignthevacantpositiontoadisabledemployee k who,althoughqualified,isnotthemostqualifiedapplicant.Huberv.WalMartStores,486 Q F.3d480,48384(8thCir.2007).Inaddition,anemployerisnotrequiredto bumpanother 7 employeeinordertoreassignadisabledemployeetothatposition.Cravens,214F.3dat1019. { Promotionisnotrequired.Id.Finally,theemployeemustbe otherwisequalifiedforthe a reassignmentposition.Id. G   Anemployerisnotobligatedtoprovideanemployeetheaccommodationheorshe B requestsorprefers.See,e.g.,Cravens,214F.3dat1019.Theemployerneedonlyprovidesome ( reasonableaccommodation.Hennenfentv.MidDakotaClinic,P.C.,164F.3d419,422n.2(8th l  Cir.1998);accordKielv.SelectArtificials,Inc.,169F.3d1131,1137(8thCir.1999)( Ifmore R! thanoneaccommodationwouldallowtheindividualtoperformtheessentialfunctionsofthe 8"  position,theemployerprovidingtheaccommodationhastheultimatediscretiontochoose #! betweeneffectiveaccommodations,andmaychoosethelessexpensiveaccommodationorthe $" accommodationthatiseasierforittoprovide.). $#   Anemployersshowingthattherequestedaccommodationwouldviolatetherulesofan C&% existingsenioritysystemisordinarilyenoughtoshowthattheaccommodationisnot )' &  reasonableandtoentitletheemployertosummaryjudgment.USAirways,Inc.v.Barnett,535 (!' U.S.391,394,406(2002).Theemployeemaydefeatsummaryjudgmentbypresentingevidence ("( ofspecialcircumstancesthatmakeanexceptiontoaseniorityrule reasonableintheparticular )}#)  case.Id.at1519,1525.Examplesofspecialcircumstancesaretheemployersfairlyfrequent *c$* exerciseofarighttochangethesenioritysystemunilaterallyandasenioritysystemcontaining ^ exceptionssuchthatonefurtherexceptionisunlikelytomatter.Id.at1525. D    TheADAdoesnotrequirethepreferentialtreatmentofindividualswithdisabilitiesin ? termsofjobqualificationsasareasonableaccommodation.SeeHarrisv.PolkCounty,103F.3d  % 696,697(8thCir.1996)(employerlawfullydeniedjobtodisabledapplicantonbasisofcriminal i  recordwhichallegedlyhadresultedfrompriorpsychologicalproblemsbecause anemployer O  mayholddisabledemployeestothesamestandardoflaw-abidingconductasallother 5  employees).     Formorediscussionof reasonableaccommodationsundertheADA,seeinfraModel t  Instruction5.51CandCommitteeComments. Z  &   TheInteractiveProcess U    Beforeanemployermustmakeanaccommodationforthephysicalormentallimitation    ofanemployee,theemployermusthaveknowledgethatsuchalimitationexists.Millerv.   ' NationalCasualtyCo.,61F.3d627,629(8thCir.1995);accordCannicev.NorwestBankIowa z  N.A.,189F.3d723,726(8thCir.1999).Thus,itisgenerallytheresponsibilityoftheplaintiffto ` requesttheprovisionofareasonableaccommodation.Miller,61F.3dat630(citing29C.F.R. F 1630App.,1630.9);Cannice,189F.3dat727;accordBucklesv.FirstDataResources,Inc., , 176F.3d1098,1101(8thCir.1999)(Theburdenremainswiththeplaintiff toshowthata p reasonableaccommodation,allowinghimtoperformtheessentialfunctionsofhisjob,is V possible.);Molev.BuckhornRubberProds.,Inc.,165F.3d1212,1218(8thCir.1999) < (affirminggrantofsummaryjudgmentforthedefendantwhere only[theplaintiff]could " accuratelyidentifytheneedforaccommodationsspecifictoherjobandworkplaceandshe  failedtodoso);Wallinv.MinnesotaDep'tofCorrections,153F.3d681,689(8thCir.1998)  ( Wherethedisability,resultinglimitations,andnecessaryreasonableaccommodations,arenot v open,obvious,andapparenttotheemployer,asisoftenthecasewhenmentaldisabilitiesare \ involved,theinitialburdenrestsprimarilyupontheemployee...tospecificallyidentifythe B disabilityandresultinglimitations,andtosuggestthereasonableaccommodations.(citation ( omitted)). l    Oncetheplaintiffhasmadesucharequest,theADAanditsimplementingregulations !g! requirethatthepartiesengageinan interactiveprocesstodeterminewhatprecise "M" accommodationsarenecessary.See29C.F.R.1630.2(o)(3)&1630App.,1630.9;accord #3# Fjellestad,188F.3dat951.Thismeansthattheemployer shouldfirstanalyzetherelevantjob w$$ andthespecificlimitationsimposedbythedisabilityandthen,inconsultationwiththe ]%% individual,identifypotentialeffectiveaccommodations.SeeCannice,189F.3dat727.In C&& essence,theemployerandtheemployeemustworktogetheringoodfaithtohelpeachother )' ' determinewhataccommodationisnecessary.Id. (!(   Severalcourts,however,haveheldthatanemployer'sfailuretoengageinaninteractive h) #* process,standingalone,isinsufficienttoexposetheemployertoliabilityundertheADA.See, N*#+ e.g.,Barnettv.U.S.Air,Inc.,157F.3d744,752(9thCir.1998)(andcasescitedtherein);accord 4+$, Cravens,214F.3dat1021;Fjellestad,188F.3dat952( Wetendtoagreewiththosecourtsthat ,%- holdthatthereisnoperseliabilityundertheADAifanemployerfailstoengageinan ^ interactiveprocess.);Cannice,189F.3dat727. D   TheEighthCircuithasrecognizedthatalthoughanemployerwillnotbeheldliableunder ? theADAforfailingtoengageinaninteractiveprocessifnoreasonableaccommodationwas  % possible,thefailureofanemployertoengageinaninteractiveprocesstodeterminewhether i  reasonableaccommodationsarepossibleisprimafacieevidencethattheemployermaybeacting O  inbadfaith.SeeFjellestad,188F.3dat952;Cravens,214F.3dat1021(Toestablishthatan 5  employerfailedtoparticipateinaninteractiveprocess,adisabledemployeemustshowthe   employerknewaboutthedisability;theemployeerequestedaccommodationorassistance;the   employerdidnotmakeagoodfaithefforttoassisttheemployee;andtheemployeecouldhave   beenreasonablyaccommodatedbutfortheemployerslackofgoodfaith.).Accordingly,the o  EighthCircuithasheldthatsummaryjudgmentistypicallyprecludedwhenthereisagenuine U  disputeastowhethertheemployeractedingoodfaithandengagedintheinteractiveprocessof ;  seekingreasonableaccommodations.SeeCravens,214F.3dat1022;Fjellestad,188F.3dat !  953;accordDeanev.PoconoMedicalCenter,142F.3d138(3dCir.1998)(singletelephone e  conversationbetweentheplaintiffandemployer hardlysatisfiesourstandardthattheemployer K  makereasonableeffortstoassisttheemployee[and]tocommunicatewithhimingoodfaith). 1   Ontheotherhand,summaryjudgmentmaybeappropriatewheretheemployeefailsto , engageintheinteractiveprocess.See,e.g.,Treanor,200F.3dat575(theplaintifffailedto p createagenuinequestionoffactindisputeonissueofinteractiveprocesswheretheplaintiff V requestedpart-timework,thedefendantindicatedthatnosuchpositionexisted,theplaintiff < failedtoidentifyanyparticular suitablepositionandtherewasnoevidencethatthedefendant " actedinbadfaithbyfailingtoinvestigatefurthertheexistenceofareasonableaccommodation);  Websterv.MethodistOccupationalHealthCenters,Inc.,141F.3d1236(7thCir.1998)(no  liabilitywhereemployeefailedtoparticipateintheinteractiveprocessrequiredundertheADA); v Stewartv.HappyHerman'sCheshireBridge,Inc.,117F.3d1278,1286(11thCir.1997)(no \ liabilitywheretheplaintifffailedtoengageininteractiveprocessafteremployeroffered B accommodationsinthatshedidnotprovideemployerwithanysubstantivereasonsastowhyall ( fiveoftheprofferedaccommodationswereunreasonable);Gerdesv.Swift-Eckrich,Inc.,949F. l  Supp.1386(N.D.Iowa1996)(summaryjudgmentforemployerappropriatewhereresponsibility R! forcausingthebreakdownoftheinteractiveprocessrestedplainlyontheplaintiff),affd,125 8"  F.3d634(8thCir.1997). #!   Similarly,summaryjudgmentmaybeappropriateintheabsenceofevidencethatthe w$# employerfailedtomakeagoodfaithefforttoarriveatareasonableaccommodationforthe ]%$ plaintiff.See,e.g.,Mole,165F.3dat1218(affirminggrantofsummaryjudgmentforemployer C&% where thereisnoevidence[theemployer]failedtomakeagoodfaithreasonableefforttohelp )' & [theplaintiff]determineifotheraccommodationsmightbeneeded.);Beckv.Universityof (!' WisconsinBoardofRegents,75F.3d1130,1137(7thCir.1996)( [W]here,ashere,the ("( employerdoesnotobstructtheprocess,butinsteadmakesreasonableeffortsbothto )}#) communicatewiththeemployeeandprovideaccommodationbasedontheinformationit *c$* possessed,ADAliabilitysimplydoesnotfollow.). +I%+ &   @! StatutoryDefenses  ^   TheADAspecificallyprovidesforthefollowingdefenses:(1)unduehardship(42 Y U.S.C.12112(b)(5)(A));(2)directthreattothehealthorsafetyofothersintheworkplace(42 ? ' ^ U.S.C.12113(b));(3)employmentqualificationstandard,testorselectioncriterionthatis  % job-relatedandconsistentwithbusinessnecessity(42U.S.C.12113(a));(4)religiousentity(42 i  U.S.C.12113(d)(1));(5)infectiousorcommunicabledisease(42U.S.C.12113(e)(2));and O  (6)illegaluseofdrugs(42U.S.C.12114(a)).Thestatutorydefensesmostlikelytoleadto 5  instructionissuesareunduehardshipanddirectthreat.SeeinfraModelInstructions5.53Aand   5.53B.TheCommitteeassumesthattheburdenofprovingandpleadingthesedefensesisonthe   defendant.   &   UndueHardship @    Assetforthabove,theADAprovidesthatanemployerneednotprovideareasonable ;  accommodationifitcanprovethattheaccommodationwouldimposeanunduehardshiponthe !  ' @Koperationofitsbusiness.Theterm unduehardshipisdefinedas anactionrequiring e  significantdifficultyorexpense,whichistobeconsideredinlightofthefollowingfactors:(i) K  thenatureandcostoftheaccommodation;(ii)theemployersfinancialresourcesatthefacility 1 inquestion;(iii)theemployersoverallfinancialresources;and(iv)thefiscalrelationshipofthe  facilityinquestionwiththeemployersoverallbusiness.42U.S.C.12111(10).  &   DirectThreat V   TheADAspecificallypermitsemployerstorejectapplicantsandterminateemployees Q whoposea directthreattothehealthorsafetyofothersintheworkplaceifsuchdirectthreat 7 ' Vcannotbeeliminatedbyreasonableaccommodation.42U.S.C.12113(b);seeWoodv.Omaha { Sch.Dist.,25F.3d667(8thCir.1994)(insulin-dependentindividualswithpoorlycontrolled a diabeteswerenotqualifiedtoserveasschoolbusdrivers). G   Thecourtsalsohaveusedthe directthreatdoctrinetosupporttheterminationsof B individualswhoassaultorthreatencoworkers.Forexample,inWilliamsv.Widnall,79F.3d ( 1003(10thCir.1996),thecourtupheldtheterminationofanalcoholicemployeewhothreatened l   hissupervisor.SeealsoCrawfordv.Runyon,79F.3d743(8thCir.1996)(upholdingdistrict R!! courtsfindingofnopretextinterminationofpostalworkerwhothreatenedtokillhis 8"" supervisor);Fentonv.PritchardCorp.,926F.Supp.1437(D.Kan.1996)(upholding ## terminationofdisgruntledemployeewhothreatenedto gopostal). $$   TheSupremeCourt,inChevronU.S.A.,Inc.v.Echazabal,536U.S.73,78(2002),held ]%& thatthestatutoryreferencetothreatsto otherindividualsintheworkplacedidnotprecludethe C&' EEOCfromadoptingaregulationthat,intheCourtswords, carriesthedefenseonestep )' ( further,byallowinganemployertoadoptaqualificationstandardrequiringthatanindividual (!) notposeadirectthreattotheindividualsownhealthorsafety,aswellasthehealthorsafetyof ("*  others.29C.F.R.1630.15(b)(2).Seealso29C.F.R.1630.2(r). )}#+ &      @ ProceduresandRemedies  ^   Pursuantto42U.S.C.12117,ADAcasesgenerallyadopttheproceduresandremedy Y schemesfromTitleVIIcases.Doanev.CityofOmaha,115F.3d624,629(8thCir.1997). ? ' ^/Accordingly,anEEOCchargeandright-to-suenoticetypicallywillbenecessarypreconditions  % toanADAclaim.See42U.S.C.2000e-5.ByvirtueoftheCivilRightsActof1991,damages i  undertheADAgenerallyarethesameasthoseavailableunderTitleVII.Thus,potential O  remediesinADAcasesincludebackpay,compensatorydamages,punitivedamages,and 5  attorneysfees.See42U.S.C.1981a.     InADAcases,aplaintiffprevailsontheissueofliabilitybyshowingthatdiscrimination t  wasa motivatingfactorintheadverseemploymentdecision.Pedigov.P.A.M.Transport, Z  Inc.,60F.3d1300,1301(8thCir.1995).SeealsoDesertPalace,Inc.v.Costa,539U.S.90,97 @  102(2003)(holdingthat motivatingfactoristhestandardforliabilityinaTitleVII &  discriminationcase).Theemployermayneverthelessavoidanawardofdamagesor    reinstatementbyshowingthatitwouldhavetakenthesameactionintheabsenceofthe   impermissiblemotivatingfactor.Pedigo,60F.3dat1301;Doane,115F.3dat629.Insuch z  cases, remediesavailablearelimitedtoadeclaratoryjudgment,aninjunctionthatdoesnot ` includeanorderforreinstatementorforbackpay,andsomeattorneysfeesandcosts.Doane, F 115F.3dat629(quotingPedigo,60F.3dat1301)(citing42U.S.C.2000e-5(g)(2)(B)(i)& , (ii)).ButseePedigov.P.A.M.Transport,Inc.,98F.3d396,397-98(8thCir.1996)(discussing p prevailingpartyforpurposesofawardingattorneysfees). V   Inaddition,theADAprovidesa goodfaithdefenseifanemployer demonstratesgood Q faitheffortstofindareasonableaccommodationwiththeplaintiff.See42U.S.C.1981a(a)(3) 7 andModelInstruction5.55,infra.Ifthejuryfindsthattheemployerhasmadesuchefforts,the { plaintiffcannotrecovercompensatoryorpunitivedamages.See42U.S.C.1981a(a)(3).  a i @  %   5.51AADA-DISPARATETREATMENT-ELEMENTS(ActualDisability) c  ^   Yourverdictmustbefortheplaintiffandagainstthedefendantifallofthefollowing * elementshavebeenproved1:  %   First,theplaintiffhad(specifyallegedimpairment(s));2and  ~   Second,such(specifyallegedimpairment(s))substantiallylimitedtheplaintiff'sabilityto 5  (specifymajorlifeactivityoractivitiesaffected);and3  0    Third,thedefendant(specifyaction(s)takenwithrespecttotheplaintiff)4;and     Fourth,theplaintiffcouldhaveperformedtheessentialfunctions5of(specifyjobheldor @  positionsought)6atthetimethedefendant(specifyaction(s)takenwithrespecttotheplaintiff) ;  and     Fifth,thedefendantknew7oftheplaintiff's(specifyallegedimpairment(s))andthe K  plaintiff's(specifyallegedimpairment(s))[wasamotivatingfactor]8[playedapart]9inthe F defendant'sdecisionto(specifyaction(s)takenwithrespecttotheplaintiff).    Ifanyoftheaboveelementshasnotbeenproved,[orifthedefendantisentitledtoa V verdictunder(describeinstruction),]10thenyourverdictmustbeforthedefendant.[Youmay Q findthattheplaintiff's(specifyallegedimpairment(s))[wasamotivatingfactor][playedapart]  inthedefendant's(decision)11ifithasbeenprovedthatthedefendant'sstatedreason(s)forits a  (decision)[(is)(are)]apretexttohidediscrimination.]12 \" &    @$ NotesonUse  $   1.ModelInstruction3.04(BurdenofProof)tellsthejurythatsomethingisprovedonly l & ifthejuryfindsitismorelikelytruethannottrue.Thephrase greaterweightoftheevidence R!' is' )notnecessaryhere.ItcanbeincludedinInstruction3.04ifdesiredbythecourt. 8"(   2.Inatypicalcase,theplaintiffwillallegediscriminationonthebasisofanactual #3* disability.See42U.S.C.12102(1)(A).Insuchcases,thenameoftheconditionisnot w$+ essentialaslongasthespecifiedconditionfitsthedefinitionofanimpairment,asthattermis ]%, usedintheADA.SeeDoanev.CityofOmaha,115F.3d624,627(8thCir.1997)( [t]he C&- determinationofwhetheranindividualhasadisabilityisnotnecessarilybasedonthenameor )' . diagnosisoftheimpairmentthepersonhas,butratherontheeffectofthatimpairmentonthelife (!/ oftheindividual.)(quoting29C.F.R.1630App.,1630.2(j)).Excessivedetailisneither ("0 necessarynordesirableandmaybeinterpretedbytheappellatecourtasacommentonthe )}#1 evidence.SeeCavinessv.Nucor-YamatoSteelCo.,105F.3d1216,1222(8thCir.1997) *c$2 (cautioningdistrictcourttobemindfulofplacing undueemphasisononeparty'sevidence). +I%3   AsdiscussedintheCommitteeComments,however,iftheplaintiffcontendsthatheor ^ shehadarecordofadisability,thelanguageoftheinstructionwillhavetobemodified.See42 D U.S.C.12102(1)(B).Forcasesinwhichtheplaintiffallegesthatheorshewasregardedbythe * defendantashavingadisability,seeinfraModelInstruction5.51B.Seeid.12102(1)(C).     3.Thiselementisdesignedtosubmittheissueofwhethertheplaintiffsalleged i  impairmentconstitutesa disabilityundertheADA.Ifnecessary,thephrase substantially O  limitsmaybedefined.SeeinfraModelInstruction5.52C. 5    4.Inserttheappropriatelanguagedependingonthenatureofthecase(e.g., discharge,  0   failuretohire, failuretopromote,or demotioncase).Wheretheplaintiffresignedbut t  claimsa constructivedischarge,thisinstructionshouldbemodified.SeeinfraModel Z  Instruction5.93. @    5.Thiselementisdesignedtosubmittheissueofwhethertheplaintiffisa qualified ;  individualundertheADA.Ifnecessary,thephrase essentialfunctionsmaybedefined.See !  infraModelInstruction5.52B. e    6.Inadischargeordemotioncase,specifythepositionheldbytheplaintiff.Ina ` failure-to-hireorfailure-to-promotecase,specifythepositionforwhichtheplaintiffapplied. F SeeTreanorv.MCITelecommunicationsCorp.,200F.3d570,575-76(8thCir.2000)(agreeing , withdistrictcourtsassessmentthatitcouldnotevaluatewhethertheplaintiffwasaqualified p individualwithinthemeaningoftheADAbecausetheplaintifffailedtoidentifyanyparticular V jobforwhichshewasqualified). <   7.Thislanguagemayneedtobemodifiedifthereisadisputewhetherthedefendanthad 7 adequateknowledgeoftheplaintiffsimpairment.SeeWebbv.MercyHosp.,102F.3d958,960 { (8thCir.1996)(holdingthatanemployerdidnotviolatetheADAwhenitdischargedanurse a whohadahistoryofhospitalizationfordepressionbecausetherewasnoevidencethatthe G employerknewofherdiagnosis);Hopperv.HallmarkCards,Inc.,87F.3d983,990(8thCir. - 1996)(upholdingsummaryjudgmentfortheemployerwheretheplaintiffconcealedtheseverity  ofherdisablingconditioneventhoughtheemployerhadsomeawarenessoftheplaintiffshealth  problems).SeealsoMillerv.NationalCasualtyCo.,61F.3d627,630(8thCir.1995)    (employeescomplaintsofstressinsufficienttoputemployeronnoticeofanydisabilitywhenit !g! hadnotbeeninformedaboutadiagnosisofmanicdepression;toextentsymptomswereknown, "M" theywerenot soobviouslymanifestationsofanunderlyingdisabilitythatitwouldbe #3# reasonabletoinferthat[her]employeractuallyknewofthedisability(quotingHedbergv. w$$ IndianaBellTele.Co.,47F.3d928,934(7thCir.1995))).Formorediscussiononthisissue,see ]%% suprasection5.50. C&&   8. Motivatingfactoristheproperphrasetouseintheinstruction,seePedigov.P.A.M. '>!( TransportInc.,60F.3d1300,1301(8thCir.1995),andtheCommitteerecommendsthatthe ($")  definitionsetforthinModelInstruction5.96,infra,begiven. h) #*   9.SeeinfraModelInstruction5.96,whichdefines motivatingfactorintermsof ^ whetherthecharacteristic playedapartoraroleinthedefendantsdecision.Thephrase D  motivatingfactorneednotbedefinedifthedefinitionitselfisusedintheelementinstruction. *    10.Thislanguageshouldbeusedwhenthedefendantissubmittinganaffirmative  % defense.TheADAspecificallyprovidesforthefollowingaffirmativedefenses:directthreat(42 i  U.S.C.12113(b));religiousentity(42U.S.C.12113(d)(1));infectiousorcommunicable O  disease(42U.S.C.12113(e)(2));illegaluseofdrugs(42U.S.C.12114(a));unduehardship(42 5  U.S.C.12112(b)(5)(A));andemploymentqualificationstandard,testorselectioncriterionthat   isjob-relatedandconsistentwithbusinessnecessity(42U.S.C.12113(a)).     11.Thisinstructionmakesreferencestothedefendant's"decision."Itmaybemodified Z  ifanothertermsuchas"actions"or"conduct"wouldbemoreappropriate. @    12.Thissentencemaybeadded,ifappropriate.SeeinfraModelInstruction5.95and ;  Moorev.RobertsonFireProtectionDist.,249F.3d786,790n.9(8thCir.2001),whichstates !   [w]edonotexpressanyviewastowhetheriteverwouldbereversibleerrorforatrialcourtto e  failtogiveapretextinstruction,thoughwetendtodoubtit. K  &   @--! CommitteeComments  F   Thisinstructionisdesignedtosubmitcasesinwhichtheprimaryissueiswhetherthe  plaintiff'sdisabilitywasamotivatingfactorintheemploymentdecision.Theinstructionmaybe  '  modifiediftheplaintiffallegesthatheorshehasarecordofadisability.See42U.S.C. k 12102(1)(B);29C.F.R.1630.2(g).Iftheplaintiffallegesthatheorshedidnothavean Q actualdisability,butthatheorshewasregardedbythedefendantashavingadisability,see42 7 U.S.C.12102(1)(C),theappropriateinstructionforuseisModelInstruction5.51B,infra. {   TheMcDonnellDouglasburden-shiftingschemeappliesinanalyzingclaimsof v intentionaldiscriminationundertheADA.See,e.g.,Christopherv.Adam'sMarkHotels,137 \ F.3d1069,1071(8thCir.1998)(citingMcDonnellDouglasCorp.v.Green,411U.S.792, B 802-04(1973)).Itisunnecessaryandinadvisable,however,toinstructthejuryregardingthe ( McDonnellDouglasanalysis.Langv.StarHerald,107F.3d1308,1312(8thCir.1997) l   ( Referencetothiscomplexanalysisisnotnecessary...orevenrecommended.);Williamsv. R!! ValentecKisco,Inc.,964F.2d723,731(8thCir.1992)( [T]heMcDonnellDouglas'ritualisnot 8"" wellsuitedasadetailedinstructiontothejury'andaddslittleunderstandingtodecidingthe ## ultimatequestionofdiscrimination.)(quotingGrebinv.SiouxFallsIndep.Sch.Dist.No.49-5, $$ 779F.2d18,20(8thCir.1985)).Instead,thesubmissiontothejuryshouldfocusontheultimate $% issuesofwhetherintentionaldiscriminationwasamotivatingfactorinthedefendant's %r& employmentdecision.SeeLang,107F.3dat1312.  &X ' j @  %   5.51BADA-DISPARATETREATMENT-ELEMENTS(PerceivedDisability) 1   ^   Yourverdictmustbefortheplaintiffandagainstthedefendantifallofthefollowing * elementshavebeenproved1:  %   First,[theplaintiffhador][thedefendantkneworbelievedplaintiffhad](specifyalleged  ~ impairment(s))2;and 5    Second,thedefendant(specifyaction(s)takenwithrespecttotheplaintiff)3;and  0    Third,theplaintiffcouldhaveperformedtheessentialfunctions4of(specifyjobheldor   positionsought)5atthetimethedefendant(specifyaction(s)takenwithrespecttotheplaintiff); @  and ;    Fourth,thedefendantsbeliefregardingplaintiff's(specifyallegedimpairment(s))[wasa   motivatingfactor]6[playedapart]7inthedefendant'sdecisionto(specifyaction(s)takenwith K  respecttotheplaintiff). F   Ifanyoftheaboveelementshasnotbeenproved,[orifthedefendantisentitledtoa  verdictunder(describeinstruction),]8thenyourverdictmustbeforthedefendant.[Youmay V findthattheplaintiff's(specifyallegedimpairment(s))[wasamotivatingfactor][playedapart] Q inthedefendant's(decision)9ifithasbeenprovedthatthedefendant'sstatedreason(s)forits  (decision)[(is)(are)]apretexttohidediscrimination.]10 a  &    @$ NotesonUse  \"   1.ModelInstruction3.04(BurdenofProof)tellsthejurythatsomethingisprovedonly $ ifthejuryfindsitismorelikelytruethannottrue.Thephrase greaterweightoftheevidence % is'  notnecessaryhere.ItcanbeincludedinInstruction3.04ifdesiredbythecourt.  &   2.Itmaybethatinthemajorityof perceiveddisabilitycases,theplaintiffhasan 8"( actualimpairment,althoughtheimpairmentdoesnotsubstantiallylimitanyoftheplaintiff's #) majorlifeactivities.See42U.S.C.12102(3)(A)(explainingthatanindividualmeetsthe $* requirementof beingregardedashavingsuchanimpairmentiftheindividualestablishesthat $+ heorshehasbeensubjectedtoanactionprohibitedundertheADAbecauseofanactualor %r, perceivedphysicalormentalimpairment,whetherornottheimpairmentlimitsorisperceivedto &X - limitamajorlifeactivity).Animpairmentthatistransitory(havinganactualorexpected '>!. durationofsixmonthsorless)andminordoesnotqualifyasaperceiveddisability.42U.S.C. ($"/ 12102(3)(B). h) #0   Thenameoftheconditionisnotessentialaslongasthespecifiedconditionfitsthe *c$2 definitionofanimpairmentasusedintheADA.SeeDoanev.CityofOmaha,115F.3d624, +I%3 627(8thCir.1997)( [t]hedeterminationofwhetheranindividualhasadisabilityisnot ^ necessarilybasedonthenameordiagnosisoftheimpairmentthepersonhas,butratheronthe D effectofthatimpairmentonthelifeoftheindividual.)(quoting29C.F.R.1630App., * 1630.2(j)).Excessivedetailisneithernecessarynordesirableandmaybeinterpretedbythe   appellatecourtasacommentontheevidence.SeeCavinessv.Nucor-YamatoSteelCo.,105   F.3d1216,1222(8thCir.1997)(cautioningdistrictcourttobemindfulofplacing undue  ~ emphasisononeparty'sevidence).  d   3.Inserttheappropriatelanguagedependingonthenatureofthecase(e.g., discharge,    failuretohire, failuretopromote,or demotioncase).Wheretheplaintiffresignedbut   claimsa constructivedischarge,thisinstructionshouldbemodified.SeeinfraModel   Instruction5.57. o    4.Thiselementisdesignedtosubmittheissueofwhethertheplaintiffisa qualified &  individualundertheADA.Ifnecessary,thephrase essentialfunctionsmaybedefined.See    infraModelInstruction5.52B.     5.Inadischargeordemotioncase,specifythepositionheldbytheplaintiff.Ina K  failure-to-hireorfailure-to-promotecase,specifythepositionforwhichtheplaintiffapplied. 1 SeeTreanorv.MCITelecommunicationsCorp.,200F.3d570,575-76(8thCir.2000)(agreeing  withdistrictcourtsassessmentthatitcouldnotevaluatewhethertheplaintiffwasaqualified  individualwithinthemeaningoftheADAbecausetheplaintifffailedtoidentifyanyparticular  jobforwhichshewasqualified). k   6. Motivatingfactoristheproperphrasetouseintheinstruction,seePedigov.P.A.M. " TransportInc.,60F.3d1300,1301(8thCir.1995),andtheCommitteerecommendsthatthe  definitionsetforthinModelInstruction5.96,infra,begiven.    7.SeeinfraModelInstruction5.96,whichdefines motivatingfactorintermsof G whetherthecharacteristic playedapartoraroleinthedefendantsdecision.Thephrase -  motivatingfactorneednotbedefinedifthedefinitionitselfisusedintheelementinstruction.    8.Thislanguageshouldbeusedwhenthedefendantissubmittinganaffirmative l   defense.TheADAspecificallyprovidesforthefollowingaffirmativedefenses:directthreat(42 R!! U.S.C.12113(b));religiousentity(42U.S.C.12113(d)(1));infectiousorcommunicable 8"" disease(42U.S.C.12113(e)(2));illegaluseofdrugs(42U.S.C.12114(a));unduehardship(42 ## U.S.C.12112(b)(5)(A));andemploymentqualificationstandard,testorselectioncriterionthat $$ isjob-relatedandconsistentwithbusinessnecessity(42U.S.C.12113(a)). $%   9.Thisinstructionmakesreferencestothedefendant's"decision."Itmaybemodifiedif C&' anothertermsuchas"actions"or"conduct"wouldbemoreappropriate. )' (   10.Thissentencemaybeadded,ifappropriate.SeeinfraModelInstruction5.95and ($"* Moorev.RobertsonFireProtectionDist.,249F.3d786,790n.9(8thCir.2001),whichstates h) #+  [w]edonotexpressanyviewastowhetheriteverwouldbereversibleerrorforatrialcourtto N*#, failtogiveapretextinstruction,thoughwetendtodoubtit. 4+$- &   @--! CommitteeComments  ^   Thisinstructionisdesignedtosubmitcasesinwhichtheprimaryissueiswhetherthe Y plaintiff'sperceiveddisabilitywasamotivatingfactorintheemploymentdecision.See42 ? ' ^. U.S.C.12102(1)(C).  %   TheMcDonnellDouglasburden-shiftingschemeappliesinanalyzingclaimsof  ~ intentionaldiscriminationundertheADA.See,e.g.,Christopherv.Adam'sMarkHotels,137  d F.3d1069,1071(8thCir.1998)(citingMcDonnellDouglasCorp.v.Green,411U.S.792,  J 802-04(1973)).Itisunnecessaryandinadvisable,however,toinstructthejuryregardingthe  0  McDonnellDouglasanalysis.Langv.StarHerald,107F.3d1308,1312(8thCir.1997) t  ( Referencetothiscomplexanalysisisnotnecessary...orevenrecommended.).  Z  k @CC %   5.51A/B(1)ADA-DISPARATETREATMENT@@aa# SAMEDECISION nC3   ^   IfyoufindinfavoroftheplaintiffunderInstruction___,1thenyoumustanswerthe * followingquestionintheverdictform[s]:Hasitbeenproved2thatthedefendantwouldhave  % (specifyactiontakenwithrespecttotheplaintiff)evenifthedefendanthadnotconsideredthe  ~ plaintiffs(specifyallegedimpairment)? 5  &   @$ NotesonUse   0    1.Fillinthenumberortitleoftheessentialelementsinstructionhere.   ' 5   2.ModelInstruction3.04(BurdenofProof)tellsthejurythatsomethingisprovedonly @  ifthejuryfindsitismorelikelytruethannottrue.Thephrase greaterweightoftheevidence &  isnotnecessaryhere.ItcanbeincludedinInstruction3.04ifdesiredbythecourt.    &   @--! CommitteeComments  e    Ifaplaintiffprevailsontheissueofliabilitybyshowingthatdiscriminationwasa ` "motivatingfactor,"thedefendantneverthelessmayavoidanawardofdamagesorreinstatement F ' e7 byshowingthatitwouldhavetakenthesameaction"intheabsenceoftheimpermissible , motivatingfactor."See42U.S.C.2000e-5(g)(2)(B).Thisinstructionisdesignedtosubmit p this"samedecision"issuetothejury.SeeDoanev.CityofOmaha,115F.3d624,629(8thCir. V 1997)(discussingremediesavailablein"mixedmotive"caseunderADA);Pedigov.P.A.M. < Transport,Inc.,60F.3d1300,1301(8thCir.1995)(same).SeealsoPedigov.P.A.M. " Transport,Inc.,98F.3d396,396-97(8thCir.1996)(discussing prevailingpartyforpurposes  ofawardingattorneysfees).   l @  %   5.51CADA-REASONABLEACCOMMODATIONCASES ^ @ (SpecificAccommodationIdentified) ni<   D   Yourverdictmustbefortheplaintiffandagainstthedefendantifallofthefollowing   elementshavebeenproved1: i    First,theplaintiffhad(specifyallegedimpairment(s));2and  d   Second,such(specifyallegedimpairment(s))substantiallylimitedtheplaintiff'sabilityto    (specifymajorlifeactivityoractivitiesaffected);and3 t    Third,thedefendantknew4oftheplaintiffs(specifyallegedimpairment(s));and o    Fourth,theplaintiffcouldhaveperformedtheessentialfunctions5ofthe(specifyjob &  heldorpositionsought)atthetimethedefendant(specifyaction(s)takenwithrespecttothe !  plaintiff)iftheplaintiffhadbeenprovidedwith(specifyaccommodation(s)identifiedbythe z  plaintiff)6;and 1   Fifth,providing(specifyaccommodation(s)identifiedbytheplaintiff)wouldhavebeen , reasonable;and    Sixth,thedefendantfailedtoprovide(specifyaccommodation(s)identifiedbythe < plaintiff)andfailedtoprovideanyotherreasonableaccommodation.7 7   Ifanyoftheaboveelementshasnotbeenproved,[orifthedefendantisentitledtoa  verdictunder(describeinstruction),]8thenyourverdictmustbeforthedefendant. G! &    @$ NotesonUse  B#   1.ModelInstruction3.04(BurdenofProof)tellsthejurythatsomethingisprovedonly % ifthejuryfindsitismorelikelytruethannottrue.Thephrase greaterweightoftheevidence  & is' C notnecessaryhere.ItcanbeincludedinInstruction3.04ifdesiredbythecourt. !g'   2.Thenameoftheconditionisnotessentialaslongasthespecifiedconditionfitsthe #) definitionofanimpairmentasusedintheADA.SeeDoanev.CityofOmaha,115F.3d624, $* 627(8thCir.1997)( [t]hedeterminationofwhetheranindividualhasadisabilityisnot $+ necessarilybasedonthenameordiagnosisoftheimpairmentthepersonhas,butratheronthe %r, effectofthatimpairmentonthelifeoftheindividual.)(quoting29C.F.R.1630App., &X - 1630.2(j)).Excessivedetailisneithernecessarynordesirableandmaybeinterpretedbythe '>!. appellatecourtasacommentontheevidence.SeeCavinessv.Nucor-YamatoSteelCo.,105 ($"/ F.3d1216,1222(8thCir.1997)(cautioningdistrictcourttobemindfulofplacing undue h) #0  emphasisononeparty'sevidence). N*#1   3.Thiselementisdesignedtosubmittheissueofwhethertheplaintiffsalleged ^  impairmentconstitutesa disabilityundertheADA.Ifnecessary,thephrase substantially D limitsmaybedefined.SeeinfraModelInstruction5.52C. *   4.Thislanguagemayneedtobemodifiedifthereisadisputewhetherthedefendanthad  % adequateknowledgeoftheplaintiffsimpairment.SeeWebbv.MercyHosp.,102F.3d958,960 i  (8thCir.1996)(holdingthatanemployerdidnotviolatetheADAwhenitdischargedanurse O  whohadahistoryofhospitalizationfordepressionbecausetherewasnoevidencethatthe 5  employerknewofherdiagnosis);Hopperv.HallmarkCards,Inc.,87F.3d983,990(8thCir.   1996)(upholdingsummaryjudgmentfortheemployerwheretheplaintiffconcealedtheseverity   ofherdisablingconditioneventhoughtheemployerhadsomeawarenessoftheplaintiffshealth   problems).SeealsoMillerv.NationalCasualtyCo.,61F.3d627,630(8thCir.1995) o  (employeescomplaintsofstressinsufficienttoputemployeronnoticeofanydisabilitywhenit U  hadnotbeeninformedaboutadiagnosisofmanicdepression;toextentsymptomswereknown, ;  theywerenot soobviouslymanifestationsofanunderlyingdisabilitythatitwouldbe !  reasonabletoinferthat[her]employeractuallyknewofthedisability(quotingHedbergv. e  IndianaBellTele.Co.,47F.3d928,934(7thCir.1995))).Formorediscussiononthisissue,see K  suprasection5.50. 1   5.Thiselementisdesignedtosubmittheissueofwhethertheplaintiffisa qualified , individualundertheADA.Ifnecessary,thephrase essentialfunctionsmaybedefined.See p infraModelInstruction5.52B. V   6.Itmaybethatinthemajorityofcases,theplaintiffrequeststheprovisionofaspecific Q accommodation(e.g.,amodifiedworkschedule).Insomecases,however,theplaintiffmay 7 simplynotifytheemployerofhisorherneedforanaccommodationingeneral.Insuchcases, { thelanguageoftheinstructionshouldbemodified. a   7.Anemployerisnotobligatedtoprovideanemployeetheaccommodationheorshe \ requestsorprefers.See,e.g.,Cravens,214F.3dat1019.Theemployerneedonlyprovidesome B reasonableaccommodation.Hennenfentv.MidDakotaClinic,P.C.,164F.3d419,422n.2(8th ( Cir.1998);accordKielv.SelectArtificials,Inc.,169F.3d1131,1137(8thCir.1999)( Ifmore l  thanoneaccommodationwouldallowtheindividualtoperformtheessentialfunctionsofthe R!  position,'theemployerprovidingtheaccommodationhastheultimatediscretiontochoose 8"! betweeneffectiveaccommodations,andmaychoosethelessexpensiveaccommodationorthe #" accommodationthatiseasierforittoprovide.'). $#   8.Thislanguageshouldbeusedwhenthedefendantissubmittinganaffirmative ]%% defense.TheADAspecificallyprovidesforthefollowingaffirmativedefenses:directthreat(42 C&& U.S.C.12113(b));religiousentity(42U.S.C.12113(d)(1));infectiousorcommunicable )' ' disease(42U.S.C.12113(e)(2));illegaluseofdrugs(42U.S.C.12114(a));unduehardship (!( (42U.S.C.12112(b)(5)(A));andemploymentqualificationstandard,testorselectioncriterion (")  thatisjob-relatedandconsistentwithbusinessnecessity(42U.S.C.12113(a)). )}#* &      @--! CommitteeComments  ^   TheADArequiresemployerstomakereasonableaccommodationstoallowdisabled Y individualstoperformtheessentialfunctionsoftheirpositions.Kielv.SelectArtificials,Inc., ? ' ^Z 169F.3d1131,1136(8thCir.1999).Althoughmanyindividualswithdisabilitiesarequalified  % toperformtheessentialfunctionsofjobswithoutneedofanyaccommodation,thisinstructionis i  designedforuseincasesinwhichthenatureorextentofaccommodationsprovidedtoan O  otherwisequalifiedindividualisindispute.Foradiscussionofthe interactiveprocessin 5  whichemployersandemployeesmayberequiredtoengagetodeterminethenatureandextentof   accommodationsneeded,seesuprasection5.50.     Theterm accommodationmeansmakingmodificationstotheworkplacewhichallows Z  apersonwithadisabilitytoperformtheessentialfunctionsofthejoborallowsapersonwitha @  disabilitytoenjoythesamebenefitsandprivilegesasanemployeewithoutadisability.See &  Kiel,169F.3dat1136( Areasonableaccommodationshouldprovidethedisabledindividualan    equalemploymentopportunity,includinganopportunitytoattainthesamelevelofperformance,   benefits,andprivilegesthatisavailabletosimilarlysituatedemployeeswhoarenotdisabled.). z    A reasonableaccommodationisonethatcouldreasonablybemadeunderthe 1 circumstancesandmayincludebutisnotlimitedto:makingexistingfacilitiesusedby  employeesreadilyaccessibletoandusablebyindividualswithdisabilities;jobrestructuring;  part-timeormodifiedworkschedules;reassignmenttoavacantposition;acquisitionor  modificationsofequipmentordevices;appropriateadjustmentormodificationsofexaminations, k trainingmaterials,orpolicies;theprovisionofqualifiedreadersorinterpreters;andothersimilar Q accommodationsforindividualswithdisabilities.29C.F.R.1630.2(o);Bensonv.Northwest 7 Airlines,Inc.,62F.3d1108,1112-13(8thCir.1995). {   Althoughpart-timeworkandjobrestructuringmaybeconsideredreasonable v accommodations, [t]hisdoesnotmeananemployerisrequiredtoofferthoseaccommodations \ ineverycase.Treanorv.MCITelecommunicationsCorp.,200F.3d570,575(8thCir.2000). B Moreover,althoughjobrestructuringisapossibleaccommodationundertheADA,anemployer ( neednotreallocatetheessentialfunctionsofajob.Fjellestadv.PizzaHutofAm.,Inc.,188F.3d l  944,950(8thCir.1999);Lloydv.HardinCounty,Iowa,207F.3d1080,1084(8thCir.2000); R!  Treanorv.MCITelecommunicationsCorp.,200F.3d570,575(8thCir.2000);Moritzv. 8"! FrontierAirlines,Inc.,147F.3d784,788(8thCir.1998);Benson,62F.3dat1112-13(citing42 #" U.S.C.12111(9)(B);29C.F.R.1630.2(o)(2)(ii)).Inaddition,anemployerisnotobligatedto $# hireadditionalemployeesorreassignexistingworkerstoassistanemployee.Fjellestad,188 $$ F.3dat950(citingMoritz,124F.3dat788).TheADAdoesnotrequireanaccommodation that %r% wouldcauseotheremployeestoworkharder,longer,orbedeprivedofopportunities.Rehrsv. &X & TheIamsCo.,486F.3d353,357(8thCir.2007). '>!'   ReassignmenttoavacantpositionisanotherpossibleaccommodationundertheADA. (") Benson,62F.3dat1114(citing42U.S.C.12111(9)(B);29C.F.R.1630.2(o)(2)(ii));seealso )}#* Fjellestad,188F.3dat950-51(theplaintiffcreatedgenuineissueofmaterialfactastowhether *c$+ employercouldhavereassignedhertoaspecific,vacantposition).Infact,theEighthCircuit +I%, hasrecognizedthat,incertaincircumstances,reassignmenttoavacantpositionmaybe ^  necessaryasareasonableaccommodation.SeeCravensv.BlueCross&BlueShieldof D KansasCity,214F.3d1011,1018(8thCir.2000).Thescopeofthereassignmentdutyis * limited,however.Id.at1019.Forexample,reassignmentisanaccommodationof lastresort;   thatis,the veryprospectofreassignmentdoesnotevenariseunlessaccommodationwithinthe   individualscurrentpositionwouldposeanunduehardship.Id.Moreover,theADAdoesnot  ~ requireanemployertocreateanewpositionasanaccommodation.Id.;seealsoTreanor,200  d F.3dat575( [T]heADAdoesnotrequireanemployertocreateanewpart-timepositionwhere  J nonepreviouslyexisted.);Fjellestad,188F.3dat950(employernotrequiredtocreatenew  0 positionortocreatepermanentpositionoutofatemporaryone).Anemployerwhohasan t  establishedpolicyoffillingvacantpositionswiththemostqualifiedapplicantisnotrequiredto Z  assignthevacantpositiontoadisabledemployeewho,althoughqualified,isnotthemost @  qualifiedapplicant.Huberv.WalMartStores,486F.3d480,48384(8thCir.2007).In &  addition,anemployerisnotrequiredto bumpanotheremployeeinordertoreassignadisabled    employeetothatposition.Cravens,214F.3dat1019.Promotionisnotrequired.Id.Finally,   theemployeemustbe otherwisequalifiedforthereassignmentposition.Id. z    Anemployerisnotobligatedtoprovideanemployeetheaccommodationheorshe 1 requestsorprefers.See,e.g.,Cravens,214F.3dat1019.Theemployerneedonlyprovidesome  reasonableaccommodation.Hennenfentv.MidDakotaClinic,P.C.,164F.3d419,422n.2(8th  Cir.1998);accordKielv.SelectArtificials,Inc.,169F.3d1131,1137(8thCir.1999)( Ifmore  thanoneaccommodationwouldallowtheindividualtoperformtheessentialfunctionsofthe k position,theemployerprovidingtheaccommodationhastheultimatediscretiontochoose Q betweeneffectiveaccommodations,andmaychoosethelessexpensiveaccommodationorthe 7 accommodationthatiseasierforittoprovide.). {   Anemployersshowingthattherequestedaccommodationwouldviolatetherulesofan v existingsenioritysystem(e.g.,anemployeesrequesttoremainatalighterdutypositioninthe \ mailroom,indisregardofmoresenioremployeesrightsto bidintothatposition)isordinarily B enoughtoshowthattheaccommodationisnot reasonableandtoentitletheemployerto ( summaryjudgment.USAirways,Inc.v.Barnett,535U.S.391,394,40304,122S.Ct.1516, l  1519,1524(2002).Theemployeemaydefeatsummaryjudgmentandcreateajuryquestionby R! presentingevidenceofspecialcircumstancesthatmakeanexceptiontoaseniorityrule 8"   reasonableintheparticularcase.Id.at1519,1525.Examplesofspecialcircumstancesare #! theemployersfairlyfrequentexerciseofarighttochangethesenioritysystemunilaterallyand $" asenioritysystemcontainingexceptionssuchthatonefurtherexceptionisunlikelytomatter. $# Id.at1525. %r$   TheADAdoesnotrequirethepreferentialtreatmentofindividualswithdisabilitiesin )' & termsofjobqualificationsasareasonableaccommodation.SeeHarrisv.PolkCounty,103F.3d (!' 696,697(8thCir.1996)(employerlawfullydeniedjobtodisabledapplicantonbasisofcriminal ("( recordwhichallegedlyhadresultedfrompriorpsychologicalproblemsbecause anemployer )}#) mayholddisabledemployeestothesamestandardoflaw-abidingconductasallother *c$* employees). +I%+   Insomecases,thetimingoftheplaintiff'sallegeddisabilityiscritical.Ifnecessary,the ^ languagemaybemodifiedtoincorporatetherelevanttimeframeoftheplaintiff'salleged D disability.  * m @  %   5.52AADADEFINITION:DISABILITY de   ^ @''[Nodefinitionrecommended.] *  @--! CommitteeComments      Asdrafted,theModelInstructionsdonotusetheterm"disability"and,thus,donot O  requirethejurytodeterminewhetheraplaintiffhasa"disability."Rather,theinstructions 5  requirethejurytofindthefactswhichsupporttheunderlyingelementsofadisabilityunderthe   Act.    n @X X  %   5.52BADADEFINITION:ESSENTIALFUNCTIONS deF   ^   Indeterminingwhetherajobfunctionisessential,youshouldconsiderthefollowing * factors:[(1)Theemployer'sjudgmentastowhichfunctionsofthejobareessential;(2)written  % jobdescriptions;(3)theamountoftimespentonthejobperformingthefunctioninquestion;(4)  ~ consequencesofnotrequiringthepersontoperformthefunction;(5)thetermsofacollective 5  bargainingagreement;(6)theworkexperienceofpersonswhohaveheldthejob;(7)thecurrent  0  workexperienceofpersonsinsimilarjobs;(8)whetherthereasonthepositionexistsisto   performthefunction;(9)whethertherearealimitednumberofemployeesavailableamong @  whomtheperformanceofthefunctioncanbedistributed;(10)whetherthefunctionishighly ;  specializedandtheindividualinthepositionwashiredfor[(his)(her)]expertiseorabilityto   performthefunction;and(11)(listanyotherrelevantfactorssupportedbytheevidence)].1 K    Noonefactorisnecessarilycontrolling.Youshouldconsideralloftheevidencein F decidingwhetherajobfunctionisessential.    Theterm"essentialfunctions"meansthefundamentaljobdutiesoftheemployment V positiontheplaintiffholdsorforwhichtheplaintiffhasapplied.Theterm"essentialfunctions" Q doesnotincludethemarginalfunctionsoftheposition.   & % @$ NotesonUse  a    1.Thisinstructionshouldbemodified,asappropriate,toincludeonlythosefactors \" '%ab supportedbytheevidence. B# &   @--! CommitteeComments  %   TheADAprotectsonlythoseindividualswho,withorwithoutreasonable R!' accommodation,canperformtheessentialfunctionsoftheemploymentpositionthattheplaintiff 8"( ' a holdsordesires.See42U.S.C.12111(8);Lloydv.HardinCounty,Iowa,207F.3d1080,1084 #) (8thCir.2000);Moritzv.FrontierAirlines,Inc.,147F.3d784,786-87(8thCir.1998);Benson $* v.NorthwestAirlines,Inc.,62F.3d1108,1112-13(8thCir.1995).Thus,thisinstructionis $+ designedforuseinconnectionwiththeessentialelementsinstructionincaseswheretheissueof %r, whetheraparticularjobrequirementortaskisan"essentialfunction"ofthejobisindispute. &X - Theinstruction,althoughnottechnicallyadefinition,shouldbeusedtoinstructthejuryin '>!. determiningwhetheragivenjobdutyisessential. ($"/   Theinstructionisbasedon29C.F.R.1630.2(n)andtheEighthCircuit'sopinionsin )}#1  Nesserv.TransWorldAirlines,Inc.,160F.3d442,445-46(8thCir.1998)( Anemployer's *c$2 identificationofaposition'sessentialfunctionsisgivensomedeferenceundertheADA.); ^ Moritz,147F.3dat787;andBenson,62F.3dat1113.  D  o @   %   5.52CADADEFINITION:SUBSTANTIALLYLIMITS .ߐ   ^   Indeterminingwhethertheplaintiff'simpairmentsubstantiallylimitstheplaintiff's * abilityto(specifymajorlifeactivityaffected),youshouldcomparetheplaintiff'sabilityto  % (specifymajorlifeactivityaffected)withthatoftheaverageperson.Indoingso,youshould  ~ alsoconsider:(1)thenatureandseverityoftheimpairment;(2)howlongtheimpairmentwill 5  lastorisexpectedtolast;and(3)thepermanentorlong-termimpact,orexpectedimpact,ofthe  0  impairment.[Temporaryimpairmentswithlittleornolong-termimpactarenotsufficient.]1     Itisnotthenameofanimpairmentoraconditionthatmatters,butrathertheeffectofan @  impairmentorconditiononthelifeofaparticularperson. ;   & ? @$ NotesonUse    '?   1.Usethebracketedlanguageonlyifitissupportedbytheevidence. K  @--! CommitteeComments  F   Thisinstructionisdesignedforuseinconnectionwiththeessentialelementsinstruction  incasesinwhichtheissueofwhethertheplaintiffhasadisabilityundertheADAisindispute.  Thelanguageoftheinstructionisbasedon29C.F.R.1630.2(j).Theterm substantially k limitsmaybeofsuchcommonusagethatadefinitionisnotrequired.IftheCourtdesiresto Q definetheterm,however,theCommitteerecommendsthisdefinition.Thisinstructionshould 7 notbegivenincaseswheretheplaintiffclaimsthatthedefendant regardedtheplaintiffas { havinganimpairment. a   AnimpairmentisonlyadisabilityundertheADAifitsubstantiallylimitsoneormore \  majorlifeactivities.See42U.S.C.12102(1).  B!  p@/ /  %   5.53A UNDUEHARDSHIP-STATUTORYDEFENSE mo   ^   Yourverdictmustbeinfavorofthedefendantifithasbeenproved1thatproviding * (specifyaccommodation)wouldcauseanunduehardshipontheoperationofthedefendant's  % business.  ~   Theterm unduehardship,asusedintheseinstructions,meansanactionrequiringthe 5  defendanttoincursignificantdifficultyorexpensewhenconsideredinlightofthefollowing:  0    [(1)thenatureandcostof(specifyaccommodation);     (2)theoverallfinancialresourcesofthefacilityinvolvedintheprovisionof(specify @  accommodation),thenumberofpersonsemployedatsuchfacilityandtheeffectonexpenses ;  andresources;     (3)theoverallfinancialresourcesofthedefendant; K    (4)theoverallsizeofthebusinessofthedefendantwithrespecttothenumberofits F employeesandthenumber,typeandlocationofitsfacilities;    (5)thetypeofoperationofthedefendant,includingthecomposition,structure,and V functionsoftheworkforce; Q   (6)theimpactof(specifyaccommodation)ontheoperationofthefacility,includingthe  impactontheabilityofotheremployeestoperformtheirdutiesandtheimpactonthefacility's a  abilitytoconductbusiness; \"   and(listanyotherrelevantfactorssupportedbytheevidence)].2 $ &    @$ NotesonUse  l &   1.ModelInstruction3.04(BurdenofProof)tellsthejurythatsomethingisprovedonly !g( ifthejuryfindsitismorelikelytruethannottrue.Thephrase greaterweightoftheevidence "M) is' l I notnecessaryhere.ItcanbeincludedinInstruction3.04ifdesiredbythecourt. #3*   2.Thisinstructionshouldbemodified,asappropriate,toincludeonlythosefactors $, supportedbytheevidence. %r- &   @--! CommitteeComments  )' /   UndertheADA,anemployermustprovideareasonableaccommodationtotheknown ($"1 physicallimitationsofaqualifiedapplicantoremployeewithadisabilityunlessitcanshowthat h) #2 ' )'֣ theaccommodationwouldimposeanunduehardshiponthebusiness.See42U.S.C.12111(9), N*#3 42U.S.C.12112(b)(5)andModelInstruction5.51B,supra,CommitteeComments.Thus,this 4+$4 instructionshouldbeusedtosubmitthedefenseofunduehardship.See42U.S.C.12111(10). ,%5   EighthCircuitcaselawholdsthatthedefendantinanycivilcaseisentitledtoaspecific ^ instructiononitstheoryofthecase,iftheinstructionis legallycorrect,supportedbythe D evidenceandbroughttothecourt'sattentioninatimelyrequest.DesMoinesBd.ofWater * Worksv.Alvord,Burdick&Howson,706F.2d820,823(8thCir.1983).     q@} }  %   5.53B DIRECTTHREAT-STATUTORYDEFENSE ২   ^   Yourverdictmustbeinfavorofthedefendantifithasbeenproved1that: *   First,thedefendant(specifyaction(s)takenwithrespecttotheplaintiff)becausethe  % plaintiffposedadirectthreattothehealthorsafetyof[(theplaintiff)(others)(theplaintiffor  ~ others)2]intheworkplace;and 5    Second,suchdirectthreatcouldnotbeeliminated3byreasonableaccommodation.  0    Adirectthreatmeansasignificantriskofsubstantialharmtothehealthorsafetyofthe   personorotherpersonsthatcannotbeeliminatedbyreasonableaccommodation.The @  determinationthatadirectthreatexistsmustbebasedonanindividualizedassessmentofthe ;  plaintiff'spresentabilitytosafelyperformtheessentialfunctionsofthejob.     Indeterminingwhetherapersonposesadirectthreat,youmustconsider:(1)the K  durationoftherisk;(2)thenatureandseverityofthepotentialharm;(3)thelikelihoodthatthe F potentialharmwilloccur;and(4)thelikelytimebeforethepotentialharmoccurs.  &    @$ NotesonUse  V   1.ModelInstruction3.04(BurdenofProof)tellsthejurythatsomethingisprovedonly Q ifthejuryfindsitismorelikelytruethannottrue.Thephrase greaterweightoftheevidence 7 is' Vd notnecessaryhere.ItcanbeincludedinInstruction3.04ifdesiredbythecourt. {   2.Selectthewordorphrasethatbestdescribesthedefendantstheory. v    3.Theterm directthreatisdefinedbytheADAas asignificantrisktothehealthor -" safetyofothersthatcannotbeeliminatedbyreasonableaccommodation.See42U.S.C. # 12111(3).Theapplicableregulationsdefine directthreatasa significantriskofsubstantial $ harmtothehealthorsafetyoftheindividualorothersthatcannotbeeliminatedorreducedby  % reasonableaccommodation.See29C.F.R.1630.2(r)(emphasisadded). !g& &   @--! CommitteeComments  #(   Thisinstructionshouldbeusedinsubmittingthedefenseofdirectthreat.See42U.S.C. w$* 12111(3);29C.F.R.1630.2(r).EighthCircuitcaselawholdsthatthedefendantinanycivil ]%+ ' ## caseisentitledtoaspecificinstructiononitstheoryofthecase,iftheinstructionis legally C&, correct,supportedbytheevidenceandbroughttothecourt'sattentioninatimelyrequest.Des )' - MoinesBd.ofWaterWorksv.Alvord,Burdick&Howson,706F.2d820,823(8thCir.1983). (!.   UndertheADA,anemployermayapplyitsqualificationstandards,tests,orselection h) #0 criteriatoscreenout,denyajobto,ordenyabenefitofemploymenttoadisabledperson,ifsuch N*#1  criteriaarejob-relatedandconsistentwithbusinessnecessityandifthepersoncannotperform 4+$2 theessentialfunctionofthepositionwithreasonableaccommodation.42U.S.C.12113(a); ^ EEOCv.AICSecurityInvestigations,Ltd.,55F.3d1276,1283-84(7thCir.1995). D    TheADAincludeswithintheterm qualificationstandardstherequirementthatthe ? employeenotposeadirectthreattothehealthorsafetyofotherindividualsintheworkplace.  % See42U.S.C.12133(b).TheSupremeCourthasupheld29C.F.R.1630.2(r)and i  1630.15(b)(2),whichalsoallowanemployertoadoptaqualificationstandardrequiringthatthe O  individualnotposeadirectthreattohisorherownsafety.ChevronU.S.A.,Inc.v.Echazabal, 5  536U.S.73,78(2002).     Foradiscussionofthe directthreatdefenseinthehealthcarecontext,seeBragdonv. t  Abbott,524U.S.624,649-50(1998)(healthcareprofessionalhasdutytoassessriskbasedon Z  objective,scientificinformationavailabletohimorherandothersinprofession).  @   r@  %   5.54AACTUALDAMAGESADA m   ^   IfyoufindinfavoroftheplaintiffunderInstruction___1[andifyouanswer noin * responsetoInstruction___,]2thenyoumustawardtheplaintiffsuchsumasyoufindwillfairly  % andjustlycompensatetheplaintiffforanydamagesyoufindtheplaintiffsustainedasadirect  ~ resultof[describethedefendant'sdecision--e.g., thedefendant'sfailuretohiretheplaintiff]. 5  Theplaintiff'sclaimfordamagesincludesthreedistincttypesofdamagesandyoumustconsider  0  themseparately.     First,youmustdeterminetheamountofanywagesandfringebenefits3theplaintiff @  wouldhaveearnedin[(his)(her)]employmentwiththedefendantif[(he)(she)]hadnotbeen ;  dischargedon[fillindateofdischarge]throughthedateofyourverdict,4minustheamountof   earningsandbenefitsthattheplaintiffreceivedfromotheremploymentduringthattime. K    Second,youmustdeterminetheamountofanyotherdamagessustainedbytheplaintiff, F suchas[listdamagessupportedbytheevidence].5Youmustenterseparateamountsforeach  typeofdamagesintheverdictformandmustnotincludethesameitemsinmorethanone V category.6 Q   [Youarealsoinstructedthattheplaintiffhasadutyunderthelawto mitigate[(his)  (her)]damages--thatis,toexercisereasonablediligenceunderthecircumstancestominimize a  [(his)(her)]damages.Therefore,ifithasbeenproved7thattheplaintifffailedtoseekoutortake \" advantageofanopportunitythatwasreasonablyavailableto[(him)(her)],youmustreduce $ [(his)(her)]damagesbytheamount[(he)(she)]reasonablycouldhaveavoidedif[(he)(she)] l & hadsoughtoutortakenadvantageofsuchanopportunity.]8 !g(   [Remember,throughoutyourdeliberations,youmustnotengageinanyspeculation, #* guess,orconjectureandyoumustnotawarddamagesunderthisInstructionbywayof w$, punishmentorthroughsympathy.]9 %r. &   @$ NotesonUse  )' 0   1.Fillinthenumberortitleoftheessentialelementsinstructionhere. ($"2 ')'   2.Fillinthenumberortitleofthe samedecisioninstructionhere.Evenifthejury )}#4 findsthatthedefendantwouldhavemadethesamedecisionregardlessoftheplaintiffs *c$5 disability,theCourtmaydirectthejurytodeterminetheamountofdamages,ifany,sustainedby +I%6 theplaintiff.Thisapproachwillprotectagainstthenecessityofaretrialofthecaseintheevent ^ theunderlyingliabilitydeterminationisreversedonappeal. D   3.Whencertainbenefits,suchasemployer-subsidizedhealthinsurance,arerecoverable ? undertheevidence,thisinstructionmaybemodifiedtoexplaintothejurythemannerinwhich  % recoveryforthosebenefitsistobecalculated.SeeHartleyv.Dillards,Inc.,310F.3d1054, i  1062(8thCir.2002)(discussinglostbenefitsinADEAcase);Gaworskiv.ITTCommercial O  FinanceCorp.,17F.3d1104,1111(8thCir.1994)(allowinginsurancereplacementcosts,lost 5  401(k)contributionsinADEAcase).     4.Frontpayisanequitableissueforthejudgetodecide.Salitrosv.ChryslerCorp.,306 t  F.3d562,571(8thCir.2002).Insomecases,thedefendantwillassertsomeindependent Z  post-dischargereason--suchasaplantclosingorsweepingreductioninforce--astowhythe @  plaintiffwouldhavebeenterminatedinanyeventbeforetrial.See,e.g.,Cleverlyv.Western &  Elec.Co.,450F.Supp.507(W.D.Mo.1978),aff'd,594F.2d638(8thCir.1979).Inthose    cases,thisinstructionmustbemodifiedtosubmitthisissueforthejury'sdetermination.     5.UndertheCivilRightsActof1991,aprevailingADAplaintiffmayrecoverdamages K  formentalanguishandotherpersonalinjuries.Thetypesofdamagesmentionedin 1 1981a(b)(3)include futurepecuniarylosses,emotionalpain,suffering,inconvenience,mental  anguish,lossofenjoymentoflife,andothernonpecuniarylosses.Forcasesinvolvingthe  provisionofareasonableaccommodation(ModelInstruction5.51C,supra),theplaintiffmay  notrecoversuchdamagesifthedefendantdemonstrated goodfaitheffortstoarriveata k reasonableaccommodationwiththeplaintiff.SeeinfraModelInstruction5.55. Q   6.Iftheissueof frontpayissubmittedtothejury,itshouldbedistinguishedfroman  awardofcompensatorydamages,whichissubjecttothestatutorycap.SeeinfraCommittee  Comments.Accordingly,separatecategoriesofdamagesmustbeidentified. v   7.ModelInstruction3.04(BurdenofProof)tellsthejurythatsomethingisprovedonly - ifthejuryfindsitismorelikelytruethannottrue.Thephrase greaterweightoftheevidence  isnotnecessaryhere.ItcanbeincludedinInstruction3.04ifdesiredbythecourt.    8.Thisparagraphisdesignedtosubmittheissueof"mitigationofdamages"in R!! appropriatecases.SeeColemanv.CityofOmaha,714F.2d804,808(8thCir.1983);Fieldlerv. 8"" IndianheadTruckLine,Inc.,670F.2d806,808-09(8thCir.1982). ##   9.Thisparagraphmaybegivenatthetrialcourt'sdiscretion. w$% &   @--! CommitteeComments  %r'   B.` hp x (#XBTheCivilRightsActof1991makesthreesignificantchangesinthelawregardingthe )' ) recoveryofdamagesinTitleVIIcases.First,theplaintiffprevailsontheissueofliabilityby (!* ' % showingthatunlawfuldiscriminationwasa motivatingfactorintherelevantemployment ("+ decision;however,theplaintiffcannotrecoveranyactualdamagesiftheemployershowsthatit )}#, wouldhavemadethesameemploymentdecisionevenintheabsenceofanydiscriminatory *c$- intent.42U.S.C.2000e-2(g)(2)(B).Second,theCivilRightsActpermitstheplaintiffto +I%. recovergeneralcompensatorydamagesinadditiontothetraditionalemploymentdiscrimination ^ remedyofbackpayandlostbenefits.Id.1981a(a).Third,theActexpresslylimitsthe D recoveryofgeneralcompensatorydamagestocertaindollaramounts,rangingfrom$50,000to * $300,000dependinguponthesizeoftheemployer.Id.1981a(b).     Thisinstructionisdesignedtosubmitthestandardbackpayformulaoflostwagesand i  benefitsreducedbyinterimearningsandbenefits.SeeFiedlerv.IndianheadTruckLine,Inc., O  670F.2d806,808-09(8thCir.1982).Thisinstructionmaybemodifiedtoarticulatethetypesof 5  interimearningswhichshouldbeoffsetagainsttheplaintiff'sbackpay.Forexample,severance   payandwagesfromotheremploymentordinarilyareoffsetagainstabackpayaward.See   Krausev.DresserIndustries,910F.2d674,680(10thCir.1990);Cornettav.UnitedStates,851   F.2d1372,1381(Fed.Cir.1988);Farissv.LynchburgFoundry,769F.2d958,966(4thCir. o  1985).Unemploymentcompensation,SocialSecuritybenefitsorpensionbenefitsordinarilyare U  notoffsetagainstabackpayaward.SeeDoynev.UnionElectricCo.,953F.2d447,451(8th ;  Cir.1992)(holdingthatpensionbenefitsarea"collateralsourcebenefit");Dreyerv.Arco !  ChemicalCo.,801F.2d651,653n.1(3dCir.1986)(SocialSecurityandpensionbenefitsnot e  deductible);Protosv.VolkswagenofAmerica,Inc.,797F.2d129,138-39(3dCir.1986) K  (unemploymentbenefitsnotdeductible);Rasimasv.MichiganDept.ofMentalHealth,714F.2d 1 614,626(6thCir.1983)(same).ButseeBlumv.WitcoChemicalCorp.,829F.2d367,374(3d  Cir.1987)(pensionbenefitsreceivedasaresultofsubsequentemploymentconsideredin  offsettingdamagesaward);Toledov.Nobel-Sysco,Inc.,892F.2d1481,1493(10thCir.1989)  (deductibilityofunemploymentcompensationiswithintrialcourt'sdiscretion);Hornv.Duke k Homes,755F.2d599,607n.12(7thCir.1985)(same);EEOCv.EnterpriseAss'nSteamfitters Q LocalNo.638,542F.2d579,592(2dCir.1976)(same).However,becauseTitleVII,as 7 amendedbytheCivilRightsActof1991,nolongerlimitsrecoveryofdamages,theinstruction { permitstherecoveryofgeneraldamagesforpain,suffering,humiliation,andthelike. a   Becausethelawimposesalimitongeneralcompensatorydamagesbutdoesnotlimitthe \ recoveryofbackpayandlostbenefits,theCommitteebelievesthatthesetypesofdamagesmust B beconsideredandassessedseparatelybythejury.Otherwise,ifthejuryawardedasingledollar ( amount,itwouldbeimpossibletoidentifytheportionoftheawardthatwasattributabletoback l  payandtheportionthatwasattributableto generaldamages.Asaresult,thetrialcourtwould R! notbeabletodeterminewhetherthejury'sawardexceededthestatutorylimit. 8"    Insomecases,adiscriminationplaintiffmaybeeligibleforfrontpay.Becausefrontpay #3" isessentiallyanequitableremedy inlieuofreinstatement,frontpayisanissueforthecourt, w$# notthejury.Salitrosv.ChryslerCorp.,306F.3d562,571(8thCir.2002).Ifthetrialcourt ]%$ submitstheissueoffrontpaytothejury,thejurysdeterminationmaybebinding.SeeDoynev. C&% UnionElectricCo.,953F.2d447,451(8thCir.1992)(ADEAcase). )' &   InKramerv.LoganCountySchoolDist.No.R-1,157F.3d620,625-26(8thCir.1998), ($"( thecourtruledthat frontpayisanequitableremedyexcludedfromthestatutorylimiton h) #)  compensatorydamagesprovidedforin[42U.S.C.]1981a(b)(3). N*#*   AlthoughtheCivilRightsActof1991expresslylimitstheamountofcompensatoryand ^  punitivedamagesdependinguponthesizeoftheemployer,thejuryshallnotbeadvisedonany D suchlimitation.42U.S.C.1981a(c)(2).Instead,thetrialcourtwillsimplyreducetheverdict * bytheamountofanyexcess.     ;s@  %   5.54BNOMINALDAMAGESADA  {   ^   IfyoufindinfavoroftheplaintiffunderInstruction___1[andifyouanswer"no"in * responsetoInstruction___,]2butyoudonotfindthattheplaintiff'sdamageshavemonetary  % value,thenyoumustreturnaverdictfortheplaintiffinthenominalamountofOneDollar  ~ ($1.00).3 5  &   @$ NotesonUse   0    1.Fillinthenumberortitleoftheessentialelementsinstructionhere.   ' m   2.Fillinthenumberortitleofthe samedecisioninstructionhere.Evenifthejury @  findsthatthedefendantwouldhavemadethesamedecisionregardlessoftheplaintiffs &  disability,theCourtmaydirectthejurytodeterminetheamountofdamages,ifany,awardedto    theplaintiff.Thisapproachwillprotectagainstthenecessityofaretrialofthecaseintheevent   theunderlyingliabilitydeterminationisreversedonappeal. z    3.Onedollar($1.00)arguablyistherequiredamountincasesinwhichnominal 1 damagesareappropriate.Nominaldamagesareappropriatewhenthejuryisunabletoplacea  monetaryvalueoftheharmthattheplaintiffsufferedfromtheviolationofhisrights.Deanv.  Civiletti,670F.2d99,101(8thCir.1982)(TitleVII);cf.Cowansv.Wyrick,862F.2d697(8th  Cir.1988)(inprisonercivilrightsaction,nominaldamagesareappropriatewherethejury k cannotplaceamonetaryvalueoftheharmsufferedbytheplaintiff);Haleyv.Wyrick,740F.2d Q 12(8thCir.1984). 7 &   @--! CommitteeComments     Mostemploymentdiscriminationcasesinvolvelostwagesandbenefits.Insomecase, G however,thejurymaybepermittedtoreturnaverdictforonlynominaldamages.Forexample, - ' v iftheplaintiffwasgivenseverancepayandwasabletosecureabetterpayingjob,theevidence   maynotsupportanawardofbackpay,butmaysupportanawardofcompensatorydamages. ! Thisinstructionisdesignedtosubmittheissueofnominaldamagesinappropriatecases.   "  =;t@  %   5.54CPUNITIVEDAMAGESADA  Y   ^   Inadditiontothedamagesmentionedintheotherinstructions,thelawpermitsthejury * undercertaincircumstancestoawardpunitivedamages.  %   IfyoufindinfavoroftheplaintiffunderInstruction(s)_______,1andifyouanswer no  ~ inresponsetoInstruction_____,2thenyoumustdecidewhetherthedefendantactedwithmalice 5  orrecklessindifferencetotheplaintiffsrightnottobediscriminatedagainst3onthebasisofa  0  disability.Thedefendantactedwithmaliceorrecklessindifferenceif:   0  B.44 <DL!!XBithasbeenproved4that(insertthename(s)ofthedefendantormanager5whoterminated5 @  theplaintiffsemployment)knewthatthe[termination]6wasinviolationofthelaw ;  prohibitingdisabilitydiscrimination,oractedwithrecklessdisregardofthatlaw.7 (#(# [However,youmaynotawardpunitivedamagesifithasbeenproved[thatthedefendantmadea K  good-faithefforttocomplywiththelawprohibitingdisabilitydiscrimination]8. F   Ifithasbeenprovedthatthedefendantactedwithmaliceorrecklessindifferencetothe  plaintiffsrights[anddidnotmakeagoodfaithefforttocomplywiththelaw,]then,inaddition V toanyotherdamagestowhichyoufindtheplaintiffentitled,youmay,butarenotrequiredto, Q awardtheplaintiffanadditionalamountaspunitivedamagesforthepurposesofpunishingthe  defendantforengaginginsuchmisconductanddeterringthedefendantandothersfrom a  engaginginsuchmisconductinthefuture.Youshouldpresumethattheplaintiffhasbeenmade \" wholefor[(his)(her)(its)]injuriesbythedamagesawardedunderInstruction_____.9 $   Indeterminingwhethertoawardpunitivedamages,youshouldconsiderwhetherthe l & defendantsconductwasreprehensible.10Inthisregard,youmayconsiderwhethertheharm !g( sufferedbytheplaintiffwasphysicaloreconomicorboth;whethertherewasviolence,deceit, #* intentionalmalice,recklessdisregardforhumanhealthorsafety;whetherthedefendants w$, conductthatharmedtheplaintiffalsocausedharmorposedariskofharmtoothers;andwhether %r. therewasanyrepetitionofthewrongfulconductandpastconductofthesortthatharmedthe )' 0 plaintiff.11 ($"2   Ifyoudecidetoawardpunitivedamages,youshouldconsiderthefollowingindeciding )}#4 theamountofpunitivedamagestoaward: 4+$6   1.howmuchharmthedefendantswrongfulconductcausedtheplaintiff[andcould ^ causetheplaintiffinthefuture].12[Youmaynotconsiderharmtoothersindecidingtheamount Y ofpunitivedamagestoaward.]13     2.whatamountofpunitivedamages,inadditiontotheotherdamagesalreadyawarded, i  isneeded,consideringthedefendantsfinancialcondition,topunishthedefendantfor[(his)  d (her)(its)]wrongfulconducttowardtheplaintiffandtodeterthedefendantandothersfrom    similarwrongfulconductinthefuture; t    3.[theamountoffinesandcivilpenaltiesapplicabletosimilarconduct].14 o    Theamountofanypunitivedamagesawardshouldbearareasonablerelationshiptothe &  harmcausedtotheplaintiff.15 !    [Youmayassesspunitivedamagesagainstanyoralldefendantsoryoumayrefuseto z  imposepunitivedamages.Ifpunitivedamagesareassessedagainstmorethanonedefendant, 1 theamountsassessedagainstsuchdefendantsmaybethesameortheymaybedifferent.]16 ,   [Youmaynotawardpunitivedamagesagainstthedefendant[s]forconductinother  states.]17 < & ~  @$ NotesonUse  7   1.Fillinthenumberortitleoftheessentialelementsinstructionhere.SeesupraModel   Instructions5.51A,5.51Band5.51C. v! '~   2.Fillinthenumberortitleofthe samedecisioninstructionifapplicable.Seesupra -# ModelInstruction5.51A/B(1). $   3.Althoughafindingofdiscriminationordinarilysubsumesafindingofintentional l & misconduct,thislanguageisincludedtoemphasizethethresholdforrecoveryofpunitive R!' damages.UndertheCivilRightsActof1991,thestandardforpunitivedamagesiswhetherthe 8"( defendantacted withmaliceorwithrecklessindifferencetothe[plaintiffs]federallyprotected #) rights.CivilRightsActof1991,102(codifiedat42U.S.C.1981a(b)(1)). $*   4.ModelInstruction3.04(BurdenofProof)tellsthejurythatsomethingisprovedonly ]%, ifthejuryfindsitismorelikelytruethannottrue.Thephrase greaterweightoftheevidence C&- isnotnecessaryhere.ItcanbeincludedinInstruction3.04ifdesiredbythecourt. )' .   5.Usethenameofthedefendant,themanagerwhotooktheaction,orotherdescriptive ($"0 phrasesuchas themanagerwhofiredtheplaintiff. h) #1   6.Thislanguageisdesignedforuseinadischargecase.Ina failuretohire, failureto *c$3 promote, demotion,or constructivedischargecase,thelanguagemustbemodified. +I%4   7.SeeKolstadv.AmericanDentalAssn,527U.S.526,535,536(1999)(holdingthat ^  maliceorrecklessindifferencepertaintotheemployersknowledgethatitmaybeactingin D violationoffederallaw,notitsawarenessthatitisengagingindiscriminationandthat an * employermustatleastdiscriminateinthefaceofaperceivedriskthatitsactionswillviolate   federallawtobeliableinpunitivedamages);Cannyv.Dr.Pepper/SevenUpBottlingGroup,   Inc.,439F.3d894,903(8thCir.2006)(citingKolstadandobservingthatanawardofpunitive  ~ damagesmaybeinappropriatewhentheunderlyingtheoryofdiscriminationisnovelorpoorly  d recognizedor whentheemployer(1)isunawarefederallawprohibitstherelevantconduct,(2)  J believesthediscriminatoryconductislawful,or(3)reasonablybelievesthereisabonafide  0 occupationalqualificationdefenseforthediscriminatoryconduct). t    8.Usethisphraseonlyifthegoodfaithofthedefendantistobepresentedtothejury. o  Thistwo-parttestwasarticulatedbytheUnitedStatesSupremeCourtinKolstadv.American U  DentalAssn,527U.S.526(1999),aTitleVIIcase.ForadiscussionofKolstad,seethe ;  CommitteeComments.Itisnotclearfromthecasewhobearstheriskofnonpersuasiononthe !  goodfaithissue.TheCommitteepredictsthatcaselawwillplacetheburdenonthedefendantto e  raisetheissueandproveit. K    9.Fillinthenumberortitleoftheactualdamagesornominaldamagesinstructionhere. F   10.Theword reprehensibleisusedinthesamesenseasitisusedincommonparlance.  TheSupremeCourt,inStateFarmMut.Auto.Ins.Co.v.Campbell,538U.S.408,419(2003),  stated: Itshouldbepresumedaplaintiffhasbeenmadewholeforhisinjuriesbycompensatory k damages,sopunitivedamagesshouldonlybeawardedifthedefendantsculpability,after Q havingpaidcompensatorydamages,issoreprehensibleastowarranttheimpositionoffurther 7 sanctionstoachievepunishmentordeterrence.InPhilipMorrisUSAv.Williams,549U.S. { 346,355,127S.Ct.1057,106465(2007),theSupremeCourtheldthat,whileharmtopersons a otherthantheplaintiffmaybeconsideredindeterminingreprehensibility,ajurymaynotpunish G fortheharmcausedtopersonsotherthantheplaintiff.TheCourtstatedthatprocedureswere - necessarytoassure thatjuriesarenotaskingthewrongquestion,i.e.,seeking,notsimplyto  determinereprehensibility,butalsotopunishforharmcausedstrangers.Id.at355.    11.Anyitemnotsupportedbytheevidence,ofcourse,shouldbeexcluded. R!    12.Thissentencemaybeusedifthereisevidenceoffutureharmtotheplaintiff. "M" К  13.Aparagraphinstructingthejurythatanypunitivedamagesawardshouldnotinclude $$ anamountforharmsufferedbypersonswhoarenotpartiestothecasemaybenecessaryif $% evidenceconcerningharmsufferedbynonpartieshasbeenintroduced.SeePhilipMorrisUSAv. %r& Williams,549U.S.at355;StateFarmMut.Auto.Ins.Co.v.Campbell,538U.S.408,42224 &X ' (2003);Williamsv.ConAgraPoultryCo.,378F.3d790,79798(8thCir.2004). '>!(   14.Insertthisphraseonlyifevidencehasbeenintroduced,orthecourthastakenjudicial ("* notice,offinesandpenaltiesforsimilarconduct.SeeBMWofNorthAmerica,Inc.v.Gore,517 )}#+ U.S.559,575(1996),noting civilpenaltiesauthorizedincomparablecasesasaguidepostto *c$, beconsidered.SeealsoStateFarmMut.Auto.Ins.Co.v.Campbell,538U.S.408,428(2003). +I%-   15.SeeStateFarmMut.Auto.Ins.Co.v.Campbell,538U.S.408,425(2003)(stating ^ that inpractice,fewawardsexceedingasingledigitratiobetweenpunitiveandcompensatory D damages,toasignificantdegree,willsatisfydueprocessandobservingthat: Singledigit * multipliersaremorelikelytocomportwithdueprocess,whilestillachievingtheStatesgoalsof   deterrenceandretribution,thanawardswithratiosinrangeof500to1[citingBMWofNorth   America,Inc.v.Gore,517U.S.559,582(1996)]or,inthiscase,of145to1.).  ~   16.Thebracketedlanguageisavailableforuseifpunitivedamagesclaimsaresubmitted 5  againstmorethanonedefendant.     17.Ifevidencehasbeenintroducedconcerningconductbythedefendantthatwaslegal t  inthestatewhereitwascommitted,thejurymustbetoldthattheycannotawardpunitive Z  damagesagainstthedefendantforsuchconduct.SeeStateFarmMut.Auto.Inc.Co.v. @  Campbell,538U.S.408,422(2003);BMWofNorthAmerica,Inc.v.Gore,517U.S.559,572 &  73(1996);Williamsv.ConAgraPoultryCo.,378F.3d790,79798(8thCir.2004).Thisissue    normallywillnotcomeupincasesunderfederallaw.Inanycaseinwhichevidenceisadmitted   forsomepurposesbutmaynotbeconsideredbythejuryinawardingpunitivedamages,the z  courtshouldgiveanappropriatelimitinginstruction. ` &   @--!CommitteeComments     UndertheCivilRightsActof1991,aTitleVIIorADAplaintiffmayrecoverdamages p byshowingthatthedefendantengagedindiscrimination withmaliceorwithreckless V indifference' * to[hisorher]federallyprotectedrights.See42U.S.C.1981a(b)(1).Seealso < ModelInstruction4.53,supra,onpunitivedamagesandPacificMut.LifeIns.Co.v.Haslip,499 " U.S.1(1991).In1999,theUnitedStatesSupremeCourtexplainedthattheterms maliceand   recklessultimatelyfocusontheactorsstateofmind.Kolstadv.AmericanDentalAssn,527  U.S.526,535(1999).TheCourtaddedthatthetermspertaintotheemployersknowledgethat v itmaybeactinginviolationoffederallaw,notitsawarenessthatitisengagingin \ discrimination.Id.Tobeliableforpunitivedamages,theemployermustatleastdiscriminatein B thefaceofaperceivedriskthatitsactionswillviolatefederallaw.Id.at536.Rejectingthe ( conclusionofthelowercourtthatpunitivedamageswerelimitedtocasesinvolvingintentional l  discriminationofan egregiousnature,theCourtheldthataplaintiffisnotrequiredtoshow R!  egregiousoroutrageousdiscriminationindependentoftheemployersstateofmind.Id.at546. 8"!   TheKolstadcasealsoestablishedagood-faithdefensetoplacelimitsonanemployers #3# vicariousliabilityforpunitivedamages.RecognizingthatTitleVIIandtheADAareboth w$$ effortstopromotepreventionofdiscriminationaswellasremediation,theCourtheldthatan ]%% employermaynotbevicariouslyliableforthediscriminatorydecisionsofmanagerialagents C&& wherethosedecisionsarecontrarytotheemployersgoodfaitheffortstocomplywithTitleVII )' ' ortheADA.Id.at545.TheCourtdoesnotclarifywhichpartyhastheburdenofproofonthe (!( issueofgoodfaith. (")   Forcasesinvolvingtheprovisionofareasonableaccommodation(seesupraModel N*#+  Instruction5.51C),theplaintiffmaynotrecoverpunitivedamagesifthedefendantdemonstrated 4+$,  goodfaitheffortstoarriveatareasonableaccommodationwiththeplaintiff.SeeinfraModel ^ Instruction5.55. D    UndertheADA,asamendedbytheCivilRightsActof1991,theupperlimitonan ? awardincludingpunitiveandcompensatorydamagesis$300,000.See42U.S.C.1981a(b)(3)  % (limitingthesumofcompensatoryandpunitivedamagesawardsdependingonthesizeofthe i  employer).Foradiscussionofsubmittingpunitivedamagestothejuryunderbothstateand O  federallaw,seeKimzeyv.Wal-MartStores,Inc.,107F.3d568,575-78(8thCir.1997). 5    Thisinstructionattemptstoincorporatetheconstitutionallyrelevantprinciplessetforth  0  bytheSupremeCourtinPhilipMorrisUSAv.Williams,549U.S.346(2007);StateFarmMut. t  Auto.Ins.Co.v.Campbell,538U.S.408(2003),BMWofNorthAmerica,Inc.v.Gore,517U.S. Z  559(1996),HondaMotorCo.v.Oberg,512U.S.415(1994),andTXOProductionCorp.v. @  AllianceResourcesCorp.,509U.S.443,45962(1993).InStateFarm,538U.S.at417,the &  courtobserved: Wehaveadmonishedthat[p]unitivedamagesposeanacutedangerof    arbitrarydeprivationofproperty.Juryinstructionstypicallyleavethejurywithwidediscretion   inchoosingamounts,andthepresentationofevidenceofadefendantsnetworthcreatesthe z  potentialthatjurieswillusetheirverdictstoexpressbiasesagainstbigbusinesses,particularly ` thosewithoutstronglocalpresences.(quotingHondaMotor,512U.S.at432).SeeBakerv. F JohnMorrell&Co.,266F.Supp.2d909,961(N.D.Iowa2003),affd,382F.3d816(8thCir. , 2004),andInReExxonValdez,296F.Supp.2d1071,1080(D.Alaska2004),forexamplesof p punitivedamagesinstructionsinwhichthecourtattemptedtoincorporateconstitutional V standards. <   ThelastparagraphisbasedonStateFarm,538U.S.at421,inwhichthecourtheldthat: 7  Astatecannotpunishadefendantforconductthatmayhavebeenlawfulwhereit { occurred8Nor,asageneralrule,doesaStatehavealegitimateconcerninimposingpunitive a damagestopunishadefendantforunlawfulactscommittedoutsideoftheStatesjurisdiction. G Thecourtspecificallymandatedthat: Ajurymustbeinstructed,furthermore,thatitmaynot - useevidenceofoutofstateconducttopunishadefendantforactionthatwaslawfulinthe  jurisdictionwhereitoccurred.StateFarm,538U.S.at422.   =u @  %   5.55 GOODFAITHDEFENSETOCOMPENSATORYANDPUNITIVEDAMAGES  A   ^   IfyoufindinfavoroftheplaintiffunderInstruction___,1thenyoumustanswerthe * followingquestionintheverdictform(s):Hasitbeenproved2thatthedefendantmadeagood  % faitheffortandconsultedwiththeplaintiff,toidentifyandmakeareasonableaccommodation?  ~ & ~ @$ NotesonUse  5    1.Fillinthenumberortitleofthe reasonableaccommodationessentialelements  0  instructionhere(ModelInstruction5.51C,supra). t  '~5 C   2.ModelInstruction3.04(BurdenofProof)tellsthejurythatsomethingisprovedonly o  ifthejuryfindsitismorelikelytruethannottrue.Thephrase greaterweightoftheevidence U  isnotnecessaryhere.ItcanbeincludedinInstruction3.04ifdesiredbythecourt. ;  &   @--! CommitteeComments      Thisinstructionisdesignedforuseincaseswhereadiscriminatorypracticeinvolvesthe K  provisionofareasonableaccommodation.Thelanguageisderivedfrom42U.S.C. 1 ' F 1981a(a)(3),whichprovidesthattheplaintiffmaynotrecoverdamagesifthedefendant  "demonstratesgoodfaithefforts"toarriveatareasonableaccommodationwiththeplaintiff.    Ifthejuryanswerstheaboveinterrogatoryintheaffirmative,theplaintiffmaystillbe V entitledtoattorneys'feesandnominaldamages.  <  v @ %   5.56BUSINESSJUDGMENT  I   ^ @--! CommitteeComments  *   SeeinfraModelInstruction5.94.   %   w@q q  %   5.57CONSTRUCTIVEDISCHARGE J   ^  @--! CommitteeComments  *   SeeinfraModelInstructionNo.5.93.  %    `    0  a`h a ) x@!!  %   5.60RETALIATIONUNDEREMPLOYMENTDISCRIMINATIONSTATUTES  @*  IntroductoryComment enL   | L   \XXtB   ԍ5.60RETALIATIONUNDEREMPLOYMENTDISCRIMINATIONSTATUTES IntroductoryComment  M C  K4X`  hp x (#4X!K t ?\\#?XtX?\nM #B   ԍ5.60RETALIATIONUNDEREMPLOYMENTDISCRIMINATIONSTATUTES IntroductoryComment  N C    Thefollowinginstructionsaredesignedforuseincaseswheretheplaintiffallegesthathe H orshewasdischargedorotherwiseretaliatedagainstbecauseheorsheopposedanunlawful . ~ employmentpractice,or participatedinanymannerinaproceedingunderoneofthe  d discriminationstatutes.TitleVII,theAgeDiscriminationinEmploymentAct,TheAmericans  J WithDisabilitiesAct,theFamilyandMedicalLeaveAct,andotherfederalemploymentlaws  0 expresslyprohibitretaliationagainstemployeeswhoengagein protectedactivity.See,e.g.,42    U.S.C.2000e3(TitleVII);29U.S.C.623(d)(ADEA);42U.S.C.1223(ADA);29U.S.C.    2615(FMLA).Inaddition,42U.S.C.1981hasbeenconstruedtoprohibitretaliationagainst   employeeswhoengageinprotectedoppositiontoracialdiscrimination.Kimv.NashFinchCo., x  123F.3d1046,1059(8thCir.1997).Moreover,theantiretaliationlawsmay,insome ^  circumstances,extendprotectiontocover thirdpartyreprisals,inwhichanemployertakes D  adverseactionagainstoneindividualbecauseofthatpersonscloserelationshipwithanother *z  individualwhoengagedinprotectedactivity.SeeThompsonv.NorthAmericaStainless,LP, ` ___U.S.___,(2011)(whereemployeeengagesinprotectedactivity,andemployerretaliatesby F dischargingemployee's_fiance_,_fiance_ԀisanaggrievedpersonwithstandingtosueunderTitle , VIIsantiretaliationprovision).   dt  Theseinstructionsaredesignedtosubmittheissueofliabilityinaretaliationcaseunder l TitleVIIandotherfederaldiscriminationlaws.Toestablishaclaimofretaliation,theplaintiff R mustshow(1)heorsheengagedina protectedactivity,(2)theemployertookorengagedina 8 materiallyadverseaction,and(3)acausalconnectionexistedbetweentheprotectedactivityand  themateriallyadverseaction.BurlingtonNorthern&SantaFeRy.Co.v.White,548U.S.53,  6768,126S.Ct.2405,241415(2006);see,e.g.,Higginsv.Gonzales,481F.3d578,589(8th  Cir.2007).Anactionis materiallyadverseif itwellmighthavedissuadedareasonable  workerfrommakingorsupportingachargeofdiscrimination,Burlington,548U.S.at68; f Vajdlv.MesabiAcademyofKidspeace,Inc.,484F.3d546,552(8thCir.2007). L  Sd] p x (#X`  hp x (#]Q ProtectedActivity:Opposition   Q4X` hp x (#X(#Q  Aretaliationplaintiffdoesnotneedtoprovethattheunderlyingemploymentpracticeby  ! theemployerwasunlawful;instead,employeesareprotectedfromretaliationiftheyopposean !" employmentpracticewhichtheyreasonablyandingoodfaithbelievetobeunlawful.SeeClark "# CountySchoolDistrictv.Breeden,532U.S.268(2001);Wentzv.MarylandCas.Co.,869F.2d #$ 1153,1155(8thCir.1989)(ADEAcase: Contrarytothedistrictcourtsruling...toprovethat g$% heengagedinprotectedactivity,Wentzneednotestablishthattheconductheopposedwas... M% & discriminatory.). 3&!'   Inordertobe protectedactivity,theemployeescomplaintmustrelatetounlawful l'") employmentpractices;oppositiontoallegeddiscriminationagainststudentsorcustomersisnot R(#* protectedbecauseitdoesnotrelatetoanunlawfulemploymentpractice.Artisv.Francis 8)$+ Howell,161F.3d1178(8thCir.1998).Asageneralproposition,however,thethresholdfor *n%, engagingin protectedactivityisfairlylow:thetouchstoneissimplywhethertheemployee +T&- hadareasonable,goodfaithbeliefthattheemployerhadcommittedanunlawfulemployment +:'. practice.Stuartv.GeneralMotorsCorp.,217F.3d621,634(8thCir.2000);Buettnerv.Eastern ^ ArchCoalSalesCo.,216F.3d707,714(8thCir.2000);Wentz,869F.2dat1155. D < p x (#XX(#<&  Q__ ProtectedActivity:Participation ' c Ԉ  X Q4X` hp x (#X(#Q&    Inadditiontoprohibitingretaliationbasedonanemployees oppositiontowhatheor   shereasonablybelievestobeanunlawfulemploymentpractice,TitleVIIandotherfederal  w employmentlawsprotectemployeesfromretaliationbasedontheir participationin  ]  proceedingsunderthesestatutes.E.g.,42U.S.C.2000e3(TitleVII);29U.S.C.623(d)  C  (ADEA);42U.S.C.12203(ADA).Crossv.Cleaver,142F.3d1059,1071(8thCir.1988). )  Protected participationappearstoincludefilingachargewiththeEEOC(oraparallelstateor m  localagency),filingalawsuitunderoneofthefederalemploymentstatutes,orservingasa S  witnessinanEEOCcaseordiscriminationlawsuit.Unlike oppositioncases,employeeswho 9   participateintheseproceedingsappeartohaveabsoluteprotectionfromretaliation,   irrespectiveofwhethertheunderlyingclaimwasmadereasonablyandingoodfaith.Bensonv.   LittleRockHiltonInn,742F.2d414(8thCir.1984).'  c     dS< p x (#XX(#<Q~~ MateriallyAdverseAction   Ԉ $ Q4X` hp x (#X(#Q  Toqualifyasunlawfulretaliation,theemployermusthavetakena"materiallyadverse" n action.BurlingtonNorthern&SantaFeRy.Co.v.White,548U.S.53,6768,126S.Ct.2405, T 241415(2006).Tobe"materiallyadverse,"theplaintiffmustshowthatareasonableemployee : inplaintiff'spositionmightwellhavebeen dissuadedfromfilingorsupportingachargeof   discrimination.Id.at68.Thisisanobjectivestandard.Id.   Sd  Therequisite"materiallyadverse"actionisnotlimitedtoactionsthataffecttheterms P andconditionsofemploymentId.Indeed,itextendsbeyondworkplaceandemployment 6 relatedactsandharm.Id.Ontheotherhand,trivialactionsarenotmateriallyadverse.Id.at  121516.Pettyslights,minorannoyances,orasimplelackofgoodmannersnormallyarenot  sufficienttodemonstratethatanactionismateriallyadverse.Id.Boththeactionanditscontext  mustbeexamined,asactsthatmaybeimmaterialinsomesituationsmaybematerialinothers. p  Id.;seeCleggv.ArkansasDept.ofCorrection,2007WL2296414(8thCir.2007);Stewartv.  V! IndependentSch.Dist.No.196,481F.3d1034(8thCir.2007).Anemployer'sactionsmaybe !<" considered"cumulatively""extreme,systematicretaliatoryconduct"maybeconsidered ""# materiallyadverse._Devin_Ԁv._Schwan_'sHomeService,Inc.,2007WL1948310(8thCir.2007). f#$ < p x (#XX(#<ӀQ"   CausalConnection   Ԉ $A& Q4X` hp x (#X(#Q  Plaintiffmustshowtherewasacausalconnectionbetweentheplaintiffsprotected %z( activityandtheemployersmateriallyadverseaction.Ithasbeenheldthattiming    alone    Ԁmaybe &` ) insufficienttoestablishcausation.CompareBradleyv.Widnall,232F.3d626(8thCir.2000); 'F!* _Scroggins_Ԁv.UniversityofMinnesota,221F.3d1042(8thCir.2000),with_Bassett_Ԁv.Cityof (,"+ Minneapolis,211F.3d1097,1105(8thCir.2000);seealsoSmithv.St.LouisUniversity,109 p)#, F.3d1261,1266(8thCir.1997)( Passageoftimebetweeneventsdoesnotbyitselfforeclosea V*#- claimofretaliation).Theproximitybetweentheplaintiffsprotectedactivityandthe <+$. employersmateriallyadverseactionoftenisastrongcircumstantialfactor.Smith,109F.3dat ",%/ 1266;_Bassett_,211F.3dat1105.InClarkCountySchoolDist.v.Breeden,532U.S.268,273 ^ (2001),theSupremeCourtnotedthatthe casesthatacceptmeretemporalproximitybetweenan D employersknowledgeofprotectedactivity"andamateriallyadverseemploymentaction as * sufficientevidenceofcasualtytoestablishaprimafaciecaseuniformlyholdthatthetemporal   proximitymustbeveryclose.   < p x (#XX(#<&  Q     StandardforCausation     'x Ԉ |  Q4X` hp x (#X(#Q& ,   UnderTitleVII,asamendedbytheCivilRightsActof1991,thestandardforcausation   toestablishliabilityfordiscriminationiswhetherdiscriminatoryintentwasa motivating   factorintheemployersdecision.42U.S.C.2000e2(m)(pretextcases);DesertPalace,Inc.   v.Costa,539U.S.90(2003);seealsoPedigov.P.A.M.Transp.Inc.,60F.3d1300(8thCir. g  1995)(applying motivatingfactorcausationstandardinADAcase).However,theEighth M  CircuithasnotedthattheCivilRightsActof1991didnotmodifythestandardforliabilityin 3 TitleVIIretaliationcasesand,accordingly,theplaintiffmustshowthatretaliationwasa w  determiningfactorintheemployerschallengeddecision.VanHornv.BestBuyStores,L.P., ] 526F.3d1144,1148(8thCir.2008);Carringtonv.CityofDesMoines,Iowa,481F.3d1046, C 1053(8thCir.2007).Butcf.Warrenv.Prejean,301F.3d893,90001(8thCir.2002) ) ( [_i]nstructing_ԀthejurythatWarrenmustprovebyapreponderanceoftheevidencethathersex  andgrievanceweremotivatingfactorsin_DYS_decisiontodischargeher,fairlyandadequately  reflectstheapplicablelawofthiscircuit)(emphasisadded).Withrespecttoretaliationcases } underotherstatutessuchastheADEA,theCommitteebelievesthatthe determiningfactor c standardshouldbeusedunlessanduntilthecaselawindicatesotherwiseor,inthealternative, I thedistrictcourtmayusethespecialinterrogatoriesat5.92toobtainfindingstobothstandards. / NeithertheSupremeCourtnortheEighthCircuithasruledonthisissueasofthepublication s datefortheseinstructions.',y  Y < p x (#XX(#<&  Q     RemediesandVerdictForms   ' m Ԉ  4! Q4X` hp x (#X(#Q& ~   Lawyersandjudgesshouldutilizethedamagesinstructionsandverdictformswhich !m# applytothetypeofdiscriminationinquestion.Inotherwords,inaTitleVIIretaliationcase "S$ (andsubjecttothecausationstandardissuediscussedabove),thecourtshouldusesupraModel #9% Instructions5.01Aetseq.;inanADEAretaliationcase,thecourtshouldusesupraModel }$& Instructions5.11Aetseq.;andsoon.'~!C  c%'   Thefollowinginstructionsarepatternedonasituationwheretheplaintiffclaims &> ) retaliationbasedonhisorheroppositiontoallegedracediscrimination. #XtXX?XtN #  '$!* К,)z S-,{@  %   5.61RETALIATIONFORPARTICIPATIONIN ^ @w w PROCEEDINGSUNDEREMPLOYMENTSTATUTES    D   ?XtXXXtYourverdictmustbefortheplaintiffandagainstthedefendantontheplaintiffs   retaliationclaimifallthefollowingelementshavebeenproved1: i    First,theplaintiff[filedanEEOCchargealleging(racediscrimination)]2;and  d   Second,thedefendant(discharged,transferred,reassigned)3theplaintiff;and      [Third,theplaintiffs(discharge,transfer,reassignment)mightwellpersuadeanother t  reasonableemployeeinthesameorsimilarcircumstancesnotto[fileanEEOCcharge]]4;and o    [Third,Fourth],theplaintiffs[filingofanEEOCcharge]wasadeterminingfactor5in &  thedefendantsdecision6to(discharge,transfer,reassign)theplaintiff. !    Ifanyoftheaboveelementshasnotbeenproved,yourverdictmustbeforthedefendant z  andyouneednotproceedfurtherinconsideringthisclaim. 1   The[filingofanEEOCcharge]wasadeterminingfactoronlyifthedefendantwould , nothavedischargedtheplaintiffbutfortheplaintiff'sfilingofanEEOCcharge;itdoesnot  requirethatthefilingofanEEOCchargewastheonlyreasonforthedecisionmadebythe < defendant.7[Youmayfindthattheplaintiff's[filingofanEEOCcharge][wasadetermining 7 factor]inthedefendant's(decision)ifithasbeenprovedthatthedefendant'sstatedreason(s)for  its(decision)[(is)(are)]apretexttohidediscrimination.]8 G!  t< p x (#XX(#<Q$ NotesonUse  B# Q4X` hp x (#X(#Q  1.ModelInstruction3.04(BurdenofProof)tellsthejurythatsomethingisprovedonly $ ifthejuryfindsitismorelikelytruethannottrue.Thephrase greaterweightoftheevidence  % isnotnecessaryhere.ItcanbeincludedinInstruction3.04ifdesiredbythecourt.  !h&    2.Describetheprotectedconductandselecttheappropriatetermsdependingupon  #' whethertheplaintiffsunderlyingcomplaintinvolveddiscriminationbasedonrace,gender,age, $( disability,etc. $)   3.Selecttheappropriatetermdependinguponwhethertheallegedretaliatoryaction F&* involveddischarge,demotion,failuretopromote,transfer,suspension,etc. ,' +  dt  4.Onlysubmitthisparagraphwhenthepartiesdisputewhetheradecisionoractwas ((",  materiallyadverse.SeesupraIntroductoryComments.TheCommitteeelectednottousethe l)#- phrase materiallyadversedirectlyintheelementsinstructionforsimplicity.Actualuseofthe R*#. phrase materiallyadverseintheelementsinstructionmaybepreferredinsomeinstances.The 8+$/ Committeerecommendsdefining materiallyadverseintheinstructioninthisinstance. ,%0   5.Seethediscussionintheintroductorycomments,Section5.60,regardingthestandard ^ forliabilityinretaliationcases.ThisinstructionassumesretaliationunderTitleVII(race,creed, D color,sex,etc.).Ifretaliationisbasedonsomethingelse,seetheIntroductoryCommentsin * section5.60.     6.Thisinstructionmakesreferencestothedefendant's"decision."Itmaybemodifiedif Z  anothertermsuchas"actions"or"conduct"wouldbemoreappropriate. @    7.Thisdefinitionofthephrase,"thefilingofanEEOCchargewasadeterminingfactor"  , isbasedonGrebinv.SiouxFallsIndep.SchoolDist.No.495,779F.2d18,20n.1(8thCir. p  1985). V   8.Thissentencemaybeadded,ifappropriate.SeeModelInstruction5.95,infra,and B  Moorev.RobertsonFireProtectionDist.,249F.3d786,790n.9(8thCir.2001),whichstates (   [w]edonotexpressanyviewastowhetheriteverwouldbereversibleerrorforatrialcourtto l  failtogiveapretextinstruction,thoughwetendtodoubtit. R  #XtXX?Xt #\XXt#XtX\ #Ԛ   `     h      p    d/-|@  %   5.62RETALIATIONFOROPPOSITION ^ @H H TOHARASSMENTORDISCRIMINATION    D   ?XtXXXtYourverdictmustbefortheplaintiffandagainstthedefendantontheplaintiffs   retaliationclaimifallthefollowingelementshavebeenproved1: i    First,theplaintiffcomplainedtothedefendantthat[(he)(she)(nameofthirdparty)]2  d wasbeing(harassed/discriminatedagainst)3onthebasisof(race)4;and      Second,theplaintiffreasonablybelievedthat[(he)(she)(nameofthirdparty)]wasbeing t  (harassed/discriminatedagainst)3onthebasisof(race)5;and o    Third,thedefendant(discharged,transferred,reassigned)6theplaintiff; &    [Fourth,the(transfer,reassignment)mightwellpersuadeareasonablepersoninthe !  sameorsimilarcircumstancesnottocomplainabout(harassment/discrimination)]7;and z    Fourth,theplaintiffscomplaintof(racialharassment)(racediscrimination)wasa 1 (determining)8factorinthedefendantsdecisionto(discharge,transfer,reassign)theplaintiff. ,   Ifanyoftheaboveelementshasnotbeenproved,yourverdictmustbeforthedefendant  andyouneednotproceedfurtherinconsideringthisclaim. <   Theplaintiffscomplaintof(harassment/discrimination)wasadeterminingfactoronly 7 ifthedefendantwouldnothavedischargedtheplaintiffbutfortheplaintiffscomplaintof  (discrimination/harassment);itdoesnotrequirethatthecomplaintof G! (discrimination/harassment)wastheonlyreasonforthedecisionmadebythedefendant.9󀀀[You B# mayfindthattheplaintiff's[filingofanEEOCcharge][wasadeterminingfactor]inthe % defendant's(decision)10ifithasbeenprovedthatthedefendant'sstatedreason(s)forits R!' (decision)[(is)(are)]apretexttohidediscrimination.]11 "M)  t< p x (#XX(#<Q$ NotesonUse  $+ Q4X` hp x (#X(#Q  1.ModelInstruction3.04(BurdenofProof)tellsthejurythatsomethingisprovedonly ^%, ifthejuryfindsitismorelikelytruethannottrue.Thephrase greaterweightoftheevidence D&- isnotnecessaryhere.ItcanbeincludedinInstruction3.04ifdesiredbythecourt. *' .   2.Selecttheappropriatetermdependinguponwhethertheplaintiffcomplainedabout (&"/ discriminationtowardhimselforherselforathirdparty. j) #0   3.Selecttheappropriatetermdependingonwhethertheplaintiffsunderlyingcomplaint *f$1 involvedharassmentoranallegedlydiscriminatoryemploymentdecision. +L%2   4.Selecttheappropriatetermdependinguponwhethertheunderlyingcomplaintwas ^ basedonrace,gender,age,disability,etc. D   5.Theplaintiffneednotprovethattheunderlyingemploymentpracticebytheemployer @ was,infact,unlawful.Instead,employeesareprotectediftheyopposedanemploymentpractice  & whichtheyreasonablyandingoodfaithbelievetobeunlawful.Onlysubmitthisparagraphif j  thereisevidencetosupportafactualdisputeastowhethertheplaintiffwascomplainingofor P  opposingdiscriminationingoodfaith.SeesupraIntroductoryComments. 6    6.Selecttheappropriatetermdependinguponwhethertheallegedlyretaliatoryaction  2 involveddischarge,demotion,failuretopromote,reassignment,suspension,etc. v   7.Onlysubmitthisparagraphwhenthepartiesdisputewhetheradecisionoractwas r   materiallyadverse.TheCommitteeelectednottousethephrase materiallyadversedirectly X  intheelementsinstructionforsimplicity.Actualuseofthephrase materiallyadverseinthe >  elementsinstructionmaybepreferredinsomeinstances.TheCommitteerecommendsdefining $   materiallyadverseintheinstructioninthisinstance.Toqualifyasunlawfulretaliation,the h  employermusthavetakena materiallyadverseaction.BurlingtonNorthern&SantaFeRy. N  Co.v.White,548U.S.53,6768,126_S.Ct_.2405,241415(2006).Tobe materiallyadverse, 4 theplaintiffmustshowthatareasonableemployeeinplaintiffspositionmightwellhavebeen   dissuadedfromcomplainingaboutdiscriminationorharassment.Id.at68.Thisisan  objectivestandard.Id. Byfocusingonthematerialityofthechallengedactionandthe  perspectiveofareasonablepersonintheplaintiffsposition,[theSupremeCourt]_believe[s_]this n standardwillscreenouttrivialconductwhileeffectivelycapturingthoseactsthatarelikelyto T dissuadeemployeesfromcomplainingorassistingincomplaintsaboutdiscrimination.Id.at : 6970.Ultimateemploymentdecisionssuchasdemotionanddischargegenerallymeetthis ~  standard.Id.at60. d   8.Seethediscussionintheintroductorycomments,Section5.60,regardingthestandard ` forliabilityinretaliationcases.ThisinstructionassumesretaliationunderTitleVII(race,creed, F color,sex,etc.).Ifretaliationisbasedonsomethingelse,seetheIntroductoryCommentsin , Section5.60. p    9.Thisdefinitionofthephrase, complaintof(harassment/discrimination)wasa !l determiningfactorisbasedonGrebinv.SiouxFallsIndep.SchoolDist.No.495,779F.2d18, "R 20n.1(8thCir.1985). #8   10.Thisinstructionmakesreferencestothedefendant's"decision."Itmaybemodified $ ifanothertermsuchas"actions"or"conduct"wouldbemoreappropriate. %x   dt  11.Thissentencemaybeadded,ifappropriate.SeeModelInstruction5.95,infra,and 0' ! Moorev.RobertsonFireProtectionDist.,249F.3d786,790n.9(8thCir.2001),whichstates (!"  [w]edonotexpressanyviewastowhetheriteverwouldbereversibleerrorforatrialcourtto ("# failtogiveapretextinstruction,thoughwetendtodoubtit.#XtXX?Xtڜ # )#$  ,+$% Їt/}֚  20H ?XtXXXt%   5.63RETALIATIONTHIRDPARTYREPRISAL oǺ   ^0 t N14 <DL!XX(#N  Yourverdictmustbefortheplaintiffandagainstthedefendantontheplaintiffs  retaliationclaimifallthefollowingelementshavebeenproved1: K    First,theplaintiffhada[specifynatureofrelationship]with[NAMEOFPERSONWHO    COMPLAINED],2 a 3    Second,[NAMEOFPERSONWHOCOMPLAINED][filedanEEOCchargealleging   (racediscrimination)]3; wI    Third,thedefendant(describeadverseemploymentactionsuchasdischarged, 4 transferred,reassigned)4theplaintiff; _   Fourth,theplaintiffs(transfer,reassignment)mightwellpersuadeareasonableperson J inthesameorsimilarcircumstancesas[NAMEOFPERSONWHOCOMPLAINED]notto u (fileanEEOCcharge)5;and    Fifth,[NAMEOFPERSONWHOCOMPLAINED]s[filingofanEEOCcharge]wasa  determiningfactor6inthedefendantsdecisionto(discharge,transfer,reassign)theplaintiff.    Ifanyoftheaboveelementshasnotbeenproved,yourverdictmustbeforthedefendant   andyouneednotproceedfurtherinconsideringthisclaim. ("   The[filingofanEEOCcharge]wasadeterminingfactoronlyifthedefendantwould $ nothavedischargedtheplaintiffbutforthefilingofanEEOCcharge;itdoesnotrequirethatthe >!& filingofanEEOCchargewastheonlyreasonforthedecisionmadebythedefendant.7[You "i( mayfindthat[NAMEOFPERSONWHOCOMPLAINED]s[filingofanEEOCcharge][wasa #* determiningfactor]inthedefendant's(decision)8ifithasbeenprovedthatthedefendant'sstated I%!, reason(s)forits(decision)[(is)(are)]apretexttohidediscrimination.]9 &t".  td9DL!X!9Q$ NotesonUse _(1$0 N14 <DL!DX!N   ThisinstructionisbasedonModelInstruction5.61,andisintendedtosubmitathird )%1  partyreprisalclaiminwhichtheplaintiff/employeewasallegedlysubjectedtounlawful *q&2 retaliationbecauseanotheremployee,withwhomtheplaintiffhadarelationship,engagedin ^ protectedparticipation. D    1.ModelInstruction3.04(BurdenofProof)tellsthejurythatsomethingisprovedonly @ ifthejuryfindsitismorelikelytruethannottrue.Thephrase greaterweightoftheevidence  & isnotnecessaryhere.ItcanbeincludedinInstruction3.04ifdesiredbythecourt. j    2.Insertthenameoftheindividualallegedtohaveengagedintheprotectedactivity,and  f describethenatureoftherelationshipwiththeplaintiff.InThompsonv.NorthAmerican  L Stainless,LP,___U.S.___,131_S.Ct_.863(2011),theCourtheldthat,whereanemployee  2 engagesinprotectedactivity,andtheemployerretaliatesbydischargingtheemployees_fianc_, v the_fianc_ԀisanaggrievedpersonwithstandingtosueunderTitleVIIsantiretaliationprovision. \  However,theCourtexpressly _decline[d_]toidentifyafixedclassofrelationshipsforwhich B  thirdpartyreprisalsareunlawful.Weexpectthatfiringaclosefamilymemberwillalmost (  alwaysmeettheBurlingtonstandard,andinflictingamilderreprisalonamereacquaintancewill   almostneverdoso,butbeyondthatwearereluctanttogeneralize.131_S.Ct_.at868.Thetrial   courtmustdeterminewhethertherelationshipatissuesatisfiestheThompsonstandard,andthis |  paragraphshouldbeusedifthereisafactualdisputeastothenatureoftherelationship. b   3.Describetheprotectedconductandselecttheappropriatetermsdependingupon  whethertheplaintiffsunderlyingcomplaintinvolveddiscriminationbasedonrace,gender,age,  disability,etc.    4.Selecttheappropriatetermdependinguponwhethertheallegedretaliatoryaction @ involveddischarge,demotion,failuretopromote,transfer,suspension,etc. &   5.Onlysubmitthisparagraphwhenthepartiesdisputewhetheradecisionoractwas "  materiallyadverse.TheCommitteeelectednottousethephrase materiallyadversedirectly f intheelementsinstructionforsimplicity.Actualuseofthephrase materiallyadverseinthe L elementsinstructionmaybepreferredinsomeinstances.TheCommitteerecommendsdefining 2  materiallyadverseintheinstructioninthisinstance.Toqualifyasunlawfulretaliation,the  employermusthavetakena materiallyadverseaction.BurlingtonNorthern&SantaFeRy.  Co.v.White,548U.S.53,6768,126_S.Ct_.2405,241415(2006).Tobe materiallyadverse,   theplaintiffmustshowthatareasonableemployeeinplaintiffspositionmightwellhavebeen !l  dissuadedfromcomplainingaboutdiscriminationorharassment.Id.at68.Thisisan "R objectivestandard.Id. Byfocusingonthematerialityofthechallengedactionandthe #8 perspectiveofareasonablepersonintheplaintiffsposition,[theSupremeCourt]_believe[s_]this |$ standardwillscreenouttrivialconductwhileeffectivelycapturingthoseactsthatarelikelyto b%  dissuadeemployeesfromcomplainingorassistingincomplaintsaboutdiscrimination.Id.at H&! 6970.Ultimateemploymentdecisionssuchasdemotionanddischargegenerallymeetthis .' " standard.Id.at60. (!#   6.Seethediscussionintheintroductorycomments,Section5.60,regardingthestandard n)#$ forliabilityinretaliationcases.ThisinstructionassumesretaliationunderTitleVII(race,creed, T*#% color,sex,etc.).Ifretaliationisbasedonsomethingelse,seetheIntroductoryCommentsin :+$& Section5.60.  ,%'   7.Thisdefinitionofthephrase, thefilingofanEEOCchargewasadeterminingfactor ^ isbasedonGrebinv.SiouxFallsIndep.SchoolDist.No.495,779F.2d18,20n.1(8thCir. D 1985). *   8.Thisinstructionmakesreferencestothedefendant's"decision."Itmaybemodifiedif  & anothertermsuchas"actions"or"conduct"wouldbemoreappropriate. j    9.Thissentencemaybeadded,ifappropriate.SeeModelInstruction5.95,infra,and  f Moorev.RobertsonFireProtectionDist.,249F.3d786,790n.9(8thCir.2001),whichstates  L  [w]edonotexpressanyviewastowhetheriteverwouldbereversibleerrorforatrialcourtto  2 failtogiveapretextinstruction,thoughwetendtodoubtit.#XtXX?Xt # v  2,% Їut~ ?XtXXXt  %   5.64RETALIATIONTHIRDPARTYREPRISALFOROPPOSITIONTO ^ HARASSMENTORDISCRIMINATION ar  L  M   D m L  M  L  M    Yourverdictmustbefortheplaintiffandagainstthedefendantontheplaintiffs   retaliationclaimifallthefollowingelementshavebeenprovedL  M  1L  M  : Q    L  M  FirstL  M  ,theplaintiffhada[specifynatureofrelationship]with[NAMEOFPERSONWHO   COMPLAINED],L  M  2L  M   w    L  M  SecondL  M  ,[NAMEOFPERSONWHOCOMPLAINED]complainedtothedefendantthat D  [(he)(she)(nameofthirdparty)]L  M  3L  M  Ԁwasbeing(harassed/discriminatedagainst)L  M  4L  M  Ԁonthebasisof ?  (race)]L  M  5L  M  ;and     L  M  ThirdL  M  ,[NAMEOFPERSONWHOCOMPLAINED]reasonablybelievedthat[(he)(she) e (nameofthirdparty)]wasbeing(harassed/discriminatedagainst)L  M  6L  M  Ԁonthebasisof(race);and    L  M  Fourth,L  M  Ԁthedefendant(discharged,transferred,reassigned)L  M  7L  M  Ԁtheplaintiff;    [L  M  FifthL  M  ,the(transfer,reassignment)mightwellpersuadeareasonablepersoninthesame X orsimilarcircumstancesnottocomplainabout(harassment/discrimination)];andL  M  8L  M      L  M  SixthL  M  ,[NAMEOFPERSONWHOCOMPLAINED]'scomplaintof(racialharassment) ~ (racediscrimination)wasa(determining)L  M  9L  M  Ԁfactorinthedefendantsdecisionto(discharge, 5 transfer,reassign)theplaintiff. 0     Ifanyoftheaboveelementshasnotbeenproved,yourverdictmustbeforthedefendant [!! andyouneednotproceedfurtherinconsideringthisclaim. "V#     The complaintof(harassment/discrimination)wasadeterminingfactoronlyifthe $#% defendantwouldnothavedischargedtheplaintiffbutforthecomplaintof %|' (discrimination/harassment);itdoesnotrequirethatthecomplaintof 3' ) (discrimination/harassment)wastheonlyreasonforthedecisionmadebythedefendant.L  M  10L  M  Ԁ[You (."+  mayfindthat[NAMEOFPERSONWHOCOMPLAINED]'s[complaintofdiscrimination] )#- [wasadeterminingfactor]inthedefendant's(decision)L  M  11L  M  Ԁifithasbeenprovedthatthe ^ defendant'sstatedreason(s)forits(decision)[(is)(are)]apretexttohidediscrimination.]L  M  12L  M   Y  6DLX!6L  M  Q$L  M  NotesonUseL  M  Ԉ  &  H.4 <DLDXHL  M    ThisinstructionisbasedonModelInstruction5.62,andisintendedtosubmitathird   partyreprisalclaiminwhichtheplaintiff/employeewasallegedlysubjectedtounlawful  f retaliationbecauseanotheremployee,withwhomtheplaintiffhadarelationship,engagedin  L protectedopposition.  2     1.ModelInstruction3.04(BurdenofProof)tellsthejurythatsomethingisprovedonly   ifthejuryfindsitismorelikelytruethannottrue.Thephrase greaterweightoftheevidence r  isnotnecessaryhere.ItcanbeincludedinInstruction3.04ifdesiredbythecourt. X      2.Insertthenameoftheindividualallegedtohaveengagedintheprotectedactivity,and   describethenatureoftherelationshipwiththeplaintiff.InL  M  Thompsonv.NorthAmerican   Stainless,LPL  M  ,___U.S.___,131_S.Ct_.863(2011),theCourtheldthat,whereanemployee ~  engagesinprotectedactivity,andtheemployerretaliatesbydischargingtheemployee's_fiance_, d the_fiance_ԀisanaggrievedpersonwithstandingtosueunderTitleVII'santiretaliationprovision. J However,theCourtexpressly"_decline[d_]toidentifyafixedclassofrelationshipsforwhich 0 thirdpartyreprisalsareunlawful.Weexpectthatfiringaclosefamilymemberwillalmost t alwaysmeettheL  M  BurlingtonL  M  Ԁstandard,andinflictingamilderreprisalonamereacquaintancewill Z almostneverdoso,butbeyondthatwearereluctanttogeneralize."131_S.Ct_.at868.Thetrial @ courtmustdeterminewhethertherelationshipatissuesatisfiestheL  M  ThompsonL  M  Ԁstandard,andthis & paragraphshouldbeusedifthereisafactualdisputeastothenatureoftherelationship.       3.Selecttheappropriatetermdependinguponwhethertheindividualcomplainedabout f discriminationtowardhimselforherselforathirdparty. L   4.Selecttheappropriatetermdependingonwhethertheindividual'sunderlying H complaintinvolvedharassmentoranallegedlydiscriminatoryemploymentdecision. .   5.Selecttheappropriatetermdependinguponwhethertheunderlyingcomplaintwas   basedonrace,gender,age,disability,etc. !n     6.Theplaintiffneednotprovethattheunderlyingemploymentpracticebytheemployer &# was,infact,unlawful.Instead,employeesareprotectediftheyopposedanemploymentpractice  $ whichtheyreasonablyandingoodfaithbelievetobeunlawful.Onlysubmitthisparagraphif $ thereisevidencetosupportafactualdisputeastowhethertheindividualwascomplainingofor %z  opposingdiscriminationingoodfaith.L  M  SeesupraL  M  ԀIntroductoryComments. &` !     7.Selecttheappropriatetermdependinguponwhethertheallegedlyretaliatoryaction (!" involveddischarge,demotion,failuretopromote,reassignment,suspension,etc. ("#     8.Onlysubmitthisparagraphwhenthepartiesdisputewhetheradecisionoractwas X*#$  materiallyadverse.TheCommitteeelectednottousethephrase materiallyadversedirectly >+$% intheelementsinstructionforsimplicity.Actualuseofthephrase materiallyadverseinthe $,%& elementsinstructionmaybepreferredinsomeinstances.TheCommitteerecommendsdefining ^  materiallyadverseintheinstructioninthisinstanceToqualifyasunlawfulretaliation,the D employermusthavetakena"materiallyadverse"action.L  M  BurlingtonNorthern&SantaFeRy. * Co.v.WhiteL  M  ,548U.S.53,6768,126S.Ct.2405,241415(2006).Tobe"materiallyadverse,"   theplaintiffmustshowthatareasonableemployeeinplaintiff'spositionmightwellhavebeen    dissuadedfromcomplainingaboutdiscriminationorharassment.L  M  Id.L  M  Ԁat68.Thisisan  ~ objectivestandard.L  M  IdL  M  ."L  M  Byfocusingonthematerialityofthechallengedactionandthe  d perspectiveofareasonablepersonintheplaintiff'sposition,L  M  [theSupremeCourt]L  M  Ԁ_believeL  M  [s_]L  M  Ԁthis  J standardwillscreenouttrivialconductwhileeffectivelycapturingthoseactsthatarelikelyto  0 dissuadeemployeesfromcomplainingorassistingincomplaintsaboutdiscrimination.L  M  "L  M  IdL  M  .at t  6970.L  M  ԀL  M  Ultimateemploymentdecisionssuchasdemotionanddischargegenerallymeetthis Z  standard.L  M  IdL  M  .at60. @    9.Seethediscussionintheintroductorycomments,Section5.60,regardingthestandard <  forliabilityinretaliationcases.ThisinstructionassumesretaliationunderTitleVII(race,creed, "  color,sex,etc.).Ifretaliationisbasedonsomethingelse,L  M  seeL  M  ԀtheIntroductoryCommentsin f  Section5.60. L   dtL  M    10.Thisdefinitionofthephrase,"complaintof(harassment/discrimination)wasa H determiningfactor"isbasedonL  M  Grebinv.SiouxFallsIndep.SchoolDist.No.495L  M  ,779F.2d18, . 20n.1(8thCir.1985). tdL  M   r   11.Thisinstructionmakesreferencestothedefendant's"decision."Itmaybemodified n ifanothertermsuchas"actions"or"conduct"wouldbemoreappropriate. T   12.Thissentencemaybeadded,ifappropriate.L  M  SeeL  M  ԀModelInstruction5.95,L  M  infraL  M  ,and   L  M  Moorev.RobertsonFireProtectionDist.L  M  ,249F.3d786,790n.9(8thL  M  ԀCir.2001),whichstates   [w]edonotexpressanyviewastowhetheriteverwouldbereversibleerrorforatrialcourtto z failtogiveapretextinstruction,thoughwetendtodoubtit. `  t?( 4 <DLX?L  M  #XtXX?XtN #   cay  h03u@1 1  %   5.70FIRSTAMENDMENTRETALIATION(42U.S.C.1983) 0 @ IntroductoryComment )       ThelegaltheoryunderlyingFirstAmendmentretaliationcasesisthat"aStatecannot b conditionpublicemploymentonabasisthatinfringestheemployee'sconstitutionallyprotected H interestinfreedomofexpression."Connickv.Myers,461U.S.138,142(1983);seealso .   Pickeringv.BoardofEduc.,391U.S.563,56874(1968);Perryv.Sindermann,408U.S.593,    597-98(1972);Mt.HealthyCitySchoolDist.v.Doyle,429U.S.274,283-84(1977);Rankinv.  z  McPherson,483U.S.378,383-84(1987);Watersv.Churchill,511U.S.661(1994).Although  `  mostFirstAmendmentretaliationcasesrelatetotheterminationoftheplaintiff'semployment,  F  theycaninvolvedemotions,suspensions,andotheremploymentrelatedactions.See,e.g.,  ,  Steverv.IndependentSchoolDist.No.625,943F.2d845(8thCir.1991)(transfer);Powellv.   Basham,921F.2d165,16768(8thCir.1990)(denialofpromotion);Duckworthv.Ford,995 x  F.2d858,86061(8thCir.1993)(harassment).Generally,therearethreeissuesinFirst ^  Amendmentretaliationcases:whethertheplaintiff'sspeechwas"protectedactivity"underthe D FirstAmendment;whethertheplaintiff'sspeechwasamotivatingorsubstantialfactorinthe * defendant'sdecisiontoterminateorotherwiseimpairtheplaintiff'semployment;andwhetherthe  defendantwouldhavetakenthesameactionirrespectiveoftheplaintiff'sspeech.E.g.,Hamerv. v Brown,831F.2d1398,1401(8thCir.1987);Lewisv.HarrisonSchoolDist.,805F.2d310,313 \ (8thCir.1986).InviewoftheSupremeCourt'sdecisioninMt.HealthyCitySchoolDist.v. B Doyle,429U.S.274(1977),themodelinstructiononliabilityutilizesamotivatingfactor/same ( decisionburdenshiftingformatinallFirstAmendmentretaliationcases.   53 @  %   5.71FIRSTAMENDMENTRETALIATIONELEMENTS(42U.S.C.1983)     ^   Yourverdictmustbefortheplaintiff[andagainstdefendant_______________]1[onthe * plaintiff'sFirstAmendmentretaliationclaim]2ifthefollowingelementshavebeenproved3:  %   First,thedefendant[discharged]4theplaintiff;and  ~   Second,theplaintiff's[herespecificallydescribetheplaintiff'sprotectedspeech-e.g., 5  lettertothelocalnewspaper]5[wasamotivatingfactor]6[playedapart]7inthedefendant's  0  decision[todischarge]8theplaintiff[;and     Third,thedefendantwasactingundercoloroflaw].9 @    However,yourverdictmustbeforthedefendantifanyoftheaboveelementshasnot ;  beenproved,orifithasbeenprovedthatthedefendantwouldhave[discharged]theplaintiff   regardlessof[(his)(her)](lettertothelocalnewspaper).10[Youmayfindthattheplaintiff's K  [lettertoalocalnewspaper][wasamotivatingfactor][playedapart]inthedefendant's F (decision)11ifithasbeenprovedthatthedefendant'sstatedreason(s)forits(decision)[(is)(are)]  nottherealreason,but[(is)(are)]apretexttohidediscrimination.]12 V  &  @$ NotesonUse  Q   1.Usethisphraseiftherearemultipledefendants.  'p   2.Thebracketedlanguageshouldbeinsertedwhentheplaintiffsubmitsmorethanone a  claimtothejury. G!   3.ModelInstruction3.04(BurdenofProof)tellsthejurythatsomethingisprovedonly B# ifthejuryfindsitismorelikelytruethannottrue.Thephrase greaterweightoftheevidence ($ isnotnecessaryhere.ItcanbeincludedinInstruction3.04ifdesiredbythecourt. l %   4.Thisinstructionisdesignedforuseinadischargecase.Ina"failuretohire,""failure !g' topromote,"or"demotion"case,theinstructionmustbemodified.Wheretheplaintiffresigned "M( butclaimsa"constructivedischarge,"thisinstructionshouldbemodified.SeeinfraModel #3) Instruction5.93. w$*   5.Toavoiddifficultquestionsregardingcausation,itisveryimportanttospecifically %r, describethespeechwhichformsthebasisfortheclaim.Vaguereferencesto"theplaintiff's &X - speech"or"theplaintiff'sstatementstotheschoolboard"oftenwillbeinadequate;instead, '>!. specificreferencetothetime,placeandsubstanceofthespeech(e.g.,"theplaintiff'scomments ($"/ criticizingteachersalariesattheApril1992schoolboardmeeting")isrecommended.Whenever h) #0 thereisagenuineissueastowhethertheplaintiff'sspeechwas"protected"bytheFirst N*#1 Amendment,thetrialcourtshouldbeextremelycarefulinmakingtherecordregardingthis 4+$2 issue.Ifthetrialcourtcanreadilydeterminethattheplaintiff'sspeechwas"protected"bythe ,%3 FirstAmendmentwithoutresorttojuryfindings,asuccinctdescriptionoftheprotectedspeech ^ shouldbeinsertedintheelementsinstruction.Bywayofexample,themodelinstructionmakes D referencetotheplaintiff's"lettertothelocalnewspaper."However,ifthereisanunderlying * factualdisputeimpactingwhethertheplaintiff'sspeechwasprotected,anyquestionsoffact   shouldbesubmittedtothejurythroughspecialinterrogatoriesorotherspecialinstructional   devices.SeeCookv.Tadros,312F.3d386,388(8thCir.2002);Shandsv.CityofKennett,993  ~ F.2d1337,134243(8thCir.1993).  d   AssuggestedbyShandsv.CityofKennett,993F.2d1337,134243(8thCir.1993),the   trialcourtmayseparatelysubmitspecialinterrogatoriestoelicitjuryfindingsastotherelevant   balancingfactors,whilereservingjudgmentonthelegalimpactofthosefindings.Forasample   setofinterrogatories,seeinfraModelInstruction5.71A.Theuseofspecialinterrogatorieson o  thesemodelinstructionswasapprovedinCookv.Tadros,312F.3d386,388(8thCir.2002).If U  thetrialcourttakesthisapproach,itshouldpostponeitsentryofjudgmentwhileitfully ;  evaluatestheimplicationsofthejury'sfindingsoffact.SeeinfraModelInstruction5.73A. !  Alternatively,iftheessentialjuryissuecanbecrystallizedintheformofasingleessential e  elementwhichtheplaintiffmustprove,itmaybeincludedintheelementsinstruction.For K  example,inMcGeev.SouthPemiscotSchoolDist.,712F.2d339,342(8thCir.1983),thetrial 1 courtinstructedthejurythatitsverdicthadtobeforthedefendantsifitbelievedthatthe  plaintiff's"exerciseoffreespeechhadadisruptiveimpactuponthe[schooldistrict's]  employees."    6.TheCommitteebelievesthattheterm"motivatingfactor"shouldbedefined.See < infraInstruction5.96. "   7.SeeinfraModelInstruction5.96,whichdefines motivatingfactorintermsof { whetherthecharacteristic playedapartoraroleinthedefendantsdecision.Thephrase a  motivatingfactorneednotbedefinedifthedefinitionitselfisusedintheelementinstruction. G   8.Thebracketedtermshouldbeconsistentwiththefirstelement.Accordingly,this B instructionmustbemodifiedina"failuretohire,""failuretopromote,"or"demotion"case. (   9.Usethislanguageiftheissueofwhetherthedefendantwasactingundercolorofstate    law,aprerequisitetoaclaimunder42U.S.C.1983.Typically,thiselementwillbeconceded !g! bythedefendant.Ifso,itneednotbeincludedinthisinstruction. "M"   10.Ifappropriate,thisinstructionmaybemodifiedtoincludea"businessjudgment" $$ and/ora"pretext"instruction.SeeinfraModelInstructions5.94,5.95. $%   11.Thisinstructionmakesreferencestothedefendant's"decision."Itmaybemodified C&' ifanothertermsuchas"actions"or"conduct"wouldbemoreappropriate. )' (   12.Thissentencemaybeadded,ifappropriate.SeeModelInstruction5.95,infra,and ($"* Moorev.RobertsonFireProtectionDist.,249F.3d786,790n.9(8thCir.2001),whichstates h) #+  [w]edonotexpressanyviewastowhetheriteverwouldbereversibleerrorforatrialcourtto N*#, failtogiveapretextinstruction,thoughwetendtodoubtit. 4+$- & ~ @--! CommitteeComments  ^ OVERVIEW Y   Publicemployersmaynotretaliateagainsttheiremployeesforspeakingoutonmattersof   '~^2 publicconcernunlesstheirspeechcontainsknowinglyorrecklesslyfalsestatements,   underminestheabilityoftheemployeetofunction,orinterfereswiththeoperationofthe  ~ governmentalentity.McGeev.SouthPemiscotSchoolDist.,712F.2d339,342(8thCir.1983);  d seealsoDuckworthv.Ford,995F.2d858,861(8thCir.1993)(holdingthatthedefendantswere  J notentitledtoqualifiedimmunityinFirstAmendmentcase);Shandsv.CityofKennett,993F.2d  0  1337,134446(8thCir.1993)(affirmingj.n.o.v.foremployerwheretheplaintiff'scomments t  regardingpersonnelandsafetyissueswerenotprotectedbyFirstAmendment);Bausworthv. Z  HazelwoodSchoolDist.,986F.2d1197(8thCir.1993)(affirmingsummaryjudgmentfor @  employerwheretheplaintiff'scommentsregardingschooldistrictpolicywerenot"protected &  activity");Buzekv.CountyofSaunders,972F.2d992(8thCir.1992)(individualdefendantwas    notentitledtoqualifiedimmunitydefenseinFirstAmendmentcase);Bartlettv.Fischer,972   F.2d911(8thCir.1992)(approvingqualifiedimmunitydefenseinFirstAmendmentcase); z  Steverv.IndependentSchoolDist.No.625,943F.2d845(8thCir.1991)(analyzing"protected ` speech"and"causation"issues);Powellv.Basham,921F.2d165(8thCir.1990)(holdingthat F publicemployee'scriticismofemployer'spromotionprocesswas"protectedactivity");Crainv. , BoardofPoliceComm'rs,920F.2d1402(8thCir.1990)(affirmingsummaryjudgmentwhere p theplaintiffs'internalgrievancesdidnotrisetothelevelof"protectedspeech");Hoffmannv. V MayorofCityofLiberty,905F.2d229(8thCir.1990)(employeegrievancewasnotprotected < bytheFirstAmendment);Darnellv.Ford,903F.2d556(8thCir.1990)(rulingthatstatepolice " officer'ssupportofacertaincandidateforthepositionofHighwayPatrolSuperintendentwas  "protectedactivity").  & % PRIMARYISSUESINFIRSTAMENDMENTCASES G   Generally,therearethreeprimaryissuesinFirstAmendmentretaliationcases: B '%G6= (1)whethertheplaintiff'sspeechwas"protectedactivity"undertheFirstAmendment; ( (2)whethertheplaintiff'sprotectedactivitywasasubstantialormotivatingfactorinthe l  defendant'sdecisiontoterminateorotherwiseimpairtheplaintiff'semployment;and(3)whether R!  thedefendantwouldhavetakenthesameactionirrespectiveoftheplaintiff'sprotectedactivity. 8"! Hamerv.Brown,831F.2d1398,1401(8thCir.1987);Lewisv.HarrisonSchoolDist.,805F.2d #" 310,313(8thCir.1986);Coxv.DardanellePublicSchoolDist.,790F.2d668,672(8thCir. $# 1986).Thedeterminationofwhethertheplaintiff'sspeechwas"protected"presentsaquestion $$ oflawforthecourt.E.g.,Bausworthv.HazelwoodSchoolDist.,986F.2d1197,1198(8thCir. %r% 1993);Lewisv.HarrisonSchoolDist.,805F.2d310,313(8thCir.1986). &X & & % SECONDARYISSUESRELATINGTO"PROTECTEDSPEECH"DETERMINATION (!(   Ingeneral,thequestionofwhethertheplaintiff'sspeechwas"protected"dependsupon h) #* '%(B twosubissues:(1)whethertheplaintiff'sspeechaddressedamatterof"publicconcern";and N*#+ (2)whether,inbalancingthecompetinginterests,theplaintiff'sinterestincommentingon 4+$, mattersofpublicconcernoutweighsthegovernment'sinterestinrenderingefficientservicesto ,%- itsconstituents.Watersv.Churchill,511U.S.661(1994);Hamerv.Brown,831F.2d1398, ^ 1401-02(8thCir.1987);Coxv.DardanellePublicSchoolDist.,790F.2d668,672(8thCir. D 1986).Inmanycases,thetrialcourtwillbeabletodeterminewhethertheplaintiff'sspeechwas * protectedwithoutmuchdifficulty.However,asdiscussedbelow,complicatedissuescanarise   whentherearefactualdisputesunderlyingthisissue.SeeShandsv.CityofKennett,993F.2d   1337,1342(8thCir.1993).  ~ & %   a.PublicConcern 5    Analysisofwhethertheplaintiff'sspeechaddressedamatterof"publicconcern"requires  0  '%5 F considerationoftheplaintiff'sroleinconveyingthespeech,whethertheplaintiffattemptedto t  communicatetothepublicatlarge,andwhethertheplaintiffwasattemptingtogeneratepublic Z  debateormerelypursuingpersonalgain.Bausworthv.HazelwoodSchoolDist.,986F.2d1197 @  (8thCir.1993);butcf.Derricksonv.BoardofEduc.,703F.2d309,316(8thCir.1983)(speech &  canbeprotectedevenifitwas"privatelyexpress[ed]"totheplaintiff'ssuperiors);Darnellv.    Ford,903F.2d556,563(8thCir.1990)(speechwasprotectedevenifitwasmotivatedbythe   plaintiff'sselfinterest);seegenerallyConnickv.Myers,461U.S.138,147(1983)(speechisnot z  protectedbyFirstAmendmentiftheplaintiffspeaksmerelyasanemployeeuponmattersonly ` ofpersonalinterest).Determinationofwhethertheplaintiff'sspeechaddressedamatterof F publicconcernappearstofallexclusivelywithintheprovinceofthecourt.SeeLewisv. , HarrisonSchoolDist.,805F.2d310,31213(8thCir.1986)(trialcourterredinfollowingjury's p findingthattheplaintiff'sspeechdidnotaddressamatterofpublicconcern). V & %   b.BalancingofInterests Q   Analysisofthe"balancing"issuedependsuponavarietyoffactors,whichtraditionally  '%3M haveincludedthefollowing:theneedforharmonyintheworkplace;whetherthegovernmental  entity'smissionrequiredacloseworkingrelationshipbetweentheplaintiffandhisorherco v workerswhenthespeechinquestionhascausedorcouldhavecauseddeteriorationinthe \ plaintiff'sworkrelationships;thetime,place,andmannerofthespeech;thecontextinwhich B thedisputearose;thedegreeofpublicinterestinthespeech;andwhetherthespeechimpaired ( theplaintiff'sabilitytoperformhisorherduties.Shandsv.CityofKennett,993F.2d1337,1344 l  (8thCir.1993);Hamerv.Brown,831F.2d1398,1402(8thCir.1987);seegenerallyPickering R!  v.BoardofEduc.,391U.S.563,568(1968).Thisbalancingprocessisflexible,andtheweight 8"! tobegiventoanyonefactordependsuponthespecificcircumstancesofeachcase.Shandsv. #" CityofKennett,993F.2d1337,1344(8thCir.1993). $# & %   c.BalancingandJuryInstructions ]%%   Althoughthebalancingprocessultimatelyisafunctionforthecourt,EighthCircuitcase &X ' '%]%R lawindicatesthatsubsidiaryfactualissuesmustbesubmittedtothejury.Forexample,in '>!( McGeev.SouthPemiscotSchoolDist.,712F.2d339,342(8thCir.1983),thecourtstatedthat ($") "[i]twasforthejurytodecidewhetherthe[plaintiff's]letter[totheeditor]createddisharmony h) #* betweenMcGeeandhisimmediatesupervisors."Likewise,inLewisv.HarrisonSchoolDist., N*#+  805F.2d310,315(8thCir.1986),theEighthCircuitruledthatitwaserrorforthetrialcourtto 4+$, disregardthejury'sspecialinterrogatoryfindingsoncertainbalancingissues.InShandsv.City ^ ofKennett,993F.2d1337(8thCir.1993),thecourtstatedthat: D  0   ` Anyunderlyingfactualdisputesconcerningwhethertheplaintiff'sspeechis ? protected...shouldbesubmittedtothejurythroughspecialinterrogatoriesorspecial  % verdictforms.Forexample,thejuryshoulddecidefactualquestionssuchasthenature i  andsubstanceoftheplaintiff'sspeechactivity,andwhetherthespeechcreated O  disharmonyintheworkplace.Thetrialcourtshouldthencombinethejury'sfactual 5  findingswithitslegalconclusionsindeterminingwhethertheplaintiff'sspeechis   protected. (#(# Id.at134243(citationsomitted).Accordingly,thismodelinstructionmaybesupplemented Z  withasetofspecialinterrogatoriesoritmayrequiremodificationtoelicitspecificjuryfindings @  oncriticalbalancingissuessuchas"disharmony."SeeinfraModelInstruction5.71An.2.The &  useofthesespecialinterrogatorieswasapprovedinCookv.Tadros,312F.3d386,388(8thCir.    2002).Althoughtheplaintiffappearstohavetheburdenofproofastowhetherthespeechwas   "constitutionallyprotected,"seeCoxv.MillerCountyR1SchoolDist.,951F.2d927,931(8th z  Cir.1991)andSteverv.IndependentSchoolDist.No.625,943F.2d845,84950(8thCir.1991), ` itisunclearwhethertheplaintiffbearstheburdenofproofastoeachsubsidiaryfactor. F   Whenthetrialcourtsubmitsspecialinterrogatoriestothejury,itbearsemphasisthatthe  ultimatedecisionastowhethertheplaintiff'sspeechwasprotectedisaquestionoflawforthe  court.E.g.,Lewisv.HarrisonSchoolDist.,805F.2d310,31213(8thCir.1986)(trialcourt k erredinfollowingjury'sfindingthatspeechdidnotaddressmatterofpublicconcern);Bowman Q v.PulaskiCountySpecialSchoolDist.,723F.2d640,64445(8thCir.1983)(theplaintiff's 7 speechwasprotectedeventhoughit"contributedtotheturmoil"attheworkplace).Italsobears { emphasisthatthedefendant'sreasonableperceptionofthecriticaleventsiscontrolling;thejury a cannotbeallowedtosubstituteitsjudgmentastowhat"reallyhappened"forthehonestand G reasonablebeliefofthedefendant.Watersv.Churchill,511U.S.661(1994.) - & %   d.BalancingandQualifiedImmunity (   Theneedtoaddressthebalancingissueinjuryinstructionsismostlikelytoariseincases    '%:a broughtagainstmunicipalities,schooldistricts,andotherlocalgovernmentalbodieswhichare !g! notentitledtoqualifiedimmunityorEleventhAmendmentimmunity.Incontrast,EighthCircuit "M" caselawsuggeststhatindividualdefendantsmayhavequalifiedimmunitywithrespecttoany #3# jurytriabledamagesclaimsifthe"balancingissue"becomescriticalinaFirstAmendmentcase. w$$ SeeGranthamv.Trickey,21F.3d289,295(8thCir.1994)(holdingthatindividualdefendants ]%% areentitledtoqualifiedimmunitywherethereisspecificandunrefutedevidencethatthe C&& employee'sspeechaffectedmoraleandsubstantiallydisruptedtheworkenvironment);Bartlettv. )' ' Fisher,972F.2d911,916(8thCir.1992)(suggestingthatqualifiedimmunityfromdamages (!( willapplywheneveraFirstAmendmentretaliationcaseinvolvesthe"balancingtest").Butcf. (") Duckworthv.Ford,995F.2d858,861(8thCir.1993)(rejectingindividualdefendants'qualified )}#* immunitydefenseinFirstAmendmentcase);Buzekv.CountyofSaunders,972F.2d992(8th *c$+ Cir.1992)(rejectingqualifiedimmunityinFirstAmendmentcasewherethedefendantfailedto +I%, introduceevidencesufficienttoinvokethebalancetest);Powellv.Basham,921F.2d165, ^ 167-68(8thCir.1990)(rejectingqualifiedimmunitydefenseinFirstAmendmentwrongful D dischargecases);Lewisv.HarrisonSchoolDist.,805F.2d310,318(8thCir.1986)(same).In * Watersv.Churchill,511U.S.661(1994),theSupremeCourtdeclinedtoaddresstheissueof   qualifiedimmunityinFirstAmendmentcases.Inaddition,stategovernmentalbodiestypically   haveEleventhAmendmentimmunityfromdamagesclaims.Willv.MichiganDept.ofState  ~ Police,491U.S.58(1989).Accordingly,whenbalancingissuesariseinacasebroughtbya  d stateemployee,thedefendantsmayhaveimmunityfromaclaimfordamagesand,asaresult,  J therewouldbenoneedforajurytrialorjuryinstructions.  0 & % MOTIVATIONANDCAUSATION     Ifaplaintiffcanmaketherequiredthresholdshowingthatheorsheengagedinprotected @  '%k activity,theremainingissuesfocusonthequestionsofmotivationandcausation:wasthe &  plaintiff'semploymentterminatedorotherwiseimpairedbecauseofhisorherprotectedactivity?    InMt.HealthyCitySchoolDist.v.Doyle,429U.S.274,287(1977),theSupremeCourt   introducedthe motivatingfactor/ samedecisionburdenshiftingformatinFirstAmendment z  retaliationcases.Ontheissueofcausation,italsoshouldbenotedthattheEighthCircuithas ` allowedaclaimagainstadefendantwhorecommendedtheplaintiff'sdismissalbutlackedfinal F decisionmakingauthority.Darnellv.Ford,903F.2d556,561-62(8thCir.1990).TheEighth , Circuitalsohasallowedaclaimagainstaschoolboardforunknowinglycarryingoutaschool p principal'sretaliatoryrecommendation.Coxv.DardanellePub.SchoolDist.,790F.2d668,676 V (8thCir.1986).InWatersv.Churchill,511U.S.661(1994),theSupremeCourtruledthata < publicemployerdoesnotviolatetheFirstAmendmentifithonestlyandreasonablybelieves " reportsbycoworkersofunprotectedconductbytheplaintiff;theSupremeCourtdidnotaddress  thesituationwherethepublicemployerrelieduponthetaintedrecommendationofa  managementlevelemployee.  v 75 @  %   5.71AFIRSTAMENDMENTRETALIATIONSPECIALINTERROGATORIES ^ @REGARDING"PROTECTEDSPEECH"BALANCINGISSUES D @!(42U.S.C.1983) 19r   *   ToassisttheCourtindeterminingwhethertheplaintiff's[describethespeechuponwhich   theplaintiff'sclaimisbasede.g.,"memotoPrincipalJonesdatedJanuary24,1989"]1was O  protectedbytheFirstAmendmenttotheUnitedStatesConstitution,youaredirectedtoconsider  J andanswerthefollowingquestions:    (430  1.0` (#(#Didtheplaintiff's[memotoPrincipalJonesdatedJanuary24,1989]cause,or Z  couldithavecaused,disharmonyordisruptionintheworkplace?2U ` (#` (# 0  2.0` (#(#Didtheplaintiff's[January24,1989,memotoPrincipalJones]impair[(his)    (her)]abilitytoperform[(his)(her)]duties?3e ` (#` (#   PleaseusetheSupplementalVerdictFormtoindicateyouranswerstothesequestions.4 `  &  @$ NotesonUse     1.Describethespeechuponwhichtheplaintiffbaseshisorherclaim. p 'fx   2.ThefirsttwofactorsmentionedinShandsrelateto"theneedforharmonyintheoffice k orworkplace"and"whetherthegovernment'sresponsibilitiesrequiredacloseworking Q relationshiptoexistbetweentheplaintiffandcoworkers."Shands,993F.2dat1344.The 7 secondfactormentionedinShandsaddresseswhethertheplaintiff'sspeechcausedorcouldhave { causeddeteriorationintheplaintiff'sworkingrelationships.Shands,993F.2dat1344.This a questionisdesignedtotestthisissue. G   3.YetanotherbalancingfactormentionedinShandsiswhetherthespeechatissue B! impairedtheplaintiff'sabilitytoperformhisorherassignedduties.SeeShands,993F.2dat (" 1344.Thisquestionisdesignedtotestthisissue.AsdiscussedintheCommitteeComments, l # thislistofquestionsisnotrequiredinallcases,norisitallinclusive.Ifotherissuesexist R!$ concerningthecontextorcontentoftheplaintiff'sspeech,additionalquestionsshouldbe 8"% included. #&   4.Thejury'sanswerstothespecialinterrogatoriesshouldberecordedonaSupplemental w$( VerdictForm.SeeinfraModelInstruction5.73A. ]%) & % @--! CommitteeComments  &X +   TheEighthCircuithasindicatedthat,wheneverthePickeringbalancingprocessmustbe (!- '%&~ invokedtodeterminewhethertheplaintiff'sspeechwasprotectedbytheFirstAmendment, (". "[a]nyunderlyingfactualdisputes...shouldbesubmittedtothejurythroughspecial )}#/ interrogatoriesorspecialverdictforms."Shandsv.CityofKennett,993F.2d1337,1342(8th *c$0 Cir.1993).ThisinstructionisdesignedtomeetthemandateofShandsandtheuseofspecial +I%1 interrogatoriesbasedonthesemodelinstructionswasapprovedinCookv.Tadros,312F.3d386, ^ 388(8thCir.2002).SeegenerallyCommitteeCommentstoModelInstruction5.71,supra. D   Ifthereisamaterialdisputeovertheprecisecontentoftheplaintiff'sspeech,itappears ? thattheissuemustberesolvedbythejury.Inresolvinganysuchfactualdispute,deferencemust  % begiventothehonestandreasonableperceptionofthedefendant.Watersv.Churchill,511U.S. i  661(1994).Thus,ifthedefendanttakesthepositionthatitterminatedtheplaintiffbasedona O  thirdpartyreportthattheplaintiffengagedinunprotectedinsubordination,thefollowing 5  sequenceofinterrogatoriesmaybeappropriate:   0   ` 1. Didtheplaintiffsaythat[(his)(her)]supervisorwasincompetent?t (#(# @>>&Yes_____ p   No_____ o  0  Note: 0` (#(#0 ` (#` (#Ifyouransweris"yes,"youshouldnotanswerQuestionNo.2.Ifyour &  answeris"no,"continueontheQuestionNo.2.   (# (# 0   ` 2. Didthedefendanthonestlyandreasonablybelievethereportof[namethe e  plaintiff'scoworkerorothersourceofthirdpartyreport]thattheplaintiffhadreferredto K  [(his)(her)]supervisorasincompetent?1(#(# @>>&Yes_____ p   No_____ ,   Ingeneral,itappearsthattheplaintiffhastheburdenofshowingthathisorherspeech  wasconstitutionallyprotected.SeeCoxv.MillerCountyR1SchoolDist.,951F.2d927,931 k (8thCir.1991);Steverv.IndependentSchoolDist.No.625,943F.2d845,84950(8thCir. Q 1991).However,itisunclearwhethertheplaintiffshouldbeartheriskofnonpersuasionon 7 everysubsidiaryfactualissue.Accordingly,thisinstructiondoesnotincludeany"burdenof { proof"language.Italsoshouldbenotedthattheultimatebalancingtestrestswithintheprovince a oftheCourtandthatnoparticularfactorisdispositive.SeeShands,993F.2dat1344,1346.  G 97 @ %   5.72AFIRSTAMENDMENTRETALIATIONACTUALDAMAGES ^ @!(42U.S.C.1983)     D   IfyoufindinfavoroftheplaintiffunderInstruction____,1thenyoumustawardthe   plaintiffsuchsumasyoufindwillfairlyandjustlycompensatetheplaintiffforanyactual i  damagesyoufindtheplaintiffsustainedasadirectresultofthedefendant'sconductassubmitted  d inInstruction_____.2Actualdamagesincludeanywagesorfringebenefitsyoufindtheplaintiff    wouldhaveearnedin[(his)(her)]employmentwiththedefendantif[(he)(she)]hadnotbeen t  dischargedon[fillindateofdischarge],throughthedateofyourverdict,minustheamountof o  earningsandbenefitsfromotheremploymentreceivedbytheplaintiffduringthattime.3Actual &  damagesalsomayinclude[listdamagessupportedbytheevidence].4 !    [Youarealsoinstructedthattheplaintiffhasadutyunderthelawto"mitigate"[(his) z  (her)]damagesthatis,toexercisereasonablediligenceunderthecircumstancestominimize 1 [(his)(her)]damages.Therefore,ifithasbenproved5thattheplaintifffailedtoseekoutortake , advantageofanopportunitythatwasreasonablyavailableto[(him)(her)],youmustreduce  [(his)(her)]damagesbytheamount[(he)(she)]reasonablycouldhaveavoidedif[(he)(she)] < hadsoughtoutortakenadvantageofsuchanopportunity.]6[Remember,throughoutyour 7 deliberations,youmustnotengageinanyspeculation,guess,orconjectureandyoumustnot  awardanydamagesbywayofpunishmentorthroughsympathy.]7 G!  &  @$ NotesonUse  B#   1.Insertthenumberortitleofthe"essentialelement"instructionhere. % ''   2.Whencertainbenefits,suchasemployersubsidizedhealthinsurancebenefits,are R!' recoverableundertheevidence,thisinstructionmaybemodifiedtoexplaintothejurythe 8"( mannerinwhichrecoveryforthosebenefitsistobecalculated.Claimsforlostbenefitsoften #) presentdifficultissuesastothepropermeasureofrecovery.SeeTolanv.LeviStrauss&Co., $* 867F.2d467,470(8thCir.1989)(discussingdifferentapproaches).Somecourtsdenyrecovery $+ forlostbenefitsunlesstheemployeepurchasessubstitutecoverage,inwhichcasethemeasureof %r, damagesistheemployee'soutofpocketexpenses.Syvockv.MilwaukeeBoilerMfg.Co.,665 &X - F.2d149,161(7thCir.1981);Pearcev.CarrierCorp.,966F.2d958(5thCir.1992).Other '>!. courtspermittherecoveryoftheamounttheemployerwouldhavepaidaspremiumsonthe ($"/ employee'sbehalf.Farissv.LynchburgFoundry,769F.2d958,96465(4thCir.1985).The h) #0 Committeeexpressesnoviewastowhichapproachisproper.Thisinstructionalsomaybe N*#1 modifiedtoexcludecertainitemswhichwerementionedduringtrialbutarenotrecoverable 4+$2 becauseofaninsufficiencyofevidenceorasamatteroflaw. ,%3   3.Thissentenceshouldbeusedtoguidethejuryincalculatingtheplaintiff'seconomic ^ damages.Insection1983cases,however,aprevailingplaintiffmayrecoveractualdamagesfor D emotionaldistressandotherpersonalinjuries.SeeCareyv.Piphus,435U.S.247(1978).The * wordsfollowing"minus"areaccurateonlytotheextentthattheyrefertoemploymentthathas   beentakeninlieuoftheemploymentwiththedefendant.Thatissignificantwhere,forexample,   theplaintiffhadaparttimejobwithsomeoneotherthanthedefendantbeforethedischargeand  ~ retaineditafterthedischarge.Inthatcircumstance,theamountofearningsandbenefitsfrom  d thatparttimeemploymentreceivedafterthedischargeshouldnotbedeductedfromthewages  J orfringebenefitstheplaintiffwouldhaveearnedwiththedefendantifheorshehadnothave  0 beendischarged,unlesstheparttimejobwasenlargedafterthedischarge.Insuchacase,the t  instructionshouldbemodifiedtomakeitcleartothejurywhichincomemaybeusedtoreduce Z  theplaintiff'srecovery. @    4.Insection1983cases,aprevailingplaintiffmayrecoverdamagesformentalanguish ;  andotherpersonalinjuries.Thespecificelementsofdamagesthatmaybesetforthinthis !  instructionaresimilartothosefoundintheCivilRightsActof1991.See42U.S.C. e  1981a(b)(3).SeesupraModelInstructions5.02An.8and4.50A. K    5.ModelInstruction3.04(BurdenofProof)tellsthejurythatsomethingisprovedonly F ifthejuryfindsitismorelikelytruethannottrue.Thephrase greaterweightoftheevidence , isnotnecessaryhere.ItcanbeincludedinInstruction3.04ifdesiredbythecourt. p   6.Thisparagraphisdesignedtosubmittheissueof"mitigationofdamages"in k appropriatecases.SeeColemanv.CityofOmaha,714F.2d804,808(8thCir.1983). Q   7.Thisparagraphmaybegivenatthetrialcourt'sdiscretion.  & % @--! CommitteeComments  a   Thisinstructionisdesignedtosubmitthestandardbackpayformulaoflostwagesand \ '%aV benefitsreducedbyinterimearningsandbenefits.SeeFiedlerv.IndianheadTruckLine,Inc., B 670F.2d806,808(8thCir.1982).Moreover,becausesection1983damagesarenotlimitedto ( backpay,theinstructionalsopermitstherecoveryofgeneraldamagesforpain,suffering, l   humiliation,andthelike. R!!   Insomecases,adiscriminationplaintiffmaybeeligibleforfrontpay.Becausefrontpay "M# isessentiallyanequitableremedy inlieuofreinstatement,frontpayisanissueforthecourt, #3$ notthejury.ExcelCorp.v.Bosley,165F.3d635(8thCir.1999).SeeMacDissiv.Valmont w$% Indus.,856F.2d1054,1060(8thCir.1988);Newhousev.McCormick&Co.,110F.3d635,641 ]%& (8thCir.1997)(frontpayisanissueforthecourt,notthejury,inADEAcases).Ifthetrialcourt C&' submitstheissueoffrontpaytothejury,thejurysdeterminationmaybebinding.SeeDoynev. )' ( UnionElectricCo.,953F.2d447,451(8thCir.1992)(ADEAcase). (!)   Thisinstructionmaybemodifiedtoarticulatethetypesofinterimearningswhichshould h) #+ beoffsetagainsttheplaintiff'sbackpay.Forexample,severancepayandwagesfromother N*#, employmentordinarilyareoffsetagainstabackpayaward.SeeKrausev.DresserIndustries, 4+$- 910F.2d674,680(10thCir.1990);Cornettav.UnitedStates,851F.2d1372,1381(Fed.Cir. ,%. 1988);Farissv.LynchburgFoundry,769F.2d958,966(4thCir.1985).Unemployment ^ compensation,SocialSecuritybenefitsorpensionbenefitsordinarilyarenotoffsetagainsta D backpayaward.SeeDoynev.UnionElectricCo.,953F.2d447,451(8thCir.1992)(holding * thatpensionbenefitsarea"collateralsourcebenefit");Dreyerv.ArcoChemicalCo.,801F.2d   651,653n.1(3dCir.1986)(SocialSecurityandpensionbenefitsnotdeductible);Protosv.   VolkswagenofAmerica,Inc.,797F.2d129,13839(3dCir.1986)(unemploymentbenefitsnot  ~ deductible);Rasimasv.MichiganDept.ofMentalHealth,714F.2d614,626(6thCir.1983)  d (same)butcf.BlumvWitcoChemicalCorp.,829F.2d367,374(3dCir.1987)(pensionbenefits  J receivedasaresultofsubsequentemploymentconsideredinoffsettingdamagesaward);Toledo  0 v.NobelSysco,Inc.,892F.2d1481,1493(10thCir.1989)(deductibilityofunemployment t  compensationiswithintrialcourt'sdiscretion);Hornv.DukeHomes,755F.2d599,607n.12 Z  (7thCir.1985)(same);EEOCv.EnterpriseAss'nSteamfittersLocalNo.638,542F.2d579,592 @  (2dCir.1976)(same). &    Thisinstructionisdesignedtoencompassasituationwherethedefendantassertssome !  independentpostdischargereasonsuchasaplantclosingorsweepingreductioninforcewhy e  theplaintiffwouldhavebeenterminatedinanyeventbeforetrial.See,e.g.,Cleverlyv.Western K  Elec.Co.,450F.Supp.507(W.D.Mo.1978),aff'd,594F.2d638(8thCir.1979).Nevertheless, 1 thetrialcourtmaygiveaseparateinstructionwhichsubmitsthisissueinmoredirectterms.   ;9 @ %   5.72BFIRSTAMENDMENTRETALIATION@@#@@#NOMINALDAMAGES ^ @!(42U.S.C.1983) e   D   IfyoufindinfavoroftheplaintiffunderInstruction____,1butyoudonotfindthatthe   plaintiff'sdamageshavemonetaryvalue,thenyoumustreturnaverdictfortheplaintiffinthe i  nominalamountofOneDollar($1.00).2  d  &  @$ NotesonUse       1.Insertthenumberortitleofthe essentialelementsinstructionhere. t  ' _   2.OneDollar($1.00)arguablyistherequiredamountincasesinwhichnominal o  damagesareappropriate.Nominaldamagesareappropriatewhenthejuryisunabletoplacea U  monetaryvalueontheharmthattheplaintiffsufferedfromtheviolationofhisorherrights.Cf. ;  Cowansv.Wyrick,862F.2d697(8thCir.1988)(inprisonercivilrightsaction,nominaldamages !  areappropriatewherethejurycannotplaceamonetaryvalueontheharmsufferedbythe e  plaintiff);Haleyv.Wyrick,740F.2d12(8thCir.1984). K  & % @--! CommitteeComments  F   Mostemploymentdiscriminationcasesinvolvelostwagesandbenefits.Nevertheless,a  '%¹ nominaldamageinstructionshouldbegiveninappropriatecases,suchaswhereaplaintiff  claimingadiscriminatoryharassmentdidnotsustainanylossofearnings.Goodwinv.Circuit k CourtofSt.LouisCounty,729F.2d541,54243,548(8thCir.1984). Q   Anawardofnominaldamagescansupportapunitivedamageaward.SeeGoodwinv.  CircuitCourtofSt.LouisCounty,729F.2dat548.    Ifnominaldamagesaresubmitted,theverdictformmustcontainalinewherethejury G canmakethatfinding.  - =; @ %   5.72CFIRSTAMENDMENTRETALIATIONPUNITIVEDAMAGES ^ @!(42U.S.C.1983) eЅ   D   Inadditiontothedamagesmentionedinotherinstructions,thelawpermitsthejuryunder   certaincircumstancestoawardpunitivedamages. i    Ifyoufindinfavoroftheplaintiffandagainstthedefendant[name],1[andifithasbeen  d proved2thattheplaintiffsfiringwasmotivatedbyevilmotiveorintent,orthatthedefendant    actedwithrecklessindifferencetotheplaintiffsrights],3theninadditiontoanyotherdamages t  towhichyoufindtheplaintiffentitled,youmay,butarenotrequiredto,awardtheplaintiffan o  additionalamountaspunitivedamagesforthepurposesofpunishingthedefendantforengaging &  insuchmisconductanddeterringthedefendantandothersfromengaginginsuchmisconductin !  thefuture.Thedefendantactedwithrecklessindifferenceif: z  0  ithasbeenprovedthat[insertthename(s)ofthedefendantormanager4whoterminated5 1 theplaintiffsemployment]knewthatthe(termination)wasinviolationofthelaw , prohibitingretaliationoractedwithrecklessdisregardofthatlaw.6(#(#   Youshouldpresumethataplaintiffhasbeenmadewholefor[his,her,its]injuriesbythe < damagesawardedunderInstruction____.7 7   Ifyoudecidetoawardpunitivedamages,youshouldconsiderthefollowingindeciding  theamountofpunitivedamagestoaward: G!   1.Howreprehensiblethedefendantsconductwas.8Inthisregard,youmayconsider B# [whethertheharmsufferedbytheplaintiffwasphysicaloreconomicorboth;whethertherewas % violence,deceit,intentionalmalice,recklessdisregardforhumanhealthorsafety;whetherthe R!' defendantsconductthatharmedtheplaintiffalsoposedariskofharmtoothers;whetherthere "M) wasanyrepetitionofthewrongfulconductandpastconductofthesortthatharmedthe $+ plaintiff].9 ]%-   2.Howmuchharmthedefendantswrongfulconductcausedtheplaintiff[andcould &X / causetheplaintiffinthefuture].10[Youmaynotconsiderharmtoothersindecidingtheamount (!1 ofpunitivedamagestoaward.]11 h) #3   3.Whatamountofpunitivedamages,inadditiontotheotherdamagesalreadyawarded, *c$5 isneeded,consideringthedefendantsfinancialcondition,topunishthedefendantfor[his,her, ,%7 its]wrongfulconducttowardtheplaintiffandtodeterthedefendantandothersfromsimilar ^ wrongfulconductinthefuture. Y   4.[Theamountoffinesandcivilpenaltiesapplicabletosimilarconduct].12     Theamountofanypunitivedamagesawardshouldbearareasonablerelationshiptothe i  harmcausedtotheplaintiff.13  d   [Youmayassesspunitivedamagesagainstanyoralldefendantsoryoumayrefuseto    imposepunitivedamages.Ifpunitivedamagesareassessedagainstmorethanonedefendant, t  theamountsassessedagainstsuchdefendantsmaybethesameortheymaybedifferent.]14 o    [Youmaynotawardpunitivedamagesagainstthedefendant[s]forconductinother &  states.]15 !   @$ NotesonUse  z    1.Publicentities,suchascities,cannotbesuedforpunitivedamagesundersection 1 1983.CityofNewportv.FactConcerts,Inc.,453U.S.247(1981).Consequently,thetargetof  apunitivedamageclaimmustbeanindividualdefendant,suedinhisorherindividualcapacity.    2.ModelInstruction3.04(BurdenofProof)tellsthejurythatsomethingisprovedonly V ifthejuryfindsitismorelikelytruethannottrue.Thephrase greaterweightoftheevidence < isnotnecessaryhere.ItcanbeincludedinInstruction3.04ifdesiredbythecourt. "   3.SeesupraModelInstruction5.22Cn.2. {   4.Usethenameofthedefendant,themanagerwhotooktheaction,orotherdescriptive v  phrasesuchas themanagerwhofiredtheplaintiff. \!   5.Thislanguageisdesignedforuseinadischargecase.Ina failuretohire, failureto # promote, demotion,or constructivedischargecase,thelanguagemustbemodified. $   6.SeeKolstadv.AmericanDentalAssn,527U.S.526,535,536(1999)(holdingthat R!&  maliceorrecklessindifferencepertaintotheemployersknowledgethatitmaybeactingin 8"' violationoffederallaw,notitsawarenessthatitisengagingindiscriminationandthat an #( employermustatleastdiscriminateinthefaceofaperceivedriskthatitsactionswillviolate $) federallawtobeliableinpunitivedamages);Cannyv.Dr.Pepper/SevenUpBottlingGroup, $* Inc.,439F.3d894,903(8thCir.2006)(citingKolstadandobservingthatanawardofpunitive %r+ damagesmaybeinappropriatewhentheunderlyingtheoryofdiscriminationisnovelorpoorly &X , recognizedor whentheemployer(1)isunawarefederallawprohibitstherelevantconduct,(2) '>!- believesthediscriminatoryconductislawful,or(3)reasonablybelievesthereisabonafide ($". occupationalqualificationdefenseforthediscriminatoryconduct). h) #/    7.Fillinthenumberortitleoftheactualdamagesornominaldamagesinstructionhere. *c$1   8.Theword reprehensibleisusedinthesamesenseasitisusedincommonparlance. ^  TheSupremeCourt,inStateFarmMut.Auto.Ins.Co.v.Campbell,538U.S.408,419(2003), D stated: Itshouldbepresumedaplaintiffhasbeenmadewholeforhisinjuriesbycompensatory * damages,sopunitivedamagesshouldonlybeawardedifthedefendantsculpability,after   havingpaidcompensatorydamages,issoreprehensibleastowarranttheimpositionoffurther   sanctionstoachievepunishmentordeterrence.InPhilipMorrisUSAv.Williams,549U.S.  ~ 346,355,127S.Ct.1057,106465(2007),theSupremeCourtheldthat,whileharmtopersons  d otherthantheplaintiffmaybeconsideredindeterminingreprehensibility,ajurymaynotpunish  J fortheharmcausedtopersonsotherthantheplaintiff.TheCourtstatedthatprocedureswere  0 necessarytoassure thatjuriesarenotaskingthewrongquestion,i.e.,seeking,notsimplyto t  determinereprehensibility,butalsotopunishforharmcausedstrangers.Id.at355. Z    9.Anyitemnotsupportedbytheevidence,ofcourse,shouldbeexcluded. U    10.Thissentencemaybeusedifthereisevidenceoffutureharmtotheplaintiff.      11.Aparagraphinstructingthejurythatanypunitivedamagesawardshouldnotinclude e  anamountforharmsufferedbypersonswhoarenotpartiestothecasemaybenecessaryif K  evidenceconcerningharmsufferedbynonpartieshasbeenintroduced.SeePhilipMorrisUSAv. 1 Williams,549U.S.at355,127S.Ct.at106465;StateFarmMut.Auto.Ins.Co.v.Campbell,  538U.S.408,42224(2003);Williamsv.ConAgraPoultryCo.,378F.3d790,79798(8thCir.  2004).    12.Insertthisphraseonlyifevidencehasbeenintroduced,orthecourthastakenjudicial < notice,offinesandpenaltiesforsimilarconduct.SeeBMWofNorthAmerica,Inc.v.Gore,517 " U.S.559,575(1996),noting civilpenaltiesauthorizedincomparablecasesasaguidepostto  beconsidered.SeealsoStateFarmMut.Auto.Ins.Co.v.Campbell,538U.S.408,428(2003).    13.SeeStateFarmMut.Auto.Ins.Co.v.Campbell,538U.S.408,425(2003)(stating G that inpractice,fewawardsexceedingasingledigitratiobetweenpunitiveandcompensatory - damages,toasignificantdegree,willsatisfydueprocessandobservingthat: Singledigit  multipliersaremorelikelytocomportwithdueprocess,whilestillachievingtheStatesgoalsof  deterrenceandretribution,thanawardswithratiosinrangeof500to1[citingBMWofNorth    America,Inc.v.Gore,517U.S.559,582(1996)]or,inthiscase,of145to1.). !g!   14.Thebracketedlanguageisavailableforuseifpunitivedamagesclaimsaresubmitted ## againstmorethanonedefendant. $$   15.Ifevidencehasbeenintroducedconcerningconductbythedefendantthatwaslegal ]%& inthestatewhereitwascommitted,thejurymustbetoldthattheycannotawardpunitive C&' damagesagainstthedefendantforsuchconduct.SeeStateFarmMut.Auto.Inc.Co.v. )' ( Campbell,538U.S.408,422(2003);BMWofNorthAmerica,Inc.v.Gore,517U.S.559, (!) 572-73(1996);Williamsv.ConAgraPoultryCo.,378F.3d790,79798(8thCir.2004).This ("* issuenormallywillnotcomeupincasesunderfederallaw.Inanycaseinwhichevidenceis )}#+ admittedforsomepurposesbutmaynotbeconsideredbythejuryinawardingpunitive *c$, damages,thecourtshouldgiveanappropriatelimitinginstruction. +I%- & ~ @--! CommitteeComments  ^   Punitivedamagesarerecoverableunder42U.S.C.1983.Smithv.Wade,461U.S.30 Y (1983). ? '~^   Thisinstructionattemptstoincorporatetheconstitutionallyrelevantprinciplessetforth   bytheSupremeCourtinPhilipMorrisUSAv.Williams,549U.S.346(2007);StateFarmMut.  ~ Auto.Ins.Co.v.Campbell,538U.S.408(2003),BMWofNorthAmerica,Inc.v.Gore,517U.S.  d 559(1996),HondaMotorCo.v.Oberg,512U.S.415(1994),andTXOProductionCorp.v.  J AllianceResourcesCorp.,509U.S.443,45962(1993).InStateFarm,538U.S.at417,the  0  Courtobserved: Wehaveadmonishedthat[p]unitivedamagesposeanacutedangerof t  arbitrarydeprivationofproperty.Juryinstructionstypicallyleavethejurywithwidediscretion Z  inchoosingamounts,andthepresentationofevidenceofadefendantsnetworthcreatesthe @  potentialthatjurieswillusetheirverdictstoexpressbiasesagainstbigbusinesses,particularly &  thosewithoutstronglocalpresences.(quotingHondaMotor,512U.S.at432).SeeBakerv.    JohnMorrell&Co.,266F.Supp.2d909,961(N.D.Iowa2003),affd,382F.3d816(8thCir.   2004),andInReExxonValdez,296F.Supp.2d1071,1080(D.Alaska2004),forexamplesof z  punitivedamagesinstructionsinwhichthecourtattemptedtoincorporateconstitutional ` standards. F   ThelastparagraphisbasedonStateFarm,538U.S.at421,inwhichtheCourtheldthat:   Astatecannotpunishadefendantforconductthatmayhavebeenlawfulwhereit  occurred....Nor,asageneralrule,doesaStatehavealegitimateconcerninimposingpunitive k damagestopunishadefendantforunlawfulactscommittedoutsideoftheStatesjurisdiction. Q TheCourtspecificallymandatedthat: Ajurymustbeinstructed,furthermore,thatitmaynot 7 useevidenceofoutofstateconducttopunishadefendantforactionthatwaslawfulinthe { jurisdictionwhereitoccurred.StateFarm,538U.S.at422.  a ?= @ %   5.73FIRSTAMENDMENTRETALIATIONVERDICTFORM ^ @!(42U.S.C.1983) eЫ   D @<<'VERDICT    Note: 0  0` (#(#Completethisformbywritinginthenamesrequiredbyyourverdict. ~` (#` (#   Onthe[FirstAmendmentretaliation]1claimoftheplaintiff[JohnDoe],assubmittedin  J Instruction_____,2wefindinfavorof   ______________________________________________________________________________ U  @(PlaintiffJohnDoe)or(DefendantSamSmith) ;   Note: 0  0` (#(#Completethefollowingparagraphsonlyiftheabovefindingisinfavorofthe e  plaintiff.Iftheabovefindingisinfavorofthedefendant,haveyourforeperson K  signanddatethisformbecauseyouhavecompletedyourdeliberationonthis 1 claim.` (#` (#   Wefindplaintiff's(name)damagesasdefinedinInstruction_____3tobe:  0  0` (#(#$_____________(statingtheamountor,ifnone,writetheword"none")4(stating 7 theamount,orifyoufindthattheplaintiff'sdamageshavenomonetaryvalue,set  forthanominalamountsuchas$1.00).5G` (#` (#   Weassesspunitivedamagesagainstdefendant(name),assubmittedinInstruction ! ______,6asfollows: R!# 0  0` (#(#$____________(statingtheamountor,ifnone,writetheword"none").$'` (#` (#    `     h   __________________________________________ &X +    `     h   Foreperson '>!, Date:__________ h) #.   N*#/ & %  @$ NotesonUse  ^   1.Thebracketedlanguageshouldbeincludedwhentheplaintiffsubmitsmultipleclaims Y to'%^ thejury. ?   2.Thenumberortitleofthe essentialelementsinstructionshouldbeinsertedhere.     3.Thenumberortitleofthe actualdamagesinstructionshouldbeinsertedhere. O    4.Usethisphraseifthejuryhasnotbeeninstructedonnominaldamages.  J    5.Usethisphraseifthejuryisinstructedonnominaldamages.     6.Thenumberortitleofthe punitivedamagesinstructionshouldbeinsertedhere.  Z  A? @  %   5.73AFIRSTAMENDMENTRETALIATIONSPECIAL ^ @INTERROGATORIESON_ BALANCING_ԀISSUES(42U.S.C.1983) e%   D @ SUPPLEMENTALVERDICTFORM     AsdirectedinInstructionNo._____,1wefindasfollows:  ~  QuestionNo.1 :0 0 (# (#Didtheplaintiff's[memotoPrincipalJones]2cause,orcouldit  J havecaused,disharmonyordisruptionintheworkplace? 0(#(#    `    ____Yes  ____No Z  0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (#0 (# (#(Markan"X"intheappropriatespace)@ (#(#  QuestionNo.2 :0 0 (# (#Didtheplaintiff's[memotoPrincipalJones]impair[(his)(her)]    abilitytoperform[(his)(her)]duties? (#(#    `    ____Yes  ____No ` 0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (#0 (# (#(Markan"X"intheappropriatespace)F(#(#    `     h   __________________________________________ V    `     h   Foreperson < Date:_______________   & % @$ NotesonUse  v   1.Thenumberortitleofthespecialinterrogatoryinstructionshouldbeinsertedhere. - Seesupra'% ModelInstruction5.71A.    2.Describethespeechuponwhichtheplaintiffbaseshisorherclaim.Thisdescription l  shouldbeidenticaltothephraseusedinthespecialinterrogatoryinstruction.SeesupraModel R! АInstruction5.71A. 8"  & % @--! CommitteeComments  #3"   SeesupraCommitteeCommentstoInstructionNo.5.71A.Thesespecialinterrogatories $$ are'%# availableforusewhentherearefactualdisputesunderlyingthedeterminationofwhetheror %r% nottheplaintiff'sspeechwasprotectedbytheFirstAmendment.Thissupplementalverdictform &X & shouldneverbeusedalone;italwaysshouldaccompanyModelInstructions5.71,5.71Aand '>!' 5.73,supra. ($"(   Thequestionslistedinthismodelinstructionareforillustrationonly;ineverycase,the )}#* listofrelevantquestionsmustbetailoredtotheparticularsituation.Italsobearsemphasisthat *c$+ theultimatequestionofwhethertheplaintiff'sspeechwasprotectedisfortheCourtandthatno +I%, singlefactorisdispositive.Accordingly,whenthissupplementalverdictformisused,thetrial ^ courtshouldreceiveallofthejury'sfindingsanditshouldpostponeitsentryofjudgmentwhile D itfullyevaluatestheimplicationsofthosefindings.h0   * dc E c0jA8tXdXXd8@GG %   5.80FAMILYANDMEDICALLEAVEACT(FMLA)(29U.S.C.26012654) 0 @$Introduction R%    L  M    TheseinstructionsareforusewithcasesbroughtundertheFamilyandMedicalLeave b Act(FMLA),29U.S.C.26012654L  M  .ThepurposesoftheFMLAaretobalancethedemands H ontheworkplacewiththeneedsoffamilies,topromotethestabilityandeconomicsecurityof .   families,andtopromotenationalinterestsinpreservingfamilyintegrity.29U.S.C.2601(b).    TheActentitleseligibleemployeestotakeuptotwelveworkweeksofunpaidleavebecauseofa  z  serioushealthconditionthatmakestheemployeeunabletoperformthefunctionsofhisorher  `  position;becauseofthebirthofasonordaughterandtocareforthenewbornchild;for  F  placementwiththeemployeeofasonordaughterforadoptionorfostercare;tocareforthe  ,  employeesspouse,son,daughter,orparentwhohasaserioushealthcondition;orbecauseofa   qualifyingexigencyofacoveredmilitarymember.29U.S.C.2612;29C.F.R.825.112. x  Additionally,eligibleemployeesareentitledtoupto26workweeksofleavetocarefora ^  coveredservicememberwithaseriousinjuryorillness.29U.S.C.2612;29C.F.R.825.112. D @L  M  EmployersCoveredbytheFMLAL  M  Ԉ    AcoveredemployerundertheActisoneengagedincommerceorinanindustry v affectingcommercewhoemploysfiftyormoreemployeesforeachworkingdayduringeachof \ twentyormorecalendarworkweeksinthecurrentorprecedingcalendaryear.29U.S.C. B 2611(4)(A);29C.F.R.825.104(a);L  M  Bealv.RubbermaidCommercialProducts,IncL  M  .,972F. ( Supp.1216,1222n.13(S.D.Iowa1997),L  M  affd,L  M  Ԁ149F.3d1186(8thL  M  ԀCir.1998).Tobecovered,  theemployeemustworkinanareawheretheemployeremploysfiftyormoreemployeeswithin t a75mileradius.29U.S.C.2611(2)(B)(ii);29C.F.R.825.110(a)(3).TheEighthCircuithas Z alsoheldthatpublicofficialsintheirindividualcapacitiesare employersundertheFMLA. @ L  M  Darbyv.BratchL  M  ,287F.3d673,68081(8thL  M  ԀCir.2002).Inaddition,theSupremeCourthasheld & thatstatesareemployersundertheFMLA.L  M  NevadaDeptofHumanResourcesv.HibbsL  M  ,538   U.S.721(2003). r  @NNL  M  EmployeesEligibleforLeaveL  M  Ԉ K" L  M    NotallemployeesareentitledtoleaveunderFMLA.Beforeanemployeecantakeleave $$ tocareforhimselforherself,orafamilymember,thefollowingeligibilityrequirementsmustbe  % met:heorshemusthavebeenemployedbytheemployerforatleasttwelvemonthsandmust p!& haveworkedatleast1,250hoursduringtheprevioustwelvemonthperiod.29U.S.C. V"' 2611(2)(A). <# (   Amendmentsin2008totheFMLAprovidetwonewleaveentitlements:military $"* caregiverleaveandqualifyingexigencyleave.TheDepartmentofLaborissuedrevised {%"+ implementingregulationseffectiveJanuary16,2009,allowingfamilymembersofwounded a&#, militarypersonneltotakeuptosixmonthsofunpaidleavetocareforthemduringtheir G'$- rehabilitationprocess.29C.F.R.825L  M  etseqL  M  .L  M  ;L  M  seeL  M  Ԁ73FR67934L  M  etseqL  M  .Eligibleemployeeswho -(%. arefamilymembersofcoveredservicememberswillbeabletotakeupto26workweeksofleave )&/ inasingletwelvemonthperiodtocareforaservicememberwhohasaseriousillnessorinjury )y'0 thatwasincurredinthelineofdutywhileonactiveduty.Thattwelvemonthperiodbegins *_(1 whentheemployeestartsusingmilitarycaregiverleave.Employerswillnothavetheoptionof +E)2 usingthecalendaryearmethodastheydoforothertypesofFMLAleave.Entitlementto26 ^ weeksofmilitarycaregiverleaveisprovidedforeachservicememberandforeachillnessor D injury,andcoversmoreextendedfamilymembersthanthosewhomaytakeFMLAleavefor * otherreasons.     QualifyingexigencyleaveisintendedtohelpthefamiliesofmembersoftheNational i  GuardandReservesmanagethemembersaffairswhiletheyareonactivedutyorcalledto O  activedutystatusinsupportofacontingencyoperation.Familymembersmayuseallorpartof 5  theregularallotmentoftwelveweeksofFMLAleave.Thefinalruledefines anyqualifying   exigencytoincludeanumberofbroadcategoriesofreasonsandactivities,includingshort   noticedeployment,militaryeventsandrelatedactivities,childcareandschoolactivities,   financialandlegalarrangements,counseling,restandrecuperation,postdevelopmentactivities, o  andanyadditionalactivitiesagreedtobytheemployerandtheemployee. U    TheRegulationsshouldbeconsultedforappropriateguidanceandjuryinstructions    concerningthenewmilitaryfamilyleaveprovisions.L  M     @ L  M  FamilyMembersContemplatedbytheFMLAL  M  Ԉ K    Employeesarealsoeligibleforleavewhencertainfamilymembers!hisorherspouse, F son,daughter,orparent!haveserioushealthconditions.Spousemeansahusbandorwifeas , definedorrecognizedunderstatelawwheretheemployeeresides,includingcommonlaw p spousesinstateswherecommonlawmarriagesarerecognized.29U.S.C.2611(13);29C.F.R. V 825.122(a). <   ParentmeansabiologicalparentofanemployeeoranindividualwhostoodL  M  inloco 7 parentisL  M  Ԁtoanemployeewhentheemployeewasachild.29U.S.C.2611(7).Theterm {  parentdoesnotincludegrandparentsorparentsinlawunlessagrandparentorparentinlaw a meetstheL  M  inlocoparentisL  M  definition.L  M  Krohnv.ForstingL  M  ,11F.Supp.2d1082,1091(E.D.Mo. G 1998). -   UndertheFMLAforthepurposesofleavetakenforbirthoradoptionortocarefora ( familymemberwithaserioushealthcondition,asonordaughtermeansabiological,adoptedor l   fosterchild,astepchild,alegalward,orachildofapersonstandingL  M  inlocoparentisL  M  ,whois R!! eitherunderage18,orwhoisage18orolderbutisincapableofselfcarebecauseofamentalor 8"" physicaldisability.29U.S.C.2611(12);29C.F.R.825.122(c).Personswith L  M  inloco ## parentisL  M  L  M  ԀstatusundertheFMLAincludethosewhohavedaytodayresponsibilitytocarefor $$ andfinanciallysupportachild.29C.F.R.825.122(c)(3). $%   Incapableofselfcaremeansthattheindividualrequiresactiveassistanceor C&' supervisiontoprovidedailyselfcareinthreeormoreoftheactivitiesofdailylivingor )' ( instrumentalactivitiesofdailyliving.29C.F.R.825.122(c)(1). (!)   Activitiesofdailylivingincludeadaptiveactivitiessuchascaringappropriatelyfor h) #+ onesgroomingandhygiene,bathing,dressingandeating.L  M  Id.L  M  Ԁ Instrumentalactivitiesofdaily N*#, livingincludecooking,cleaning,shopping,takingpublictransportation,payingbills, 4+$- maintainingaresidence,usingtelephonesanddirectories,usingapostoffice,etc.L  M  Id.L  M  Ԁ Physical ,%. ormentaldisabilitymeansaphysicalormentalimpairmentthatsubstantiallylimitsoneormore ^ ofthemajorlifeactivitiesofanindividual.29C.F.R.825.122(c)(2).Thesetermsaredefined D inthesamemannerastheyareundertheAmericanswithDisabilitiesAct.L  M  Id.L  M  Ԁ *   L  M  ForthepurposesofFMLAqualifyingexigencyleave, sonordaughteronactivedutyor  % calltoactivedutystatusmean theemployeesbiological,adopted,orfosterchild,stepchild, i  legalward,orachildforwhomtheemployeestoodinlocoparentis,whoisonactivedutyorcall O  toactivedutystatus,andwhoisofanyage.29C.F.R.825.122(g). 5    Forthepurposesofleavetocareforacoveredservicememberwithaseriousinjuryor  0  illness, sonordaughterofacoveredservicemembermeansthe servicemembersbiological, t  adopted,orfosterchild,stepchild,legalward,orachildforwhomtheservicememberstoodin Z  locoparentis,andwhoisofanyage.29C.F.R.825.122(h).A parentofacovered @  servicememberis acoveredservicemembersbiological,adoptive,steporfosterfatheror &  mother,oranyotherindividualwhostoodinlocoparentistothecoveredservicemember.29    C.F.R.825.122(i).L  M     @v v L  M  LeaveforBirth,AdoptionorFosterCareL  M  Ԉ K  L  M    TheFMLApermitsanemployeetotakeleaveforthebirthoftheemployeessonor F daughterortocareforthechildafterbirth,forplacementofasonordaughterwiththeemployee , foradoptionorfostercare,ortocareforthechildafterplacement.29U.S.C.2612(a);29 p C.F.R.825.100. V   Anexpectantmothermaytakeleaveforpregnancy,prenatalcare,orforherownserious Q healthconditionfollowingthebirthofthechild.29C.F.R.825.120(a)(4).Circumstancesmay 7 requirethattheFMLAleavebeginbeforetheactualdateofthebirthofachildortheactual { placementforadoptionofachild.Forexample,anexpectantmothermayneedtobeabsent a fromworkforprenatalcare,orherconditionmaymakeherunabletowork.29C.F.R. G 825.120(a)(4).Theexpectantmother isentitledtoleaveforincapacityeventhoughshedoes - notreceivetreatmentfromahealthcareproviderduringtheabsenceandeveniftheabsence  doesnotlastformorethanthreeconsecutivecalendardays.29C.F.R.825.120(a)(5).An  expectantfather isentitledtoFMLAleaveifneededtocareforhispregnantspousewhois    incapacitatedorifneededtocareforherduringherprenatalcare,orifneededtocareforthe !g! spousefollowingthebirthofachildifthespousehasaserioushealthcondition.29C.F.R. "M" 825.120(a)(5). #3#   Likewise,prospectiveadoptiveorfosterparents maytakeleavebeforetheactual $% placementoradoptionofachildifabsencefromworkisrequiredfortheplacementforadoption %r& orfostercaretoproceed.29C.F.R.825.121(a)(1). &X '   AhusbandandwifewhoareeligibleforFMLAleaveandareemployedbythesame (!) coveredemployermaybelimitedtoacombinedtotalof12weeksofleaveduringany12month ("* periodiftheleaveistakenforthebirthoftheemployeessonordaughterortocareforthechild )}#+  afterbirth,forplacementofasonordaughterwiththeemployeeforadoptionorfostercareorto *c$, careforthechildafterplacement,ortocarefortheemployeesparentwithaserioushealth ^ condition.29C.F.R.825.120. D    Anemployeesentitlementtoleaveforabirthorplacementforadoptionorfostercare ? expiresattheendofthetwelvemonthperiodbeginningonthedateofthebirthorplacement  % unlessstatelawallows,ortheemployerpermits,leavetobetakenforalongerperiod.29C.F.R. i  825.120(a)(2).AnysuchFMLAleavemustbeconcludedduringthisoneyearperiod.L  M  Id.L  M  ԀAn O  employeeisnotrequiredtodesignatewhethertheleavetheemployeeistakingisFMLAleave 5  orleaveunderstatelaw.29C.F.R.825.701.IfanemployeesleavequalifiesforFMLAand   statelawleave,theleaveusedcountsagainsttheemployeesentitlementunderbothlaws.L  M  Id.L  M     @8 8 L  M  WhatConstitutesa SeriousHealthCondition?L  M  Ԉ Z  L  M    OneofthemorefrequentlylitigatedaspectsoftheFMLAistheissueofwhattypeof U  conditionconstitutesa serioushealthconditionundertheAct.Theconceptof serioushealth ;  conditionwasmeanttobeconstruedbroadly,sothattheFMLAsprovisionsareinterpretedto !  effecttheActsremedialpurpose.L  M  Stekloffv.St.JohnsMercyHealthSystemsL  M  ,218F.3d858, e  862_(8thL  M  _ԀCir.2000).Thephraseisdefinedintheregulationsasanillness,injury,impairmentor K  physicalormentalconditionthatinvolvesinpatientcare,aperiodofincapacitycombinedwith 1 treatmentbyahealthcareprovider,pregnancyorprenatalcare,chronicconditions,longterm  incapacitatingconditions,andconditionsrequiringmultipletreatments.29C.F.R.825.113(a);  29C.F.R.825.115.  L  M    Specifically,inpatientcaremeansanovernightstayinahospital,hospice,orresidential < medicalcarefacility,includinganyperiodofincapacity(inabilitytowork,attendschoolor " performotherregulardailyactivities),oranysubsequenttreatmentinconnectionwiththe  inpatientcare.29C.F.R.825.114(a)(1).    Incapacityplustreatmentmeansaperiodofincapacity(inabilitytowork,attendschool G orperformotherregulardailyactivities)ofmorethanthreefullconsecutivedays,includingany - subsequenttreatmentorperiodofincapacityrelatingtothesamecondition,thatL  M  alsoL  M  Ԁinvolves:  1)treatmenttwoormoretimesbyahealthcareprovider,byanurseorphysiciansassistant  underdirectsupervisionofahealthcareprovider,orbyaproviderofhealthservices(for    example,aphysicaltherapist)underordersof,oronreferralby,ahealthcareprovider;thetwo !g! visitsmustoccurwithinthirtydaysofthestartoftheperiodofincapacity,29C.F.R. "M" 825.115(a)(1);or2)treatmentbyahealthcareprovideronatleastoneoccasionwhichresultsin #3# aregimenofcontinuingtreatmentunderthesupervisionofthehealthcareprovider,withthefirst w$$ visittothehealthcareprovidertakingplacewithinsevendaysoftheincapacity.29C.F.R. ]%% 825.115(a)(2)and(3).Insomecircumstances,theregulatorydefinitionofincapacityoffers C&& limitedguidance.L  M  See,e.g.,Caldwellv.HollandofTexasL  M  ,208F.3d671,675_(8thL  M  _ԀCir.2000)(in )' ' situationwherethreeyearoldchilddidnotworkorattendschool,theFMLAregulationsoffered (!( insufficientguidancefordeterminingwhetherchildwasincapacitatedandfactfindermust (") determinewhetherthechildsillnessdemonstrablyaffectedhisorhernormalactivity). )}#*   NotethatundertheFMLA,ademonstrationthatanemployeeisunabletoworkinhisor 4+$, hercurrentjobduetoaserioushealthconditionisenoughtoshowtheemployeeisincapacitated ,%- evenifthatjobistheonlyonetheemployeeisunabletoperform.L  M  StekloffL  M  ,218F.3dat861. ^ ThisstandardislessstringentthanundertheADAinwhichaplaintiffmustshowthatheorshe D isunabletoworkinabroadrangeofjobstoshowthatheorsheisunabletoperformthemajor * lifeactivityofworking.L  M  Id.L  M       Pregnancyorprenatalcareincludesanyperiodofincapacityduetothepregnancyor i  prenatalcare,suchastimeofffromworkfordoctorsvisits.29C.F.R.825.115(b). O    Achronichealthconditionmeansaconditionwhichrequiresperiodicvisitsfortreatment  J byahealthcareprovider,orbyanurseorphysiciansassistantunderdirectsupervisionofa  0  healthcareprovider,whichcontinuesoveranextendedperiodoftime(includingrecurring t  episodesofasingleunderlyingcondition),andmaycauseepisodesofincapacity(inabilityto Z  work,attendschoolorperformotherregulardailyactivities)ratherthancontinuingincapacity. @  29C.F.R.825.115(c).Toqualifyasachronicserioushealthcondition,theemployeemust &  makeatleasttwovisitstoahealthcareproviderperyear.29C.F.R.825.115(c)(1).      Longtermincapacitatingconditionsarethoseforwhichtreatmentmaynotbeeffective, e  butrequirecontinuingsupervisionofahealthcareprovider,eventhoughthepatientmaynotbe K  receivingactivetreatment.29C.F.R.825.115(d). 1   Conditionsrequiringmultipletreatmentsincludeanyperiodofabsencetoreceive , multipletreatments(includinganyperiodofrecoveryfromthetreatments)byahealthcare p provider,orbyaproviderofhealthcareservicesunderordersof,oronreferralby,ahealthcare V provider,eitherforrestorativesurgeryafteranaccidentorotherinjury,orforaconditionthat < wouldlikelyresultinaperiodofincapacity(inabilitytowork,attendschoolorperformother " regulardailyactivities)ofmorethanthreeconsecutivecalendardaysintheabsenceofmedical  interventionortreatment.29C.F.R.825.115(e).    TheFMLAregulationsprovidesomeguidanceconcerningwhatisandisnotaserious G healthcondition.Forexample,thefollowinggenerallydonotfallwithinthedefinitionofa - serioushealthcondition:routinephysical,eyeordentalexaminations;treatmentsforacneor  plasticsurgery;commonailmentssuchasacoldortheflu,earaches,upsetstomach,minor  ulcers,headaches(otherthanmigraines);andtreatmentforroutinedentalororthodontic    problemsorperiodontaldisease.29C.F.R.825.113(c)(d).Whiletheaboveconditionsarenot !g! generallyconsidered serious,theEighthCircuithasheldthatsomeconditions,suchasupset "M" stomachoraminorulcer,couldstillbe serioushealthconditionsiftheymeettheregulatory #3# criteria,forexample,anincapacityofmorethanthreeconsecutivecalendardaysthatalso w$$ involvedqualifyingtreatment.L  M  Thorsonv.Gemini,Inc.L  M  ,205F.3d370,379_(8thL  M  _ԀCir.),L  M  affdL  M  ,205 ]%% F.3d370_(8thL  M  _ԀCir.2000). C&&   Inaddition,theregulationsprovideguidanceregardingwhatconditionscommonlyare '>!( consideredserioushealthconditions.Forexample,chronicconditionscouldincludeasthma, ($") diabetesorepilepsy;longtermincapacitatingconditionscouldincludeAlzheimers,asevere h) #* strokeortheterminalstagesofadisease;andconditionsrequiringmultipletreatmentscould N*#+ includecancer(chemotherapy,radiation,etc.),severearthritis(physicaltherapy),orkidney 4+$, disease(dialysis).29C.F.R.825.115. ,%-   CourtsintheEighthCircuithaveprovidedadditionalguidanceregardingwhat ^ constitutesaserioushealthcondition.InL  M  Bealv.RubbermaidCommercialProducts,Inc.L  M  ,972F. D Supp.1216(S.D.Iowa1997),L  M  affdL  M  ,149F.3d1186_(8thL  M  _ԀCir.1998),thecourtanalyzedseveral * conditionsagainsttheregulatorydefinition.Thecourtfoundthataminorbackailment,eczema,   andnonincapacitatingbronchitiswerenotserioushealthconditionsundertheFMLA.L  M  Id.L  M  Ԁat   122325.ThecourtalsoheldthatanemployeewasnotentitledtoFMLAleavesubsequentto  ~ hersonsdeathnoting [l]eaveisnotmeanttobeusedforbereavementbecauseadeceased  d personhasnobasicmedical,nutritional,orpsychologicalneedswhichneedtobecaredfor.L  M  Id.  J at1216.  0   Inaddition,theEighthCircuithasheldthatexaminationsandevaluationsgiventoan   employeeschildtodeterminewhetherthechildhadbeensexuallymolesteddidnotamountto o  treatmentforaserioushealthconditioncoveredbytheFMLA.L  M  Martyszenkov.Safeway,IncL  M  ., U  120F.3d120,12324(8thL  M  ԀCir.1997).Theallegedmolestationdidnotcreateamentalcondition ;  thathinderedthechildsabilitytoparticipateinanyactivityatallanddidnotrestrictanyofthe !  childsdailyactivities.L  M  Id.L  M  Ԁ e    Theregulationsalsoprovidethatthephrase continuingtreatmentasusedinthe ` definitionofserioushealthcondition,includesacourseofprescriptionmedicationandtherapy, F butnotoverthecountermedications,bedrestorexercise.29C.F.R.825.113(c). ,   TheRegulationsalsoprovidethattheemployeemustobtainamedicalcertification  regardingaserioushealthcarecondition.29C.F.R.825.304.Iftheemployerviewsone k medicalcertificationformasincompleteorinsufficient,thenewRegulationsrequirethe Q employertonotifytheemployee,inwriting,andgivetheemployeesevencalendardaysto 7 provideadditionalinformation.29C.F.R.825.304(c). { @SeparateCausesofActionUndertheFMLAforInterferenceandRetaliation v L  M    CourtshaverecognizedtwodistinctcausesofactionundertheFMLA.First,aplaintiff - maypursuerecoveryunderan interferencetheory.Thisclaimarisesunder29U.S.C.  2615(a)(1),whichmakesitunlawfulforanemployer tointerferewith,restrain,ordenyan  employeesrightsundertheFMLA.Underaninterferenceclaim,itistheplaintiffsburdento    demonstratethatshewasentitledtoabenefitundertheFMLA,butwasdeniedthatentitlement.L  M   !g! Phillipsv.MathewsL  M  ,547F.3d905,91314(8thL  M  ԀCir.2008).TheFMLAentitleseligible "M" employeestoreinstatementattheendoftheirFMLAleavetothepositionheldbeforetaking #3# leaveoranequivalentposition.Iftheplaintiffmeetsthisburden,thenitisthedefendants w$$ burdentodemonstratethatshewouldhavebeendeniedreinstatementevenifshehadnottaken ]%% FMLAleave. C&&   ThesecondtypeofrecoveryundertheFMLAisthe retaliationtheory.Thisclaim '>!( arisesunder29U.S.C.2615(a)(2),whichmakesitunlawfulforanemployertodiscriminate ($") againstanemployeewhohastakenFMLAleave.Retaliationclaimsareanalyzedunderthe h) #* burdenshiftingframeworkofL  M  McDonnellDouglasCorp.v.GreenL  M  ,411U.S.792(1973).To N*#+ establishaprimafaciecaseofretaliationundertheFMLA,aplaintiffmustshow(1)sheengaged 4+$, inastatutorilyprotectedactivity;(2)shesufferedanadverseemploymentaction;and(3)a ,%- causalconnectionexistsbetweentheadverseactionandtheplaintiffsexerciseofherFMLA ^ rights.Afterestablishingaprimafaciecase,theburdenshiftstotheemployertoarticulatea D legitimate,nondiscriminatoryreasonforitsadverseemploymentaction.Iftheemployeroffersa * legitimate,nondiscriminatoryreason,theburdenisshiftedbacktotheplaintifftoestablishthat   theemployersreasonsarepretextual.(Mostcitationsomitted.)   @ppNoticeoftheNeedforLeave   L  M    InordertobeentitledtoleaveundertheFMLA,theemployeemustgivetimelynoticeof Z  theneedforleaveandprovidetheemployersufficientinformationthatleaveisforaqualifying @  reasonundertheFMLA.L  M  Phillipsv.MatthewsL  M  ,547F.3L  M  d905,909(8thCir.2008)L  M  ;Scobeyv. &  NucorSteelArkansasL  M  ,580F.3L  M  dL  M  Ԁ781,78586(8thL  M  ԀCir.2009).L  M  ԀIftheleaveisforeseeable,the    employeemustprovideatleastthirtydaysadvancenoticebeforetheleaveistobegin.L  M  ԀL  M  Ԁ29C.F.R.   825.302(a).Iftheleaveisunforeseeablethentheemployeeistoprovidenoticetothe z  employerassoonaspracticableunderthefactsandcircumstancesoftheparticularcase.29 ` C.F.R.825.303(a).Assoonaspracticablemeansassoonaspossibleandpractical,takinginto F accountthecircumstancesoftheindividualcase,whichinmostcaseswouldbethatsamedayor , thenextbusinessday.29C.F.R.825.302(b).Further,anemployermayrequirethatthe p employeecomplywiththeemployersnoticerequirementsabsentunusualcircumstances.29 V C.F.R.825.302(d). <   Additionallythe,employeemustprovidesufficientinformationaboutthereasonfor 7 leavefortheemployertoreasonablydeterminetheFMLAmayapplytotheleaverequest.29 { C.F.R.825.302(c)and29C.F.R.825.303(b);L  M  Woodsv.DaimL  M  lL  M  erChryslerCorp.L  M  Ԁ409F.3d a 984,990(8thL  M  ԀCir.2005). Theemployersdutiesarisewhentheemployeeprovidesenough G informationtoputtheemployeronnoticethattheemployeemaybeinneedofFMLAleave. - L  M  Phillips,L  M  547F.3L  M  dat909L  M  Ԁ(quotingBrowningv.LibertyMutualInsCo.L  M  ,178F.3L  M  d194L  M  3(8thL  M  ԀCir.  1999)).Thus,employeeshaveanaffirmativedutytotimelyadvisetheemployeroftheneedand  reasonforleave.L  M  ScobeyL  M  ,580F.3L  M  dat78586.L  M       @ L  M  TheRelationshipBetweentheFairLaborStandardsAct(FLSA), 8"" L  M  @ CivilRightsLegislation,andtheFMLAL  M  ӈ ## L  M    AlthoughearliercasessuggestedtheFMLAwasmoreakintotheFLSAthantoCivil w$% Rightslegislation,L  M  see,e.g.,Morrisv.VCW,Inc.L  M  ,1996WL740544(W.D.Mo.1996),the ]%& SupremeCourthasleftnodoubtthattheFMLAisanantidiscriminationstatute.L  M  NevadaDept C&' ofHumanResourcesv.HibbsL  M  ,538U.S.721,72829(2003)(holdingtheFMLAaimstoprotect )' ( therighttobefreefromgenderbaseddiscriminationintheworkplaceandsuchastatutory (!) schemeissubjecttoheightenedscrutiny).However,theFLSAcanprovideguidanceforthe ("* interpretationofFMLAtermssuchasusingFLSA hoursofservicetocalculateFMLA )}#+ eligibilityforleaveanddeterminationofwhetherasupervisorisan employerforFMLA *c$, purposes.L  M  SeeMorrisL  M  Ԁat*2andcasescitedtherein. +I%-   InretaliationcasesundertheFMLA,courtsfrequentlyborrowtheframeworkand ^ methodofanalysisincivilrightscases.L  M  See,e.g.L  M  ,L  M  Phillipsv.MathewsL  M  ,547F.3d905,91314 D (8thL  M  ԀCir.2008)(FMLAmakesitunlawfulforanemployertodiscriminateagainstanyindividual * foropposinganypracticemadeunlawfulbytheAct;thisoppositionclauseisderivedfromTitle   VIIoftheCivilRightsActof1964).     NothingintheFMLAmodifiesoraffectsanyfederalorstatelawprohibiting O  discriminationonthebasisofrace,religion,color,nationalorigin,sex,ageordisability(L  M  e.g.L  M  , 5  TitleVII,thePregnancyDiscriminationAct,theRehabilitationAct,theADA,etc.).29U.S.C.   2651(a)(b);29C.F.R.825.702(a).    lj8tXXdXd8 @y y  %   5.81AFMLAWRONGFULTERMINATIONELEMENTS ^ @ (EmployeewithaSeriousHealthCondition)  ͔   D   \XXtYourverdictmustbefortheplaintiff[andagainstdefendant__________]1ifall   ofthefollowingelementshavebeenproved2:  )   [First,theplaintiffwaseligibleforleave3;and]     First,theplaintiffhadaserioushealthcondition(asdefinedinInstruction u   ______)4;and     Second,theplaintiffwas[absentfromwork]5becauseofthatserioushealth c  condition;and |    [Third,theplaintiffgavethedefendanttimelynotice(asdefinedinInstruction Q  ______)6of[(his)(her)]needtobe[absentfromwork]5]7;and j   [Fourth,assoonaspracticable(asdefinedinInstruction______)8,theplaintiff ? gavethedefendantsufficientinformationsothatthedefendantkneworshouldhave X knowntheabsencewasforaserioushealthcondition]9;and -   Fifth,thedefendant[describeemploymentactiontaken,e.g.,discharged]10the F plaintiff;and    Sixth,theplaintiffs[absencefromwork]5wasa[(motivating)(determining)]11 4 factorinthedefendantsdecisionto[describeemploymentactiontaken,e.g.,discharge]10  ! theplaintiff.  "#   However,yourverdictmustbeforthedefendantifanyoftheaboveelementshas !% notbeenproved[orifthedefendantisentitledtoaverdictunder(Instruction______)]12. n#'   [Youmayfindthattheplaintiffs[absencefromwork]wasa[(motivating) $) (determining)]factorinthedefendants(decision)13ifithasbeenprovedthatthe \&+ defendantsstatedreason(s)forits(decision)[(is)(are)]apretexttohide 'u!- discrimination.]14 J)"/  8,%3    NotesonUse ^  s   1.Usethisphraseiftherearemultipledefendants. X   2.ModelInstruction3.04(BurdenofProof)tellsthejurythatsomethingis L  provedonlyifthejuryfindsitismorelikelytruethannottrue.Thephrase greater F  weightoftheevidenceisnotnecessaryhere.ItcanbeincludedinInstruction3.04if @  desiredbythecourt. :    3.BeforeanemployeecanexerciserightsundertheFMLA,heorshemustbe .  eligibleforleave.Seesupra EmployeesEligibleforLeavesectionin5.80.This (  elementisbracketedherebecauseitisanticipatedthatthiselementwillbeneeded "  infrequentlyaseligibilityissueswilllikelybedecidedasamatteroflaw.Inthecase   whereeligibilityisafactissue,thiselementshouldbeincorporatedandtheremaining   elementsrenumberedaccordingly.     4.InsertthenumberoftheInstructiondefining serioushealthcondition.    5.Itisanticipatedthattheseinstructionswillbemorecommonlyappliedtocases  inwhichtheplaintiffactuallytookleave.However,theFMLAalsoprotectsaneligible  employeewhoseleaverequestwasdeniedbytheemployer.Insuchasituation,insert  languagethatcorrespondstothefactsofthecase.    6.Referencetotheinstructionrelatingtothedefinitionof TimelyNotice | shouldbegivendependingonwhethertheleavewasforeseeable,30dayspursuantto29 v _C.F.R._Ԁ825.302(a)orunforeseeable,lessthan30dayspursuantto29_C.F.R._ p 825.303(a). j   7.Thiselementisbracketedbecause timelynoticemaynotbeafactissue.Ifit  ^ isafactissue,thiselementshouldbeincorporatedandtheremainingelements !X renumberedaccordingly. "R   8.InsertthenumberoftheInstructiondefining assoonaspracticable. $F   9.Thiselementisbracketedbecausethesufficiencyoftheinformationorcontent &: ! ofthenoticesothatthedefendant knewor shouldhaveknownthattherequested '4!" leavewasFMLAqualifyingleavemaynotbeafactissue.See825.302(c)for (."# foreseeableleaveor29_C.F.R._Ԁ825.303(b)forunforeseeableleave.Ifitisafactissue, )(#$  thiselementshouldbeincorporatedandtheremainingelementsrenumberedaccordingly. *"$%   10.Insertlanguagethatcorrespondstothefactsofthecase.Inadditionto ^  protectingemployeesfromretaliatorytermination,theFMLAprohibitsemployersfrom X interferingwithorretaliatingagainstemployeeswhoattempttoexerciserightsunderthe R FMLA.See_Throneberry_Ԁv._McGehee_Ԁ_Desha_ԀCountyHosp.,403F.3d972,977(8thCir. L  2005)( TheFMLAmakesitunlawfulforanyemployertointerferewith,restrain,or F  denytheexerciseofortheattempttoexercise,anyrightprovidedundertheFMLA,29 @  U.S.C.2615(a)(1).Aviolationofthisprovisioncreateswhatiscommonlyknownas :  theinterferencetheoryofrecovery.29U.S.C.2617....TheFMLAalsomakesit 4  unlawfulforanyemployertodischargeorinanyothermannerdiscriminateagainstany . individualforopposinganypracticemadeunlawfulbytheFMLA.29U.S.C. (  2615(a)(2).Aviolationofthisprovisioncreateswhatiscommonlyknownasthe "  discriminationtheoryofrecovery.29U.S.C.2617.)     11.SeetheIntroductionforadiscussionofwhethertheterm determiningfactor   or motivatingfactorshouldbeused.      12.Thislanguageshouldbeusedwhenthedefendantissubmittinganaffirmative  defense.    13.Thisinstructionmakesreferencestothedefendants decision.Itmaybe  modifiedifanothertermsuchas actionsor conductwouldbemoreappropriate.    14.Thissentencemaybeadded,ifappropriate.SeeModelInstruction5.95, | infra,andMoorev.RobertsonFireProtectionDist.,249F.3d786,790n.9(8thCir. v 2001),whichstates [w]edonotexpressanyviewastowhetheriteverwouldbe p reversibleerrorforatrialcourttofailtogiveapretextinstruction,thoughwetendto j doubtit. d    CommitteeComments  ^    TheFMLAprohibitsanemployerfromterminatinganemployeebecausethe !X employeeexercisedrightsorattemptedtoexerciserightsundertheFMLA.Anemployee "R whocontendsheorshewasterminatedbecauseofFMLAleave,orarequesttotake #L FMLAleave,mustshowthattheemployersactionwasmotivatedbydiscrimination $F becauseoftheleaveorrequestforleave.Marksv.TheSchoolDist.ofKansasCity, %@  Missouri,941F.Supp.886,892(W.D.Mo.1996)(quotingDayv.ExcelCorp.,1996 &: ! WL294341(D.Kan.1996)). '4!"   Iftheplaintiffisallegingthedefendantsstatedreasonforitsemploymentaction )(#$ isapretexttohidediscrimination,ModelInstruction5.95,infra,maybeused.#XtX\ޤ # *"$%   z+%& ol@   %   5.81BFMLAWRONGFULTERMINATIONELEMENTS ^ @Y Y (EmployeeNeededtoCareforSpouse,Parent,Son D @) ) orDaughterwithaSeriousHealthCondition  D  )1 *   \XXtYourverdictmustbefortheplaintiff[andagainstdefendant_________]2ifallof   thefollowingelementshavebeenproved3: m    [First,theplaintiffwaseligibleforleave4;and]     First,theplaintiffs[identifyfamilymember]hadaserioushealthcondition(as [  definedinInstruction______)5;and t    Second,theplaintiffwasneededtocarefor[identifyfamilymember];and I    Third,theplaintiffwas[absentfromwork]6tocarefor[identifyfamilymember]; b  and 7    [Fourth,theplaintiffgavethedefendanttimelynotice(asdefinedinInstruction P ____)7of[(his)(her)]needtobe[absentfromwork]6]8and %   [Fifth,assoonaspracticable(asdefinedinInstruction______)9,theplaintiffgave > thedefendantsufficientinformationsothatthedefendantkneworshouldhaveknown  theabsencewasforaserioushealthconditionof[identifyfamilymember]]10;and ,   Sixth,thedefendant[describeemploymentactiontaken,e.g.,discharged]11the  plaintiff;and x    Seventh,theplaintiffs[absencefromwork]6wasa[(motivating)(determining)]12 " factorinthedefendantsdecisionto[describeemploymentactiontaken,e.g.,discharge] f!$ 11theplaintiff. "&   However,yourverdictmustbeforthedefendantifanyoftheaboveelementshas T$( notbeenproved[orifthedefendantisentitledtoaverdictunder(Instruction_____)]13. %m*   [Youmayfindthattheplaintiffs[absencefromwork]wasa[(motivating) B' , (determining)]factorinthedefendants(decision)14ifithasbeenprovedthatthe ([". defendantsstatedreason(s)forits(decision)[(is)(are)]apretexttohide 0*#0 discrimination.]15 +I%2    ` &    NotesonUse'X  X  &    1.ThisInstructionisforuseincasesinwhichtheemployeesfamilymemberhad R aserioushealthcondition.ModelInstruction5.81C,infra,shouldbeusedforcasesin L  whichtheemployeeneededleavebecauseofabirth,adoptionorfostercare.'RR  F    2.Usethisphraseiftherearemultipledefendants. :    3.ModelInstruction3.04(BurdenofProof)tellsthejurythatsomethingis . provedonlyifthejuryfindsitismorelikelytruethannottrue.Thephrase greater (  weightoftheevidenceisnotnecessaryhere.ItcanbeincludedinInstruction3.04if "  desiredbythecourt.     4.BeforeanemployeecanexerciserightsundertheFMLA,heorshemustbe    eligibleforleave.Seesupra EmployeesEligibleforLeavesectionin5.80.This    elementisbracketedherebecauseitisanticipatedthatthiselementwillbeneeded  infrequentlyaseligibilityissueswilllikelybedecidedasamatteroflaw.Inthecase  whereeligibilityisafactissue,thiselementshouldbeincorporatedandtheremaining  elementsrenumberedaccordingly.    5.InsertthenumberoftheInstructiondefining serioushealthcondition.    6.Itisanticipatedthattheseinstructionswillbemorecommonlyappliedtocases | inwhichtheplaintiffactuallytookleave.However,theFMLAalsoprotectsaneligible v employeewhoseleaverequestwasdeniedbytheemployer.Insuchasituation,insert p languagethatcorrespondstothefactsofthecase. j   7.Referencetotheinstructionrelatingtothedefinitionof TimelyNotice  ^ shouldbegivendependingonwhethertheleavewasforeseeable,30dayspursuantto29 !X _C.F.R._Ԁ825.302(a)orunforeseeable,lessthan30dayspursuantto29_C.F.R._ "R 825.303(a). `  #L   8.Thiselementisbracketedbecause timelynoticemaynotbeafactissue.Ifit %@  isafactissue,thiselementshouldbeincorporatedandtheremainingelements &: ! renumberedaccordingly. '4!" ̀  9.InsertthenumberoftheInstructiondefining assoonaspracticable. )(#$   *"$%   10.Thiselementisbracketedbecausethesufficiencyoftheinformationor ^  contentofthenoticesothatthedefendant knewor shouldhaveknownthatthe X requestedleavewasFMLAqualifyingleavemaynotbeafactissue.See825.302(c)for R foreseeableleaveor29_C.F.R._Ԁ825.303(b)forunforeseeableleave.Ifitisafactissue, L  thiselementshouldbeincorporatedandtheremainingelementsrenumberedaccordingly. F    11.Insertthelanguagethatcorrespondstothefactsofthecase.Inadditionto :  protectingemployeesfromretaliatorytermination,theFMLAprohibitsemployersfrom 4  interferingwithorretaliatingagainstemployeeswhoattempttoexerciserightsunderthe . FMLA.See_Throneberry_Ԁv._McGehee_Ԁ_Desha_ԀCountyHosp.,403F.3d972,977(8thCir. (  2005)( TheFMLAmakesitunlawfulforanyemployertointerferewith,restrain,or "  denytheexerciseofortheattempttoexercise,anyrightprovidedundertheFMLA,29   U.S.C.2615(a)(1).Aviolationofthisprovisioncreateswhatiscommonlyknownas   theinterferencetheoryofrecovery.29U.S.C.2617....TheFMLAalsomakesit   unlawfulforanyemployertodischargeorinanyothermannerdiscriminateagainstany    individualforopposinganypracticemadeunlawfulbytheFMLA.29U.S.C.  2615(a)(2).Aviolationofthisprovisioncreateswhatiscommonlyknownasthe  discriminationtheoryofrecovery.29U.S.C.2617.)    12.SeetheIntroductionforadiscussionofwhethertheterm determiningfactor  or motivatingfactorshouldbeused.    13.Thislanguageshouldbeusedwhenthedefendantissubmittinganaffirmative | defense. v   14.Thisinstructionmakesreferencestothedefendants decision.Itmaybe j modifiedifanothertermsuchas actionsor conductwouldbemoreappropriate. d   15.Thissentencemaybeadded,ifappropriate.SeeModelInstruction5.95, !X infra,andMoorev.RobertsonFireProtectionDist.,249F.3d786,790n.9(8thCir. "R 2001),whichstates [w]edonotexpressanyviewastowhetheriteverwouldbe #L reversibleerrorforatrialcourttofailtogiveapretextinstruction,thoughwetendto $F doubtit. %@    򀀀CommitteeComments &: !    TheFMLAentitlesaneligibleemployeetotakeupto12workweeksofleaveif (."# theemployeeisneededtocarefortheemployeesspouse,son,daughterorparentwitha )(#$ serioushealthcondition.TheFMLAprohibitsanemployerfromterminatingan *"$% employeebecausetheemployeeexercisedrightsorattemptedtoexerciserightsunderthe z+%& FMLA.AnemployeewhocontendsheorshewasterminatedbecauseofFMLAleave, ^ orarequesttotakeFMLAleave,mustshowthattheemployersactionwasmotivatedby X discriminationbecauseoftheleaveorrequestforleave.Marksv.TheSchoolDist.of R KansasCity,Missouri,941F.Supp.886,892(W.D.Mo.1996)(quotingDayv.Excel L  Corp.,1996WL294341(D.Kan.1996)). F    Iftheplaintiffisallegingthedefendantsstatedreasonforitsemploymentaction :  isapretexttohidediscrimination,ModelInstruction5.95,infra,maybeused.#XtX\} # 4    . po@y y  %   5.81CFMLAWRONGFULTERMINATIONELEMENTS ^ @ (EmployeeLeaveforBirth,AdoptionorFosterCare) *v  1 D   \XXtYourverdictmustbefortheplaintiff[andagainstdefendant_________]2ifallof   thefollowingelementshavebeenproved3:  )   [First,theplaintiffwaseligibleforleave4;and]     First,theplaintiffwas[absentfromwork]5becauseof[thebirthofasonor u   daughter,orforplacementwiththeplaintiffofasonordaughterforadoptionorfoster   care]6;and c    [Second,theplaintiffgavethedefendanttimelynotice(asdefinedinInstruction |  _____)7of[(his)(her)]needtobe[absentfromwork]5]8and Q    [Third,assoonaspracticable(asdefinedinInstruction______)9,theplaintiff j gavethedefendantsufficientinformationsothatthedefendantkneworshouldhave ? knowntheabsencewasfor[thebirthofasonordaughter,orforplacementwiththe X plaintiffofasonordaughterforadoptionorfostercare]]10and -   Fourth,thedefendant[describeemploymentactiontaken,e.g.,discharged]11the F plaintiff;and    Fifth,theplaintiffs[absencefromwork]5wasa[(motivating)(determining)]12 4 factorinthedefendantsdecisionto[describeemploymentactiontaken,e.g.,discharge]10  ! theplaintiff.  "#   However,yourverdictmustbeforthedefendantifanyoftheaboveelementshas !% notbeenproved[orifthedefendantisentitledtoaverdictunder(Instruction____)]13. n#'   [Youmayfindthattheplaintiffs[absencefromwork]wasa[(motivating) $) (determining)]factorinthedefendants(decision)14ifithasbeenprovedthatthe \&+ defendantsstatedreason(s)forits(decision)[(is)(are)]apretexttohide 'u!- discrimination.]15 J)"/   +D%3    NotesonUse ^  x     1.ThisInstructionisforuseincasesinwhichtheemployeeneededleavebecause R ofabirth,adoptionorfostercare.ModelInstruction5.81B,supra,shouldbeusedfor L  casesinwhichtheemployeesfamilymemberhadaserioushealthcondition.This F  InstructiondiffersfromModelInstruction5.81B,supra,inthatitdoesnotincludean @  elementrequiringtheplaintifftoshowthatheorshewas neededtocareforthe :  newborn,adoptedchildorfosterchild.OneofthepurposesoftheFMLAistoprovide 4  timeforearlyparentchildbonding.1993U.S.CodeCong.andAdmin.News3,11;139 . Cong.Rec.H319,384,387,396;KelleyCo.v._Marquardt_,172Wis.2d234,493 (  N.W.2d68,75(Wis.1992). "    2.Usethisphraseiftherearemultipledefendants.     3.ModelInstruction3.04(BurdenofProof)tellsthejurythatsomethingis    provedonlyifthejuryfindsitismorelikelytruethannottrue.Thephrase greater  weightoftheevidenceisnotnecessaryhere.ItcanbeincludedinInstruction3.04if  desiredbythecourt.    4.BeforeanemployeecanexerciserightsundertheFMLA,heorshemustbe   eligibleforleave.Seesupra EmployeesEligibleforLeavesectionin5.80.This  elementisbracketedherebecauseitisanticipatedthatthiselementwillbeneeded  infrequentlyaseligibilityissueswilllikelybedecidedasamatteroflaw.Inthecase | whereeligibilityisafactissue,thiselementshouldbeincorporatedandtheremaining v elementsrenumberedaccordingly. p   5.Itisanticipatedthattheseinstructionswillbemorecommonlyappliedtocases d inwhichtheplaintiffactuallytookleave.However,theFMLAalsoprotectsaneligible  ^ employeewhoseleaverequestwasdeniedbytheemployer.Insuchasituation,insert !X languagethatcorrespondstothefactsofthecase. "R   6.Insertthelanguagethatcorrespondstothefactsofthecase. $F   7.Referencetotheinstructionrelatingtothedefinitionof TimelyNotice &: ! shouldbegivendependingonwhethertheleavewasforeseeable,30dayspursuantto29 '4!" _C.F.R._Ԁ825.302(a)orunforeseeable,lessthan30dayspursuantto29_C.F.R._ (."# 825.303(a). `  )(#$   *"$%   8.Thiselementisbracketedbecause timelynoticemaynotbeafactissue.Ifit ^  isafactissue,thiselementshouldbeincorporatedandtheremainingelements X renumberedaccordingly. R   9.InsertthenumberoftheInstructiondefining assoonaspracticable. F    10.Thiselementisbracketedbecausethesufficiencyoftheinformationor :  contentofthenoticesothatthedefendant knewor shouldhaveknownthatthe 4  requestedleavewasFMLAqualifyingleavemaynotbeafactissue.See825.302(c)for . foreseeableleaveor29_C.F.R._Ԁ825.303(b)forunforeseeableleave.Ifitisafactissue, (  thiselementshouldbeincorporatedandtheremainingelementsrenumberedaccordingly. "    11.Insertthelanguagethatcorrespondstothefactsofthecase.Inadditionto   protectingemployeesfromretaliatorytermination,theFMLAprohibitsemployersfrom   interferingwithorretaliatingagainstemployeeswhoattempttoexerciserightsunderthe    FMLA.See_Throneberry_Ԁv._McGehee_Ԁ_Desha_ԀCountyHosp.,403F.3d972,977(8thCir.  2005)( TheFMLAmakesitunlawfulforanyemployertointerferewith,restrain,or  denytheexerciseofortheattempttoexercise,anyrightprovidedundertheFMLA,29  U.S.C.2615(a)(1).Aviolationofthisprovisioncreateswhatiscommonlyknownas  theinterferencetheoryofrecovery.29U.S.C.2617....TheFMLAalsomakesit  unlawfulforanyemployertodischargeorinanyothermannerdiscriminateagainstany  individualforopposinganypracticemadeunlawfulbytheFMLA.29U.S.C.  2615(a)(2).Aviolationofthisprovisioncreateswhatiscommonlyknownasthe | discriminationtheoryofrecovery.29U.S.C.2617.) v   12.SeetheIntroductionforadiscussionofwhethertheterm determiningfactor j or motivatingfactorshouldbeused. d   13.Thislanguageshouldbeusedwhenthedefendantissubmittinganaffirmative !X defense. "R   14.Thisinstructionmakesreferencestothedefendants decision.Itmaybe $F modifiedifanothertermsuchas actionsor conductwouldbemoreappropriate. %@    15.Thissentencemaybeadded,ifappropriate.SeeModelInstruction5.95, '4!" infra,andMoorev.RobertsonFireProtectionDist.,249F.3d786,790n.9(8thCir. (."# 2001),whichstates [w]edonotexpressanyviewastowhetheriteverwouldbe )(#$ reversibleerrorforatrialcourttofailtogiveapretextinstruction,thoughwetendto *"$% doubtit. z+%& &     @ CommitteeComments  ^      TheFMLAentitlesaneligibleemployeetotakeupto12workweeksofleavefor R thebirthofasonordaughter,orforplacementwiththeemployeeofasonordaughter L  foradoptionorfostercare.29U.S.C.2612(a)(1)(A),(B);29_C.F.R._Ԁ825.112(a)(1), F  (2).TheFMLAprohibitsanemployerfromterminatinganemployeebecausethe @  employeeexercisedrightsorattemptedtoexerciserightsundertheFMLA.Anemployee :  whocontendsthatheorshewasterminatedbecauseofFMLAleave,orarequesttotake 4  FMLAleave,mustshowthattheemployersactionwasmotivatedbydiscrimination . becauseoftheleaveorrequestforleave.Marksv.TheSchoolDist.ofKansasCity, (  Missouri,941F.Supp.886,892(W.D.Mo.1996)(quotingDayv.ExcelCorp.,1996 "  WL294341(D.Kan.1996)).   Ѐ  Iftheplaintiffisallegingthedefendantsstatedreasonforitsemploymentaction   isapretexttohidediscrimination,ModelInstruction5.95,infra,maybeused.'^ #XtX\] #       qp@y y  %   5.81DFMLAWRONGFULTERMINATIONELEMENTS ^ @ (QualifyingExigencyLeaveRelatedtoCoveredMilitaryMember)    D   \XXtYourverdictmustbefortheplaintiff[andagainstdefendant_________]1ifallof   thefollowingelementshavebeenproved2:  )   [First,theplaintiffwaseligibleforleave3;and]     Second,aqualifyingexigency(asdefinedinInstruction_____)4existed;and u     Third,suchqualifyingexigencyaroseoutofthefactthattheplaintiffs[spouse,   son,daughter,orparent]wasonactivedutyorcalltoactivedutystatusinsupportofa c  contingencyoperation5(asdefinedinInstruction______);and |    Fourth,such[spouse,son,daughter,orparent]wasamemberofthe[Army Q  NationalGuardoftheUnitedStates,ArmyReserve,NavyReserve,MarineCorps j Reserve,AirNationalGuardoftheUnitedStates,AirForceReserve,orCoastGuard ? ReserveorwasretiredmemberoftheRegularArmedForcesorReserve]6;and X     Fifth,theplaintiffwas[absentfromwork]% q 7%q becauseofsuchqualifyingexigency;and -     [Sixth,theplaintiffgavethedefendanttimelynotice(asdefinedinInstruction F ____)8of[(his)(her)]needtobe[absentfromwork]7]9and    [Seventh,assoonaspracticable(asdefinedinInstruction____)10,theplaintiff 4 gavesufficientinformationsothatthedefendantkneworshouldhaveknownthatthe  ! absencewasforaqualifyingexigencyarisingoutofthefactthattheplaintiffs[spouse,  "# son,daughter,orparent]wasonactivedutyorcalltoactivedutystatusinsupportofa !% contingencyoperation;]11and h  n#'   Eighth,thedefendant[describeemploymentactiontaken,e.g.,discharged]12the $) plaintiff;and \&+   Ninth,theplaintiffs[absencefromwork]7wasa[(motivating)(determining)]13 'u!- factorinthedefendantsdecisionto[describeemploymentactiontaken,e.g.,discharge] J)"/  12theplaintiff. *c$1 _  However,yourverdictmustbeforthedefendantifanyoftheaboveelementshas ^  notbeenproved[orifthedefendantisentitledtoaverdictunder(Instruction_____)]14. w   [Youmayfindthattheplaintiffs[absencefromwork]wasa[(motivating) L  (determining)]factorinthedefendants(decision)15ifithasbeenprovedthatthe  e defendantsstatedreason(s)forits(decision)[(is)(are)]apretexttohide :  discrimination.]16  S    NotesonUse (   X  B.` hp x '#XB 1.Usethisphraseiftherearemultipledefendants. A   ;  2.ModelInstruction3.04(BurdenofProof)tellsthejurythatsomethingis 5  provedonlyifthejuryfindsitismorelikelytruethannottrue.Thephrase greater /  weightoftheevidenceisnotnecessaryhere.ItcanbeincludedinInstruction3.04if ) desiredbythecourt. #  { 3.BeforeanemployeecanexerciserightsundertheFMLA,heorshemustbe u  eligibleforleave.Seesupra EmployeesEligibleforLeavesectionin5.80.This o elementisbracketedherebecauseitisanticipatedthatthiselementwillbeneeded i  infrequentlyaseligibilityissueswilllikelybedecidedasamatteroflaw.Inthecase c whereeligibilityisafactissue,thiselementshouldbeincorporatedandtheremaining ] elementsrenumberedaccordingly. W  Q 4.InsertthenumberoftheInstructiondefining qualifyingexigency. K  E 5. Theactivedutyordersofacoveredmilitarymemberwillgenerallyspecifyif ?  theservicememberisservinginsupportofacontingencyoperationbycitationtothe 9! relevantsectionofTitle10oftheUnitedStatesCodeand/orbyreferencetothespecific 3"  nameofthecontingencyoperation. -#!  '$" 6.QualifyingExigencyleaveisnotavailablewherethefamilymemberison !%# activedutyorcalltoactivedutystatusinsupportofacontingencyoperationasamember &$ oftheRegularArmedForces. ' %  (!& 7.Itisanticipatedthattheseinstructionswillbemorecommonlyappliedtocases  )"' inwhichtheplaintiffactuallytookleave.However,theFMLAalsoprotectsaneligible *#( employeewhoseleaverequestwasdeniedbytheemployer.Insuchasituation,insert *$) languagethatcorrespondstothefactsofthecase._ +%* Ї8.Referencetotheinstructionrelatingtothedefinitionof TimelyNotice ^ shouldbegivendependingonwhethertheleavewasforeseeable,30dayspursuantto29 X _C.F.R._Ԁ825.302(a)orunforeseeable,lessthan30dayspursuantto29_C.F.R._ R 825.303(a). L   F  9.Thiselementisbracketedbecause timelynoticemaynotbeafactissue.Ifit @  isafactissue,thiselementshouldbeincorporatedandtheremainingelements :  renumberedaccordingly. 4   .  t X  10.InsertthenumberoftheInstructiondefining assoonaspracticable. (   t XE.` hp x '#X'#E11.Thiselementisbracketedbecausethesufficiencyoftheinformationor 8  contentofthenoticesothatthedefendant knewor shouldhaveknownthatthe 2  requestedleavewasFMLAqualifyingleavemaynotbeafactissue.See825.302(c)for ,  foreseeableleaveor29_C.F.R._Ԁ825.303(b)forunforeseeableleave.Ifitisafactissue, &  thiselementshouldbeincorporatedandtheremainingelementsrenumberedaccordingly. ~   x 12.Insertthelanguagethatcorrespondstothefactsofthecase.Inadditionto r protectingemployeesfromretaliatorytermination,theFMLAprohibitsemployersfrom l interferingwithorretaliatingagainstemployeeswhoattempttoexerciserightsunderthe f FMLA.See_Throneberry_Ԁv._McGehee_Ԁ_Desha_ԀCountyHosp.,403F.3d972,977(8thCir. ` 2005)( TheFMLAmakesitunlawfulforanyemployertointerferewith,restrain,or Z denytheexerciseofortheattempttoexercise,anyrightprovidedundertheFMLA,29 T U.S.C.2615(a)(1).Aviolationofthisprovisioncreateswhatiscommonlyknownas N theinterferencetheoryofrecovery.29U.S.C.2617....TheFMLAalsomakesit H unlawfulforanyemployertodischargeorinanyothermannerdiscriminateagainstany B individualforopposinganypracticemadeunlawfulbytheFMLA.29U.S.C. < 2615(a)(2).Aviolationofthisprovisioncreateswhatiscommonlyknownasthe 6  discriminationtheoryofrecovery.29U.S.C.2617.) 0!  *" 13.SeetheIntroductionforadiscussionofwhethertheterm determiningfactor $# or motivatingfactorshouldbeused. $  % 14.Thislanguageshouldbeusedwhenthedefendantissubmittinganaffirmative &  defense.  ' !  (!" 15.Thisinstructionmakesreferencestothedefendants decision.Itmaybe )"# modifiedifanothertermsuchas actionsor conductwouldbemoreappropriate. )#$   *$% 16.Thissentencemaybeadded,ifappropriate.SeeModelInstruction5.95, ^  infra,andMoorev.RobertsonFireProtectionDist.,249F.3d786,790n.9(8thCir. X 2001),whichstates [w]edonotexpressanyviewastowhetheriteverwouldbe R reversibleerrorforatrialcourttofailtogiveapretextinstruction,thoughwetendto L  doubtit.#XtX\ # F    @  uq@   %   5.81EFMLAWRONGFULTERMINATIONELEMENTS ^ @>>(EmployeeNeededtoCareforCoveredServicememberwithaSeriousInjuryorIllness) em0   D  * _\XXtYourverdictmustbefortheplaintiff[andagainstdefendant_________]1ifallof   thefollowingelementshavebeenproved2:  )    ` [First,theplaintiffwaseligibleforleave3;and]      ` Second,theplaintiff[(is)(was)]the[spouse,son,daughter,parent,ornext u   ofkin(asdefinedinInstruction___)4]ofacoveredservicemember(asdefinedin   Instruction___)5;and c     ` Third,suchcoveredservicemember[(has)(had)]aseriousinjuryorillness(as |  definedinInstruction___)6;and Q     ` Fourth,theemployeewasneededtocareforsuchcoveredservicemember j (asdefinedinInstruction___)7;and ?  ` Fifth,theplaintiffwas[absentfromwork]8tocareforsuchcovered X servicemember;and -  ` [Sixth,theplaintiffgavethedefendanttimelynotice(asdefinedin F Instruction_______)9of[(his)(her)]needtobe[absentfromwork]8]10and   ` [Seventh,assoonaspracticable(asdefinedinInstruction____)11,the 4 plaintiffgavesufficientinformationsothatthedefendantkneworshouldhaveknown  ! thattheabsencewasfortheneedtocareforacoveredservicemember];12and  "#  ` Eighth,thedefendant[describeemploymentactiontaken,e.g., !% discharged]13theplaintiff;and n#'  ` Ninth,theplaintiffs[absencefromwork]8wasa[(motivating) $) (determining)]14factorinthedefendantsdecisionto[describeemploymentactiontaken, \&+ e.g.,discharge]10theplaintiff. 'u!-  ` However,yourverdictmustbeforthedefendantifanyoftheabove J)"/ elementshasnotbeenproved[orifthedefendantisentitledtoaverdictunder *c$1 (Instruction_____)]15. 8,%3  ` [Youmayfindthattheplaintiffs[absencefromwork]wasa[(motivating) ^ (determining)]factorinthedefendants(decision)16ifithasbeenprovedthatthe w defendantsstatedreason(s)forits(decision)[(is)(are)]apretexttohide L  discrimination.]17  e  :    S    NotesonUse (    E.` hp x '#X'#E 1.Usethisphraseiftherearemultipledefendants. A   ;  2.ModelInstruction3.04(BurdenofProof)tellsthejurythatsomethingis 5  provedonlyifthejuryfindsitismorelikelytruethannottrue.Thephrase greater /  weightoftheevidenceisnotnecessaryhere.ItcanbeincludedinInstruction3.04if ) desiredbythecourt. #  { 3.BeforeanemployeecanexerciserightsundertheFMLA,heorshemustbe u  eligibleforleave.Seesupra EmployeesEligibleforLeavesectionin5.80.This o elementisbracketedherebecauseitisanticipatedthatthiselementwillbeneeded i  infrequentlyaseligibilityissueswilllikelybedecidedasamatteroflaw.Inthecase c whereeligibilityisafactissue,thiselementshouldbeincorporatedandtheremaining ] elementsrenumberedaccordingly. W  Q 4.InsertthenumberoftheInstructiondefining nextofkinforacovered K militarymember. E  ?  5.InsertthenumberoftheInstructiondefining coveredservicememberfor 9! leavetocareforacoveredservicememberwithaseriousinjuryorillness. 3"   -#! 6.InsertthenumberoftheInstructiondefininga seriousinjuryorillnessofa '$" coveredservicemember. !%#  &$ 7.InsertthenumberoftheInstructiondefining neededtocarefor. ' %  (!&   8.Itisanticipatedthattheseinstructionswillbemorecommonlyappliedtocasesin  )"' whichtheplaintiffactuallytookleave.However,theFMLAalsoprotectsaneligible *#( employeewhoseleaverequestwasdeniedbytheemployer.Insuchasituation,insert *$) languagethatcorrespondstothefactsofthe_case. +%* Ї9.Referencetotheinstructionrelatingtothedefinitionof TimelyNoticeshould ^ begivendependingonwhethertheleavewasforeseeable,30dayspursuantto29_C.F.R._ X 825.302(a)orunforeseeable,lessthan30dayspursuantto29_C.F.R._Ԁ825.303(a). R  L   t X    10.Thiselementisbracketedbecause timelynoticemaynotbeafactissue.If F  itisafactissue,thiselementshouldbeincorporatedandtheremainingelements @  renumberedaccordingly. :  Ѐ  11.InsertthenumberoftheInstructiondefining assoonaspracticable.  J   12.Thiselementisbracketedbecausethesufficiencyoftheinformationor  contentofthenoticesothatthedefendant knewor shouldhaveknownthatthe   requestedleavewasFMLAqualifyingleavemaynotbeafactissue.See825.302(c)for    foreseeableleaveor29_C.F.R._Ԁ825.303(b)forunforeseeableleave.Ifitisafactissue,   thiselementshouldbeincorporatedandtheremainingelementsrenumberedaccordingly.    t XE.` hp x '#X'#E13.Insertthelanguagethatcorrespondstothefactsofthecase.Inadditionto l  protectingemployeesfromretaliatorytermination,theFMLAprohibitsemployersfrom f interferingwithorretaliatingagainstemployeeswhoattempttoexerciserightsunderthe ` FMLA.See_Throneberry_Ԁv._McGehee_Ԁ_Desha_ԀCountyHosp.,403F.3d972,977(8thCir. Z 2005)( TheFMLAmakesitunlawfulforanyemployertointerferewith,restrain,or T denytheexerciseofortheattempttoexercise,anyrightprovidedundertheFMLA,29 N U.S.C.2615(a)(1).Aviolationofthisprovisioncreateswhatiscommonlyknownas H theinterferencetheoryofrecovery.29U.S.C.2617....TheFMLAalsomakesit B unlawfulforanyemployertodischargeorinanyothermannerdiscriminateagainstany < individualforopposinganypracticemadeunlawfulbytheFMLA.29U.S.C. 6 2615(a)(2).Aviolationofthisprovisioncreateswhatiscommonlyknownasthe 0 discriminationtheoryofrecovery.29U.S.C.2617.) *  $  14.SeetheIntroductionforadiscussionofwhethertheterm determiningfactor ! or motivatingfactorshouldbeused. "  # 15.Thislanguageshouldbeusedwhenthedefendantissubmittinganaffirmative  $ defense. %  & 16.Thisinstructionmakesreferencestothedefendants decision.Itmaybe &  modifiedifanothertermsuchas actionsor conductwouldbemoreappropriate. '!!  ("" 17.Thissentencemaybeadded,ifappropriate.SeeModelInstruction5.95, )## infra,andMoorev.RobertsonFireProtectionDist.,249F.3d786,790n.9(8thCir. *$$ 2001),whichstates [w]edonotexpressanyviewastowhetheriteverwouldbe +~%% reversibleerrorforatrialcourttofailtogiveapretextinstruction,thoughwetendto ^ doubtit. X #XtX\.1 #  R vu@   %   5.81FFMLAFAILURETOREINSTATEELEMENTS ^ @ (EmployeewithaSeriousHealthCondition) ctEU   D  *  ` _\XXtYourverdictmustbefortheplaintiff[andagainstdefendant____________   ]1ifallofthefollowingelementshavebeenproved2:  )  ` [First,theplaintiffwaseligibleforleave3;and]    ` First,theplaintiffhadaserioushealthcondition(asdefinedinInstruction u   ______)4;and    ` [Second,theplaintiffgavethedefendanttimelynotice(asdefinedin c  Instruction______)5of[(his)(her)]needtobe[absentfromwork]6]7;and |   ` [Third,assoonaspracticable(asdefinedinInstruction____)8,theplaintiff Q  gavesufficientinformationsothatthedefendantkneworshouldhaveknownthatthe j absencewasforaserioushealthcondition]9;and p  ?  ` Fourth,theplaintiffwasabsentfromworkbecauseofthatserioushealth X condition;and -  ` Fifth,theplaintiffreceivedtreatmentandwasabletoreturntoworkand F performthefunctionsof[(his)(her)]jobattheexpirationoftheleaveperiod10;and   ` Sixth,thedefendantrefusedtoreinstatetheplaintifftothesameoran 4 equivalentposition(asdefinedinInstruction______)11heldbytheplaintiffwhenthe  ! absencebegan.  "#  ` However,yourverdictmustbeforthedefendantifanyoftheabove !% elementshasnotbeenproved[orifthedefendantisentitledtoaverdictunder n#' (Instruction____)]12. $)  t  NotesonUse \&+  ]  ` 1.Usethisphraseiftherearemultipledefendants. 'l!,  ` 2.ModelInstruction3.04(BurdenofProof)tellsthejurythatsomethingis 8)"- provedonlyifthejuryfindsitismorelikelytruethannottrue.Thephrase greater 2*#. weightoftheevidenceisnotnecessaryhere.ItcanbeincludedinInstruction3.04if ,+$/ desiredbythe_court. &,%0  ` 3.BeforeanemployeecanexerciserightsundertheFMLA,heorshemust ^ be eligibleforleave.Seesupra EmployeesEligibleforLeavesectionin5.80.This X elementisbracketedherebecauseitisanticipatedthatthiselementwillbeneeded R infrequentlyaseligibilityissueswilllikelybedecidedasamatteroflaw.Inthecase L  whereeligibilityisafactissue,thiselementshouldbeincorporatedandtheremaining F  elementsrenumberedaccordingly. @   ` 4.InsertthenumberoftheInstructiondefining serioushealthcondition.  P  ` 5.Referencetotheinstructionrelatingtothedefinitionof Timely  Noticeshouldbegivendependingonwhethertheleavewasforeseeable,30days  pursuantto29_C.F.R._Ԁ825.302(a)orunforeseeable,lessthan30dayspursuantto29   _C.F.R._Ԁ825.303(a).     ` 6. Insertlanguagewithrespecttothenatureoftheleavethat x  correspondstothefactsofthecase. r   ` 7.Thiselementisbracketedbecause timelynoticemaynotbeafact   issue.Ifitisafactissue,thiselementshouldbeincorporatedandtheremainingelements | renumberedaccordingly. v  ` 8.InsertthenumberoftheInstructiondefining assoonaspracticable. B  ` 9.Thiselementisbracketedbecausethesufficiencyoftheinformationor R contentofthenoticesothatthedefendant knewor shouldhaveknownthatthe L requestedleavewasFMLAqualifyingleavemaynotbeafactissue.See825.302(c)for F foreseeableleaveor29_C.F.R._Ԁ825.303(b)forunforeseeableleave.Ifitisafactissue, @ thiselementshouldbeincorporatedandtheremainingelementsrenumberedaccordingly. :  ` 10.Definethe leaveperiodorusethedateoftheexpirationoftheleave  period.    ` 11.InsertthenumberoftheInstructiondefining equivalentposition. n!  ` 12.Thislanguageshouldbeusedwhenthedefendantissubmittingan "~ affirmativedefense. #x &    CommitteeComments'D%sj  D% j &   ` TheFMLAentitlesanemployeeonleavetobereinstatedtothesameoran &T  equivalentpositionuponreturnfromleave.29U.S.C.2614;29_C.F.R._Ԁ825.214; 'N! _McGraw_Ԁv.Sears,Roebuck&Co.,21F.Supp.2d1017(D.Minn.1998).'&j  (H"  ` Anemployeehasnogreaterrighttoreinstatementortootherbenefitsand *# conditionsofemploymentthaniftheemployeehadbeencontinuouslyemployedduring +$  theFMLAperiod.29_C.F.R._Ԁ825.216(a).Forexample,iftheemployercanprovethat ,%! duringtheFMLAleavetheemployeewouldhavebeenlaidoffandnotentitledtojob ^ restorationregardlessofthatleave,theemployeecannotprevail.Id.SeeinfraModel X Instruction5.84A._Throneberry_Ԁv._McGehee_Ԁ_Desha_ԀCountyHosp.,403F.3d972,978 R (8thCir.2005). L   ` Iftheplaintiffisallegingthedefendantsstatedreasonforitsemployment  \ actionisapretexttohidediscrimination,ModelInstruction5.95,infra,maybeused.#XtX\@V #  V   "  wv@  %   5.81GFMLAFAILURETOREINSTATE!ELEMENTS ^ @  (EmployeeNeededtoCareforaSpouse, Z @o o SonorDaughterwithaSeriousHealthCondition) vep  1    l  \XXtYourverdictmustbefortheplaintiff[andagainstdefendant__________)2ifallof  h thefollowingelementshavebeenproved3: =   ` [First,theplaintiffwaseligibleforleave4;and] (  ` First,theplaintiffs[identifyfamilymember]hadaserioushealth   condition(asdefinedinInstruction______)5;and ,   ` Second,theplaintiffwasneededtocarefor(asdefinedinInstruction u _____)6[(his)(her)][identifyfamilymember]becauseofthatserioushealthcondition;  and c  ` [Third,theplaintiffgavethedefendanttimelynotice(asdefinedin N Instruction_____)7of[(his)(her)]needtobe[absentfromwork]8]9;and g  ` [Fourth,assoonaspracticable(asdefinedinInstruction______)10,the R plaintiffgavesufficientinformationsothatthedefendantkneworshouldhaveknown ' thattheabsencewasforaserioushealthconditionof[identifyfamilymember]]11;and '#  @  ` Fifth,theplaintiffwasabsentfromworkbecause[(he)(she)]wascaringfor !+ [(his)(her)][identifyfamilymember]withtheserioushealthcondition;and #   ` Sixth,theplaintiffwasabletoreturnto[(his)(her)]jobattheexpirationof $" theleaveperiod;and b& $  ` Seventh,thedefendantrefusedtoreinstatetheplaintifftothesameoran M(!& equivalentposition(asdefinedbyInstruction_____)12heldbytheplaintiffwhenthe )f#( absencebegan. ;+$* _ ` However,yourverdictmustbeforthedefendantifanyoftheabove ^ elementshasnotbeenproved[orifthedefendantisentitledtoaverdictunder w (Instruction_____)]13. L     7  NotesonUse  G  z  ` 1.ThisInstructionisforuseincasesinwhichtheemployeesfamily  memberhadaserioushealthcondition.ModelInstruction5.81F,infra,shouldbeused    forcasesinwhichtheemployeeneededleavebecauseofabirth,adoptionorfostercare.    ` 2.Usethisphraseiftherearemultipledefendants. u   ` 3.ModelInstruction3.04(BurdenofProof)tellsthejurythatsomethingis   provedonlyifthejuryfindsitismorelikelytruethannottrue.Thephrase greater   weightoftheevidenceisnotnecessaryhere.ItcanbeincludedinInstruction3.04if y desiredbythecourt. s  ` 4.BeforeanemployeecanexerciserightsundertheFMLA,heorshemust ? be eligibleforleave.Seesupra EmployeesEligibleforLeaveinsection5.80.This 9 elementisbracketedherebecauseitisanticipatedthatthiselementwillbeneeded 3 infrequentlyaseligibilityissueswilllikelybedecidedasamatteroflaw.Inthecase - whereeligibilityisafactissue,thiselementshouldbeincorporatedandtheremaining ' elementsrenumberedaccordingly. !  ` 5.InsertthenumberoftheInstructiondefining serioushealthcondition. '#  1    ` 6.InsertthenumberoftheInstructiondefining neededtocarefor.   ` 7.Referencetotheinstructionrelatingtothedefinitionof Timely e! Noticeshouldbegivendependingonwhethertheleavewasforeseeable,30days _" pursuantto29C.F.R.825.302(a)orunforeseeable,lessthan30dayspursuantto29 Y# C.F.R.825.303(a). S$  ` 8. Insertlanguagewithrespecttothenatureoftheleavethat %c correspondstothefactsofthecase. &]   ` 9.Thiselementisbracketedbecause timelynoticemaynotbeafact )(! issue.Ifitisafactissue,thiselementshouldbeincorporatedandtheremainingelements #)"  renumberedaccordingly. *#!  ` 10.InsertthenumberoftheInstructiondefining assoonas_practicable. +-%"  ` 11.Thiselementisbracketedbecausethesufficiencyoftheinformationor ^ contentofthenoticesothatthedefendant knewor shouldhaveknownthatthe X requestedleavewasFMLAqualifyingleavemaynotbeafactissue.See825.302(c)for R foreseeableleaveor29_C.F.R._Ԁ825.303(b)forunforeseeableleave.Ifitisafactissue, L  thiselementshouldbeincorporatedandtheremainingelementsrenumberedaccordingly. F   ` 12.InsertthenumberoftheInstructiondefining equivalentposition.  V  ` 13.Thislanguageshouldbeusedwhenthedefendantissubmittingan "  affirmativedefense.    CommitteeComments ,     ` TheFMLAentitlesaneligibleemployeetotakeupto12workweeksof   leaveiftheemployeeisneededtocarefortheemployeesspouse,son,daughterorparent   withaserioushealthcondition.TheFMLAalsoentitlesanemployeeonleavetobe   reinstatedtothesameoranequivalentpositionuponreturnfromleave.29U.S.C.   2614;29_C.F.R._Ԁ825.214;_McGraw_Ԁv.Sears,Roebuck&Co.,21F.Supp.2d1017(D.   Minn.1998). |  ` Anemployeehasnogreaterrighttoreinstatementortootherbenefitsand H conditionsofemploymentthaniftheemployeehadbeencontinuouslyemployedduring B theFMLAperiod.29_C.F.R._Ԁ825.216(a).Forexample,iftheemployercanprovethat < duringtheFMLAleavetheemployeewouldhavebeenlaidoffandnotentitledtojob 6 restorationregardlessofthatleave,theemployeecannotprevail.Id.SeeinfraModel 0 Instruction5.84A._Throneberry_Ԁv._McGehee_Ԁ_Desha_ԀCountyHosp.,403F.3d972,978 * (8thCir.2005). $  ` Iftheplaintiffisallegingthedefendantsstatedreasonforitsemployment 4 actionisapretexttohidediscrimination,ModelInstruction5.95,infra,maybeused.#XtX\5r # '#  .      txw@  %   5.81HFMLAFAILURETOREINSTATE!ELEMENTS ^ @ (EmployeeLeaveforBirth,AdoptionorFosterCare)   1 D  * \XXtYourverdictmustbefortheplaintiff[andagainstdefendant__________)2ifallof   thefollowingelementshavebeenproved3:  ) [First,theplaintiffwaseligibleforleave4;and]   First,theplaintiffwasabsentfromworkbecauseof[thebirthofasonordaughter, u   orforplacementwiththeplaintiffofasonordaughterforadoptionorfostercare]5;and   [Second,theplaintiffgavethedefendanttimelynotice(asdefinedinInstruction c  _____)6of[(his)(her)]needtobe[absentfromwork]7]8;and |  [Third,assoonaspracticable(asdefinedinInstruction____)9,theplaintiffgave Q  sufficientinformationsothatthedefendantkneworshouldhaveknownthattheabsence j wasfor[thebirthofasonordaughter,orforplacementwiththeplaintiffofasonor ? daughterforadoptionorfostercare]]10;and   X Fourth,theplaintiffwasabletoreturnto[(his)(her)]jobattheexpirationofthe - leaveperiod11;and F Fifth,thedefendantrefusedtoreinstatetheplaintifftothesameoranequivalent  position(asdefinedbyInstruction_____)12heldbytheplaintiffwhentheabsencebegan. 4 However,yourverdictmustbeforthedefendantifanyoftheaboveelementshas  ! notbeenproved[orifthedefendantisentitledtoaverdictunder(Instruction_____)]13.  "#  t&    NotesonUse'!  !% & &  1.ThisInstructionisforuseincasesinwhichtheemployeeneededleavebecause e#& ofabirth,adoptionorfostercare.ModelInstruction5.81E,supra,shouldbeusedfor _$' casesinwhichtheemployeesfamilymemberhadaserioushealthcondition.This Y%( InstructiondiffersfromInstruction5.81E,supra,inthatitdoesnotincludeanelement S&) requiringtheplaintifftoshowthatheorshewas neededtocareforthenewborn, M' * adoptedchildorfosterchild.OneofthepurposesoftheFMLAistoprovidetimefor G(!+ earlyparentchildbonding.1993U.S.CodeCong.andAdmin.News3,11;139Cong. A)", Rec.H319,384,387,396;KelleyCo.v._Marquardt_,172Wis.2d234,493N.W.2d68, ;*#- 75(Wis.1992).'e#y  5+$. 2.Usethisphraseiftherearemultipledefendants. ^ 3.ModelInstruction3.04(BurdenofProof)tellsthejurythatsomethingisproved n onlyifthejuryfindsitismorelikelytruethannottrue.Thephrase greaterweightof h theevidenceisnotnecessaryhere.ItcanbeincludedinInstruction3.04ifdesiredby  b thecourt.  \ 4.BeforeanemployeecanexerciserightsundertheFMLA,heorshemustbe (   eligibleforleave.Seesupra EmployeesEligibleforLeavesectionin5.80.This "  elementisbracketedherebecauseitisanticipatedthatthiselementwillbeneeded  infrequentlyaseligibilityissueswilllikelybedecidedasamatteroflaw.Inthecase  whereeligibilityisafactissue,thiselementshouldbeincorporatedandtheremaining   elementsrenumberedaccordingly.    5.Insertthelanguagethatcorrespondstothefactsofthecase. x  6.Referencetotheinstructionrelatingtothedefinitionof TimelyNotice   shouldbegivendependingonwhethertheleavewasforeseeable,30dayspursuantto29   _C.F.R._Ԁ825.302(a)orunforeseeable,lessthan30dayspursuantto29_C.F.R._ | 825.303(a). v 7.Insertlanguagewithrespecttothenatureoftheleavethatcorrespondstothe B factsofthecase. < 8.Thiselementisbracketedbecause timelynoticemaynotbeafactissue.Ifit L isafactissue,thiselementshouldbeincorporatedandtheremainingelements F renumberedaccordingly. @ 9.InsertthenumberoftheInstructiondefining assoonaspracticable.   10.Thiselementisbracketedbecausethesufficiencyoftheinformationor z contentofthenoticesothatthedefendant knewor shouldhaveknownthatthe t  requestedleavewasFMLAqualifyingleavemaynotbeafactissue.See825.302(c)for n! foreseeableleaveor29_C.F.R._Ԁ825.303(b)forunforeseeableleave.Ifitisafactissue, h"  thiselementshouldbeincorporatedandtheremainingelementsrenumberedaccordingly. b# 11.Definethe leaveperiodorusetheactualdateoftheexpirationoftheleave $r period. %l 12.InsertthenumberoftheInstructiondefining equivalentposition. 8'  13.Thislanguageshouldbeusedwhenthedefendantissubmittinganaffirmative (H" defense. )B#  +$    CommitteeComments ^   TheFMLAentitlesaneligibleemployeetotakeupto12workweeksofleavefor n thebirthofasonordaughter,orforplacementwiththeemployeeofasonordaughter h foradoptionorfostercare.TheFMLAalsoentitlesanemployeeonleavetobe  b reinstatedtothesameoranequivalentpositionuponreturnfromleave.29U.S.C.  \ 2614;29_C.F.R._Ԁ825.214;_McGraw_Ԁv.Sears,Roebuck&Co.,21F.Supp.2d1017(D.  V Minn.1998).  P Anemployeehasnogreaterrighttoreinstatementortootherbenefitsand  conditionsofemploymentthaniftheemployeehadbeencontinuouslyemployedduring  theFMLAperiod.29_C.F.R._Ԁ825.216(a).Forexample,iftheemployercanprovethat   duringtheFMLAleavetheemployeewouldhavebeenlaidoffandnotentitledtojob    restorationregardlessofthatleave,theemployeecannotprevail.Id.SeeinfraModel   Instruction5.84A._Throneberry_Ԁv._McGehee_Ԁ_Desha_ԀCountyHosp.,403F.3d972,978   (8thCir.2005)   Iftheplaintiffisallegingthedefendantsstatedreasonforitsemploymentaction f isapretexttohidediscrimination,ModelInstruction5.95,infra,maybeused.#XtX\ #  `   p yx@   %   5.81IFMLA!FAILURETOREINSTATEELEMENTS ^ @ (QualifyingExigencyLeaveRelatedtoCoveredMilitaryMember) :   Z    \XXtYourverdictmustbefortheplaintiff[andagainstdefendant_________]1ifallof l  thefollowingelementshavebeenproved2:   [First,theplaintiffwaseligibleforleave3;and]  p Second,aqualifyingexigency(asdefinedinInstruction_____)4existed;and [  Third,suchqualifyingexigencyaroseoutofthefactthattheplaintiffs[spouse, F  son,daughter,orparent]wasonactivedutyorcalltoactivedutystatusinsupportofa   contingencyoperation5(asdefinedinInstruction______);and 4 Fourth,such[spouse,son,daughter,orparent]wasamemberofthe[Army } NationalGuardoftheUnitedStates,ArmyReserve,NavyReserve,MarineCorps  Reserve,AirNationalGuardoftheUnitedStates,AirForceReserve,orCoastGuard k  ReserveorwasretiredmemberoftheRegularArmedForcesorReserve];6and  [Fifth,theplaintiffgavethedefendanttimelynotice(asdefinedinInstruction o ____)7of[(his)(her)]needtobe[absentfromwork]8]9;and D [Sixth,assoonaspracticable(asdefinedinInstruction____)10,theplaintiffgave /  sufficientinformationsothatthedefendantkneworshouldhaveknownthattheabsence !H wasforaqualifyingexigencyarisingoutofthefactthattheplaintiffs[spouse,son, #! daughter,orparent]wasonactivedutyorcalltoactivedutystatusinsupportofa $6# contingencyoperation]]11;and  &% Seventh,theplaintiffwasabsentfromworkbecauseofsuchqualifyingexigency; '!'  and m)#) Eighth,theplaintiffwasabletoreturnto[(his)(her)]jobattheexpirationofthe ^  leaveperiod;and w Ninth,thedefendantrefusedtoreinstatetheplaintifftothesameoranequivalent  b position(asdefinedbyInstruction____)12heldbytheplaintiffwhentheabsencebegan. 7  However,yourverdictmustbeforthedefendantifanyoftheaboveelementshas "  notbeenproved[orifthedefendantisentitledtoaverdictunder(Instruction___)].13 ;    NotesonUse &    E.` hp x '#X'#E 1.Usethisphraseiftherearemultipledefendants. o  2.ModelInstruction3.04(BurdenofProof)tellsthejurythatsomethingis   provedonlyifthejuryfindsitismorelikelytruethannottrue.Thephrase greater y weightoftheevidenceisnotnecessaryhere.ItcanbeincludedinInstruction3.04if s desiredbythecourt. m 3.BeforeanemployeecanexerciserightsundertheFMLA,heorshemustbe 9  eligibleforleave.Seesupra EmployeesEligibleforLeavesectionin5.80.This 3 elementisbracketedherebecauseitisanticipatedthatthiselementwillbeneeded - infrequentlyaseligibilityissueswilllikelybedecidedasamatteroflaw.Inthecase ' whereeligibilityisafactissue,thiselementshouldbeincorporatedandtheremaining ! elementsrenumberedaccordingly.  4.InsertthenumberoftheInstructiondefining qualifyingexigency. + 5. Theactivedutyordersofacoveredmilitarymemberwillgenerallyspecifyif  theservicememberisservinginsupportofacontingencyoperationbycitationtothe   relevantsectionofTitle10oftheUnitedStatesCodeand/orbyreferencetothespecific ! nameofthecontingencyoperation. " 6.QualifyingExigencyleaveisnotavailablewherethefamilymemberison S$ activedutyorcalltoactivedutystatusinsupportofacontingencyoperationasamember M% oftheRegularArmedForces. G&   X  7.Referencetotheinstructionrelatingtothedefinitionof TimelyNotice 'W!! shouldbegivendependingonwhethertheleavewasforeseeable,30dayspursuantto29 (Q"" _C.F.R._Ԁ825.302(a)orunforeseeable,lessthan30dayspursuantto29_C.F.R._ )K##  825.303(a). *E$$   8.Insertlanguagewithrespecttothenatureoftheleavethatcorrespondstothe ^  factsofthecase. X   9.Thiselementisbracketedbecause timelynoticemaynotbeafactissue.Ifit h isafactissue,thiselementshouldbeincorporatedandtheremainingelements  b renumberedaccordingly.  \   10.InsertthenumberoftheInstructiondefining assoonaspracticable. (    11.Thiselementisbracketedbecausethesufficiencyoftheinformationor  8 contentofthenoticesothatthedefendant knewor shouldhaveknownthatthe 2 requestedleavewasFMLAqualifyingleavemaynotbeafactissue.See825.302(c)for ,  foreseeableleaveor29_C.F.R._Ԁ825.303(b)forunforeseeableleave.Ifitisafactissue, &  thiselementshouldbeincorporatedandtheremainingelementsrenumberedaccordingly. ~   t XE.` hp x '#X'#E12.InsertthenumberoftheInstructiondefining equivalentposition.      13.Thislanguageshouldbeusedwhenthedefendantissubmittinganaffirmative   defense.#XtX\0 # |   v zy@  %   5.81JFMLA!FAILURETOREINSTATEELEMENTS ^ @ (EmployeeNeededtoCareforCoveredServicemember D @withaSeriousInjuryorIllness) h   *     ` \XXtYourverdictmustbefortheplaintiff[andagainstdefendant_________]1if   allofthefollowingelementshavebeenproved2: m    [First,theplaintiffwaseligibleforleave3;and]     Second,theplaintiff[(is)(was)]the[spouse,son,daughter,parent,ornextofkin [  (asdefinedinInstruction___)4]ofacoveredservicemember(asdefinedinInstruction t  __);5and I    Third,suchcoveredservicemember[(has)(had)]aseriousinjuryorillness(asdefined b  inInstruction___);6and 7    Fourth,theplaintiffwasneededtocarefor(asdefinedinInstruction____)7such P coveredservicemember;and % [Fifth,theplaintiffgavethedefendanttimelynotice(asdefinedinInstruction > ____)8of[(his)(her)]needtobe[absentfromwork]9]10;and  [Sixth,assoonaspracticable(asdefinedinInstruction___)11,theplaintiffgave , sufficientinformationsothatthedefendantkneworshouldhaveknownthattheabsence  wasfortheneedtocareforacoveredservicemember]12;and x  Seventh,theplaintiffwasabsentfromworkbecause[(he)(she)]wascaringfor " suchcoveredservicemember;and f!$ Eighth,theplaintiffwasabletoreturnto[(his)(her)]jobattheexpirationofthe "& leaveperiod;and T$( Ninth,thedefendantrefusedtoreinstatetheplaintifftothesameoranequivalent %m* position(asdefinedbyInstruction)13heldbytheplaintiffwhentheabsencebegan. B' , However,yourverdictmustbeforthedefendantifanyoftheaboveelementshas ([". notbeenproved[orifthedefendantisentitledtoaverdictunder(Instruction___)].14 0*#0   NotesonUse +I%2   E.` hp x '#X'#E% r %rF  1.Usethisphraseiftherearemultipledefendants. ^  X 2.ModelInstruction3.04(BurdenofProof)tellsthejurythatsomethingis R provedonlyifthejuryfindsitismorelikelytruethannottrue.Thephrase greater L  weightoftheevidenceisnotnecessaryhere.ItcanbeincludedinInstruction3.04if F  desiredbythecourt. @   :  3.BeforeanemployeecanexerciserightsundertheFMLA,heorshemustbe 4   eligibleforleave.Seesupra EmployeesEligibleforLeavesectionin5.80.This . elementisbracketedherebecauseitisanticipatedthatthiselementwillbeneeded (  infrequentlyaseligibilityissueswilllikelybedecidedasamatteroflaw.Inthecase "  whereeligibilityisafactissue,thiselementshouldbeincorporatedandtheremaining   elementsrenumberedaccordingly.      4.InsertthenumberoftheInstructiondefining nextofkinforacovered    militarymember.    5.InsertthenumberoftheInstructiondefining coveredservicememberfor  leavetocareforacoveredservicememberwithaseriousinjuryorillness.    6.InsertthenumberoftheInstructiondefininga seriousinjuryorillnessofa  coveredservicemember.   | 7.InsertthenumberoftheInstructiondefining neededtocarefor. v  p  t X  8.Referencetotheinstructionrelatingtothedefinitionof TimelyNotice j shouldbegivendependingonwhethertheleavewasforeseeable,30dayspursuantto29 d _C.F.R._Ԁ825.302(a)orunforeseeable,lessthan30dayspursuantto29_C.F.R._  ^ 825.303(a). !X   9.Insertlanguagewithrespecttothenatureoftheleavethatcorrespondstothe $# factsofthecase. $   10.Thiselementisbracketedbecause timelynoticemaynotbeafactissue.If %. itisafactissue,thiselementshouldbeincorporatedandtheremainingelements &(  renumberedaccordingly. '"!!   11.InsertthenumberoftheInstructiondefining assoonaspracticable. (""   12.Thiselementisbracketedbecausethesufficiencyoftheinformationor \*## contentofthenoticesothatthedefendant knewor shouldhaveknownthatthe V+$$ requestedleavewasFMLAqualifyingleavemaynotbeafactissue.See825.302(c)for ^ foreseeableleaveor29_C.F.R._Ԁ825.303(b)forunforeseeableleave.Ifitisafactissue, X thiselementshouldbeincorporatedandtheremainingelementsrenumberedaccordingly. R  t XE.` hp x '#X'#E13.InsertthenumberoftheInstructiondefining equivalentposition.  b   \ 14.Thislanguageshouldbeusedwhenthedefendantissubmittinganaffirmative  V defense.#XtX\ #  P    J {z@ %   5.82FMLA SAMEDECISION h^   ^  D \XXt[IfyoufindinfavoroftheplaintiffunderInstruction____,1thenyoumustanswer * thefollowingquestionintheverdictform[s]:Hasitbeenproved2thatthedefendant  C wouldhave[describeemploymentactiontaken,e.g.,discharged]3theplaintiffevenifthe   defendanthadnotconsideredtheplaintiffs[absencefromwork]4.]5  1  t& h   NotesonUse     1.InsertthenumberortitleoftheessentialelementsInstructionhere.'h  t  2.ModelInstruction3.04(BurdenofProof)tellsthejurythatsomethingis   provedonlyifthejuryfindsitismorelikelytruethannottrue.Thephrase greater ~  weightoftheevidenceisnotnecessaryhere.ItcanbeincludedinInstruction3.04if x  desiredbythecourt. r  3.Selectthelanguagethatcorrespondstothefactsofthecase. > 4.Itisanticipatedthattheseinstructionswillbemorecommonlyappliedtocases N inwhichtheplaintiffactuallytookleave.However,theFMLAalsoprotectsaneligible H employeewhoseleaverequestwasdeniedbytheemployer.Insuchasituation,insert B languagethatcorrespondstothefactsofthecase. < 5.TheEighthCircuithasheldthattheFMLAdoesnotimposestrictliabilityfor  allinterferenceswithanemployeesFMLArights;anemployerwillnotbeheldliablefor  interferencewithanemployeesFMLArightsiftheemployercanproveitwouldhave  madethesamedecisionhadtheemployeenotexercisedrightsundertheFMLA.  _Throneberry_Ԁv._McGehee_Ԁ_Desha_ԀCountyHosp.,403F.3d972,977(8thCir.2005).    CommitteeComments ^   ^ AdefendantmayavoidliabilityinaFMLAcaseifitconvincesajurythatthe !n plaintiffwouldhavesufferedthesameadverseemploymentactionevenifheorshehad "h nottakenorrequestedFMLAleave.  #b #XtX\ # ` |{@  %   5.83AFMLADEFINITION: NEEDEDTOCAREFOR wa   Z    \XXtAnemployeeis neededtocareforaspouse,son,daughterorparentwitha l  serioushealthcondition(asdefinedinInstruction_______)1oracovered   servicemember(asdefinedinInstruction____)2whoistheemployeesspouse,son, Z  daughter,parent,ornextofkin(asdefinedinInstruction___)3whenthefamilymember s  orcoveredservicememberisunabletocarefor[(his)(her)]ownbasicmedical,hygienic H  ornutritionalneedsorsafety;orisunabletotransport[(himself)(herself)]tothedoctor. a  [Thephrasealsoincludesprovidingpsychologicalcomfortandreassurancewhichwould 6  bebeneficialtoachild,spouse,orparentwithaserioushealthcondition(asdefinedin O Instruction_______)1whoisreceivinginpatientorhomecare.Thephrasealsoincludes $ situationswheretheemployeemaybeneededtofillinforotherswhoarecaringforthe = familymemberorcoveredservicemember,ortomakearrangementsforchangesincare,  suchastransfertoanursinghome.4]Theemployeeneednotbetheonlyindividualor + familymemberavailabletocareforthefamilymemberorcoveredservicemember.    NotesonUse   c 1.InsertthenumberoftheInstructiondefining serioushealthcondition. Y 2.InsertthenumberoftheInstructiondefining coveredservicemember.  i 3.InsertthenumberoftheInstructiondefining nextofkin. 5"  4.Thedefinitionof neededtocareforismoreexpansivethanitfirstappearsfor #E! itincludessituationsinwhichtheemployeespresenceorassistancewouldprovide $?" psychologicalcomfortorassurancetoafamilymember,andinstancesinwhichthe %9# employeemayneedtomakearrangementsforcare.Incasesinwhichanyofthese &3 $ situationsareapplicable,thisInstructionshouldbemodifiedtoincludetheadditional '-!% definition(s).See29_C.F.R._Ԁ825.124(a),(b). ('"&  )#'  a+%(   CommitteeComments ^  z  ` ThisdefinitionistakenfromtheFMLAregulations.29_C.F.R._Ԁ n 825.124(a)(b).#XtX\ި #  h   4  }|@ZZ %   5.83BFMLADEFINITION: SERIOUSHEALTHCONDITION wa   ^  Z \XXtA serioushealthconditionmeansanillness,injury,impairmentorphysicalor   mentalconditionthatinvolveseither1)inpatientcareinahospital,hospice,orresidential  + medicalcarefacility,or2)continuingtreatmentbyahealthcareprovider(asdefinedin   Instruction_____)1. w     @ NotesonUse b   / 1.InsertthenumberoftheInstructiondefining healthcareprovider. r    CommitteeComments >    Thisrelativelybriefdefinitionisthestatutorydefinition.29U.S.C.2611(11).A N  moredetaileddefinitionissuppliedbytheFMLAregulationsandincludedasan H alternatedefinitioninthesemodelinstructions.29_C.F.R._Ԁ825.113.SeeinfraModel B Instruction5.83C. < #XtX\ނ #    b ~}@yy  %   5.83CFMLADEFINITION: SERIOUSHEALTHCONDITION(alternate) wa?   ^  Z _\XXtThephrasea serioushealthconditionasusedintheseinstructionsmeansan   illness,injury,impairment,orphysicalormentalconditionthatinvolves:  +  ` [Inpatientcare,whichisanovernightstay,1inahospital,hospice,or t  residentialmedicalcarefacility,includinganyperiodofincapacity(inabilitytowork,   attendschoolorperformotherregulardailyactivities),oranysubsequenttreatmentin b  connectionwiththeinpatientcare)]; {    OR f  b ` [Incapacityplustreatment,whichmeansaperiodofincapacity(inabilityto Q work,attendschoolorperformotherregulardailyactivities)ofmorethanthree & consecutivefull,calendardays,includinganysubsequenttreatmentorperiodof ? incapacityrelatingtothesamecondition,that  also  involves:   XB+ ` hp x '#X'#B 1)  Inperson2treatmenttwoormoretimes3byahealthcare  provider(asdefinedinInstruction_____)4,byanurseunderdirectsupervisionof v ahealthcareprovider(asdefinedinInstruction_____)4,orbyaproviderofhealth  services(forexample,aphysicaltherapist)underordersof,oronreferralby,a d healthcareprovider(asdefinedinInstruction_____)4;or  }   2)  Inperson2treatmentbyahealthcareprovider(asdefinedin "h" Instruction_____)2onatleastoneoccasionwhichresultsinaregimenof =$$ continuingtreatmentunderthesupervisionofthehealthcareprovider(asdefined %V& inInstruction_____)2]; +' (  X  OR )"*    ` [Anyperiodofincapacity(inabilitytowork,attendschoolorperformother ^  regulardailyactivities)duetopregnancyorforprenatalcare]; w   OR  b    ` [Achronichealthcondition,whichmeansaconditionwhichrequires  M periodicvisits(atleasttwovisitsperyear)fortreatmentbyahealthcareprovider(as "  definedinInstruction_____)2,orbyanurseorphysiciansassistantunderdirect ;  supervisionofahealthcareprovider(asdefinedinInstruction_____)2,whichcontinues   overanextendedperiodoftime(includingrecurringepisodesofasingleunderlying )  condition),andmaycauseepisodesofincapacity(inabilitytowork,attendschoolor   performotherregulardailyactivities)ratherthancontinuingincapacity]; u   OR `    ` [Aperiodofincapacity(inabilitytowork,attendschoolorperformother K regulardailyactivities)whichispermanentorlongtermduetoaconditionforwhich d treatmentmaynotbeeffective,butrequirescontinuingsupervisionofahealthcare 9 provider(asdefinedinInstruction_____)2,eventhoughthepatientmaynotbereceiving R activetreatment]; '   OR       ` [Anyperiodofabsencetoreceivemultipletreatments(includinganyperiod !" ofrecoveryfromthetreatments)byahealthcareprovider(asdefinedinInstruction #$ _____)2,orbyaproviderofhealthcareservicesunderordersof,oronreferralby,a %& healthcareprovider(asdefinedinInstruction_____)2,eitherforrestorativesurgeryafter '{!( anaccidentorotherinjury,orforaconditionthatwouldlikelyresultinaperiodof )o#* incapacity(inabilitytowork,attendschoolorperformotherregulardailyactivities)_of +c%, morethanthreefullconsecutivecalendardaysintheabsenceofmedicalinterventionor ^ treatment.]2 R   NotestoUse   \ 1.Theovernightstayrequirementisincludedin29_C.F.R._Ԁ825.114. (  2.Theinpersonrequirementisincludedin29_C.F.R._Ԁ825.115(a)(3).  8 3.Unlessextenuatingcircumstancesexist,thistreatmentmustbewithin30days  ofthefirstdayofincapacity.   4.Selectthelanguagethatcorrespondstothefactsofthecase.Withineach l  optionaldefinition,thelanguagealsomayneedtobeadjustedonacasebycasebasis f  duetovaryingfacts.Forexample,thecourtmaywishtodeletethelanguage orbya `  nurseorphysiciansassistantunderdirectsupervisionofahealthcareproviderifthe Z  factsofthecasedonotindicatethattreatmentwasprovidedbysomeoneotherthanthe T  healthcareprovider. N   CommitteeComments ^  Thisinstructionisbasedonthedefinitionof serioushealthconditionassetforth * intheFMLAregulationsat29_C.F.R._Ԁ825.113.Seeinfracommentsinsection5.80for $ furtherdiscussionofthedefinitionofaserioushealthcondition.#XtX\ #      . ~@) )  %   5.83DFMLADEFINITION: HEALTHCAREPROVIDER U  ^  Z Asusedintheseinstructionsthephrase healthcareproviderincludes[doctorof   medicine,doctorofosteopathy,podiatrist,dentist,clinicalpsychologist,optometrist,nurse k  practitioner,nursemidwife,orclinicalsocialworker]1,solongastheproviderisauthorizedto  f practiceintheStateandisperformingwithinthescopeof[(his)(her)]practice.    t@$ NotesonUse    1.Thebracketedlanguageisnotexhaustiveofthetypesofhealthcareworkerswhocan C  meettheregulatorydefinitionofahealthcareprovider.Forafulldiscussion,seetheCommittee )  Comments.Inserttheappropriatelanguagetoincludethetypeofhealthprovider(s)relevantto   thecase.   @--! CommitteeComments  N  TheFMLAdefines healthcareprovideras: I 0 ` 0 ` (#` (#(A)adoctorofmedicineorosteopathywhoisauthorizedtopractice  medicineorsurgery(asappropriate)bytheStateinwhichthedoctor  practices;orn (# (# 0 ` 0 ` (#` (#(B)anyotherpersondeterminedbytheSecretary[ofLabor]tobecapable % ofprovidinghealthcareservices.  (# (# 29_C.F.R._Ԁ825.125(a)(1)(2). d TheregulationspromulgatedbytheDepartmentofLabordefineadditionalpersons _  capableofprovidinghealthcareservicestoincludetheworkersdescribedinthemodel E Instructionaswellas1)chiropractors,iftreatmentislimitedto manualmanipulationofthe +  spinetocorrectasubluxationasdemonstratedbyXraytoexist;2)ChristianScience o ! practitionerslistedwiththeFirstChurchofChrist,ScientistinBoston,Massachusetts;3)any U!" healthcareproviderfromwhomanemployerortheemployersgrouphealthplansbenefits ;"# managerwillacceptcertificationoftheexistenceofaserioushealthconditiontosubstantiatea !#$ claimforbenefits;and4)ahealthcareproviderwhofallswithinoneofthespecifically $% mentionedcategorieswhopracticesinacountryotherthantheUnitedStates,solongasheor $& sheisauthorizedtopracticeinaccordancewiththelawofthatcountryandisperformingwithin %u' thescopeofhisorherpractice.Theregulationsstatethat authorizedtopracticeintheState &[ ( meansthatthehealthcareprovidermustbeauthorizedtodiagnoseandtreatphysicalormental 'A!) healthconditionswithoutsupervisionbyadoctororotherhealthcareprovider.29C.F.R. ('"* 825.125(b).  k) #+  @??  %   5.83EFMLADEFINITION: TIMELYNOTICELEAVEFORESEEABLE U5% 1 ^  D Thephrase timelynoticeasusedintheseinstructionsmeansthat[(he)(she)]musthave * notifiedthedefendantof[(his)(her)]needforleaveatleast30daysbeforetheleavewasto  % begin.Absentunusualcircumstances,theplaintiffmustcomplywiththedefendantsusualand  ~ customarynoticerequirementsforrequestingleave. 5   @$ NotesonUse   0  1.ThisInstructionshouldbeusedinsituationswheretheplaintiffsneedforleavewas   foreseeable. o  @--! CommitteeComments  &  TheFMLArequiresthatemployeesprovideadequatenoticetotheiremployersofthe !  needtotakeleave.Iftheneedfortheleaveisforeseeablebasedonanexpectedbirth,placement e  foradoptionorfostercare,orplannedmedicaltreatment,anemployeemustgivetheemployerat K  least30daysadvancenoticebeforetheleaveistobegin.29C.F.R.825.302(a).Seealso 1 Baileyv.Amsted,172F.3d1041(8thCir.1999).AnemployeeneednotinvoketheFMLAby  nameinordertoputanemployeronnoticethattheFMLAmayhaverelevancetothe  employeesabsencefromwork.Thorsonv.Gemini,205F.3d370,381(8thCir.2000).Nelson  v.ArkansasPediatricFacility,2001WL13291(8thCir.(Ark)).Theadequacyofthenoticeina k FMLAcontextisafactissue,notaquestionoflaw.Sandersv.MayDeptStoresCo.,315F.3d Q 940,945(8thCir.2003). 7 TheFMLAalsorequiresanemployertogiveappropriatenotice.Whetheranemployer  hassatisfieditsnoticerequirementsisajuryissue.Sanders,315F.3dat945.Theemployer v mustpostanoticeconcerningtheAct.29C.F.R.825.300(a).Inaddition,theemployermust \ givewrittennoticeofanemployeesrightsundertheActaftertheemployeehasgiventimely B andsufficientnoticetotheemployeroftheneedforleave.29C.F.R.825.301(c);Sanders,315 (  F.3dat945.  l !  @  %   5.83FFMLADEFINITION: TIMELYNOTICELEAVEUNFORESEEABLE fi/ 1 ^  D Thephrase timelynoticeasusedintheseinstructionsmeansthat[(he)(she)]musthave * notifiedthedefendantof[(his)(her)]needforleaveassoonaspracticableafter[(he)(she)]  % learnedoftheneedtotakeleave.Absentunusualcircumstances,theplaintiffmustcomplywith  ~ thedefendantsusualandcustomarynoticerequirementsforrequestingleave. 5   @$ NotesonUse   0  1.ThisInstructionshouldbeusedinsituationswheretheplaintiffsneedforleavewas   unforeseeable. o  @--! CommitteeComments  &  TheFMLArequiresthatemployeesprovideadequatenoticetotheiremployersofthe !  needtotakeleave.Inthecaseofunexpectedabsenceswhere30daysadvancenoticeisnot e  possible,theregulationsrequiretheemployeetogivetheemployernotice assoonas K  practicable.29C.F.R.825.302(a).SeealsoBaileyv.Amsted,172F.3d1041(8thCir.1999). 1 Theregulationsfurtherstatethatordinarily assoonaspracticablerequirestheemployeeto  giveatleastverbalnotificationwithinoneortwobusinessdaysaftertheemployeelearnsofthe  needforleave.29C.F.R.825.302(b).SeealsoBrowningv.LibertyMutualInsurance  Company,178F.3d1043,1049(8thCir.1999);Carterv.FordMotorCo.,121F.3d1146(8th k Cir.1997).AnemployeeneednotinvoketheFMLAbynameinordertoputanemployeron Q noticethattheFMLAmayhaverelevancetotheemployeesabsencefromwork.Thorsonv. 7 Gemini,205F.3d370,381(8thCir.2000).Nelsonv.ArkansasPediatricFacility,2001WL { 13291(8thCir.(Ark)).TheadequacyofthenoticeinaFMLAcontextisafactissue,nota a questionoflaw.Sandersv.MayDeptStoresCo.,315F.3d940,945(8thCir.2003). G TheFMLAalsorequiresanemployertogiveappropriatenotice.Whetheranemployer B hassatisfieditsnoticerequirementsisajuryissue.Sanders,315F.3dat945.Theemployer (  mustpostanoticeconcerningtheAct.29C.F.R.825.300(a).Inaddition,theemployermust l ! givewrittennoticeofanemployeesrightsundertheActaftertheemployeehasgiventimely R!" andsufficientnoticetotheemployeroftheneedforleave.29C.F.R.825.302(c);Sanders,315 8"# F.3dat945.  #$  @  %   5.83GFMLADEFINITION: EQUIVALENTPOSITION fi;  ^  D \XXtAn equivalentpositionmeansapositionthatisvirtuallyidenticaltothe * employeesformerpositionintermsofpay,benefitsandworkingconditions,including  C privileges,perquisitesandstatus.Itmustinvolvethesameorsubstantiallysimilarduties   orresponsibilities,whichmustentailsubstantiallyequivalentskill,effort,responsibility,  1 andauthority.    t  CommitteeComments }   >ThisdefinitionistakenfromtheFMLAregulationsat29_C.F.R._Ԁ825.215(a).   ThisissomewhatdifferentthantheapproachtakenbytheADA.AnADAplaintiffmust   demonstratethatheorsheisunabletoworkinabroadrangeofjobstoshowthatheor   sheisunabletoperformthemajorlifeactivityofworkingandis,therefore,disabledfor {  purposesoftheADA;aplaintiffwhoshowsonlyaninabilitytoperformhisorherown u jobhasnot,therefore,madeashowingofdisabilitysufficienttoentitlehimorhertothe o protectionsoftheADA.29_C.F.R._Ԁ1630.2(j)(3)(i).However,ademonstrationthatan i employeeisunabletoworkinhisorherjobduetoaserioushealthconditionisenough c toshowtheemployeeisincapacitatedforpurposesoftheFMLA.29_C.F.R._Ԁ ] 825.702(b);_Steckloff_Ԁv.St.JohnsMercyHealthSystems,218F.3d858,861(8thCir. W 2000).#XtX\ޏ<# `  Q    @b b  %   5.83HFMLA!DEFINITION: QUALIFYINGEXIGENCY fiPD  ^  Z A qualifyingexigencyis:   1.Shortnoticedeploymentwhichiswhenthecoveredfamilymemberisnotifiedofan   impendingcallorordertoactivedutyinsupportofacontingencyoperationsevenorless 8  calendardayspriortothedateofdeployment;or  3 2.Attendingmilitaryeventsandrelatedactivitiessuchasofficialceremonies,programs, ^  orothermilitarysponsoredeventsrelatedtotheactivedutyorcalltoactivedutystatusofthe Y  coveredmilitarymember;or   3.2   A  .3  Attendingfamilysupportorassistanceprogramsandinformationbriefings   sponsoredorpromotedbythemilitary,militaryserviceorganizations,ortheAmericanRed 6 Crosswhensuchprogramsorbriefingsarerelatedtotheactivedutyorcalltoactivedutystatus 1 ofthecoveredmilitarymember;or  4.Childcareandschoolactivities(a)whentheactivedutyorcalltoactivedutystatusof W thecoveredmilitarymembernecessitatesachangeintheexistingchildcarearrangements;(b)to  providechildcareonanurgent,immediateneedbasis(butnotonaroutine,regular,oreveryday g  basis)whentheneedforsuchcarearisesfromtheactivedutyorcalltoactivedutyofthe b coveredmilitarymember;(c)toenrollortransferachildofthecoveredmilitarymemberwhen   theenrollmentortransferisnecessitatedbytheactivedutyorcalltoactivedutystatusofthe r " coveredmilitarymember;or(d)toattendmeetingswiththestaffataschoolordaycarefacility !m$ ofthechildofthecoveredmilitarymemberwhenthemeetingsarenecessarydueto $#& circumstancearisingfromtheactivedutyorcalltoactivedutystatusofthecoveredmilitary }$( member;or %x* 5.Makingorupdatingfinancialorlegalarrangementstoaddressthecoveredmilitary 'E!, membersabsencewhileonactivedutyorcalltoactivedutystatus;or (". 6.Actingasthecoveredmilitarymembersrepresentativebeforeafederal,state,orlocal *k$0 agencytoobtain,arrange,orappealmilitaryservicebenefitswhilethecoveredmilitarymember ",%2 isonactivedutyorcalltoactivedutystatusandforninetydaysfollowingtheterminationofthe ^ coveredmilitarymembersactivedutystatus;or Y 7.Attendingcounselingforoneself,thecoveredmilitarymember,orthecovered  & militarymemberschildifthecounselingisprovidedbysomeoneotherthanahealthcare   providerandtheneedforcounselingarisesfromtheactivedutyorcalltoactivedutystatusof 6  thecoveredmilitarymember;or  1  8.Spendinguptofivedayswithacoveredmilitarymemberforeachshortterm, \  temporary,restandrecuperationleaveduringdeploymentofthecoveredmilitarymember;or W  9.Attendingpostdeploymentactivitiessuchasarrivalceremonies,reintegration $  briefingsandevents,andothermilitarysponsoredofficialceremoniesorprogramforaperiodof }  ninetydaysfollowingtheterminationofthecoveredfamilymembersactivedutystatus;or 4 10.Addressingissuesthatarisefromthedeathofacoveredmilitarymemberwhileon  activedutystatus;or Z 11.Addressingothereventswhichariseoutofthecoveredfamilymembersactiveduty ' orcalltoactivedutystatusprovidedthattheemployerandemployeeagreethatsuchleaveshall " qualifyasanexigencyandagreetoboththetiminganddurationoftheleave. {  t@--! CommitteeComments  H  ThisdefinitionistakenfromtheFMLAregulations.29C.F.R.825.126.  "  @dd  %   5.83IFMLA!DEFINITION: NEXTOFKINFORLEAVETOCARE ^ @ FORACOVEREDSERVICEMEMBERWITHASERIOUSINJURYORILLNESS IV  D  * Forthepurposesofdeterminingentitlementtoleavetocareforacoveredservicemember   withaseriousinjuryorillness, nextofkinmeansnearestbloodrelativeotherthanthecovered i  servicemembersspouse,parent,son,ordaughterinthefollowingorderofpriority:blood  d relativeswhohavebeengrantedlegalcustodyofthecoveredservicememberbycourtdecreeor    statutoryprovisions,brothersandsisters,grandparents,auntsanduncles,andfirstcousins, t  unlessthecoveredservicememberhasspecificallydesignatedinwritinganotherbloodrelative o  ashisorhernearestbloodrelativeforpurposesofmilitarycaregiverleaveundertheFMLA. &  Whennosuchdesignationismadeandtherearemultiplefamilymemberswiththesame !  levelofrelationshiptothecoveredservicemember,allsuchfamilymembersshallbeconsidered z  asthecoveredservicemembersnextofkin.Whensuchdesignationhasbeenmade,the 1 designatedindividualshallbedeemedtobethecoveredservicemembersonlynextofkin. ,  @--! CommitteeComments   ThisdefinitionistakenfromtheFMLAregulations.29C.F.R.825.122(d).__  <  @ %   5.83JFMLA!DEFINITION: COVEREDSERVICEMEMBER ^ @FORLEAVETOCAREFORACOVEREDSERVICEMEMBER D @ WITHASERIOUSINJURYORILLNESS p]  *    A coveredservicememberisacurrentmemberoftheArmedForces(includinga   memberoftheNationalGuardorReserves)oramemberoftheArmedForces,theNational O  GuardorReserveswhoisonthetemporarydisabilityretiredlist,whohasaseriousinjuryor  J illnessincurredinthelineofdutyonactivedutyforwhichheorsheisundergoingmedical   treatment,recuperation,ortherapy;orotherwiseinoutpatient1status;orotherwiseonthe Z  temporarydisabilityretiredlist.ThisdefinitiondoesnotincludeformermembersoftheArmed U  Forces,formermembersoftheNationalGuardandReserves,ormembersonthepermanent    disabilityretiredlist. e   @% NoteonUse  ` 1.OutpatientstatusreferstothestatusofamemberoftheArmedForcesassignedto  eitheramilitarymedicaltreatmentfacilityasanoutpatientoraunitestablishedforthepurpose  ofprovidingcommandandcontrolofmembersoftheArmedForcesreceivingmedicalcareas  outpatients. k @--! CommitteeComments  " ThisdefinitionistakenfromtheFMLAregulations.29C.F.R.825.127(a).  {  @PP %   5.83KFMLA!DEFINITION: SERIOUSINJURYORILLNESS ^ @FORLEAVETOCAREFORACOVEREDSERVICEMEMBER D @ WITHASERIOUSINJURYORILLNESS d  *    A seriousinjuryorillnessmeansaninjuryorillnessincurredbyacovered   servicememberinthelineofdutyonactivedutythatmayrendertheservicemembermedically O  unfittoperformthedutiesofhisorheroffice,grade,rank,orrating.  J  @--! CommitteeComments    ThisdefinitionistakenfromtheFMLAregulations.29C.F.R.825.127(a)(1).  Z   @ %   5.83LFMLA!DEFINITION: CONTINGENCYOPERATION 8h  ^  D A contingencyoperationmeansamilitaryoperation1)thatisdesignatedbythe * SecretaryofDefenseasanoperationinwhichmembersofthearmedforcesareormaybecome  % involvedinmilitaryactions,operations,orhostilitiesagainstanenemyoftheUnitedStatesor  ~ againstanopposingmilitaryforce,or2)thatresultsinthecallororderto,orretentionon,active 5  dutyofmembersoftheuniformedservicesduringawarorduringanationalemergencydeclared  0  bythePresidentorCongress.    @--! CommitteeComments  @  ThisdefinitionistakenfromtheFMLAregulations.29C.F.R.825.126(b)(3).  ;   @ %   5.83MFMLADEFINITION: ASSOONASPRACTICABLE ar^l  ^  D Thephrase assoonaspracticableasusedintheseinstructionsmeansassoonas * possibleandpractical,takingintoaccountallofthefactsandcircumstancesoftheindividual  % case.  ~  @$ NotesonUse  5  ThisdefinitionistakenfromtheFMLAregulations.29C.F.R.825.302(b).   0   @ %   5.84FMLAEXCEPTIONTOJOBRESTORATION(KeyEmployee) aro  ^  D Yourverdictmustbeforthedefendantifithasbeenproved1thattheplaintiffwasakey * employeeandthatdenyingjobrestorationtotheplaintiffwasnecessarytopreventsubstantial  % andgrievouseconomicinjurytotheoperationsoftheemployer.Inconsideringwhetherornot  ~ theplaintiffwasakeyemployeeyoumayconsiderfactorssuchaswhethertheemployercould 5  replacetheemployeeonatemporarybasis,whethertheemployercouldtemporarilydowithout  0  theemployee,andifpermanentreplacementisunavoidable,2thecostofreinstatingthe   employee. @   @$ NotesonUse  ;  1.ModelInstruction3.04(BurdenofProof)tellsthejurythatsomethingisprovedonly   ifthejuryfindsitismorelikelytruethannottrue.Thephrase greaterweightoftheevidence z  isnotnecessaryhere.ItcanbeincludedinInstruction3.04ifdesiredbythecourt. ` 2.ThissectionisbasedupontheFMLAregulationcontainedin29C.F.R.825.218(b).  @--! CommitteeComments  p Anemployermaydenyjobrestorationtoa keyemployeeifsuchdenialisnecessaryto k preventsubstantialandgrievouseconomicinjurytotheoperationsoftheemployer.29C.F.R. Q 825.216(c).Indeterminingwhatconstitutesasubstantialandgrievouseconomicinjury,the 7 focusshouldbeontheextentoftheinjurytotheemployersoperations,notwhethertheabsence { oftheemployeewillcausetheinjury.29C.F.R.825.218(a).Thisstandardisdifferentand a morestringentthanthe unduehardshiptestundertheAmericanswithDisabilitiesAct.29 G C.F.R.825.218(d).Whileaprecisedefinitionisnotprovidedintheregulations,factorsto -  considerinmakingthatdeterminationareprovidedat29C.F.R.825.218(b).Theyinclude ! whethertheemployercouldreplacetheemployeeonatemporarybasis,whethertheemployer " couldtemporarilydowithouttheemployee,andthecostofreinstatingtheemployee.Id.  # Thecourtmaywishtodefine keyemployee,whichisdefinedbytheFMLAregulation 8"% asasalariedemployeewhoiseligibletotakeFMLAleaveandwhoisamongthehighestpaid10 #& percentofalltheemployeesemployedbytheemployerwithin75milesoftheemployers $' worksite.29C.F.R.825.217(a).Themethodofdeterminingwhethertheemployeeis among $( thehighestpaid10percentisdescribedintheFMLAregulations.29C.F.R.825.217(c).No %r) morethan10percentoftheemployersemployeeswithin75milesoftheworksitemaybe key &X * employees.29C.F.R.825.217(c)(2).Theterm salariedhasthesamemeaningunderthe '>!+ FMLAasitdoesundertheFairLaborStandardsAct,29U.S.C.201219,asamended.29 ($", C.F.R.825.217(b);29C.F.R.541.118.  h) #-  @x x  %   5.84AFMLAEXCEPTIONTOJOBRESTORATION ^ @aa (EmployeewouldnothavebeenEmployedatTimeofReinstatement) ar}  D  * Yourverdictmustbeforthedefendantifithasbeenproved1thattheplaintiffwouldnot   havebeenemployedbythedefendantatthetimejobreinstatementwasrequested. i   @$ NotesonUse   d 1.ModelInstruction3.04(BurdenofProof)tellsthejurythatsomethingisprovedonly    ifthejuryfindsitismorelikelytruethannottrue.Thephrase greaterweightoftheevidence   isnotnecessaryhere.ItcanbeincludedinInstruction3.04ifdesiredbythecourt.   @--! CommitteeComments  @  Anemployerisnotrequiredtoprovideanemployeereturningfrommedicalleave any ;  right,benefitorpositionofemploymentotherthantheright,benefitorpositiontowhichthe !  employeewouldhavebeenentitledhadtheemployeenevertakenleave.29U.S.C. e  2614(a)(3)(B);Marksv.TheSchoolDist.ofKansasCity,Mo.,941F.Supp.886,892(W.D. K  Mo.1996).Thus,anemployeeisnotentitledtojobreinstatementafterFMLAleaveifthe 1 employercanshowthattheemployeewouldnototherwisehavebeenemployedatthetime  reinstatementisrequested.29C.F.R.825.216(a).Forexample,anemployerisnotrequiredto  reinstateanemployeewhowaslaidoffduringthecourseoftakingFMLAleave.29C.F.R.  825.216(a)(1).  k  @  %   5.85FMLAACTUALDAMAGES arT  ^  D \XXtIfyoufindinfavoroftheplaintiffunderInstruction____1thenyoumustaward * theplaintifftheamountofanywages,salary,employmentbenefits,andother  C compensation2theplaintiffwouldhaveearnedin[(his)(her)]employmentwiththe   defendantif[(he)(she)]hadnotbeendischargedon[fillindateofdischarge]throughthe  1 dateofyourverdict,minustheamountofearningsandbenefitsfromotheremployment   receivedbytheplaintiffduringthattime. }  [Youarealsoinstructedthattheplaintiffhasadutyunderthelawto mitigate   [(his)(her)]damages!thatis,toexercisereasonablediligenceunderthecircumstances k  tominimize[(his)(her)]damages.Therefore,ifithasbeenproved3thattheplaintiff   failedtoseekoutortakeadvantageofanopportunitythatwasreasonablyavailableto Y [(him)(her)],youmustreduce[(his)(her)]damagesbytheamount[(he)(she)] r reasonablycouldhaveavoidedif[(he)(she)]hadsoughtoutortakenadvantageofsuch G anopportunity.]4 ` [Remember,throughoutyourdeliberations,youmustnotengageinany 5 speculation,guess,orconjectureandyoumustnotawarddamagesunderthisInstruction N bywayofpunishmentorthroughsympathy.]5 #    NotesonUse  <" !  6# 1.Insertthenumberortitleoftheessentialelementsinstructionhere. !0$  "*% 2.Theentitlementto othercompensationisbasedupon29_C.F.R._Ԁ825.400(c). #$&  |$' 3.ModelInstruction3.04(BurdenofProof)tellsthejurythatsomethingis v%( provedonlyifthejuryfindsitismorelikelytruethannottrue.Thephrase greater p& ) weightoftheevidenceisnotnecessaryhere.ItcanbeincludedinInstruction3.04if j' !* desiredbythecourt. d("+  ^)#, 4.Thisparagraphisdesignedtosubmittheissueof mitigationofdamagesin X*#- appropriatecases.SeeHartleyv.Dillards,Inc.,310F.3d1054,1061(8thCir.2002); R+$. Colemanv.CityofOmaha,714F.2d804,808(8thCir.1983);Fieldlerv.Indianhead ^ TruckLine,Inc.,670F.2d806,80809(8thCir.1982). X  R 5.Thisparagraphmaybegivenatthetrialcourtsdiscretion. L   F    CommitteeComments @   5TheFMLAprovidesthataprevailingplaintiffisentitledtorecoveractual :  damagesandinterestthereonplusanadditionalequalamountasliquidateddamages.29 4  U.S.C.2617(a)(1);29_C.F.R._Ԁ825.400(c);Morrisv._VCW_,Inc.,1996WL740544 . (W.D.Mo.1996).InMorris,thecourtheldthatanemployeecouldnotrecoverinterest (  becauseshefailedtopresentevidenceattrialregardingthemethodofcalculatingthe "  amountofinterest.Id.at*16.      Whereaprevailingplaintiffhasnotlostwages,salaryoremploymentbenefits,he   orshemaybeentitledtoothercompensation.29U.S.C.2617;29_C.F.R._Ԁ825.400(c).    Forexample,anemployeewhowasdeniedFMLAleavemaybeabletorecoverany  monetarylossesincurredasadirectresultoftheFMLAviolation,suchasthecostof  providingforafamilymember,uptoanamountequalto12weeksofwagesorsalaryfor  theemployee.29U.S.C.2617(a)(1).    IntheEighthCircuit,damagesforemotionaldistressarenotpermitted.Rodgers  v.CityofDesMoines,435F.3d904(8thCir.2006)(holdingdamagesrecoverableunder  theFMLAarestrictlydefinedinthestatuteandmeasuredbyactualmonetarylosses).#XtX\υ# |   v @ 5.86[DELETED]  ^   D  ^ @@{{ J@@{{ %   5.87FMLAVERDICTFORM ar  D  * \XXtNote: ` Completethefollowingparagraphbywritinginthenamerequiredbyyour   verdict.    X  Onthe[violationoftheFMLA]1claimofplaintiff[JohnDoe],[assubmittedin   Instruction_____]2,wefindinfavorof:     _________________________________________________________________   0DL!X'#0Q(PlaintiffJohnDoe)or(DefendantXYZ,Inc.)   !DX P 6% <DL!!6Note: ` Answerthenextquestiononlyiftheabovefindingisinfavorofthe |  plaintiff.Iftheabovefindingisinfavorofthedefendant,haveyour v  forepersonsignanddatethisformbecauseyouhavecompletedyour p  deliberationsonthisclaim. j  P   Hasitbeenproved3thatthedefendantwouldhave(describeemploymentaction ^ taken,e.g.,discharged)4theplaintiffregardlessof[(his)(her)](exerciseof[(his)(her)] X rightsundertheFMLA)?5 R 0DL!  X!0QLL_____Yes_____No F !DX*DL!!*Q0 0 (Markan Xintheappropriatespace.) : !DX P 6% <DL!!6Note: ` Completethefollowingparagraphonlyifyouranswertothepreceding . questionis no.Ifyouanswered yestotheprecedingquestion,have ( yourforepersonsignanddatethisformbecauseyouhavecompletedyour  " deliberationsonthisclaim. z!  P !  X!Wefindtheplaintiffsdamagestobe: n#  $____________________(statingtheamountor,ifnone,writetheword( none). \&!  *DL!!*________________________________ P(!# Foreperson J)"$  !X!Dated:_____________________________ >+$& <+ 4 <DL!!< 8,%' #XtX\c#c0 ed  s0@u u  %   5.90MISCELLANEOUSINSTRUCTIONS F  @P P ANDSPECIAL_INTERROGATORIES ioΤ __Ԉ |,     `     h _  &&. @& &  %   5.92SPECIALINTERROGATORIESTOELICITFINDINGS ^ @E E INBORDERLINEPRETEXT/MIXEDMOTIVECASES  Z  D   Yourverdictinthiscasewillbedeterminedbyyouranswerstothefollowingquestions.   Readthequestionsandnotescarefullybecausetheyexplaintheorderinwhichthequestions i  shouldbeansweredandwhichquestionsmaybeskipped.  d   QuestionNo.1:Hasitbeenproved1thattheplaintiff's(race)2wasadeterminingfactor    inthedefendant'sdecisionto(discharge)3[(him)(her)]? (Race)wasadeterminingfactoronly t  ifthedefendantwouldnothave(discharged)theplaintiffbutfortheplaintiffs(race).Itdoes o  notrequirethat(race)wastheonlyreasonforthedecisionmadebythedefendant.4[Youmay &  findthat(race)wasadeterminingfactorifithasbeenprovedthatthedefendantsstated !  reason(s)foritsdecisionarenottherealreason(s),butareapretexttohide(race) z  discrimination.]5 1 @____Yes_____No  @ (Markan Xintheappropriatespace.)  Note:0  Ifyouanswered"yes"toQuestionNo.1,skipQuestions2and3,andcontinueonto Q Questions4and5.Ifyouanswered"no"toQuestionNo.1,proceedtoQuestionNo.2.7(#(#   QuestionNo.2:Hasitbeenprovedthattheplaintiffs(race)wasamotivatingfactor5in a thedefendant'sdecisionto(discharge)[(him)(her)]?(Race)wasa"motivatingfactor"ifthe \ plaintiffs(race)playedapart[orarole]inthedefendantsdecisionto(discharge)theplaintiff. ! However,theplaintiffs(race)neednothavebeentheonlyreasonforthedefendantsdecisionto l # (discharge)theplaintiff.[Youmayfindthat(race)wasamotivatingfactorifithasbeenproved !g% thatthedefendantsstatedreason(s)foritsdecisionarenottherealreason(s),butareapretextto #' hide(race)discrimination.]7 w$) @_____Yes_____No C&+ @ (Markan Xintheappropriatespace.) )' , Note:0  Ifyouanswered yestoQuestionNo.2,continueontoQuestionNo.3.Ifyou (". answered"no"toQuestionNo.1and notoQuestionNo.2,youshouldhaveyour )}#/ forepersonsignanddatethisformbecauseyouhavecompletedyourdeliberationsonthis *c$0 (race)discriminationclaim.+I%1(#(# Ї  QuestionNo.3:Hasitbeenprovedthatthedefendantwouldhave(discharged)the ^ plaintiffregardlessof[(his)(her)]race)? Y @_____Yes_____No  % @ (Markan Xintheappropriatespace.) i  Note:0  AnswerQuestions4and5onlyifyouanswered"yes"toQuestionNo.1orifyou 5  answered"yes"toQuestionNo.2and notoQuestionNo.3.Ifyouanswered"yes"to   QuestionNo.3,haveyourforepersonsignanddatethisformbecauseyouhave   completedyourdeliberationsonthis(race)-discriminationclaim. (#(#   QuestionNo.4:Statetheamountoftheplaintiff'sactualdamagesasthattermisdefined U  inInstruction_____:8$______________________(statingtheamount[or,ifyoufindthatthe    plaintiff'sdamageshavenomonetaryvalue,writeinthenominalamountofOneDollar e  ($1.00)]).9 `   QuestionNo.5:Whatamount,ifany,doyouassessforpunitivedamagesasthattermis  definedinInstruction_____?9$____________________(statingtheamountor,ifnone,write p theword none). k    `     h   ___________________________________     `     h   Foreperson  Date:____________________ \  @$ NotesonUse  (    1.ModelInstruction3.04(BurdenofProof)tellsthejurythatsomethingisprovedonly  " ifthejuryfindsitismorelikelytruethannottrue.Thephrase greaterweightoftheevidence !g# isnotnecessaryhere.ItcanbeincludedinInstruction3.04ifdesiredbythecourt. "M$   2.Thissetofinterrogatoriesisdesignedforuseinracediscriminationcasesunder42 $& U.S.C.1981,inwhichitisunclearwhetherthecorrectstandardforliabilityis determining $' factoror motivatingfactor.Italsomaybeappropriateincasesfiledunder42U.S.C.1983, %r( theanti-retaliationprovisionofTitleVII,ortheFamilyMedicalLeaveAct.SeeIntroductionto &X ) Section5. '>!*   3.Theseinterrogatoriesaredesignedforuseinadischargecase.Ina"failuretohire," (", "failuretopromote,"or"demotion"case,theinterrogatoriesmustbemodified.Wherethe )}#-  plaintiffresignedbutclaimsthatheorshewas"constructivelydischarged,"anadditional *c$. interrogatoryshouldbegivenasathresholdtotheinterrogatoriesshownaboveandthe ^ subsequentinterrogatorieswillhavetoberenumbered.SeeinfraModelInstruction5.93. D    4.Theexplanationofthephrase"(race)wasadeterminingfactor"isbasedonGrebinv. ? SiouxFallsIndep.SchoolDist.No.49-5,779F.2d18,20n.1(8thCir.1985).  %   5.Thebracketedphrasemaybeaddedatthecourt'soption.  ~   6.TheCommitteebelievesthattheterm"motivatingfactor"shouldbedefined.See 5  infraModelInstruction5.96.      7.Thebracketedphrasemaybeaddedatthecourt'soption. t    8.Fillinthenumberofthe"actualdamages"instructionhere.SeesupraModel o  Instruction5.22A(1981cases),5.27A(1983cases),5.02A(TitleVIIretaliationcases). U    9.Fillinthenumberofthe punitivedamagesinstructionhere.See,e.g.,Model    Instruction5.22C.IftheseinterrogatoriesareusedinanFMLAcase,thisquestionshouldbe   deletedinfavorofaquestionontheissueof goodfaith.SeeModelInstruction5.86. z  @--! CommitteeComments  1   InDesertPalace,Inc.v.Costa,539U.S.90(2003),theSupremeCourtruledthat ,  motivatingfactor/samedecisioninstructionsshouldbegiveninTitleVIIdiscriminationcases, p regardlessofwhethertheplaintiffrelieson directevidenceorcircumstantial/pretextevidence. V InGrossv.FBLFinancialServices,Inc.,___U.S.___,129S.Ct.2343(2009),theSupreme < Courtruledthat motivatingfactor/samedecisionburden-shiftinginstructionsshouldnotbe " giveninADEAcases.    TheCostaandGrossdecisionsdidnotaddresswhetherthedirectevidence/pretext a distinction(andthecorrespondinguseofa motivatingfactor/samedecisionor determining G factorstandard)remainsviableincasesfiledunder1981,1983,theantiretaliation - provisionofTitleVII,ortheFMLA.     Thesespecialinterrogatoriesaredesignedforusewhenthetrialcourtbelievesthatthe l " mixedmotive/pretextdistinctionmaystillexist.Forexample,iftheplaintifffilessuitunder R!# section1981andoffers directevidenceofracediscrimination,theseinterrogatorieswillpermit 8"$ thecourttocreateacompleterecordtopermitanalysisundereithertheory. #%   QuestionNo.1isdesignedtotesttheultimateissueina"pretext"caseofwhetherthe w$' plaintiffsraceorotherprotectedcharacteristicswasa"determiningfactor"intheemployment ]%( decisionbeingchallenged.AsreflectedinthenotefollowingQuestionNo.1,theplaintiff C&) prevailsundereitherapretextormixedmotivetheoryifthejuryfindsthatunlawful )' * discriminationwasa"determiningfactor."Thus,analysisontheissueofliabilityshouldendif (!+ thejuryanswers"yes"toQuestionNo.1.ThejurymustgoontoQuestionNo.2onlyifithas (", notbeenprovedthatdiscriminationwasa"determiningfactor." )}#-   QuestionNo.2isdesignedtotesttheproofonthe"motivatingfactor"issue.Thenote 4+$/ followingQuestionNo.2directsthejurytocontinueinitsanalysisonlyifitanswers"yes"to ,%0 thisquestion.Ifthejurydoesnotfindthatunlawfuldiscriminationwasamotivatingfactor, ^ judgmentshouldbeenteredforthedefendantonthisclaim. D   QuestionNo.3isdesignedtoreachthefinalissueina"mixedmotive"case.Asnoted ? above,theplaintiffclearlyprevailsifthejuryanswers"yes"toQuestionNo.1andthedefendant  % clearlyprevailsifthejuryreachesandanswers"no"toQuestionNo.2.Italsoisclearthatthe i  defendantprevailsifthejuryreachesandanswers"yes"toQuestionNo.3.Thus,thecourtwill O  needtorevisittheissueofwhetheracaseshouldbeclassifiedas"mixedmotive"or"pretext" 5  onlyifthejuryreachesQuestionNo.3andonlyifthejuryanswers"no"tothatquestion.Based   onthissetofjuryfindings,theplaintiffprevailsifthecaseisclassifiedundera"mixedmotive"   theory,whilethedefendantprevailsifthecaseisclassifiedundera"pretext"casetheory.     Questions1,2and3aretobesubmittedinlieuofanelementsinstruction.However, @  actualdamagesand,ifappropriate,apunitivedamagesinstruction(ora goodfaithinstruction &  inFMLAcases)mustalsobesubmitted.TheCommitteemakesnorecommendationregarding    whetherallissuesshouldbesubmittedtothejurysimultaneouslyorwhetherjurydeliberations   shouldbebifurcated,withtheissuesofactualdamagesandpunitivedamages(or goodfaith) z  beingsubmittedseparatelyfromQuestions1,2and3. `     @q q  %   5.93CONSTRUCTIVEDISCHARGE 8  ^   First,thedefendantmadetheplaintiffsworkingconditionsintolerable,and *   Second,theplaintiffs(age,race,gender,religion)1wasamotivatingfactor2inthe  % defendantsactions,and  ~   Third,[thedefendantactedwiththeintentofforcingtheplaintifftoquit]or[the 5  plaintiffsresignationwasareasonablyforeseeableresultofthedefendantsactions]3.  0    Workingconditionsareintolerableifareasonablepersonintheplaintiffssituation   wouldhavedeemedresignationtheonlyreasonablealternative.4 @   @$ NotesonUse  ;    1.Appropriatelanguageshouldbechosentoreflecttheallegedbasisforthe   discrimination.Otherprohibitedconduct,suchasretaliationagainstsomeonewhohas z  complainedofdiscrimination,maybeappropriate. `   2.Ifthetrialcourtdecidestosubmitthecaseundera determiningfactorliability  standard,thisinstructionshouldbemodifiedandanappropriatedefinitionoftheterm   determiningfactorshouldbeincluded.    3.Selecttheappropriatephraseor,insomecasesbothphrasesseparatedby or < dependingontheevidence.Ogdenv.WaxWorks,Inc.,214F.3d999,1007n.13(8thCir.2000) " ( Toestablishherconstructivedischarge,Ogdenneededtoshowthatareasonablepersonwould  havefoundtheconditionsofheremployintolerableandthattheemployereitherintendedto  forcehertoresignorcouldhavereasonablyforeseenshewoulddosoasaresultofits v actions.)(Emphasisadded.) \   4.Thisparagraphaidsthejurybyprovidingadefinitionofwhatconstitutesintolerable ! workingconditions,andexplainsthatthestandardisanobjectiveone.SeeWilliamsv.Cityof " KansasCity,Missouri,223F3d749,75354(8thCir.2000)(Williamsdidnotshowthather  # resignationwasobjectivelyreasonablewhereshequitwithoutgivingheremployerachanceto !g$ fixtheproblem);seealsoPhillipsv.TacoBellCorp.,156F.3d884,890_(8th_ԀCir.1998)(an "M% employee hasanobligationnottoassumetheworseandjumptoconclusionstooquickly.). #3& @--! CommitteeComments  $(   Thisinstructionisdesignedforuseinconnectionwiththeessentialelementsinstruction C&* incaseswheretheplaintiffresignedbutclaimsthattheemployersdiscriminatoryactionsforced )' + himorhertodoso.SeeBarrettv.OmahaNationalBank,726F.2d424,428(8thCir.1984) (!, ( [a]nemployeeisconstructivelydischargedwhenheorsheinvoluntarilyresignstoescape ("- intolerableandillegalemploymentrequirements);Hukkanenv,InternationalUnionof )}#. OperatingEngineers,Hoisting&PortableLocalNo.101,3F.3d281,285(8thCir.1993) *c$/ ( [c]onstructivedischargeplaintiffsthussatisfyBunnyBreadsintentrequirementbyshowing +I%0 theirresignationwasareasonablyforeseeableconsequenceoftheiremployersdiscriminatory ^ actions,thus,addinganalternativemethodofmeetingthestandardannouncedinJohnsonv. D BunnyBreadCo.,646F.2d1250,1256(8thCir.1981)(employersactions musthavebeen * takenwiththeintentionofforcingtheemployeetoquit)).SeealsoOgdenv.WaxWorks,Inc.,   214F.3d999,1007n.13(8thCir.2000)( Toestablishherconstructivedischarge,Ogdenneeded   toshowthatareasonablepersonwouldhavefoundtheconditionsofheremployintolerableand  ~ thattheemployereitherintendedtoforcehertoresignorcouldhavereasonablyforeseenshe  d woulddosoasaresultofitsactions.)(Emphasisadded.)Thisinstructionshouldbeusedinlieu  J ofthefirstandsecondelementsintheessentialelementsinstructions.SeeinfraModel  0 Instructions5.01(TitleVII),5.11AandB(ADEA),5.21AandB(42U.S.C.1981),5.26Aand t  B(42U.S.C.1983).  Z   @F F  %   5.94BUSINESSJUDGMENTTITLEVIICASES X  ^   Youmaynotreturnaverdictfortheplaintiffjustbecauseyoumightdisagreewiththe * defendant's(decision)1orbelieveittobeharshorunreasonable.  %  @$ NotesonUse   ~   1.Thisinstructionmakesreferencetothedefendant's"decision."Itmaybemodifiedif 5  anothertermsuchas"actions"or"conduct"ismoreappropriate.    & % @--! CommitteeComments  t    InWalkerv.AT&TTechnologies,995F.2d846(8thCir.1993),theEighthCircuitruled o  '%tthatitisreversibleerrortodenyadefendant'srequestforaninstructionwhichexplainsthatan U  employerhastherighttomakesubjectivepersonneldecisionsforanyreasonthatisnot ;  discriminatory.ThisinstructionisbasedonsamplelanguagecitedintheEighthCircuit's !  opinion.SeeWalker,995F.2dat849;cf.Blakev.J.C.PenneyCo.,894F.2d274,281(8thCir. e  1990)(upholdingadifferentbusinessjudgmentinstructionasbeingsufficient).  K   @44$ %   5.95PRETEXT  6  ^   Youmayfindthattheplaintiff's(age)(race)(sex)1wasa[motivating][determining]2 * factorinthedefendant's(decision)3ifithasbeenproved4thatthedefendant'sstatedreason(s)for  % its(decision)[(is)(are)]nottherealreason,but[(is)(are)]apretexttohide[(age)(sex)(race)]  ~ discrimination.5 5   & ? @$ NotesonUse   0    1.'? iChoosetheappropriateword.     2.Choosethesamewordasusedintheelementsinstruction. @    3.Thisinstructionmakesreferencestothedefendant's"decision."Itmaybemodifiedif ;  anothertermsuchas"actions"or"conduct"!wouldbemoreappropriate. !    4.ModelInstruction3.04(BurdenofProof)tellsthejurythatsomethingisprovedonly z  ifthejuryfindsitismorelikelytruethannottrue.Thephrase greaterweightoftheevidence ` isnotnecessaryhere.ItcanbeincludedinInstruction3.04ifdesiredbythecourt. F К  5.SeeMoorev.RobertsonFireProtectionDist.,249F.3d786,790n.9(8thCir.2001),  whichstates [w]edonotexpressanyviewastowhetheriteverwouldbereversibleerrorfora  trialcourttofailtogiveapretextinstruction,thoughwetendtodoubtit.. k & % @--! CommitteeComments  "   Theplaintiffscanestablishunlawfulbiasthrough"eitherdirectevidenceof { discriminationor'%"evidencethatthereasonsgivenfortheadverseactionareapretexttocloakthe a discriminatorymotive."Brooksv.WoodlineMotorFreight,Inc.,852F.2d1061,1063(8thCir. G 1988)(emphasisadded)."[A]nemployer'ssubmissionofadiscreditedexplanationforfiringa -  memberofaprotectedclassisitselfevidencewhichmaypersuadethefinderoffactthatsuch ! unlawfuldiscriminationactuallyoccurred."MacDissiv.ValmontIndus.,Inc.,856F.2d1054, " 1059(8thCir.1988).Thisinstruction,whichisbasedonSt.Mary'sHonorCenterv.Hicks,509  # U.S.502(1993),maybeusedinconjunctionwiththeessentialelementsinstructionwhenthe !g$ plaintiffreliessubstantiallyorexclusivelyon"indirectevidence"ofdiscrimination.Inan "M% attempttoclarifythisstandard,theEighthCircuit,inRytherv.KARE11,108F.3d832(8thCir. #3& 1997),stated: w$' 0   ` Insum,whentheemployerproducesanondiscriminatoryreasonforitsactions, %r) theprimafaciecasenolongercreatesalegalpresumptionofunlawfuldiscrimination. &X * Theelementsoftheprimafaciecaseremain,however,andiftheyareaccompaniedby '>!+ evidenceofpretextanddisbeliefofthedefendantsprofferedexplanation,theymay ($", permitthejurytofindfortheplaintiff.Thisisnottosaythat,fortheplaintifftosucceed, h) #- simplyprovingpretextisnecessarilyenough.Weemphasizethatevidenceofpretext N*#. willnotbyitselfbeenoughtomakeasubmissiblecaseifitis,standingalone, 4+$/ inconsistentwithareasonableinferenceofagediscrimination.,%0(#(# Id.at837(footnoteomitted). ^   TheCommitteebelievespretextevidencecansupportajurydecisionwheneithera Y motivatingordeterminingfactorisrequired.Rytherv.KAREII,864F.Supp.1510,1521(D. ? Minn.1994)andRytherv.KARE,108F.3d832_(8th_ԀCir.1997).   %  @  %   5.96DEFINITIONOFMOTIVATINGFACTOR u  ^   Asusedintheseinstructions,theplaintiffs(sex,gender,race,nationalorigin,religion, * disability)1wasa"motivatingfactor,"iftheplaintiffs(sex,gender,race,nationalorigin,  % religion,disability)playedapart2[orarole3]4inthedefendantsdecisionto__________5the  ~ plaintiff.However,theplaintiffs(sex,gender,race,nationalorigin,religion,disability)need 5  nothavebeentheonlyreasonforthedefendantsdecisionto__________theplaintiff.  0   @$ NotesonUse      1.Herestatetheallegedunlawfulconsideration. @    2.SeeEstesv.DickSmithFord,Inc.,856F.2d1097,110102(8thCir.1988). ;    3.SeeHazenPaperCo.v.Biggins,507U.S.604,610(1993)("Whatevertheemployers   decisionmakingprocess,adisparatetreatmentclaimcannotsucceedunlesstheemployees z  protectedtraitactuallyplayedaroleinthatprocessandhadadeterminativeinfluenceonthe ` outcome.") F   4.Caselawsuggeststhatotherlanguagecanbeusedproperlytodefine motivating  factor.Ajudgemaywishtoconsiderthefollowingalternatives:    Theterm motivatingfactor,asusedintheseinstructions,meansareason,aloneorwith < otherreasons,onwhichthedefendantreliedwhenit__________theplaintiff[,Price " Waterhousev.Hopkins,490U.S.228,24142(1989);]orwhichmovedthedefendanttowardits  decisionto__________theplaintiff[,id.at241;]orbecauseofwhichthedefendant__________  theplaintiff[,29U.S.C.623(a)(1)(ADEA);42U.S.C.2000e2(TitleVII);42U.S.C. v 12112(a)(ADA)]. \   5.Herestatetheallegedadverseemploymentaction. ! @--!%  CommitteeComments  l #   TheCommitteerecommendsgivingthisdefinition.Acourtmaydecidethattheterm !g% "motivatingfactor"neednotbedefinedexpresslybecauseitscommondefinitionisalsothe "M& applicablelegaldefinition."Motivating"isoftenusedinadirectevidence,mixedmotivecase #3' broughtunderPriceWaterhousev.Hopkins,490U.S.228(1989),tosignifythemultiplefactors, w$( atleastoneofwhichisassertedlyunlawful,whichcausedtheadverseemploymentdecision.42 ]%) U.S.C.2000e2(m);Beshearsv.Asbill,930F.2d1348,135354(8thCir.1991)(ADEAcase); C&* Partonv.GTENorth,Inc.,971F.2d150,153(8thCir.1992)."Determiningfactor"is )' + appropriateinanindirectevidence,pretextcasebroughtunderthedecisionalformatof (!, McDonnellDouglasCorp.v.Green,411U.S.792(1973);Rytherv.KareII,108F.3d832(8th ("- Cir.enbanc1997);Estesv.DickSmithFord,Inc.,856F.2d1097,110102(8thCir.1988).  )}#.  @3 3  %   5.97AFTERACQUIREDEVIDENCE s 1 ^   IfyourverdictisinfavoroftheplaintiffunderInstructionNo.___,2andifyouanswered *  notoQuestionNo.1,3thenyoumustanswerthefollowingquestiononyourverdictform:  % 0   ` QuestionNo.2:Hasitbeenproved4that,eveniftheplaintiffhadnotbeen  ~ terminatedon[insertappropriatedate],thedefendantwouldhaveterminated5the 5  plaintiffsemploymentby[insertappropriatedate]6because[insertbriefexplanationof  0  thedefendantsafteracquiredreasonfortermination.]7? (#(#  & % @$ NotesonUse  @    1.Thisinstructionisintendedforpotentialuseincasesinvolvingclaimsofwrongful ;  '%@1terminationorotheradverseemploymentactionsresultingineconomiclosstotheplaintiff. !  Whengiven,itordinarilywillbeinsertedaftertheessentialelementsinstruction(or,whengiven, e  afterthe samedecisioninstruction)andbeforetheactualdamagesinstruction.Inadditionto K  instructingonthisissue,theverdictformwillneedtobemodified.SeeinfraModelInstruction 1 5.97A.    2.Insertthenumberofthe essentialelementsinstructiongiven. p   3.Insertthenumberofthe samedecisioninstructiongiven.Ifa samedecision k instructionisnotgiven,thisphraseshouldbedeleted. Q   4.ModelInstruction3.04(BurdenofProof)tellsthejurythatsomethingisprovedonly  ifthejuryfindsitismorelikelytruethannottrue.Thephrase greaterweightoftheevidence  isnotnecessaryhere.ItcanbeincludedinInstruction3.04ifdesiredbythecourt. v   5.Theafteracquiredevidencedefensetypicallyisassertedbythedefendanttocutoff -  liabilityforeconomicdamagesbysuggestingthattheplaintiffwouldhavebeenterminatedifit ! hadbeenawareoftheafteracquiredevidenceofmisconduct.Whenthedefenseisbasedona " differentfactpatterne.g.,thedefendantassertsthattheplaintiffwouldhavebeendemotedor  # transferredtoalowerpayingjobifithadknownoftheafteracquiredevidencetheappropriate !g$ jobactionshouldbeidentified. "M%   6.Inserttheappropriatedatebaseduponthedefendantscontentionofwhentheplaintiff $' wouldhavebeenterminatedasaresultoftheafteracquiredevidence. $(   7.Describethebasisforthedefendantsafteracquiredevidencedefensee.g. the C&* plaintiffsmisrepresentationin[(his)(her)]employmentapplicationor theplaintiffs )' +  falsificationofexpensereports. (!, &     @--! CommitteeComments  ^   InMcKennonv.NashvilleBannerPublishingCo.,513U.S.352(1995),theSupreme Y Courtruledthatanemployersafteracquiredevidenceofmisconductbytheplaintiffdoesnot ?  ' ^?actasabartoliability,butitmaycutofftheplaintiffsdamagesasofthedatetheemployer  % discoveredthemisconduct.Theafteracquiredevidencedoctrineappearstobeanaffirmative i  defensewhichmustbepleadedandprovenbytheemployerdefendant. O    Toestablishanafteracquiredevidencedefensetodamages,theemployermustestablish  J that thewrongdoingwasofsuchseveritythattheemployeeinfactwouldhavebeenterminated  0  onthosegroundsaloneiftheemployerhadknownofitatthetimeofdischarge.McKennon, t  513U.S.at36263.Itisnotenoughtoshowthatthemisconductwasinviolationofcompany Z  policyormighthavejustifiedtermination;instead,theemployermustshowthattheafter @  acquiredevidencewouldhaveresultedintermination.Sheehanv.DonlenCorp.,173F.3d1039, &  1048(7thCir.1999)( [p]rovingthatthesamedecisionwouldhavebeenjustified...isnotthe    sameasprovingthatthesamedecisionwouldhavebeenmade)(quotingPriceWaterhousev.   Hopkins,490U.S.228,252(1989)). z    Theplaintiffemployeecannotcircumventtheafteracquiredevidencedefenseby 1 suggestingthatthedefendantemployerdiscoveredthepriormisconductduringthecourseof  discovery. Onceanemployerlearnsaboutemployeewrongdoingthatwouldleadtoa  legitimatedischarge,wecannotrequiretheemployertoignoretheinformation,evenifitis  acquiredduringthecourseofdiscoveryandeveniftheinformationmighthavegone k undiscoveredabsentthesuit.McKennon,513U.S.at362.  Q  @q q  %   5.97AMODIFIEDVERDICTFORM@@O O  ^ @O O INAFTERACQUIREDEVIDENCECASES en&  D  Note: 0  0` (#(#Completethefollowingparagraphbywritinginthenamerequiredbyyour   verdict. ` (#` (#   Onthe[(sex)1discrimination]2claimofplaintiff[JaneDoe],[assubmittedin  d Instruction___]3,wefindinfavorof:   @ll ________________________________________________________________ o  @ (PlaintiffJaneDoe)or(DefendantXYZ,Inc.) U  Note:0  0` (#(#Answerthenextquestiononlyiftheabovefindingisinfavoroftheplaintiff.If !  theabovefindingisinfavorofthedefendant,haveyourforepersonsignanddate e  thisformbecauseyouhavecompletedyourdeliberationsonthisclaim.K ` (#` (#   QuestionNo.1:Hasitbeenproved4thatthedefendantwouldhavedischarged5the  plaintiffon[dateonwhichtheplaintiffwasdischarged]regardlessof[(his)(her)](sex)?6 p @@@________Yes_________No " @ (Markan Xintheappropriatespace)  Note:0  0` (#(#Completethefollowingparagraphsonlyifyouranswertotheprecedingquestion v is no.Ifyouanswered yestotheprecedingquestion,haveyourforeperson \ signanddatethisformbecauseyouhavecompletedyourdeliberationsonthis B claim.(` (#` (#   QuestionNo.2:Hasitbeenprovedthat,eveniftheplaintiffhadnotbeenterminatedon R!! [insertappropriatedate]7,thedefendantwouldhaveterminatedtheplaintiffsemploymentby "M# [insertappropriatedate]because[insertbriefexplanationofthedefendantsafteracquired $% reasonfortermination.]8? ]%' @ ____Yes____No (!+ @ (Markan Xintheappropriatespace) (",   )}#- & o  Note:0  0` (#(#Continueontothefollowingparagraphsregardlessofhowyouanswered ^ QuestionNo.2.D` (#` (#   Weassesstheplaintiffsdamagesasfollows:   0  A.8` (#(#Lostwagesandbenefitsfrom[dateofactualtermination]through[date  d usedinafteracquiredevidenceinstruction]:  ` `  'o ^0   ` $________(statingtheamount[or,ifnone,writetheword none]) o  0  B.8` (#(#Lostwagesandbenefitsfrom[dateusedinafteracquiredevidence !  instruction]throughthedateofyourverdict9:z ` `     ` $________(statingtheamount[or,ifnone,writetheword none]) , ! ! ( 84&    C.0 ` Theplaintiffsotherdamages,excludingpastandfuturelostwagesandbenefits:<` (#` (# 0   ` $_________0(#(#(statingtheamount[or,ifyoufindthattheplaintiffsdamagesdo  nothaveamonetaryvalue,writeinthenominalamountofOne G! Dollar'<&5($1.00)]).10B#(#(#   [Weassesspunitivedamagesagainstthedefendant,assubmittedinInstruction___,as R!' follows: "M)    ` $_______(statingtheamountor,ifnone,writetheword none).]11 ]%-    `     h   ___________________________________ ($"1    `     h      p Foreperson h) #2 Dated:_____________________ 4+$4  ,%5  & % @$ NotesonUse  ^   1.Thisverdictformisdesignedforuseinagenderdiscriminationcase.Itmustbe Y modified'%^r9iftheplaintiffisclaimingdiscriminationbasedonrace,religion,age,orsomeother ? theoryfactor.  %   2.Thebracketedphraseshouldbesubmittedwhentheplaintiffsubmitsmultipleclaims  ~ tothejury.  d   3.Thenumberortitleofthe essentialelementsinstructionmaybeinsertedhere.      4.ModelInstruction3.04(BurdenofProof)tellsthejurythatsomethingisprovedonly t  ifthejuryfindsitismorelikelytruethannottrue.Thephrase greaterweightoftheevidence Z  isnotnecessaryhere.ItcanbeincludedinInstruction3.04ifdesiredbythecourt. @    5.SeeinfraModelInstruction5.97n.5. ;    6.Thisquestionsubmitsthe samedecisionissuetothejury.SeeinfraModel   Instruction5.01A. z    7.SeeinfraModelInstruction5.97n.6. 1   8.SeeinfraModelInstruction5.97n.7. ,   9.Althoughtheafteracquiredevidencedefensewouldbarrecoveryofeconomic  damagesaccruingafterthedateofdiscoveryoftheafteracquiredbasisfortermination, k SubparagraphBneverthelessisdesignedtoelicitthisfindingintheeventtheafteracquired Q evidencedefenseisoverruledasamatteroflawviaposttrialmotionsorappeal.Frontpayisan 7 equitableissueforthejudgetodecide.ExcelCorp.v.Bosley,165F.3d635,639(8thCir.1999) { (TitleVIIcase). a   10.TheCommitteetakesnopositiononwhether(ortowhatdegree)theafteracquired \ evidencedefensemightimpacttherecoveryofcompensatorydamages.McKennonv.Nashville B  BannerPublishingCo.,513U.S.352(1995)wasanADEAcaseinwhichtheplaintiffsremedy (! waslimitedtoeconomicdamages. l "   11.Thisparagraphshouldbeincludediftheevidenceissufficienttosupportanawardof !g$ punitivedamages.Seesupra,e.g.,ModelInstruction5.02C. "M% @--! CommitteeComments  $'   Thismodelinstructionillustratesthemodificationstotheverdictformincaseswherethe ]%) afteracquiredevidencedefenseissubmitted.SeesupraModelInstruction5.97;seealsosupra C&* ModelInstructions5.03(TitleVIIVerdictForm);5.13(ADEAVerdictForm);5.23(1981 )' + VerdictForm);5.28(1983VerdictForm);5.73(FirstAmendmentVerdictForm).s0  (#0 0e  @#%   6.FRAUDCASES d,`FԈ  0  @   %   6.01FRAUD-ODOMETER d,F  ^   Yourverdictmustbefortheplaintiff[andagainstdefendant__________]1[here * generallydescribetheclaimifthereismorethanone]ifallofthefollowingelementshavebeen  % proved2:  ~   First,thatthedefendantoritsagent[disconnected,reset,oralteredtheodometeronthe 5  vehicleinquestionbychangingthenumberofmilesindicatedthereon];3and  0    Second,thattheactionofthedefendantoritsagentwasdonewiththeintenttodefraud4   someone.5 @    Toactwithintenttodefraudmeanstoactwithintenttodeceiveorcheatforthepurpose ;  ofbringingsomefinancialgaintoone'sselforanother.     Ifanyoftheaboveelementshasnotbeenproved,yourverdictmustbeforthedefendant. K   &  @$ NotesonUse     1.Usethisphraseiftherearemultipledefendants. V 'qK  2.ModelInstruction3.04(BurdenofProof)tellsthejurythatsomethingisprovedonly Q ifthejuryfindsitismorelikelytruethannottrue.Thephrase greaterweightoftheevidence 7 isnotnecessaryhere.ItcanbeincludedinInstruction3.04ifdesiredbythecourt. {   3.Thebracketedlanguageshouldbeusedwhentheplaintiff'scivilactionisbasedupon v  aviolationof49U.S.C.32703(2).Iftheactionispremisedonanallegedviolationof49 \! U.S.C.32703(3)or32705.theelementshouldbemodifiedasfollows: B" & % 0  a)0` (#(#section32703(3)-$` (#` (# 0  0` (#(#First,thatthedefendantoritsagentoperatedthevehicleinquestionknowingthat R!& the'%Nodometerofsuchvehiclewasdisconnectedornonfunctional;8"'` (#` (# & % 0  b)0` (#(#section32705-#3)` (#` (# 0  0` (#(#First,thatthedefendantoritsagentfailedtoprovideanaccuratewritten $+ odometer'%###XtX\#  2  @ %   7.02DEFENSETHEORYINSTRUCTIONSTHREEOPTIONS ^ @9 9 IntroductionandCommitteeComments   D    EighthCircuitcaselawholdsthatthedefendantinanF.E.L.A.case,likeanypartyinany   othercivilcase,isentitledtoaspecificinstructiononitstheoryofthecase,iftheinstructionis    legallycorrect,supportedbytheevidenceandbroughttothecourt'sattentioninatimely  ~ request.BoardofWaterWorks,TrusteesoftheCityofDesMoines,Iowav.Alvord,Burdick&  d Howson,706F.2d820,823(8thCir.1983).ThispropositionappliestoF.E.L.A.cases.  J Chicago&N.W.Ry.Co.v.Green,164F.2d55,61(8thCir.1947);seealsoChicago,Rock  0 Island&PacificRailroadCo.v.Lint,217F.2d279,28486(8thCir.1954)(errortorefusethe t  defendant'sforeseeabilityofharminstructionswhich morespecificallythanthecourt's Z  instructionspresentedthedefendant'stheoryofdefense);Lewyv.RemingtonArmsCo.,Inc.,836 @  F.2d1104,111213(8thCir.1988)(thedefendantinproductsliabilitycasemaybeentitledtoa &  solecauseinstructionpresentingitstheoryofthecasetothejury,iflegallycorrect,supportedby    theevidenceandbroughttothecourt'sattentioninatimelyrequest).     The7.02seriesofdefensetheoryinstructionsprovidesforthreealternativeformatsthata K  defendantmayutilizetopresentitsdefensetheorytothejury.Ifthedefendant'stheoryisthat 1 theplaintiffhasfailedtocarryhisorherburdenofproofononeormoreoftheelementsofhis  orherclaimsetforthintheelementsinstruction,theModelInstruction7.02Aformatpermits  instructingthejurythattheirverdictmustbeforthedefendantunlessthatelementhasbeen  proved.The7.02Bformatissimilar,butdoesnotlimitthedefendanttothepreciselanguage k usedintheelementsinstruction.Thatis,thedefendantcanspecifyanyfactwhichtheplaintiff Q mustproveinordertorecoverandobtainaninstructionstatingthatthedefendantisentitledtoa 7 verdictunlessthatfactisproved.Thedefendantmaywishtousethisformatwherethedefense { theoryisthattheplaintiffhasfailedtoprovenoticeorreasonableforeseeabilityofharm. a   Theformatsusedin7.02Aand7.02Baredesignedtocoverdefensetheorieswherethe \ plaintiffhasfailedtoproveanelementofhisorherclaim.Thethirdcategoryofdefensetheory B instructions,assetforthinModelInstruction7.02C,infra,isdesignedtocoveraffirmative ( defenseswheretherailroadhastheburdenofproof. l    Thecourtshouldlimitthenumberofdefensetheoryinstructionssoasnottounduly !g  emphasizethedefensetheoriesinawaythatwouldbeunfairtotheplaintiff.TheCommittee "M! believesthatasageneralrule,thedefendantshouldbeentitledtoatleastonedefensetheory #3" instructionforeachclaimthattheplaintiffisseparatelysubmittingtothejury.Theremaybe w$# certaincaseswheremorethanonedefensetheoryinstructionshouldbegivenforaparticular ]%$ claim.Forexample,inanoccupationallungdiseasecase,theremaybeastatuteoflimitations C&% defensehingingonfactissuestobedecidedbythejuryandtherealsomaybeissuesastonotice )' & andreasonableforeseeabilityofharm.Insuchacase,thecourtmightconcludetogivea7.02C (!' instructionontheaffirmativedefenseofstatuteoflimitationsanda7.02Binstructioncovering ("( thefailuretoprovenoticeorreasonableforeseeabilityofharm.Ifthedefendantwants7.02A )}#) and7.02Binstructionstobegiveninacase,theyshouldbecombinedinasingledefensetheory *c$* instructionfollowingthe7.02Bformat.Ratherthancreatinganarbitrarylimitonthenumberof +I%+ defensetheoryinstructionsthatmaybegiven,theCommitteebelievesthatitispreferabletogive ^ thecourtflexibilityanddiscretionindealingwitheachcaseonitsownfacts.Theoperative D principlesarefairnessandevenhandedtreatment.  *  @~ ~  %   7.02AFAILUREOFPROOFONANYELEMENTOF ^ @, , THEPLAINTIFFSCASELISTEDINTHEELEMENTS ai  D   Yourverdictmustbefordefendant[(nameofthedefendant)]1[ontheplaintiff's(identify   claimpresentedinthisinstructionas first, second,etc.)2claim]unlessithasbeenproved3 i  that[(specifyanyelementuponwhichtheplaintiffbearstheburdenofproofaslistedinthe  d appropriateelementsinstructionfortheparticularclaim)].     & % @$ NotesonUse  t    1.Iftherearetwoormoredefendantsinthelawsuit,includethisphraseandidentifythe o  defendant'%t}againstwhomtheclaimidentifiedinthisinstructionismade. U    2.Includethisphraseandidentifytheclaimrepresentedinthisinstructionas first,     second,etc.,onlyifmorethanoneclaimistobesubmitted.SeeIntroductiontoSection7   (discussionofrelationshipamongF.E.L.A.claimsforgeneralnegligence,violationoftheSafety z  ApplianceActandviolationoftheBoilerInspectionAct). `   3.ModelInstruction3.04(BurdenofProof)tellsthejurythatsomethingisprovedonly  ifthejuryfindsitismorelikelytruethannottrue.Thephrase greaterweightoftheevidence  isnotnecessaryhere.ItcanbeincludedinInstruction3.04ifdesiredbythecourt.  & % @--! CommitteeComments  <   SeeIntroductionandCommitteeCommentstothe7.02seriesofdefensetheory 7 '%<instructionsforadiscussionofthegeneralprinciplesunderlyingtheiruse. {   ModelInstruction7.02A,infra,providesageneralformatthatcanbeusedwhenthe v defendant'stheoryisthattheplaintiffhasfailedtoproveanelementofhisorherclaimaslisted \ intheelementsinstruction.Whenthisformatisused,thelanguageintheelementsinstruction B  shouldberepeatedverbatiminthedefensetheoryinstruction.Forexample,ifthedefensetheory (! isthefailuretoprovecausation,theinstructionmightread:"Yourverdictmustbeforthe l " defendantontheplaintiff'sclaimunlessithasbeenprovedthatthedefendant'snegligence R!# resultedinwholeorinpartininjurytotheplaintiff." 8"$   Thedefendantmaywishtospecifyinitsdefensetheoryinstructionmorethanone #3& elementoftheplaintiff'scasethatthedefendantcontendshasnotbeenproved.Ifthedefendant w$' specifiesmorethanoneelementfromtheelementsinstruction,thedefensetheoryinstruction ]%( shouldusethesameconnectingterm( andversus or)asusedintheelementsinstruction.In C&) otherwords,inspecifyingconjunctivesubmissions,thedefensetheoryinstructionuses and )' * betweenelements;inspecifyingdisjunctivesubmissions,ituses or. (!+   Thedefendanthastheoptiontospecifyoneormoreelementsoftheelementsinstruction h) #- initsdefensetheoryinstruction.Theonlylimitationonthedefendant'srighttospecifyasmuch N*#. oraslittleoftheelementsinstructionasdesirediswithrespecttodisjunctivesubmissions.Ifthe 4+$/ defendantelectstospecifyanyelementwhichissubmittedbytheelementsinstructioninthe ,%0 disjunctive,heorshemustspecifyallsuchdisjunctiveelements.Forexample,iftheplaintiff's ^ elementsinstructionsubmitsthatthedefendanteithercommittednegligentact Aornegligent D act B,itwouldbeimpropertogiveadefensetheoryinstructionstatingthattheverdictmustbe * forthedefendantunlessthejurybelievesthatnegligentact Ahasbeenproved.Instead,the   defensetheoryinstructionwouldhavetospecifyallofthenegligentactssubmittedinthe   elementsinstructionconnectedbytheword or.   ~  @  %   7.02BFAILURETOPROVEANYFACT ^ @ ESSENTIALTOTHEPLAINTIFF'SRIGHTTORECOVER   D   Yourverdictmustbefordefendant[(nameofthedefendant)]1[ontheplaintiff's(identify   claimas first second,etc.)claim]2unlessithasbeenproved3that[(specifyanyfactwhich i  theplaintiffmustproveinordertorecover)].4  d  & % @$ NotesonUse       1.Iftherearetwoormoredefendantsinthelawsuit,includethisphraseandidentifythe t  '% defendantagainstwhomtheclaimidentifiedinthisinstructionismade. Z    2.Includethisphraseandidentifytheclaimrepresentedinthisinstructionas first, U   second,etc.,onlyifmorethanoneclaimistobesubmitted.SeeIntroductiontoSection7 ;  (discussionofrelationshipamongF.E.L.A.claimsforgeneralnegligence,violationoftheSafety !  ApplianceActandviolationoftheBoilerInspectionAct). e    3.ModelInstruction3.04(BurdenofProof)tellsthejurythatsomethingisprovedonly ` ifthejuryfindsitismorelikelytruethannottrue.Thephrase greaterweightoftheevidence F isnotnecessaryhere.ItcanbeincludedinInstruction3.04ifdesiredbythecourt. ,   4.Ofcourse,itisanissueofsubstantivelawastowhatfactsareessentialtothe  plaintiff'srighttorecover.SeetheexamplesintheCommitteeCommentsaboveforinstructions k onthedefensetheoriesoffailuretoprovenoticeandfailuretoprovereasonableforeseeabilityof Q harm. 7 & % @--! CommitteeComments     SeeIntroductionandCommitteeCommentstothe7.02seriesofdefensetheory G '%instructionsforadiscussionofthegeneralprinciplesunderlyingtheiruse.Ifthedefendant - wants7.02Aand7.02Binstructionstobegiveninacase,theyshouldbecombinedinasingle   defensetheoryinstructionfollowingthe7.02Bformat. !   Thisdefensetheoryinstructionformatissimilartothe7.02Aformat,butdiffersinthat R!# thedefendantisnotrestrictedtoarepetitionoftheexactlanguageusedintheelements 8"$ instruction.The7.02BformatisintendedbytheCommitteetoaddressthekindofinstruction #% issuesdiscussedinChicago&N.W.Ry.Co.v.Green,164F.2d55,61(8thCir.1947)and $& Chicago,RockIsland&PacificRailroadCo.v.Lint,217F.2d279,28486(8thCir.1954).See $' IntroductionandCommitteeCommentsto7.02seriesofdefensetheoryinstructions. %r(   TheCommitteeanticipatesthatthe7.02Bformatcanbeused,forexample,toinstructon )' * theplaintiff'sburdentoprove noticeand reasonableforeseeabilityofharm.Foradiscussion (!+ oftheseconcepts,seeinfraCommitteeComments,ModelInstruction7.09. (",   Thecloseandinterdependentrelationshipofnoticeandreasonableforeseeabilityofharm N*#. totheultimatequestionofwhethertherailroadexercisedduecareraisestheissuewhetherthe 4+$/ juryshouldbeinstructedtomakeseparatefindingsofnoticeandreasonableforeseeabilityof ,%0 harmintheelementsinstruction.InAtlanticCoastLineR.Co.v.Dixon,189F.2d525,52728 ^ (5thCir.1951),andPattersonv.Norfolk&WesternRailwayCompany,489F.2d303,305(6th D Cir.1973),instructionscallingforsuchseparatefindingswerefoundimproperinthatthey * misrepresentedtheultimatequestionofreasonableorordinarycare.However,inChicago,Rock   Island&PacificRailroadCo.v.Lint,217F.2d279,28486(8thCir.1954),itwashelderrorto   refusethedefendant'snoticeandreasonableforeseeabilityofharminstructionswhich"more  ~ specifically"thanthecourt'sinstructionspresentedthedefendant'stheoryofdefense.Similarly,  d inChicago&N.W.Ry.Co.v.Green,164F.2d55,61(8thCir.1947),itwaserrortorefuseto  J giveaninstructionrequestedbythedefendantondefendant'sdefensetheorythattheplaintiff  0 hadfailedtoprovenotice.Othercasesofinterestare:Dennistonv.BurlingtonNorthern,Inc., t  726F.2d391,39394(8thCir.1984)(noplainerrorininstructingthattheplaintiffwasrequired Z  toprovenotice);andBaynumv.Chesapeake&OhioRailwayCo.,456F.2d658,660(6thCir. @  1972)(verdictfortheplaintiffuponsufficientevidenceofnoticerenderedrefusalofnotice &  instructionharmlesserror).      Bywayofillustration,assumethattheplaintiff'ssubmissionofnegligenceisthatthe e  defendantfailedtoprovidereasonablysafeconditionsforworkinthattherewasoilonthe K  walkway.Assumefurtherthatthedefendant'stheoryofdefenseisthatthedefendantdidnot 1 knowandcouldnothaveknownintheexerciseofordinarycarethattherewasoilonthe  walkway.Thedefensetheoryinstructionforthisdefensemightreadasfollows: Yourverdict  mustbeforthedefendantunlessithasbeenprovedthatthedefendantkneworbytheexerciseof  ordinarycareshouldhaveknownthattherewasoilonthewalkway.Inotherwords,anotice k defensetheoryinstructionshouldspecifythedefect,conditionorothercircumstancesoitwillbe Q clearwhatfactorfactsmustbeprovedinordertoestablishnotice. 7   Wherethedefendantclaimsitisnotnegligentbecauseitdidnothaveareasonable  opportunitytoremoveorrepairadefect,suchasaspill,thejurymaybeinstructedasfollows: v  Yourverdictmustbeforthedefendantunlessithasbeenprovedthatthedefendanthada \ reasonableopportunityto[cleanupthespill]beforetheplaintiffwasinjured. B   Asanexampleofadefensetheoryinstructiononreasonableforeseeabilityofharm,  assumeacasewheretheplaintiffisclaimingoccupationallungdiseasecausedbyexposureto   dieselfumes.Thenegligencesubmissionfromtheelementsinstructionmightread: The !g  defendantfailedtoprovidereasonablysafeconditionsforworkinthattheplaintiffwas "M! repeatedlyexposedtodieselfumes.Thedefensetheoryinstructiononforeseeabilityofharm #3" mightreadasfollows: Yourverdictmustbeforthedefendantunlessithasbeenprovedthat w$# thedefendantkneworbytheexerciseofordinarycareshouldhaveknownthatrepeated ]%$ exposuretodieselfumeswasreasonablylikelytocauseharmtotheplaintiff. C&%   Whilenoticeandforeseeabilityofharmarecommondefensetheoriesthatcanbe '>!' accommodatedbythe7.02Bformat,thisformatisnotlimitedtothoseparticulartheories.This ($"( formatcanbeusedtospecifyanyfactuponwhichtheplaintiffbearstheburdenofproofand h) #) whichfactisessentialtotheplaintiff'srighttorecover.Ofcourse,itisuptothecourtto N*#* determinewhatthose essentialfactsmightbeunderthecaselawandunderthecircumstances 4+$+ oftheparticularcasebeforethecourt. ,%,   The7.02Bformatshouldnotbeusedtospecifyafactuponwhichthedefendantbearsthe ^ burdenofproof.Ifthedefendantbearstheburdenofprooftoestablishthedefensetheory,the D 7.02Cformatshouldbefollowed. *    `     h   %  @ %   7.02CDEFENSETHEORYINSTRUCTIONSAFFIRMATIVEDEFENSES nd<2  ^   Yourverdictmustbefordefendant[(nameofthedefendant)]1[ontheplaintiff's(identify * claimtowhichthisinstructionpertainsas first, second,etc.)2claim]ifallofthefollowing  % elementshavebeenproved3:  ~   [Listinnumberedparagraphseachelementofanyaffirmativedefenseuponwhichthe 5  defendantbearstheburdenofproofandwhich,ifproved,entitlesthedefendanttoaverdict.]  0   & % @$ NotesonUse      1.Iftherearetwoormoredefendantsinthelawsuit,identifythedefendanttowhomthis @  '%5instructionapplies. &    2.Includethisbracketedlanguageandidentifytheclaimtowhichthisinstruction !  pertainsas first, second,etc.,onlyifmorethanoneclaimissubmittedandoneormoreof e  suchclaimsisnotsubjecttotheaffirmativedefense. K    3.ModelInstruction3.04(BurdenofProof)tellsthejurythatsomethingisprovedonly F ifthejuryfindsitismorelikelytruethannottrue.Thephrase greaterweightoftheevidence , isnotnecessaryhere.ItcanbeincludedinInstruction3.04ifdesiredbythecourt. p & % @--! CommitteeComments  k   SeeIntroductionandCommitteeCommentstothe7.02seriesofdefensetheory " '%8instructionsforadiscussionofthegeneralprinciplesunderlyingtheiruse.    The7.02Cformatisonlytobeusedforaffirmativedefenseswherethedefendantbears a theburdenofproof.Forexample,theaffirmativedefensesofreleaseandstatuteoflimitations G sometimesturnonfactissuestoberesolvedbythejury.TheCommitteehasnotundertakento -  preparemodelinstructionsforaffirmativedefenses.Ifaparticularcaserequiresanaffirmative ! defenseinstruction,theelementsoftheaffirmativedefenseshouldbesubmittedinseparate " paragraphsconnectedby"and."Evidentiarydetailshouldbeavoided,buttheultimatefactual  # issuestoberesolvedbythejuryshouldbespecified. !g$   The7.02Cformatshouldnotbeusedinsubmittingthedefenseofcontributory #& negligencewhich,ifproved,onlyreducestheplaintiff'srecovery.Thatdefenseshouldbe $' submittedunderModelInstruction7.03,infra. $(   Assumptionoftheriskisnodefensewhatsoeverbecauseithasbeenabolishedaltogether C&* inF.E.L.A.cases.45U.S.C.54(1994). )' +   Thedefendantmayrequestadefensetheoryinstructionstatingthatiftheplaintiff's ($"- negligencewasthesolecauseofhisorherinjury,heorshemaynotrecoverundertheF.E.L.A. h) #. Foradiscussionoftheauthoritiesonsolecauseinstructions,seeinfraModelInstruction7.01 N*#/ n.9.TheCommitteetakesnopositiononwhetherasolecauseinstructionshouldbegiveninan 4+$0 F.E.L.A.case.  ,%1  @  %   7.03F.E.L.A.CONTRIBUTORYNEGLIGENCE nd9A  ^   IfyoufindinfavoroftheplaintiffunderInstruction_____(insertnumberortitleofthe * plaintiff'selementsinstruction)youmustconsiderwhetherplaintiff[(nameofdecedent)]1was  % alsonegligent.UnderthisInstruction,youmustassessapercentageofthetotalnegligence2to  ~ [plaintiff][(nameofdecedent)][ontheplaintiff's(identifyclaimtowhichthisinstruction 5  pertainsas first, second,etc.)claimagainstdefendant[(nameofthedefendant)]]3ifallof  0  thefollowingelementshavebeenproved4:     First,[plaintiff][(nameofdecedent)](characterizetheallegednegligentconduct,such @  as, failedtokeepacarefullookoutforoncomingtrains),5and ;    Second,[plaintiff][(nameofdecedent)]wastherebynegligent,and6     Third,suchnegligenceof[plaintiff][(nameofdecedent)]resultedinwholeorinpartin K  [(his)(her)]injury.7 F   [Ifanyoftheaboveelementshavenotbeenproved,thenyoumustnotassessa  percentageofnegligenceto[plaintiff][(nameofdecedent)].]8 V  & % @$ NotesonUse  Q   1.Thiscontributorynegligenceinstructionisdesignedforuseincasesinwhichthe  '%_Gemployee'sinjuryresultedindeathaswellasincasesinwhichtheemployee'sinjuriesdidnot  resultindeath.Iftheemployee'sinjuriesresultedindeath,identifythedecedentbyname. v    2.Theterms negligentand negligencemustbedefined.SeeinfraModelInstruction -" 7.09. #   3.Includethisbracketedlanguageandidentifytheclaimtowhichthisinstruction l % pertainsas first, second,etc.,onlyifmorethanoneclaimissubmitted. R!&   Iftherearetwoormoredefendantsinthelawsuit,identifythedefendantagainstwhom "M( theclaimreferredtointhisinstructionisasserted. #3)   4.ModelInstruction3.04(BurdenofProof)tellsthejurythatsomethingisprovedonly $+ ifthejuryfindsitismorelikelytruethannottrue.Thephrase greaterweightoftheevidence %r, isnotnecessaryhere.ItcanbeincludedinInstruction3.04ifdesiredbythecourt. &X -   5.Morethanoneactoromissionallegedtoconstitutecontributorynegligencemaybe (!/ heresubmittedinthesamewaythatalternativesubmissionsaremadeunderModelInstruction ("0 7.01.SeeinfraModelInstruction7.01n.6. )}#1   6.Ifmorethanoneactoromissionisallegedascontributorynegligence,thenParagraph 4+$3 Secondshouldbemodifiedtoreadasfollows: ,%4 8   ` Second,[plaintiff][(nameofdecedent)]inanyoneormoreoftheways ^ describedinParagraphFirstwasnegligent,and....D     7.Asinglestandardofcausationistobeappliedtotheplaintiff'snegligenceclaimand ? therailroad'sclaimofcontributorynegligence.NorfolkSouthernRy.Co.v.Sorrell,549U.S.  % 159(2007). i    8.Thisparagraphisoptional.Ifrequested,thecourtmayaddthisparagraph.  d @--! CommitteeComments       ContributorynegligenceisnobartorecoveryunderF.E.L.A., butthedamagesshallbe t  diminishedbythejuryinproportiontotheamountofnegligenceattributabletosuch Z  employee....45U.S.C.53(1994). @    InaF.E.L.A.casebroughtforinjuryordeathcausedbytherailroad'sviolationofa ;   statuteenactedforthesafetyofemployees,contributorynegligencewillneitherbarthe !  plaintiff'srecoverynorreducehisorherdamages.Id.TheSafetyApplianceAct(formerly45 e  U.S.C.116,recodifiedat49U.S.C.2030120304,21302,21304(1994)),andtheBoiler K  InspectionAct(formerly45U.S.C.2223,recodifiedat49U.S.C.20102,20701(1994)), 1 arestatutesenactedforthesafetyofemployees.Therefore,thisinstructionshouldnotbe  submittedinaclaimbroughtforviolationoftheBoilerInspectionAct(ModelInstruction7.04,  infra)orforviolationoftheSafetyApplianceAct(ModelInstruction7.05,infra).See  IntroductiontoSection7(discussionofrelationshipamongBoilerInspectionAct,Safety k ApplianceActandF.E.L.A.).  Q  @. .  %   7.04F.E.L.A.BOILERINSPECTIONACTVIOLATION fEW  ^   Yourverdictmustbefortheplaintiff[andagainstdefendant(nameofthedefendant)]1 * [ontheplaintiff's(identifyclaimrepresentedinthiselementsinstructionas first, second,  % etc.)claim]2ifallofthefollowingelementshavebeenproved3:  ~   First,plaintiff[(nameofdecedent)]wasanemployeeofdefendant[(nameofthe 5  defendant)]4,5  0    Second,the[locomotive][boiler][tender][(identifypartorappurtenanceoflocomotive,   boilerortenderwhichisthesubjectoftheclaim)]6atissueintheevidencewasnotinproper @  conditionandsafetooperatewithoutunnecessaryperiltolifeorlimbinthat(identifythedefect ;  whichisthesubjectoftheclaim),7and8     Third,thisconditionresultedinwholeorinpart9in[injurytotheplaintiff][deathto K  (nameofdecedent)]. F   Ifanyoftheaboveelementshasnotbeenproved,thenyourverdictmustbefor  defendant[(nameofthedefendant)].10 V   [Yourverdictmustbeforthedefendantifyoufindinfavorofthedefendantunder Q Instruction____(insertnumberortitleofaffirmativedefenseinstruction)].11   @$ NotesonUse  a    1.Iftherearetwoormoredefendantsinthelawsuit,includethisphraseandidentifythe \" defendantagainstwhomtheclaimrepresentedinthiselementsinstructionismade. B#   2.Includethisphraseandidentifytheclaimrepresentedinthiselementsinstructionas %  first, second,etc.,onlyifmorethanoneclaimistobesubmitted.  &   3.ModelInstruction3.04(BurdenofProof)tellsthejurythatsomethingisprovedonly 8"( ifthejuryfindsitismorelikelytruethannottrue.Thephrase greaterweightoftheevidence #) isnotnecessaryhere.ItcanbeincludedinInstruction3.04ifdesiredbythecourt. $*   4.F.E.L.A.providesthattherailroad shallbeliableindamagestoanypersonsuffering ]%, injurywhileheisemployedbysuchcarrier....45U.S.C.51(emphasisadded).Inthe C&- typicalF.E.L.A.case,thereisnodisputeastowhethertheinjuredordeceasedpersonwasan )' . employee,andthislanguageneednotbeincludedexcepttomaketheinstructionmorereadable. (!/ However,whenthereissuchadisputeinthecase,theterm employeemustbedefined.The ("0 definitionmustbecarefullytailoredtothespecificfactualquestionpresented,anditis )}#1 recommendedthatRestatement(Second)ofAgency(1958)beusedasaguideinamanner *c$2 consistentwiththefederalauthorities.SeeKelleyv.SouthernPacificCompany,419U.S.318, +I%3 324(1974)(discussionofRestatement(Second)ofAgency(1958)asauthoritative ^ concerningmeaningof employeeand employedunderF.E.L.A.,andassourceofproper D juryinstruction). *   5.Itmaybearguedtheplaintiffwasnotactingwithinthescopeofhisorherrailroad  % employmentatthetimeoftheincident.Ifthereisaquestionwhethertheemployeewaswithin i  thescopeofemployment,paragraphFirstshouldprovideasfollows: O  8   ` First,[plaintiff][(nameofdecedent)]wasanemployeeofdefendant  J [(nameofthedefendant)]actingwithinthescopeof[(his)(her)]employmentat  0  thetimeof[(his)(her)][injury][death][(describetheincidentallegedtohave t  causedinjuryordeath)],andZ    Ifthisparagraphisincluded,theterm scopeofemploymentmustbedefinedinrelationtothe U  factualissueinthecase.TheRestatement(Second)ofAgency(1958)isrecognizedasa ;  guide.Wilsonv.Chicago,Milwaukee,St.PaulandPac.R.Co.,841F.2d1347,1352(7thCir. !  1988).Inrarecasesitmaybearguedthatthedutiesoftheemployeedidnotaffectinterstate e  commerceandthusarenotcoveredbytheAct.Usuallyiftheemployeewasactingwithinthe K  scopeandcourseofhisorheremploymentfortherailroadhisorherconductwillbesufficiently 1 connectedtointerstatecommercetobeincludedwithintheAct.    6.TheBoilerInspectionActlanguageof49U.S.C.2701,formerly45U.S.C.23, p referstothe locomotiveortenderanditspartsandappurtenances.Thecourtshouldselectthe V termwhichconformstothecase.Thecourtmaychoosetospecificallyidentifythespecificpart < orappurtenanceofthelocomotive,boilerortenderinacaseinwhichmerereferencetothe " locomotive,boilerortenderwillnotadequatelypresentthetheoryofviolation.    7.CounselshoulddraftaconcisestatementoftheBoilerInspectionActviolation a allegedwhichissimpleandfreeofunnecessarylanguage.Exampleswhichmightbesufficient G foraBoilerActviolationare: inthattherewasoilonthelocomotivecatwalk;or inthatthe - ladderonthelocomotivewasbent;or inthatthegrabirononthelocomotivewasloose.    TheSecretaryofTransportationisauthorizedtoestablishstandardsforequipment l   coveredundertheBoilerInspectionActandtheSafetyApplianceAct.Shieldsv.AtlanticCoast R!! LineR.Co.,350U.S.318,32025(1956);Lillyv.GrandTrunkWesternR.Co.,317U.S.481, 8"" 486(1943).RegulationspromulgatedpursuanttothisauthorityarefoundinTitle49oftheCode ## ofFederalRegulationsundertheFederalRailroadAdministration(FRA)regulations.FRA $$ regulations acquire[]theforceoflawandbecome[]anintegralpartoftheAct....Lilly,317 $% U.S.at488.Suchregulationshave thesameforceasthoughprescribedintermsbythestatute, %r& AtchisonT.&S.F.Ry.Co.v.Scarlett,300U.S.471,474(1937),andviolationofsuch &X ' regulations areviolationsofthestatute,givingrisenotonlytodamagesuitsbythoseinjured, '>!( butalsotomoneypenaltiesrecoverablebytheUnitedStates.Uriev.Thompson,337U.S.163, ($") 191(1949)(citationsomitted).Iftheplaintiff'scaseisbasedonaviolationofsucharegulation, h) #* theplaintiffmayrequestthecourttoreplaceParagraphSecondoftheinstructionwitha N*#+ paragraphsubmittingtheregulationviolationtheory.SeeEckertv.Aliquippa&SouthernR. 4+$, Co.,828F.2d183,187(3dCir.1987). ,%-   8.BoththeBoilerInspectionActandtheSafetyApplianceActrequirethatthe ^ equipmentatissuebe inuse_at_Ԁthetimeofthesubjectincident.Thepurposeofthe_ in_Ԁ_use_ D elementisto_ exclude_Ԁthoseinjuriesdirectlyresultingfromtheinspection,repairorservicingof * railroadequipmentlocatedatamaintenance_facility._ԀAngellv.Chesapeake&O.Ry.Co.,618   F.2d260,262(4thCir.1980);Steerv.BurlingtonNorthern,Inc.,720F.2d975,97677(8thCir.   1983).  ~   Whethertheequipmentatissueis_ in_Ԁ_use_Ԁatthetimeofthesubjectincidentistobe 5  decidedbythecourtasaquestionoflawandnotbythejury.Pinkhamv.MaineCent.R.Co.,   874F.2d875,881(1stCir.1989)(citingSteer,720F.2dat977n.4).Becausethe_ in_Ԁ_use_   elementisaquestionoflawforthecourt,thisinstructiondoesnotsubmitthequestiontothe   jury. o    NumerousreportedcasesdiscussthiselementoftheBoilerInspectionActandSafety &  ApplianceAct,andcaseswhichconstruetheterm_ in_Ԁ_use_Ԁunderoneactareauthoritativefor    purposesofconstruingthetermundertheotheract.Holfesterv.LongIslandRailroad   Company,360F.2d369,373(2dCir.1966).Anyattempttohererepresentthecasesonpointis z  beyondthescopeoftheseNotesonUse,andcounselarereferredtotheauthoritiesforfurther ` discussionofthiselement. F   9.Thesamestandardof_ in_Ԁwholeorin_part_Ԁcausationwhichappliestogeneral  F.E.L.A.negligencecasesprosecutedunder45U.S.C.51alsoappliestoBoilerInspectionAct  cases.Greenv.RiverTerminalRy.Co.,763F.2d805,810(6thCir.1985)(citingCarterv. k Atlantic&St.AndrewsBayRailwayCo.,338U.S.430,434(1949)). Q   Thedefendantmayrequestaninstructionstatingthatiftheplaintiff'snegligencewasthe  solecauseofhisorherinjury,heorshemaynotrecoverunderF.E.L.A.NewYorkCentralR.  Co.v.Marcone,281U.S.345,350(1930);Meyersv.UnionPacificR.Co.,738F.2d328,330 v 31(8thCir.1984)(noterrortoinstructjury,_ if_Ԁyoufindthattheplaintiffwasguiltyof \ negligence,andthattheplaintiff'snegligencewasthesolecauseofhisinjury,thenyoumust B returnyourverdictinfavorof_defendant)._ԀSuchadefensemayalsoariseundertheBoiler ( InspectionandSafetyApplianceActs.SeeBeimertv.BurlingtonNorthern,Inc.,726F.2d412, l  414(8thCir.1984). R!    Solecauseinstructionshavesometimesbeencriticizedasunnecessaryandasconfusing. "M" SeeFlaniganv.BurlingtonNorthern,Inc.,632F.2d880,883n.1(8thCir.1980);Almendarezv. #3# Atchison,T.&S.F.Ry.Co.,426F.2d1095,1097(5thCir.1970);Pagev.St.LouisSouthwestern w$$ Ry.Co.,349F.2d820,82627(5thCir.1965).TheCommitteetakesnopositiononwhethera ]%% solecauseinstructionshouldbegiveninanF.E.L.A.case.Ifthecourtdecidestogiveasole C&& causetypeinstruction,thefollowingmaybeappropriate: )' ' 8  Thephrase_ in_Ԁwholeorin_part_Ԁasusedin[thisinstruction][Instruction_____ ($") (statethetitleornumberoftheplaintiff'selementsinstruction)]meansthatthe h) #* railroadisresponsibleif[describetheallegedBoilerInspectionActviolation],if N*#+  any,playedanypart,nomatterhowsmall,incausingtheplaintiff'sinjuries.This, 4+$, ofcourse,meansthattherailroadisnotresponsibleifanyothercause,including ^ theplaintiff'sownnegligence,wassolelyresponsible.*D    8  *Thisinstructionmaybegivenasaparagraphintheplaintiff'selements ? instructionorasaseparateinstruction. %   Rogersv.MissouriPac.R.Co.,352U.S.500,507(1957);Pagev.St.LouisSouthwesternRy.,  ~ 349F.2d820,82627(5thCir.1965).  d   Asisthecasewithanymodelinstruction,ifthecourtdeterminesthatsomeother    instructiononthesubjectisappropriate,suchaninstructionmaybegiven.     10.ThisparagraphshouldnotbeusedifModelInstruction7.02Aor7.02Bisgiven. Z    11.UseModelInstruction7.02C,infra,tosubmitaffirmativedefenses. U  @--! CommitteeComments       TheintroductiontoSection7discussestherelationshipamongtheBoilerInspectionAct e  (formerly45U.S.C.2223,recodifiedat49U.S.C.20102,20701(1994)),theSafety K  ApplianceAct(formerly45U.S.C.116,recodifiedat49U.S.C.2030120304,21302, 1 21304(1994)),andF.E.L.A.,45U.S.C.51,60(1994).    @P P  %   7.05F.E.L.A.SAFETYAPPLIANCEACTVIOLATION o  ^   Yourverdictmustbefortheplaintiff[andagainstdefendant(nameofthedefendant)]1 * [ontheplaintiff's(identifyclaimrepresentedinthiselementsinstructionas_ first,_Ԁ_ second,_  % etc.)claim]2ifallofthefollowingelementshavebeenproved3:  ~   First,plaintiff[(nameofdecedent)]wasanemployeeofdefendant[(nameofthe 5  defendant)]4,5  0    Second,(specifytheallegedSafetyApplianceActviolation),6and7     Third,theconditiondescribedinparagraphSecondresultedinwholeorinpart8in[injury @  totheplaintiff][deathto(nameofdecedent)]. ;    Ifanyoftheaboveelementshasnotbeenproved,thenyourverdictmustbefor   defendant[(nameofthedefendant)].9 K    [Yourverdictmustbeforthedefendantifyoufindinfavorofthedefendantunder F Instruction____(insertnumberortitleofaffirmativedefenseinstruction)].10   @$ NotesonUse  V   1.Iftherearetwoormoredefendantsinthelawsuit,includethisphraseandidentifythe Q defendantagainstwhomtheclaimrepresentedinthiselementsinstructionismade. 7   2.Includethisphraseandidentifytheclaimrepresentedinthiselementsinstructionas  _ first,_Ԁ_ second,_Ԁetc.,onlyifmorethanoneclaimistobesubmitted. v    3.ModelInstruction3.04(BurdenofProof)tellsthejurythatsomethingisprovedonly -" ifthejuryfindsitismorelikelytruethannottrue.Thephrase greaterweightoftheevidence # isnotnecessaryhere.ItcanbeincludedinInstruction3.04ifdesiredbythecourt. $   4.TheF.E.L.A.providesthattherailroad_ shall_Ԁbeliableindamagestoanyperson R!& sufferinginjurywhileheisemployedbysuchcarrier..._._Ԁ45U.S.C.51(1939)(emphasis 8"' added).InthetypicalF.E.L.A.case,thereisnodisputeastowhethertheinjuredordeceased #( personwasanemployee,andthislanguageneednotbeincludedexcepttomaketheinstruction $) morereadable.However,whenthereissuchadisputeinthecase,theterm_ employee_Ԁmustbe $* defined.Thedefinitionmustbecarefullytailoredtothespecificfactualquestionpresented,and %r+ itisrecommendedthatRestatement(Second)ofAgency(1958)beusedasaguideina &X , mannerconsistentwiththefederalauthorities.SeeKelleyv.SouthernPacificCompany,419 '>!- U.S.318,324(1974)(discussionofRestatement(Second)ofAgency(1958)asauthoritative ($". concerningmeaningof_ employee_Ԁand_ employed_ԀundertheF.E.L.A.andassourceofproper h) #/  juryinstruction). N*#0   5.Itmaybearguedtheplaintiffwasnotactingwithinthescopeofhisorherrailroad ^  employmentatthetimeoftheincident.Ifthereisaquestionwhethertheemployeewaswithin D thescopeofemployment,paragraphFirstshouldprovideasfollows: * 8   ` First,[plaintiff][(nameofdecedent)]wasanemployeeofdefendant  % [(nameofthedefendant)]actingwithinthescopeof[(his)(her)]employmentat i  thetimeof[(his)(her)][injury][death][(describetheincidentallegedtohave O  causedinjuryordeath)],and5    Ifthisparagraphisincluded,theterm_ scope_Ԁof_employment_Ԁmustbedefinedinrelationtothe  0  factualissueinthecase.TheRestatement(Second)ofAgency(1958)isrecognizedasa t  guide.Wilsonv.Chicago,Milwaukee,St.PaulandPac.R.Co.,841F.2d1347,1352(7thCir. Z  1988).Inrarecasesitmaybearguedthatthedutiesoftheemployeedidnotaffectinterstate @  commerceandthusarenotcoveredbytheAct.Usuallyiftheemployeewasactingwithinthe &  scopeandcourseofhisorheremploymentfortherailroadhisorherconductwillbesufficiently    connectedtointerstatecommercetobeincludedwithintheAct.     6.CounselshoulddraftaconcisestatementoftheSafetyApplianceActviolation K  allegedwhichissimpleandfreeofunnecessarylanguage.Anexampleofaconcisestatement 1 whichmightbesufficientinacasebroughtforviolationof49U.S.C.20302(a)(2),formerly45  U.S.C.4(1988),isasfollows:_ Third,_Ԁthegrabironatissueintheevidencewasnotsecure,  and..._._    TheSecretaryofTransportationisauthorizedtoestablishstandardsforequipment < coveredundertheBoilerInspectionActandtheSafetyApplianceAct.Shieldsv.AtlanticCoast " LineR.Co.,350U.S.318,32025(1956);Lillyv.GrandTrunkWesternR.Co.,317U.S.481,  486(1943).RegulationspromulgatedpursuanttothisauthorityarefoundinTitle49oftheCode  ofFederalRegulationsundertheFederalRailroadAdministration(FRA)regulations.FRA v regulations_ acquire_ԀtheforceoflawandbecomeanintegralpartoftheAct..._._ԀLilly,317 \ U.S.at488.Suchregulationshave_ the_Ԁsameforceasthoughprescribedintermsofthe_statute,_ B Atchison,T.&S.F.Ry.Co.v.Scarlett,300U.S.471,474(1937),andviolationofsuch ( regulations_ are_Ԁviolationsofthestatute,givingrisenotonlytodamagesuitsbythoseinjured, l  butalsotomoneypenaltiesrecoverablebytheUnited_States._ԀUriev.Thompson,337U.S.163, R!  191(1949)(citationsomitted).Iftheplaintiff'scaseisbasedonaviolationofsucharegulation, 8"! theplaintiffmayrequestthecourttoreplaceParagraphSecondoftheinstructionwitha #" paragraphsubmittingtheregulationviolationtheory.SeeEckertv.Aliquippa&SouthernR. $# Co.,828F.2d183,187(3dCir.1987). $$   7.BoththeBoilerInspectionActandtheSafetyApplianceActrequirethatthe C&& equipmentatissuebe_ in_Ԁ_use_Ԁatthetimeofthesubjectincident.Thepurposeofthe_ in_Ԁ_use_ )' ' elementisto_ exclude_Ԁthoseinjuriesdirectlyresultingfromtheinspection,repairorservicingof (!( railroadequipmentlocatedatamaintenance_facility._ԀAngellv.Chesapeake&O.Ry.Co.,618 (") F.2d260,262(4thCir.1980);Steerv.BurlingtonNorthern,Inc.,720F.2d975,97677(8thCir. )}#*  1983). *c$+   Whethertheequipmentatissueis_ in_Ԁ_use_Ԁatthetimeofthesubjectincidentistobe ^  decidedbythecourtasaquestionoflawandnotbythejury.Pinkhamv.MaineCent.R.Co., D 874F.2d875,881(1stCir.1989)(citingSteer,720F.2dat977).Becausethe_ in_Ԁ_use_Ԁelement * isaquestionoflawforthecourt,thisinstructiondoesnotsubmitthequestiontothejury.     NumerousreportedcasesdiscussthiselementoftheBoilerInspectionActandSafety i  ApplianceAct,andcaseswhichconstruetheterm_ in_Ԁ_use_Ԁunderoneactareauthoritativefor O  purposesofconstruingthetermundertheotheract.Holfesterv.LongIslandRailroadCo.,360 5  F.2d369,373(2dCir.1966).Anyattempttohererepresentthecasesonpointisbeyondthe   scopeoftheseNotesonUse,andcounselarereferredtotheauthoritiesforfurtherdiscussionof   thiselement.     8.Thestandardof_ in_Ԁwholeorin_part_ԀcausationwhichappliestogeneralF.E.L.A. @  negligencecasesisthestandardofcausationwhichappliestoF.E.L.A.casespremisedupon &  violationoftheSafetyApplianceAct._ Once_Ԁthisviolationisestablished,onlycausalrelationis    anissue.AndCongresshasdirectedliabilityiftheinjuryresulted'inwholeorinpart'from   defendant'snegligenceoritsviolationoftheSafetyAppliance_Act._ԀCarterv.Atlanta&St. z  AndrewsBayRy.Co.,338U.S.430,43435(1949). `   Thedefendantmayrequestaninstructionstatingthatiftheplaintiff'snegligencewasthe  solecauseofhisorherinjury,heorshemaynotrecoverundertheF.E.L.A.NewYorkCentral  R.Co.v.Marcone,281U.S.345,350(1930);Meyersv.UnionPacificR.R.Co.,738F.2d328,  33031(8thCir.1984)(noterrortoinstructjury,_ if_Ԁyoufindthattheplaintiffwasguiltyof k negligence,andthattheplaintiff'snegligencewasthesolecauseofhisinjury,thenyoumust Q returnyourverdictinfavorof_defendant)._ԀSuchadefensemayalsoariseundertheBoiler 7 InspectionandSafetyApplianceActs.SeeBeimertv.BurlingtonNorthern,Inc.,726F.2d412, { 414(8thCir.1984). a   Solecauseinstructionshavesometimesbeencriticizedasunnecessaryandasconfusing. \ SeeFlaniganv.BurlingtonNorthern,Inc.,632F.2d880,88384n.1(8thCir.1980);Almendarez B v.Atchison,T.&S.F.Ry.Co.,426F.2d1095,1097(5thCir.1970);Pagev.St.Louis ( SouthwesternRy.Co.,349F.2d820,82627(5thCir.1965).TheCommitteetakesnoposition l  onwhetherasolecauseinstructionshouldbegiveninanF.E.L.A.case.Ifthecourtdecidesto R!  giveasolecausetypeinstruction,thefollowingmaybeappropriate: 8"! 8  Thephrase_ in_Ԁwholeorin_part_Ԁasusedin[thisinstruction][Instruction___ #3# (statethetitleornumberoftheplaintiff'selementsinstruction)]meansthatthe w$$ railroadisresponsibleif[describetheallegedSafetyApplianceActviolation],if ]%% any,playedanypart,nomatterhowsmall,incausingtheplaintiff'sinjuries.This, C&& ofcourse,meansthattherailroadisnotresponsibleifanyothercause,including )' ' theplaintiff'sownnegligence,wassolelyresponsible.*(!(   8  *Thisinstructionmaybegivenasaparagraphintheplaintiff'selements h) #*  instructionorasaseparateinstruction.N*#+   Rogersv.MissouriPacificRailroadCo.,352U.S.500,507(1957);Pagev.St.Louis ^  SouthwesternRy.,349F.2d820,82627(5thCir.1965). D   Asisthecasewithanymodelinstruction,ifthecourtdeterminesthatsomeother ? instructiononthesubjectisappropriate,suchaninstructionmaybegiven.  %   9.ThisparagraphshouldnotbeusedifModelInstruction7.02Aor7.02Bisgiven.  ~   10.UseModelInstruction7.02C,infra,tosubmitaffirmativedefenses. 5  & % @--! CommitteeComments   0    TheIntroductiontoSection7discussestherelationshipamongtheBoilerInspectionAct   (formerly45U.S.C.2223,recodified49U.S.C.20102,20701),theSafe'% tyApplianceAct o  (formerly45U.S.C.116,recodified49U.S.C.2030120304,21302,21304),andthe U  F.E.L.A.,45U.S.C.51,etseq.  ;   @s s  %   7.06AF.E.L.A.DAMAGESINJURYTOEMPLOYEE L  ^   Ifyoufindinfavoroftheplaintiff,thenyoumustawardtheplaintiffsuchsumasyou * findwillfairlyandjustlycompensatetheplaintiffforanydamagesyoufindtheplaintiff  % sustained[andisreasonablycertaintosustaininthefuture]1asadirectresultoftheoccurrence  ~ mentionedintheevidence.2[Youshouldconsiderthefollowingelementsofdamages:3 5    1.0 ` Thephysicalpainand(mental)(emotional)sufferingtheplaintiffhasexperienced  0  (andisreasonablycertaintoexperienceinthefuture);thenatureandextentofthe t  injury,whethertheinjuryistemporaryorpermanent(andwhetheranyresulting Z  disabilityispartialortotal),(includinganyaggravationofapreexisting @  condition);& ` (#` (#   2.0 ` Thereasonableexpenseofmedicalcareandsuppliesreasonablyneededbyand !  actuallyprovidedtotheplaintifftodate(andthepresentvalueofreasonably e  necessarymedicalcareandsuppliesreasonablycertaintobereceivedinthe K  future);1` (#` (#   3.0 ` Theearningstheplaintiffhaslosttodate(andthepresentvalueofearningsthe , plaintiffisreasonablycertaintoloseinthefuture);4p` (#` (#   4.0 ` Thereasonablevalueofhouseholdserviceswhichtheplaintiffhasbeenunableto k performfor[(himself)(herself)]todate(andthepresentvalueofhousehold Q servicestheplaintiffisreasonablycertaintobeunabletoperformfor[(himself) 7 (herself)]inthefuture).]5,6{` (#` (#   [Remember,throughoutyourdeliberationsyoumustnotengageinanyspeculation, v guess,orconjectureandyoumustnotawardanydamagesbywayofpunishmentorthrough - sympathy.]7[Youmaynotincludeinyourawardanysumforcourtcostsorattorneys'fees.]8 (!   [IfyouassessapercentageofnegligencetotheplaintiffbyreasonofInstruction___  # (statethetitleornumberofthecontributorynegligenceinstruction),9donotdiminishthetotal 8"% amountofdamagesbythepercentageofnegligenceyouassesstotheplaintiff.Thecourtwilldo #3' this.]10 $)  @$ NotesonUse  C&+   1.Includethislanguageiftheevidencesupportsasubmissionofanyitemoffuture '>!- damage. ($".   2.Thelanguage_ as_Ԁadirectresultoftheoccurrencementionedinthe_evidence_Ԁshould )}#0 bedeletedandreplacedwheneverthereisevidencetendingtoprovethattheemployeesuffered *c$1 thesubjectinjuriesinanoccurrenceotherthantheoneuponwhichtherailroad'sliabilityis +I%2 premised.Insuchcases,thelanguage_ as_Ԁaresultoftheoccurrencementionedinthe_evidence_ ^ shouldbereplacedwithaconcisedescriptionoftheoccurrenceuponwhichtherailroad's D liabilityispremised.Anexampleofsuchacaseisoneinwhichtheplaintiffallegesthathisor * herinjuriesweresufferedinafallattheworkplace,andtherailroadclaimstheinjurieswere   sufferedinacaraccidentwhichwasnotjobrelated.Thefollowingwouldbeappropriate   languagetodescribetheoccurrenceuponwhichliabilityispremised:_ as_Ԁadirectresultofthe  ~ fallon(thedateofthe_fall)._  d   3.Thislistofdamagesisoptionalandisintendedtoincludethoseitemsofdamagefor   whichrecoveryiscommonlysoughtintheordinaryF.E.L.A.case.Thislistisnotintendedto   excludeanyitemofdamageswhichissupportedinevidenceandtheauthorities.Ifthecourt   electstolistitemsofdamageinthedamagesinstruction,theremust,ofcourse,beevidenceto o  supporteachitemlisted. U    4.Fortherelationshipbetweenlostfutureearningsandlostearningcapacity,see    Gorniackv.NationalR.PassengerCorp.,889F.2d481,48384(3dCir.1989);DeChicov.   MetroNorthCommuterRR,758F.2d856,861(2dCir.1985);Wilesv.NewYork,Chicago&St. z  LouisRailroadCo.,283F.2d328,33132(3dCir.1960);Downiev.UnitedStatesLinesCo., ` 359F.2d344,347(3dCir.1966)(ifpermanentinjuriesresultinimpairmentofearningcapacity, F theplaintiffisentitledtoreimbursementforsuchimpairmentincluding,butnotlimitedto, , probablelossoffutureearnings).Ifthecourtdeterminesthatthecaseisoneinwhichthejury p shouldbeinstructedonthedistinctionbetweenlossoffutureearningsandlossofearning V capacity,thismodelinstructionmaybemodifiedaccordingly.Otherwise,suchissuecanbeleft < toargument.Situationsinwhichthisdistinctionarisesmayberare. "   5.Thereasonablevalueofhouseholdserviceswhichtheinjuredemployeeisunableto { performforhimselforherselfisacompensableitemofpecuniarydamages.SeeCruzv.Hendy a Intern.Co.,638F.2d719,723(5thCir.1981)(casedecidedundertheJonesAct,46U.S.C. G 688(1982),whichspecificallyincorporatestheF.E.L.A.andwhereitwasstatedthatthe - plaintiffmayrecover_ the_Ԁcostofemployingsomeoneelsetoperformthosedomesticservices  thathewouldotherwisehavebeenabletorenderbutisnowincapableof_doing.);_Ԁcf.Hysellv.  IowaPublicServiceCo.,559F.2d468,475(8thCir.1977).     6.Iftheevidencesupportsachargethattheplaintiffhasfailedtomitigatehisorher 8"! damages,thefollowingparagraphshouldbeincludedafterthelastlisteditemofdamage,orafter #" thegeneraldamageinstructionparagraphifthecourtchoosesnottolistitemsofdamage: $# 0  Ifyoufindthatthedefendanthasprovedbythattheplaintiffhasfailedtotakereasonable ]%% stepstominimize[(his)(her)]damages,thenyourawardmustnotincludeanysumfor C&& anyamountofdamagewhichyoufindplaintiffmightreasonablyhaveavoidedbytaking )' ' suchsteps.(!((#(# InKauzlarichv.Atchison,Topeka&SantaFeRy.Co.,910S.W.2d254(Mo.banc1995),itwas h) #* heldtobereversibleerrortorefusetogivetherailroad'sproposedmitigationinstructionthat N*#+ _ closely_Ԁ_follow[ed]_Ԁtheaboveinstruction.Id.at256.Thecourtheldthatasamatteroffederal 4+$, substantivelaw,therailroadwasentitledtoamitigationinstructionwhentherewasevidenceto ,%- supportit.Id.at258.Theburdenofpleadingandprovingfailuretomitigateisonthe ^ defendant.Sayrev.MusiclandGroup,Inc.,850F.2d350,35556(8thCir.1988);Modern D Leasingv.FalconMfg.ofCalifornia,888F.2d59,62(8thCir.1989). *   7./8.Theseinstructionsmayalsobeadded.  %   9.SeeinfraModelInstruction7.03.Notethatcontributorynegligencemaynotbe  ~ submittedforclaimsallegingviolationoftheBoilerInspectionActorSafetyApplianceAct.  d   10.IfModelInstruction7.08,infra,FormofVerdict,isused,thenthisparagraphmust    begivenbecausecontributorynegligenceissubmitted.IfthealternativeFormofVerdictsetout   inCommitteeCommentsto7.08isused,thisparagraphshouldnotbeused.   &   @--! CommitteeComments  @    ThisInstructionshouldbeusedtosubmitdamagesissuesincasesinwhichthe ;  employee'sinjurieswerenotfatal.ModelInstruction7.06B,infra,shouldbeusedincasesin !  ' @whichtheemployee'sinjurieswerefatal. e    Thefinalparagraphofthisinstructiontellsthejurythatthecourtwilldiminishthetotal ` amountofdamagesinproportiontotheamountofcontributorynegligencefound.This F instructionisconsistentwiththeFormofVerdict7.08whichrequiresthejurytoassessthe , plaintiff'stotaldamagesandtheplaintiff'spercentageofcontributorynegligence.Ifcontributory p negligenceisnotsubmitted,thefinalparagraphof7.06Ashouldbeeliminated.Also,itshould V beeliminatedforclaimssubmittedundertheBoilerInspectionActandtheSafetyAppliance < Act.  "  @  %   7.06BF.E.L.A.DAMAGESDEATHOFEMPLOYEE e=  ^   Ifyoufindinfavoroftheplaintiff,thenyoumustawardtheplaintiffsuchsumasyou * findwillfairlyandjustlycompensate[hereidentifythebeneficiaries]1for[(his)(her)(their)]  % damageswhichcanbemeasuredinmoneywhichyoufind[(he)(she)(they)]sustainedasa  ~ directresultofthedeathof(nameofdecedent).2[Youshouldconsiderthefollowingelements 5  ofdamages:3  0   0  1.0` (#(#Thereasonablevalueofanymoney,goodsandservicesthat(nameofdecedent)   wouldhaveprovided(nameofbeneficiaries)had(nameofdecedent)notdiedon o  (dateofdeath).[Thesedamagesincludethemonetaryvalueof(nameofchild U  beneficiaries)'slossofanycare,attention,instruction,training,adviceand ;  guidancefrom(nameofdecedent).]4! ` (#` (#   2.0 ` Anyconsciouspainandsufferingyoufindfromtheevidencethat(nameof z  decedent)experiencedasaresultof[(his)(her)]injuries.5`` (#` (#   3.0 ` Thereasonableexpenseofmedicalcareandsuppliesreasonablyneededbyand  actuallyprovidedto(nameofdecedent).]5` (#` (#    Yourawardmustnotincludeanysumforgrieforbereavementorthelossofsocietyor V companionship.6 Q   Anyawardyoumakeforthevalueofanymoneyandserviceswhichyoufindfromthe  evidencethat(nameofdecedent)wouldhaveprovided(nameofeachbeneficiary)inthefuture a shouldbereducedtopresentvalue.Anyawardyoumakeforthevalueofanymoneyand \  servicesyoufindfromtheevidencethat(nameofdecedent)wouldhaveprovided(nameof " beneficiary)betweenthedateof[(his)(her)]deathon(dateofdeath)andthepresentshouldnot l $ bereducedtopresentvalue.7 !g&   [Remember,throughoutyourdeliberationsyoumustnotengageinanyspeculation, #( guess,orconjectureandyoumustnotawardanydamagesbywayofpunishmentorthrough w$* sympathy.]8[Youmaynotincludeinyourawardanysumforcourtcostsorattorneys'fees.]9 %r,   [Ifyouassessapercentageofnegligenceto(nameofdecedent)byreasonofInstruction )' . ____(statethenumberofthecontributorynegligenceinstruction),10donotdiminishthetotal ($"0 amountofdamagesbythepercentageofnegligenceyouassessto(nameofdecedent).Thecourt )}#2 willdothis.]11 4+$4  & ? @$ NotesonUse  ^   1.'?^AdeathactionundertheF.E.L.A.isbroughtbyapersonalrepresentative,asthe Y plaintiff,forthebenefitofspecificbeneficiaries.Thepersonalrepresentativebringstheaction ?  forthebenefitofthesurvivingwidoworhusbandandchildrenofsuchemployee;and,ifnone,  % thenofsuchemployee'sparents;and,ifnone,thenofthenextofkindependentuponsuch i  employee,....45U.S.C.51(1939). O    2.SeeKevinF.OMalley,etal.,3FEDERALJURYPRACTICEANDINSTRUCTIONS:Civil  J 128.30(5th_ed._Ԁ2000).DamagesinanF.E.L.A.deathaction aresuchasflowfromthe  0  deprivationofthepecuniarybenefitswhichthebeneficiariesmighthavereasonablyreceivedif t  thedeceasedhadnotdiedfromhisinjuries.MichiganCentralR.Co.v.Vreeland,227U.S.59, Z  70(1913). Nohardandfastrulebywhichpecuniarydamagesmayinallcasesbemeasuredis @  possible....Theruleforthemeasurementofdamagesmustdifferaccordingtotherelation &  betweenthepartiesplaintiffandthedecedent,....Id.,227U.S.at72;cf.Norfolk&Western    R.Co.v.Holbrook,235U.S.625,629(1915).     3.Thislistofdamagesisoptionalandisintendedtoincludethoseitemsofdamagefor K  whichrecoveryiscommonlysoughtintheordinaryF.E.L.A.case.Thislistisnotintendedto 1 excludeanyitemofdamageswhichissupportedinevidenceandtheauthorities.Ifthecourt  electstolistitemsofdamageinthedamagesinstruction,theremust,ofcourse,beevidenceto  supporteachitemlisted.    4.InanF.E.L.A.deathcase,recoveryislimitedtopecuniarylosses.Theitemsspecified < inthebracketedsentencehavebeendeemedpecuniarylossesinthecaseofachildbeneficiary. " Therecoverymaybedifferentinthecaseofaspouse,parentoranadultchild.Michigan  CentralR.Co.v.Vreeland,227U.S.59,70(1913);Norfolk&WesternR.Co.v.Holbrook,235  U.S.625,629(1915);Kozarv.ChesapeakeandOhioRailwayCo.,449F.2d1238,1243(6th v Cir.1971). \   5.Theitemsofdamagesetforthinparagraphs2and3arerecoverablebythepersonal  representativeonbehalfofthespouse,childrenorparentsofthedecedent,ifsupportedbythe  evidence.Iftheclaimisbroughtbythepersonalrepresentativeonbehalfofnextofkinother    thanthespouse,childrenorparents,thendependencyupondecedentmustbeshown,andthe !g! instructionswillrequiremodificationtosubmitthatissuetothejury.Theelementsinstruction "M" mightbemodifiedtosubmitthedependencyissue.45U.S.C.59(1910);Auldv.Terminal #3# R.R.Assoc.ofSt.Louis,463S.W.2d297(Mo.1970);Jensenv.Elgin,Joliet&EasternRy.Co., w$$ 24Ill.2d383,182N.E.2d211(1962). ]%%   FuneralexpensesmaynotbeincludedindamagesawardedinF.E.L.A.actionsunder &X ' eithera45U.S.C.51deathactionora45U.S.C.59survivalaction.Philadelphia&R.R.v. '>!( Marland,239Fed.1,11(3dCir.1917);DuBosev.KansasCitySouthernRy.Co.,729F.2d ($") 1026,1033(5thCir.1984);Heffnerv.PennsylvaniaR.R.Co.,81F.2d28,31(2dCir.1936); h) #* Frabuttv.NewYorkC.&St.L.R.R.,84F.Supp.460,467(W.D.Pa.1949). N*#+   6.MichiganCentralR.v.Vreeland,227U.S.59,70(1913). +I%-   7.FuturepecuniarybenefitsinanF.E.L.A.deathcaseshouldbeawardedatpresent ^ value.Chesapeake&O.R.Co.v.Kelly,241U.S.485,489-90(1916);cf.St.LouisSouthwestern D Ry.Co.v.Dickerson,470U.S.409(1985). *   8./9.Theseinstructionsmayalsobeadded.  %   10.ModelInstruction7.03,infra,submitstheissueofcontributorynegligence.  ~   11.IfModelInstruction7.08,infra,FormofVerdict,isused,thenthisparagraphmust 5  begivenwhencontributorynegligenceissubmitted.IfthealternativeFormofVerdictsetoutin    CommitteeCommentsto7.08isused,thisparagraphshouldnotbeused.   &   @--! CommitteeComments  Z    Thisinstructionshouldbeusedtosubmitdamagesincasesinwhichtheemployee's U  injurieswerefatal.ModelInstruction7.06A,infra,shouldbeusedincasesinwhichthe ;  ' Zemployee'sinjurieswerenotfatal. !    Thefinalparagraphofthisinstructiontellsthejurythatthecourtwilldiminishthetotal z  amountofdamagesinproportiontotheamountofcontributorynegligencefound.This ` instructionisconsistentwithFormofVerdict7.08whichrequiresthejurytoassessthe F plaintiff'stotaldamagesanddecedent'spercentageofcontributorynegligence.Ifcontributory , negligenceisnotsubmittedthefinalparagraphof7.06Bshouldbeeliminated.Also,itshouldbe p eliminatedforclaimssubmittedundertheBoilerInspectionActandtheSafetyApplianceAct.  V  @99 %   7.06CF.E.L.A.DAMAGESPRESENTVALUEOFFUTURELOSS sn  ^   \XXtIfyoufindthattheplaintiffwillsustain(specifydamagessubjecttopresentvalue * reduction,suchas, lostfutureearningsor futuremedicalexpenses),thenyoumust  C reducethosefuturedamagestotheirpresentvalue.     Thepresentvalueoffuturedamagesistheamountofmoneythatwillfully  1 compensatetheplaintiffforfuturedamages,assumingthatamountisinvestednowand   willearnareasonablyriskfreerateofinterestforthetimethatwillpassuntilthefuture }  damagesoccur.     Youmustnotreducetopresentvalueanynoneconomicdamagesyoufindthat k  theplaintiffisreasonablycertaintosustaininthefuture,suchasforpainandsuffering,   ormentalanguish.1 Y @$ NotesonUse  r   1.Cranev.CrestTankers,Inc.,47F.3d292,295n.5(8thCir.1995). l &  @! CommitteeComments  f   InanF.E.L.A.case anutterfailuretoinstructthejurythatpresentvalueisthe ` proper'wmeasureofadamageawardiserror.St.LouisSouthwesternRy.Co.v. Z Dickerson,470U.S.409,412(1985);MonessenSouthwesternRy.Co.v.Morgan,486 T U.S.330,339-40(1988).Ifrequested,suchaninstructionmustbegiven.However, no N singlemethodfordeterminingpresentvalueismandatedbyfederallaw.Dickerson, H 470U.S.at412.SeealsoBeanlandv.Chicago,RockIsland&PacificRailroad,480 B F.2d109,114-15(8thCir.1973);KevinF._OMalley_,etal.,3FEDERALJURYPRACTICE < ANDINSTRUCTIONS:Civil128.20(5thed.2000).  6    Onlyfutureeconomicdamagesaretobereducedtopresentvalue.Pasteconomic !0! damagesandfuturenoneconomicdamagesarenottobereducedtopresentvalue.See "*" Chesapeake&OhioR.Co.v.Kelly,241U.S.485,489(1916). #$#   InFlaniganv.BurlingtonNorthern,Inc.,632F.2d880,885(8thCir.1980),the |$$ courtstatedthatthejuryshouldnotbeinstructedtoreducedamagesforfuturepainand v%% sufferingtopresentvalue. p& &   ThisInstructioncontemplatesthatthecourtwillallowevidenceandjuryargument j' !' aboutthepropermethodforcalculatingpresentvalue.Ifadditionalinstructiononthe d("( definitionofpresentvalueorfactorstobeconsideredisdeemedappropriate,see,e.g.,5th ^)#) Cir.Civ.JuryInstr.15.3C(2006);andArkansasModelJuryInstructions-AMICivil3d, X*#* AMI2219(1989).#XtX\# R+$+   L,%, @>> %   7.06DF.E.L.A.DAMAGESINCOMETAXEFFECTSOFAWARD 4*$  ^   Theplaintiffwillnotberequiredtopayanyfederalorstateincometaxesonanyamount * thatyouaward.  %   [Whencalculatinglostearnings,ifany,youshoulduseafter-taxearnings.]1  ~  & % @$ NotesonUse  5    1.Thissentenceshouldbegivenifthereisevidenceofbothgrossandnetearningsand  0  there'%5 %isanydangerthatthejurymaybeconfusedastothepropermeasureofdamages. t  & % @--! CommitteeComments  o    Ifrequested,thejurymustbeinstructedthattheverdictwillnotbesubjecttoincome &  '%!'taxes.Norfolk&WesternRy.Co.v.Liepelt,444U.S.490,498(1980);Ganderv.FMCCorp.,    892F.2d1373,1381(8thCir.1990);Paquettev.Atlanska-Plovidba,701F.2d746,748(8thCir.   1983).Furthermore,theSupremeCourtinNorfolk&WesternRy.Co.v.Liepelt,,statedthatthe z  juryshouldbaseitsawardonthe_ after-tax_Ԁvalueoflostearningsindetermininglostearnings. ` TheCourtstated: F 0  Theamountofmoneythatawageearnerisabletocontributetothesupportofhisfamily  isunquestionablyaffectedbytheamountofthetaxhemustpaytotheFederal  Government.Itishisafter-taxincome,ratherthanhisgrossincomebeforetaxes,that k providestheonlyrealisticmeasureofabilitytosupporthisfamily.Q(#(# 444U.S.at493.    @ %   7.08FORMOFVERDICT-CONTRIBUTORYNEGLIGENCESUBMITTED 4M,  ^ @&VERDICT1 *  Note :0  0` (#(#Completethisformbywritinginthenamerequiredbyyourverdict. ` (#` (#   Ontheclaim2ofplaintiff[(nameofplaintiff)]againstdefendant[(nameofthe  d defendant)],we,thejuryfindinfavorof:  J _   `     h   _@ __________________________________________________________________ t  @^^Plaintiff[(nameofplaintiff)]orDefendant[(nameofthedefendant)] Z   Note: 0  0` (#(#Completethenextparagraphonlyiftheabovefindingisinfavoroftheplaintiff.& ` (#` (#   We,thejury,assessthetotaldamagesofplaintiff[(nameofplaintiff)]at$__________.   DONOTREDUCETHISAMOUNTBYTHEPERCENTAGEOFNEGLIGENCE,IFANY, ` YOUFINDINTHENEXTQUESTION. F  Note: 0  0` (#(#Ifyoudonotassessapercentageofnegligenceto[plaintiff][(nameofdecedent)] p underInstruction_____(statethenumberortitleofthecontributorynegligence V instruction),thenwrite_ 0"_Ԁ(zero)intheblankinthefollowingparagraph.Ifyou < doassessapercentageofnegligenceto[plaintiff][(nameofdecedent)]byreason " ofInstruction_____(statethenumberortitleofcontributorynegligence  instruction),thenwritethepercentageofnegligenceintheblankinthefollowing  paragraph.Thecourtwillthenreducethetotaldamagesyouassessabovebythe v percentageofnegligenceyouassessto[plaintiff][(nameofdecedent)].\` (#` (#   We,thejury,find[plaintiff][(nameofdecedent)]tobe_____%negligent. (  &  @$ NotesonUse  R!   1.Whenmorethanoneclaimissubmitted,ajurydecisionisrequiredoneachclaim. "M  'R!65  Althoughtheemployeemaybringclaimsfornegligenceaswellasclaimsforviolationof $" theSafetyApplianceActorBoilerInspectionActinthesamecase,theemployeeisentitledto $# onlyonerecoveryforhisorherdamages. %r$   2.Ifmorethanoneclaimissubmittedinthesamelawsuit,theclaimsshouldbe )' &  separatelyidentifiedintheverdictform.SeeinfraModelInstruction4.60. (!' &    @--! CommitteeComments  ^   ThisformofverdictcanbeusedinF.E.L.A.negligencecaseswhencontributory Y negligenceissubmitted.InF.E.L.A.caseswherecontributorynegligenceisnotsubmittedand ? in' ^8BoilerInspectionActandSafetyApplianceActcasesuseFormofVerdict7.08A.  %   Incasesinwhichtheissueofcontributorynegligencehasbeensubmittedtothejury,and  ~ thejuryhasbeeninstructedtomakefindingsontheissuesofcontributorynegligenceand  d `damages,thereisaquestionwhetherthejuryorthecourtshouldperformthecomputations  J whichreducethetotaldamagesbythepercentageofcontributorynegligencefound.Theplain  0  languageof45U.S.C.53(1908)isthat thedamagesshallbediminishedbythejury.... t  (Emphasisadded.)ThisCommitteeisnotawareofanycasespecificallyprohibitingaformof Z  verdictwhichallowsthejurytodeterminethepercentageoftheplaintiff'snegligenceand @  permitsthecourttoperformthemathematicalcalculation.StatejurisdictionssuchasArkansas &  andMissouri,andsomefederalcourts,instructthejurytoreducethetotaldamageawardbythe    percentageofcontributorynegligencebeforerenderingageneralverdictforthereducedamount   oftotaldamages.Wilsonv.BurlingtonNorthern,Inc.,670F.2d780,782-83n.1(8thCir.1982) z  (juryinstructedtoperformcontributorynegligencereductioncomputationandtoreturngeneral ` verdictfordamageawardinreducedamount);noteKevinF.OMalley,etal.,3FEDERALJURY F PRACTICEANDINSTRUCTIONS:Civil106.12,106.13,106.14(5thed.2000). ,   Anothermeanstothesameresultisforthejurytoseparatelysetforththepercentageof  contributorynegligenceandthetotalamountofdamageswithoutreductionforcontributory k negligence.Withthisinformationthecourtwillperformthecontributorynegligencedamage Q reductioncalculationinarrivingatitsjudgment.Thismaybedonebymeansofaspecial 7 verdict.Fed.R.Civ.P.49(a);Wattigneyv.SouthernPacificCompany,411F.2d854,856(5th { Cir.1969);KevinF.OMalley,etal.,3FEDERALJURYPRACTICEANDINSTRUCTIONS:Civil a 106.12,106.13,106.14(5thed.2000).Thismayalsobedonebymeansofageneralverdict G accompaniedbyspecialinterrogatories.Fed.R.Civ.P.49(b);Flaniganv.BurlingtonNorthern - Inc.,632F.2d880,884(8thCir.1980).    Ifthecourtwantsthejurytoreducethedamagesbyamonetaryamountbecauseof l  contributorynegligence,thefollowinginstructionmaybeused: R!  @&VERDICT1 "M" 0  Note: 0` (#(#0 ` (#` (#Completethisformbywritinginthenamerequiredbyyourverdict.$$ (# (# 0   ` Ontheclaim2ofplaintiff[(nameofplaintiff)]againstdefendant[(nameofthe ]%& defendant)],we,thejury,findinfavorof:C&'(#(# 0  ________________________________________________________________'>!)(#(# @Plaintiff[(nameofplaintiff)]Defendant[(nameofthedefendant)] ("+   N*#- 0  Note: 0` (#(#0 ` (#` (#Completethefollowingparagraphonlyiftheabovefindingisinfavorof ^  theplaintiff.[Ifyouassessapercentageofnegligenceto(nameof D decedent)(theplaintiff)byreasonofInstruction_____(statethenameof * thecontributorynegligenceinstruction),thenyoumustreducethetotal   amountofdamagesbythepercentageofnegligenceyouassessto(name   ofdecedent)(plaintiff).] ~ (# (# 0   ` We,thejury,assessthedamagesofplaintiff[(nameofplaintiff)]at 5  А$__________. (#(#   ByusingtherecommendedFormofVerdict7.08,thetrialcourtandcounselcan t  determinewhetherthejuryhasfoundtheplaintifftobecontributorilynegligent,andifso,the Z  percentageoffaultattributedtotheplaintiff.Whenageneralformofverdictisused,therecord @  willnotshowwhatdeterminationsweremadeonthisissueanditalsowillbeimpossibleto &  determinetheamountoftotaldamagesdeterminedbythejurybeforereductionforany    contributorynegligence.Furthermore,byusing7.08,acourtwhichreviewstheverdicton   appealwillbeabletodeterminewhatthejurydecidedontheseissues,andincertaincasesthis z  mayavoidthenecessityofaretrial.Forexample,assumethatajuryfindsfortheplaintiffand ` assesseshisorhertotaldamagesat$100,000butfindstheplaintiff50%contributorilynegligent. F Assumefurtherthatonappealitisheldthatthedefendantfailedtomakeasubmissiblecaseon , theplaintiff'scontributorynegligenceandthatitwaserrortosubmitthisissuetothejury.If p 7.08wereusedinthishypotheticalcase,theappellatecourtcouldsimplyreverseandenter V judgmentfortheplaintiffintheamountof$100,000.SeeDixonv.PennCentralCompany,481 < F.2d833(6thCir.1973).If,however,ageneralformofverdictwereused,theappellatecourt " wouldbeunabletodeterminewhetherthejuryhadfoundnonegligenceonthepartofthe  plaintiffandevaluatedhisorherdamagesat$50,000orfoundtheplaintiff90%negligentand  evaluatedhisorherdamagesat$500,000.Theappellatecourtwouldhavenochoicebutto v remandthecaseforanewtrial. \   Inaddition,itisbelievedthattheuseofFormofVerdict7.08ismorelikelytoproducea  juryverdictthatisproperandconsistentwiththecourt'sinstructions.7.08directsthejury's  attentiontotheproperissuesintheproperorder,andmakesitpossibleforthecourtandcounsel   toconfirmthatthejuryhasfollowedtheinstructionsinthisregard.  !g   @ %   7.08AFORMOFVERDICT- ^ @ CONTRIBUTORYNEGLIGENCENOTSUBMITTED 4T  D @&VERDICT1    Note: 0  0` (#(#Completethisformbywritinginthenamerequiredbyyourverdict. ~` (#` (#   Ontheclaim2ofplaintiff[(nameofplaintiff)]againstdefendant[(nameofthe  J defendant)],we,thejuryfindinfavorof:   @_______________________________________________________________________ U  @Plaintiff[(nameofplaintiff)]Defendant[(nameofthedefendant)] ;   Note: 0  0` (#(#Completethenextparagraphonlyiftheabovefindingisinfavoroftheplaintiff.e ` (#` (#   We,thejury,assessthetotaldamagesofplaintiff[(nameofplaintiff)]at$__________. 1  &  @$ NotesonUse     1.Whenmorethanoneclaimissubmitted,ajurydecisionisrequiredoneachclaim. V 'X  Althoughtheemployeemaybringclaimsfornegligenceaswellasclaimsforviolationof Q theSafetyApplianceActorBoilerInspectionActinthesamecase,theemployeeisentitledto 7 onlyonerecoveryforhisorherdamages. {   2.Ifmorethanoneclaimissubmittedinthesamelawsuit,theclaimsshouldbe v separatelyidentifiedintheverdictform.SeeinfraModelInstruction4.60. \ & % @--! CommitteeComments     ThisformofverdictshouldbeusedinF.E.L.A.negligencecaseswhencontributory l ! '%[negligenceisnotsubmitted.Also,itistobeusedinBoilerInspectionActandSafetyAppliance R!" Actcases.  8"#  @ %   7.09DEFINITIONOFTERM_ NEGLIGENT_ԀOR_ NEGLIGENCE 4~] _Ԉ ^   Theterm_ negligent_Ԁor_ negligence_ԀasusedintheseInstructionsmeansthefailureto * usethatdegreeofcarewhichanordinarilycarefulpersonwoulduseunderthesameorsimilar  % circumstances.[Thedegreeofcareusedbyanordinarilycarefulpersondependsuponthe  ~ circumstanceswhichareknownorshouldbeknownandvariesinproportiontotheharmthat 5  personreasonablyshouldforesee.Indecidingwhetherapersonwasnegligentyoumust  0  determinewhatthatpersonkneworshouldhaveknownandtheharmthatshouldreasonably   havebeenforeseen.] @   & ? @--! CommitteeComments  ;  '?a  Whentheterm_ negligent_Ԁor_ negligence_Ԁisused,itmustbedefined.NoteinfraModel   Instruction7.10(definitionofterm_ ordinary_Ԁ_care);_ԀnotealsoinfraModelInstruction7.11 z  (combineddefinitionofterms_ ordinary_Ԁ_care_Ԁand_ negligent_Ԁor_ negligence)._ `   Concerningthebracketedlanguage,inorderfortherailroadtobefoundnegligentunder  theF.E.L.A.,thejurymustfindthattherailroadeitherkneworshouldhaveknownofthe  conditionorcircumstancewhichisallegedtohavecausedtheemployee'sinjuryordeath.This  isreferredtoasthenoticerequirement.SeeSiegristv.Delaware,Lackawanna&WesternR. k Co.,263F.2d616,619(2dCir.1959)(referringtothe_ doctrine_Ԁof_notice)._ԀCloselyrelatedto Q thenoticerequirementisthe_ essential_Ԁ_ingredient_Ԁofreasonableforeseeabilityofharm.Gallick 7 v.Baltimore&OhioRailwayCo.,372U.S.108,117(1963).Giventheactualorconstructive { noticeoftheconditionorcircumstanceallegedtohavecausedinjury,_ the_Ԁdefendant'sdutyis a measuredbywhatareasonablyprudentpersonshouldorcouldhavereasonablyanticipatedas G occurringunderlike_circumstances._ԀDavisv.BurlingtonNorthern,Inc.,541F.2d182,185(8th - Cir.1976).Thus,_ the_Ԁultimatequestionoffactiswhethertherailroadexercisedreasonable   _care_Ԁandthisinvolves_ the_Ԁquestionwhethertherailroadhadnoticeofany_danger._ԀBridgerv. ! UnionRy,Co.,355F.2d382,389(6thCir.1966).  "   Thebracketedlanguageofthisinstructioninstructsthejuryonnoticeandreasonable 8"$ foreseeabilityofharm.SeeTillerv.AtlanticCoastLineR.Co.,318U.S.54,67(1943);Chicago #% &NorthWesternRailwayCompanyv.Rieger,326F.2d329,335(8thCir.1964);W.Mathes, $& JuryInstructionsandFormsforFederalCivilCases,28F.R.D.401,495(1962).Thebracketed $' languagemaybeincludedevenwhenthedefendantinstructsonthisissueinModelInstruction %r( 7.02B,infra.  &X )  @   %   7.10DEFINITIONOFTHETERM_ ORDINARY_Ԁ_CARE 4an _Ԉ ^   Thephrase_ ordinary_Ԁ_care_ԀasusedintheseInstructionsmeansthatdegreeofcarethatan * ordinarilycarefulpersonwoulduseunderthesameorsimilarcircumstances.[Thedegreeof  % careusedbyanordinarilycarefulpersondependsuponthecircumstanceswhichareknownor  ~ shouldbeknownandvariesinproportiontotheharmthatpersonreasonablyshouldforesee.In 5  decidingwhetherapersonexercisedordinarycareyoumustconsiderwhatthatpersonknewor  0  shouldhaveknownandtheharmthatshouldreasonablyhavebeenforeseen.]    & % @--! CommitteeComments  @    Whenthephrase_ ordinary_Ԁ_care_Ԁisused,itmustbedefined.NoteinfraModel ;  Instruction7.09'%@+r(definitionofterm_ negligent_Ԁor_ negligence);_ԀnotealsoinfraModel !  Instruction7.11(combineddefinitionofterms_ ordinary_Ԁ_care_Ԁand_ negligent_Ԁor_ negligence)._ e    Concerningthebracketedlanguage,inorderfortherailroadtobefoundnegligentunder ` theF.E.L.A.,thejurymustfindthattherailroadeitherkneworshouldhaveknownofthe F conditionorcircumstancewhichisallegedtohavecausedtheemployee'sinjuryordeath.This , isreferredtoasthenoticerequirement.SeeSiegristv.Delaware,Lackawanna&WesternR. p Co.,263F.2d616,619(2dCir.1959)(referringtothe_ doctrine_Ԁof_notice)._ԀCloselyrelatedto V thenoticerequirementisthe_ essential_Ԁ_ingredient_Ԁofreasonableforeseeabilityofharm.Gallick < v.Baltimore&OhioRailwayCompany,372U.S.108,117(1963).Giventheactualor " constructivenoticeoftheconditionorcircumstanceallegedtohavecausedinjury,_ the_  defendant'sdutyismeasuredbywhatareasonablyprudentpersonshouldorcouldhave  reasonablyanticipatedasoccurringunderlike_circumstances._ԀDavisv.BurlingtonNorthern, v Inc.,541F.2d182,185(8thCir.1976).Thus,_ the_Ԁultimatequestionoffactiswhetherthe \ railroadexercisedreasonable_care_Ԁandthisinvolves_ the_Ԁquestionwhethertherailroadhad B noticeofany_danger._ԀBridgerv.UnionRailwayCompany,355F.2d382,389(6thCir.1966). (    Thebracketedlanguageofthisinstructioninstructsthejuryonnoticeandreasonable  " foreseeabilityofharm.SeeTillerv.AtlanticCoastLineR.Co.,318U.S.54,67(1943);Chicago !g# &NorthWesternRailwayCompanyv.Rieger,326F.2d329,335(8thCir.1964);W.Mathes, "M$ JuryInstructionsandFormsforFederalCivilCases,28F.R.D.401,495(1962).Thebracketed #3% languagemaybeincludedevenwhenthedefendantinstructsonthisissueinModelInstruction w$& 7.02B,infra.  ]%'  @x x  %   7.11DEFINITIONSOFTHETERMS_ NEGLIGENT_Ԁ ^ @$ $ OR_ NEGLIGENCE_ԀAND_ ORDINARY_Ԁ_CARE_ԀCOMBINED 4  D   Theterm_ negligent_Ԁor_ negligence_ԀasusedintheseInstructionsmeansthefailureto   useordinarycare.Thephrase_ ordinary_Ԁ_care_Ԁmeansthatdegreeofcarethatanordinarily i  carefulpersonwoulduseunderthesameorsimilarcircumstances.[Thedegreeofcareusedby  d anordinarilycarefulpersondependsuponthecircumstanceswhichareknownorshouldbe    knownandvariesinproportiontotheharmthatpersonreasonablyshouldforesee.Indeciding t  whetherapersonwasnegligentorfailedtouseordinarycareyoumustconsiderwhatthatperson o  kneworshouldhaveknownandtheharmthatshouldreasonablyhavebeenforeseen.] &   & % @--! CommitteeComments  !    Whenevertheterm_ negligent_Ԁor_ negligence_Ԁortheterm_ ordinary_Ԁ_care_Ԁisusedin z  these'%?instructions,itmustbedefined.Whenthesetermseachappearinthesamesetof ` instructions,thisinstructionmaybeusedasanalternativetosubmittinginfraModelInstruction F 7.09_( negligent_Ԁor_ negligence)_ԀandModelInstruction7.10_( ordinary_Ԁ_care)_Ԁindividually. ,   Concerningthebracketedlanguage,inorderfortherailroadtobefoundnegligentunder  theF.E.L.A.,thejurymustfindthattherailroadeitherkneworshouldhaveknownofthe k conditionorcircumstancewhichisallegedtohavecausedtheemployee'sinjuryordeath.This Q isreferredtoasthenoticerequirement.SeeSiegristv.Delaware,Lackawanna&WesternR. 7 Co.,263F.2d616,619(2dCir.1959)(referringtothe_ doctrine_Ԁof_notice)._ԀCloselyrelatedto { thenoticerequirementisthe_ essential_Ԁ_ingredient_Ԁofreasonableforeseeabilityofharm.Gallick a v.Baltimore&OhioRailwayCompany,372U.S.108,117(1963).Giventheactualor G constructivenoticeoftheconditionorcircumstanceallegedtohavecausedinjury,_ the_ - defendant'sdutyismeasuredbywhatareasonablyprudentpersonshouldorcouldhave   reasonablyanticipatedasoccurringunderlike_circumstances._ԀDavisv.BurlingtonNorthern, ! Inc.,541F.2d182,185(8thCir.1976).Thus,_ the_Ԁultimatequestionoffactiswhetherthe  " railroadexercisedreasonable_care_Ԁandthisinvolves_ the_Ԁquestionwhethertherailroadhad !g# noticeofany_danger._ԀBridgerv.UnionRailwayCompany,355F.2d382,389(6thCir.1966). "M$   Thebracketedlanguageofthisinstructioninstructsthejuryonnoticeandreasonable $& foreseeabilityofharm.SeeTillerv.AtlanticCoastLineR.Co.,318U.S.54,67(1943);Chicago $' &NorthWesternRailwayCompanyv.Rieger,326F.2d329,335(8thCir.1964);W.Mathes, %r( JuryInstructionsandFormsforFederalCivilCases,28F.R.D.401,495(1962).Thebracketed &X ) languagemaybeincludedevenwhenthedefendantinstructsonthisissueinModelInstruction '>!* 7.02B,infra.0l  (T$/  0  @ %   8.ADMIRALTYINSTRUCTIONS 0   Introduction D |  ?XtXXXt d#XtXX?Xto#?XtXXXt    TheterritorialboundsofthedistrictcourtsoftheEighthCircuitincludelargeportionsof H theMissouriandMississippiRivers,thelongestinlandriversystemintheUnitedStates.On .   thisriversystemmovesmostoftheinlandwaterbornecommerceinAmerica.Thejurisprudence    oftheEighthCircuithasgeneratedopinionsonmanyadmiraltyandmaritimedisputesand  z  issues.Tofacilitatethesubmissionofsuchissuestojuriesinfederaljudicialactions,thejury  `  instructionsthatfollowthisintroductionaresubmitted.  F  #XtXX?XtȒ#?XtXXXt  Admiraltyandmaritimejurytrialsoccurinactionsbroughtbyemployeesagainst   employersandby_invitees_Ԁagainsttheownersandoperatorsofbusinesspremises.Thereare v  issuesuniqueandissuescommontoeachtypeofclaim.Therulesofdecisionforsuchcases \  maybefoundintherichmaritimecommonlawprecedentsofthefederalcourtsandin B Congressionallegislation. (  #XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXt  GeneralMaritimeLaw #XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXt r #XtXX?Xtk#"?XtXXXt  TheadmiraltyandmaritimecommonlawofthecourtsoftheUnitedStatesprovides < rulesofdecisionforclaimsbroughtbynonemployee_invitees_Ԁonvesselsonnavigablewaters. " #XtXX?XtҘ#?XtXXXtNorfolkShipbuilding&DrydockCorp.v.Garris#XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXt,532U.S.811,81416(2001);#XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXtTheMaxMorris#XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXt,  137U.S.1,14(1890);#XtXX?XtF#?XtXXXtKermarecv.CompagnieGeneraleTransatlantique#XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXt,358U.S.625,628 n (1959).Suchclaimantsmaybringaclaimfornegligence,subjecttoareductionofdamages(not T acompletedefense)forcomparativenegligenceorfault.#XtXX?Xt+#?XtXXXtKermarec#XtXX?XtG#?XtXXXt,358U.S.at629,630. :  X XWC` hp x XW#XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXtWeholdthattheownerofashipinnavigablewatersowestoallwhoareonboard  forpurposesnotinimicaltohislegitimateintereststhedutyofexercising j reasonablecareunderthecircumstancesofeachcase. P  X XN+ ` hp x X N#XtXX?Xtw#?XtXXXtId.#XtXX?Xt7#?XtXXXtԀat632.However,admiraltylawdoesnotprovideanonemployeeaclaimfor  unseaworthinessofthesubjectvessel.#XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXtId.#XtXX?XtM#?XtXXXtԀat629andSmithv.HarborTowing&Fleeting,Inc.,  910F.2d312(5thCir.1990). f #XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXt  TheSupremeCourtstated: 0    X XT@` hp x XT#XtXX?XtX#?XtXXXtItissettledthatthegeneralmaritimelawimposesdutiestoavoidunseaworthiness z!! andnegligence...,thatnonfatalinjuriescausedbythebreachofeitherdutyare `"" compensable...,andthatdeathcausedbybreachofthedutyofseaworthinessis F# # alsocompensable. ,$!$  X XN+ ` hp x X N#XtXX?XtD#?XtXXXtNorfolkShipbuilding&DrydockCorp.v.Garris#XtXX?XtP#?XtXXXt,532U.S.at813.TheSupremeCourt v%"% recognizedforthefirsttimein#XtXX?Xtå#?XtXXXtGarris#XtXX?Xtc#?XtXXXtԀawrongfuldeathclaimundergeneralmaritimelawbased \&#& uponnegligence.#XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXtId.#XtXX?XtR#?XtXXXtԀ B'$' #XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXt  Moregenerally,theSupremeCourthasheld,_ when_Ԁastatuteresolvesaparticularissue, ( &(  wehaveheldthatthegeneralmaritimelawmustcomplywiththat_resolution._Ԁ#XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXtId.#XtXX?XtO#?XtXXXtԀat817. r)&) #XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXt  Further, evenastoseamen,wehaveheldthatgeneralmaritimelawmayprovide ^ wrongfuldeathactionspredicatedondutiesbeyondthosethattheJonesActimposes.#XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXtId.#XtXX?Xt #?XtXXXtԀat D 818. *  _#XtXX?XtT#?XtXXXt  #XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXtSuitsbyEmployees #XtXX?Xt8#?XtXXXt  `   #XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXt  Employeeclaimantsareimmediatelyfacedwithdeterminingwhethertobringsuitfor   compensatorydamagesundergeneralmaritimelaw,theJonesAct,ortoseekworkers'   compensationundertheLongshoreandHarborWorkers'CompensationAct(LHWCA)orthe  v applicablestate'sworkers'compensationlaws.#XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXtJohnsonv.Cont'lGrainCo.#XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXt,58F.3d1232,1235 \ (8thCir.1995)(aJonesActseaman isexcludedfromcoverageundertheLHWCAandvice B  versa).AworkercoveredbytheLHWCAmaynotrecoveronatheoryofunseaworthinessof (  thevessel.#XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXtId.#XtXX?Xtj#?XtXXXtԀ#XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXtԀSeealsoStewartv.DutraConstr.Co.#XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXt,543U.S.481, #XtXX?Xtc#?XtXXXt 488#XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXt.125S.Ct.1118,1124 l  (2005)( ThustheJonesActandtheLHWCAarecomplementaryregimesthatworkintandem: R  TheJonesActprovidestortremediesto#XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXtsea#XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXtԄbasedmaritimeworkers,whiletheLHWCA 8  providesworkers'compensationto#XtXX?XtX#?XtXXXtland#XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXtԄbasedmaritimeemployees.).   #XtXX?XtE#?XtXXXt  #XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXtTheJonesAct #XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXt T   #XtXX?Xtf#?XtXXXt  The #XtXX?Xtɵ#?XtXXXt JonesActprovides #XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXt:    X XB.` hp x XB#XtXX?Xtx#?XtXXXt ` Aseamaninjuredinthecourseofemploymentor,iftheseamandiesfrom F theinjury,thepersonalrepresentativeoftheseamanmayelecttobringacivil , actionatlaw,withtherightoftrialbyjury,againsttheemployer.Lawsofthe  UnitedStatesregulatingrecoveryforpersonalinjuryto,ordeathof,arailway  employeeapplytoanactionunderthissection.   X XE+ ` hp x X E#XtXX?Xt1#?XtXXXt46U.S.C.30104(Jan.28,2008).#XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXt ( #XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXt  TheJonesActallowsonlytoaseamananegligenceactionforeitherpersonalinjuryor r wrongfuldeathagainsttheseaman'semployer.#XtXX?Xtp#?XtXXXtChandris,Inc.v.Latsis#XtXX?Xt\#?XtXXXt,515U.S.347,354 X  (1995);#XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXtBrittonv.U.S.S.GreatLakesFleet,Inc.#XtXX?Xt.#?XtXXXt,302F.3d812,816(8thCir.2002)(quoting >! #XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXtLewisv.Lewis&ClarkMarine,Inc.#XtXX?Xt"#?XtXXXt,531U.S.438,441(2001));#XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXtShowsv.Harber#XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXt,575F.2d $" 1253,1254(8thCir.1978).  # #XtXX?Xt@#?XtXXXt  #XtXX?XtӾ#?XtXXXt ThereferenceintheJonesActtolawsregulatingrecoverybyrailwayemployees T$ incorporates #XtXX?Xt$#?XtXXXt theFederalEmployers'LiabilityAct,45U.S.C.51,#XtXX?Xtݿ#?XtXXXtetseq.#XtXX?Xt^#?XtXXXtԀ(FELA), #XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXt anddoctrines :% ofnegligenceandcomparativenegligenceandabolishesthedefenseofassumptionoftherisk.  & #XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXtScindiaSteamNavigationCo.v.DeLosSantos#XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXt,451U.S.156,166n.13(1981);#XtXX?XtF#?XtXXXtBallardv.River '  Fleets,Inc.#XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXt,149F.3d829,831(8thCir.1998);#XtXX?Xt"#?XtXXXtMillerv.PattonTullyTransp.Co.#XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXt,851F.2d202, '!! 205(8thCir.1988). (t"" #XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXt  ThebroadscopeofJonesActliabilityhasbeendescribedthus: *##  X XT@` hp x XT#XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXtUnderthisstatutethetestofajurycaseissimplywhethertheproofsjustifywith f+%$ reasontheconclusionthatemployernegligenceplayedanypart,eventhe L,%% slightest,inproducingtheinjuryordeathforwhichdamagesaresought.Itdoes ^ notmatterthat,fromtheevidence,thejurymayalsowithreason,ongroundsof D probability,attributetheresulttoothercauses,includingtheemployee's * contributorynegligence.Judicialappraisaloftheproofstodeterminewhethera   juryquestionispresentedisnarrowlylimitedtothesingleinquirywhether,with   reason,theconclusionmaybedrawnthatnegligenceoftheemployerplayedany  ~ partatallintheinjuryordeath.Judgesaretofixtheirsightsprimarilytomake  d thatappraisaland,ifthattestismet,areboundtofindthatacaseforthejuryis  J madeoutwhetherornottheevidenceallowsthejuryachoiceofother  0 probabilities.Thestatuteexpresslyimposesliabilityupontheemployertopay t  damagesforinjuryordeathdue inwholeorinparttoitsnegligence. Z   X XN+ ` hp x X N#XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXtClarkv.Cent.StatesDredgingCo.#XtXX?Xt_#?XtXXXt,430F.2d63,66(8thCir.1970)(quoting#XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXtRogersv.Mo.Pac. F  R.R.#XtXX?Xt6#?XtXXXt,352U.S.500,50607(1957));#XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXtseealso#XtXX?Xt #?XtXXXtԀ#XtXX?XtX#?XtXXXtAlholmv.Am.SteamshipCo.#XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXt,144F.3d1172,1178 ,  (8thCir.1998). p  #XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXt  TheJonesActistobeliberallyconstrued toaccomplishitsbeneficentpurposes. \  #XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXtCosmopolitanShippingCo.v.McAllister#XtXX?XtQ#?XtXXXt,337U.S.783,790(1949). B  #XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXt   TheFifthCircuitin#XtXX?Xt4#?XtXXXtGautreauxv.ScurlockMarine,Inc.#XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXt,107F.3d331,339(5thCir.  1997)(enbanc),repudiateditsearliercasestothecontrary,andheldthatundertheJonesAct,an r employerhasthedutytoactwithordinaryprudencetoprovideitsemployeesasafework X environment,thatis,toactaswouldareasonableemployerinlikecircumstances.Thecourtalso > heldthataseamanisobligatedundertheJonesActtoactwithordinaryprudenceundersimilar $ circumstancestoprotecthimselffromthenegligenceofhisemployer.107F.3dat339.#XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXtSee#XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXtԀ#XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXt5th#XtXh?Xt3#?XtXXXt h  Cir.Civ.JuryInstr.#XtXX?Xt~#?XtXXXtԀ4.6(West2009).#XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXt N #XtXX?Xt@#?XtXXXt  TheissuesofactionablenegligenceandcausationunderF.E.L.A.recentlyreceivedsome : attention.OnJune23,2011,theSupremeCourtdecided#XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXtCSXTransportation,Inc.v.McBride #XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXt, ~  ___ #XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXtU.S.___,131S.Ct.2630(2011).ThequestionpresentedtotheCourtwaswhetherthe d FederalEmployersLiabilityActrequiresproofofproximatecausation.Thisisimportantto J JonesActcasesbecausetheJonesActincorporatesthestandardsofF.E.L.A.inseamens 0  personalinjurysuits.46U.S.C.30104.TheF.E.L.A.statutorystandardusesthelanguage: !  X XB.` hp x XB#XtXX?Xt\#?XtXXXtforsuchinjuryordeathresultinginwholeorinpartfromthenegligenceofanyof `" theofficers,agents,oremployeesofsuchcarrier,orbyreasonofanydefector F# insufficiency,duetoitsnegligence,inits...equipment. ,$  X XE+ ` hp x X E#XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXt45U.S.C.51. v%  #XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXt   In#XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXtCSXTransportation,Inc., #XtXX?XtI#?XtXXXtԀ theSupremeCourtmaintaineditsearlierrulingin #XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXt Rogersv. &b ! MissouriPacificR.Co., #XtXX?Xt2#?XtXXXt 352U.S.500(1957).JusticeGinsburg,writingfortheCourtin#XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXtCSX#XtXX?XtF#?XtXXXt, 'H!" summarizedtheCourtsholding: (."#  X XB.` hp x XB#XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXt[W]econcludethat[F.E.L.A.]doesnotincorporate proximatecausestandards )x#$ developedinnonstatutorycommonlawtortactions.ThechargeproperinFELA *^$% cases,wehold,simplytracksthelanguageCongressemployed,informingjuries +D%& thatadefendantrailroadcausedorcontributedtoaplaintiffemployeesinjuryif ^ therailroadsnegligenceplayedanypartinbringingabouttheinjury. D  X XE+ ` hp x X E#XtXX?Xt~#?XtXXXtId.at2634.AlsoofnoteintheCSXopinionarethestatementsthatitisunnecessarytousethe 0 label proximatecausewheninstructingthejury,#XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXtid.#XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXtԀat2636,andthatthefollowinglanguageis t  alsoappropriatewheninstructingthejuryoncausationinaF.E.L.A.case: Z   X XB.` hp x XB#XtXX?Xtb#?XtXXXt Juriesinsuchcasesareproperlyinstructedthatadefendantrailroad causedor   contributedtoarailroadworkersinjury if[therailroads]negligenceplayeda  v partnomatterhowsmallinbringingabouttheinjury. \  X XE+ ` hp x X E#XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXtId.#XtXX?Xt~#?XtXXXtԀat2636.     #XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXt  #XtXX?Xt-#?XtXXXtUnseaworthiness #XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXt :    #XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXt  TheEighthCircuitdescribedtheclaimofunseaworthiness:    X XT@` hp x XT#XtXX?Xt<#?XtXXXt Unseaworthinessisaclaimundergeneralmaritimelawbasedonthevessel ,  owner'sdutytoensurethatthevesselisreasonablyfittobeatsea.#XtXX?XtI#?XtXXXtLewis#XtXX?Xt<#?XtXXXt,531  U.S.at441....ItisacauseofactiondistinctfromJonesActnegligence,which  canbefoundwithoutacorrespondingfindingofunseaworthiness.  #XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXtThewarrantyofseaworthiness...requiresthattheship,includingthehull, ( decks,andmachinery, bereasonablyfitforthepurposeforwhichtheyareused.  #XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXtInreMatterofHechinger#XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXt,890F.2d202,207(9thCir.1989)(citationomitted).  Examplesofconditionsthatcanrenderavesselunseaworthyincludedefective | gearappurtenancesindisrepair,insufficientmanpower,unfitcrew,andimproper b methodsofloadingorstowingcargo.#XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXtUsnerv.LuckenbachOverseasCorp.#XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXt,400 H U.S.494,499(1971)....Theburdenofproofindemonstratingunseaworthiness . restsontheplaintiff,whomustshowbyapreponderanceoftheevidencethatthe r unseaworthinesswasaproximatecauseoftheinjury.#XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXtAlvarezv.J.Ray X  McDermott&Co.,Inc.#XtXX?Xt_#?XtXXXt,674F.2d1037,1042n.3(5thCir.1982).Underthese >! circumstances,proximatecausemeans: first,thattheunseaworthiness... $" playedasubstantialpartinbringingaboutoractuallycausingtheinjury;andtwo,  # thattheinjurywaseitheradirectresultofareasonableprobableconsequenceof # theunseaworthiness....#XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXtId.#XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXt $x  X XN+ ` hp x X N#XtXX?Xt #?XtXXXtBritton#XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXt,302F.3dat818.  & #XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXt#XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXt  #XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXtSeaman #XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXt )#"   #XtXX?Xtl#?XtXXXt  #XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXtT#XtXX?Xt##?XtXXXtorecoverfromhisorheremployerundereithertheJonesActorgeneralmaritimelaw, H+$# aplaintiffmustbeaseaman.#XtXX?Xtf#?XtXXXtMcDermottInternat.,Inc.v.Wilander#XtXX?Xt5#?XtXXXt,498U.S.337(1991).The .,%$ JonesActdoesnotdefine seaman.#XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXtStewartv.DutraConstr.Co.#XtXX?Xt?#?XtXXXt,543U.S.481(2005). ^ Whetheraworkerisaseaman isusuallyafactintensiveinquiryproperlylefttothejuryto D resolve.#XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXtJohnsonv.Cont.GrainCompany#XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXt,58F.3dat1235.Indeterminingwhoareandwho * arenotJonesActseamen,SupremeCourtopinionsandthoseoffederalcourtsofappealshave   distinguishedbetweenmaritimeworkerswhoseemploymentislandbasedandthosewhose   employmentisvesselbased.A seamanisanemployeewhose dutiesmustcontributetothe  ~ functionofthevesselortotheaccomplishmentofitsmission,andtheworkermusthavea  d connectiontoavessel...(oranidentifiablegroupofvessels)thatissubstantialintermsofboth  J itsdurationandnature.#XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXtChandris,Inc.v.Latsis#XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXt,515U.S.at369;#XtXX?Xt>#?XtXXXtseealso#XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXtԀ#XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXtHarborTug&Barge  0 Co.v.Papai#XtXX?Xt)#?XtXXXt,520U.S.548,554(1997).Statedanotherway, t   X<( ` hp x X<#XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXtAfinderoffactcanconcludethataworkmanwasamemberofacrewofavesselif: `   X#XtXX?Xtr#?XtXXXt(1)theinjuredworkmanperformedatleastasubstantialpartofhisworkonthe   vesselorwasassignedpermanentlytothevessel;and   #XtXX?Xt*#?XtXXXt(2)thecapacityinwhichtheworkmanwasemployedandthedutieswhichhe 8  performedcontributedtothefunctionofthevesselortoaccomplishmentofits   mission.   X X?+ ` hp x X?#XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXtMillerv.PattonTullyTransp.Co.#XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXt,851F.2dat204(quoting#XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXtSlattonv.MartinK.EbyConstr. N Co.#XtXX?Xtb#?XtXXXt,506F.2d505,510(8thCir.1974);#XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXtseealso#XtXX?XtI#?XtXXXtԀ#XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXtJohnson#XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXt,58F.3dat123536. 4 #XtXX?Xt(#?XtXXXt  AJonesAct seamanneednotbeassignedtoaspecificvessel;heorsheretains ~   seamanstatusifassignedtoagroupofJonesActvesselsundercommonownershiporcontrol. d #XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXtHarborTug&BargeCo.v.Papai#XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXt,520U.S.at556.Suchafleetofvessels musttaketheir J directionfromoneidentifiablecentralauthority.#XtXX?Xt0#?XtXXXtJohnson#XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXt,58F.3dat1236(quoting#XtXX?XtM#?XtXXXtReevesv. 0 MobileDredging&PumpingCo.#XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXt,26F.3d1247,1258(2dCir.1994)).  #XtXX?Xt- #?XtXXXt  Indeterminingwhetheranemployeeisa seaman,acourtmustlooknotonlytothe ` natureoftheactivityinwhichtheclaimantwasinjured,butalsointheoverallnatureofthe F employee'swork,whetherheorsheperformsasubstantialamountofworkonboarda vessel, , withregularityandcontinuity.In#XtXX?Xt #?XtXXXtChandris#XtXX?Xtz #?XtXXXt,theSupremeCourtestablishedaguidelinefrom   whichcourtscanvarydependinguponthecircumstancesofthecase: Aworkerwhospends   lessthanabout30percentofhistimeintheserviceofavessel...shouldnotqualifyasa ! seamanundertheJonesAct.515U.S.at371. "f #XtXX?Xt #?XtXXXt  Thereisnosuchguideline,however,for determiningwhetheraninjuredworkeris $ substantiallyconnectedtoavessel.#XtXX?Xt{ #?XtXXXtLarav.Harvey'sIowaMgmt.Co.#XtXX?Xt`#?XtXXXt,109F.Supp.2d1031, $ 1034(S.D.Iowa2000).AninjuredworkermightbeaJonesActseamanwithouthavingworked %|  onboardthevesselwhenitwasintransit.#XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXtId.#XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXtԀat1036.Further,anemployer'sconsiderationof &b ! aninjuredworkerasaJonesAct seamanbythepaymentofmaritime curemayberelevant 'H!" indeterminingseamanstatus.#XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXtId.#XtXX?Xt@#?XtXXXtԀ [T]hedeterminativefactoristheemployee'sconnectiontoa (."# vessel,nottheemployee'sparticularjob.#XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXtJohnson#XtXX?XtT#?XtXXXt,58F.3dat1236. r)#$ #XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXt  #XtXX?Xt #?XtXXXtVessel #XtXX?Xt_#?XtXXXt ,%&   #XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXt  Anemployeeclaimantcanbea seamanundertheJonesActonlyifheorsheis ^ assignedtoavessel.Thedefinitionof vesselforadmiraltyandmaritimelawpurposesis D containedin1U.S.C.3: *  X XT@` hp x XT#XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXtTheword vesselincludeseverydescriptionofwatercraftorotherartificial t  contrivanceused,orcapableofbeingused,asameansoftransportationon_water. Z   X XN+ ` hp x X N#XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXt1U.S.C.3.TheSupremeCourtconstruedthisdefinitiontorequirethesubjectstructuretobe  F practicablycapableofwatertransportation.#XtXX?Xtm#?XtXXXtStewartv.DutraConstr.Co.#XtXX?XtZ#?XtXXXt,543U.S.at #XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXt 496#XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXt,125  , S.Ct.at1128( Thequestionremainsinallcaseswhetherthewatercraft'suse'asameansof p  transportationonwater'isapracticalpossibilityormerelyatheoreticalone.). Simplyput,a V watercraftisnotcapableofbeingusedformaritimetransportinanymeaningfulsenseifithas <  beenpermanentlymooredorotherwiserenderedpracticallyincapableoftransportationor "  movement.#XtXX?Xt\#?XtXXXt543U.S.at494,125_S.Ct_.#XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXtat1127. #XtXX?Xt"#?XtXXXt   #XtXX?Xtr#?XtXXXt  Insoconstruing vessel,thecourtrejectedtherelevanceofthe innavigationfactor, R  establishedin#XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXtDigiovanniv.TraylorBros.,Inc.#XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXt,959F.2d1119(1stCir.1992)(enbanc),in 8  determiningwhetherawatercraftqualifiesasavessel. #XtXX?Xt #?XtXXXt 543U.S.at495,125_S.Ct_.#XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXtԀat1128.   Casesapplyingthatfactormustnowbeviewedwithgreatcare.#XtXX?XtQ#?XtXXXtE.g.#XtXX?Xt#?XtXXXt,#XtXX?Xt> #?XtXXXtTonnesenv.Yonkers  ContractingCo.#XtXX?Xt #?XtXXXt,82F.3d30,36(2dCir.1996);#XtXX?Xt!#?XtXXXtDigiovanniv.TraylorBros.,Inc.#XtXX?Xtg!#?XtXXXt,959F.2d  1119,1123(1stCir.1992(enbanc);#XtXX?Xt!#?XtXXXtEllenderv.KivaConstr.Eng'g,Inc.#XtXX?XtV"#?XtXXXt,909F.2d803,806(5th r Cir.1990);#XtXX?Xt"#?XtXXXtPavonev.Miss.RiverboatAmusementCorp.#XtXX?Xt=##?XtXXXt,52F.3d560,570(5thCir.1995);#XtXX?Xt##?XtXXXtHurst X v.Pilings&Structures,Inc.#XtXX?Xt$#?XtXXXt,896F.2d504,506(11thCir.1990). > #XtXX?Xt$#?XtXXXt  #XtXX?Xt%#?XtXXXtLongshoreandHarborWorkers'CompensationAct(LHWCA) #XtXX?Xtc%#?XtXXXt 0   #XtXX?Xt%#?XtXXXt  TheSupremeCourthasdescribedthefacetsoftheLHWCAgenerally: z  X<( ` hp x X<#XtXX?XtD&#?XtXXXt[T]heLongshoreandHarborWorkers'CompensationAct(LHWCA)...,33U.S.C. f 901etseq.,providesnonseamanmaritimeworkers...withnofaultworkers' L compensationclaims(againsttheiremployer,904(b))andnegligenceclaims(against 2 thevessel,905(b))forinjuryanddeath.Astothosetwodefendants,theLHWCA v  expresslypreemptsallotherclaims,905(a),(b)...,butitexpresslypreservesall \! claimsagainstthirdparties[(thosewhoneitheremployedtheclaimantnorownedthe B" vesselinvolvedintheincident)],933(a),(i). (#  X?+ ` hp x X?#XtXX?Xt3'#?XtXXXtGarris#XtXX?Xt*#?XtXXXt,532U.S.at818. r$ & 0 #XtXX?Xt*#?XtXXXt   #XtXX?XtT+#?XtXXXt905(b)ofLHWCA #XtXX?Xt+#?XtXXXt'0%%+ '  L l`   #XtXX?Xt,#?XtXXXt  InjuredmaritimeworkerswhoarenotJonesActseamenmaybeabletorecoverunder ^ theLHWCA.Section905(b)allowsalongshoreworkertoseekcompensationforinjuriescaused D bythenegligence,butnottheunseaworthiness,ofavessel:#XtXX?Xt,#?XtXXXtM z  1      #XtXX?Xt.#?XtXXXt *  X<( ` hp x X<#XtXX?Xt.#?XtXXXtIntheeventofinjurytoapersoncoveredunderthischaptercausedbythenegligenceof t  avessel,thensuchperson...maybringanactionagainstsuchvesselasathirdpartyin Z  accordancewiththeprovisionsof933ofthistitle,andtheemployershallnotbeliable @  tothevesselforsuchdamagesdirectlyorindirectly....Theliabilityofthevesselunder &  thesubsectionshallnotbebaseduponthewarrantyofseaworthinessorabreachthereof   atthetimetheinjuryoccurred.Theremedyprovidedinthissubsectionshallbe   exclusiveofallotherremediesagainstthevesselexceptremediesavailableunderthis z  chapter. `   X?+ ` hp x X?#XtXX?XtM/#?XtXXXt33U.S.C.905(b).   #XtXX?Xt3#?XtXXXt  Section905(b)doesnotdefinetheboundsofactionablenegligence.#XtXX?Xtm3#?XtXXXtReedv.ULSCorp.#XtXX?Xt4#?XtXXXt, R  178F.3d988,99091(8thCir.1999).TheEighthCircuithasrecognizedthattheownerofa 8  vesseloweslongshorementhreeduties:    X XT@` hp x XT#XtXX?XtY4#?XtXXXtThefirst,whichcourtshavecometocallthe turnoverduty,relatedtothe h  conditionofthevesseluponthecommencementofstevedoringoperations.... N Thesecondduty,applicableoncestevedoringoperationshavebegun,provides 4 thatavesselownermustexercisereasonablecaretopreventinjuriesto  longshoremeninareasthatremainunderthe activecontrolofthevessel....  Thethirdduty,calledthe dutytointervene,concernsthevessel'sobligations  withregardtocargooperationsinareasundertheprincipalcontrolofthe n independentstevedore. T  X XN+ ` hp x X N#XtXX?Xt5#?XtXXXtId.#XtXX?Xtn9#?XtXXXtԀat991(citing#XtXX?Xt9#?XtXXXtHowlettv.BirkdaleShippingCo.#XtXX?Xt :#?XtXXXt,512U.S.92,98(1994),and#XtXX?Xtp:#?XtXXXtScindiaSteam  NavigationCo.v.DeLosSantos#XtXX?Xt:#?XtXXXt,451U.S.at167).  #XtXX?XtY;#?XtXXXt  However,underthestatutesuchaclaimisdeniedtoalongshoreworkerwhowas , engagedinrepairwork.#XtXX?Xt;#?XtXXXtJohnsonv.Cont.GrainCo.#XtXX?Xt<#?XtXXXt,58F.3dat1237.Section905(b)also   providesinpart:    X XT@` hp x XT#XtXX?Xt<#?XtXXXtIfsuchpersonwasemployedtoprovideshipbuilding,repairing,orbreaking B" servicesandsuchperson'semployerwastheowner,ownerprohacvice,agent, (# operator,orchartererofthevessel,nosuchactionshallbepermitted,inwholeor $ inpartordirectlyorindirectly,againsttheinjuredperson'semployer(inany $ capacityincludingasthevessel'sowner,ownerprohacvice,agent,operator,or %|  charterer)oragainsttheemployeesoftheemployer. &b !  X XN+ ` hp x X N#XtXX?Xt>#?XtXXXt33U.S.C.905(b). ^ #XtXX?Xt@#?XtXXXt#XtXX?Xt]A#?XtXXXt  #XtXX?XtA#?XtXXXt933ofLHWCA #XtXX?XtA#?XtXXXt <    #XtXX?XtNB#?XtXXXt  Under933oftheLongshoreandHarborWorkers'CompensationAct,33U.S.C.933,  ( aworkerortherepresentativeofhisorherestatemayseekdamagesforpersonalinjuriesagainst l  anonemployer,nonvesselowner,thirdparty.Also,under933anemployerhastherightto R  recoupamountspaidundertheLHWCAtotheemployeeortherepresentativeoftheemployee's 8 estateinsuchajudicialaction.#XtXX?XtB#?XtXXXtSee#XtXX?XtD#?XtXXXtԀ33U.S.C.933.  &    #XtXX?Xt8E#?XtXXXtWrongfulDeath #XtXX?XtE#?XtXXXt h    #XtXX?XtF#?XtXXXt  Ageneralmaritimecauseofactionforwrongfuldeathduetounseaworthinesswas T  recognizedin#XtXX?XtzF#?XtXXXtMoragnev.StatesMarineLines,Inc.#XtXX?Xt>G#?XtXXXt,398U.S.375(1970).#XtXX?XtG#?XtXXXtSee#XtXX?XtH#?XtXXXtԀ#XtXX?XtLH#?XtXXXtSpillerv.Thomas :  M.Lowe,Jr.#XtXX?XtH#?XtXXXt,466F.2d903,905(8thCir.1972).TheUnitedStatesSupremeCourthas ~  recognizedaclaimunderthegeneralmaritimelawforthewrongfuldeathofanonseamandue d  tonegligence.#XtXX?Xt I#?XtXXXtSee#XtXX?Xt-J#?XtXXXtԀ#XtXX?XtuJ#?XtXXXtNorfolkShipbuilding&DrydockCorp.v.Garris#XtXX?XtJ#?XtXXXt,532U.S.811.'hE J & 0 #XtXX?Xt.K#?XtXXXt  #XtXX?XtK#?XtXXXtPunitiveDamages #XtXX?Xt L#?XtXXXt'0K    #XtXX?XtaL#?XtXXXt  Punitivedamagesarenotrecoverablebyseamen#XtXX?XtL#?XtXXXts z  2      #XtXX?XtYM#?XtXXXtԀinpersonalinjuryclaimsunderthe ( JonesActorundergeneralmaritimelaw.#XtXX?XtM#?XtXXXtMilesv.ApexMarineCorp.#XtXX?XtN#?XtXXXt,498U.S.19,31(1990)(a  seaman'srecoveryundertheJonesActorgeneralmaritimelawislimitedtopecuniarylosses);  #XtXX?XtN#?XtXXXtAlholmv.Am.SteamshipCo.#XtXX?XtO#?XtXXXt,144F.3dat118081;#XtXX?XtCP#?XtXXXtHorsleyv.MobileOilCorp.#XtXX?XtP#?XtXXXt,15F.3d200, | 203(1stCir.1994)(applying#XtXX?XtP#?XtXXXtMiles#XtXX?XtQ#?XtXXXtԀtoholdthatpunitivedamagesarenotrecoverableunder b generalmaritimelaw);#XtXX?XtQ#?XtXXXtMillerv.Am.PresentLines,Ltd.#XtXX?XtxR#?XtXXXt,989F.2d1450,1457(6thCir.1993) H (applying#XtXX?XtR#?XtXXXtMiles#XtXX?XtgS#?XtXXXtԀtoholdthatpunitivedamagesarenotrecoverableundertheJonesAct). . #XtXX?XtS#?XtXXXt  #XtXX?XtPT#?XtXXXtMaintenanceandCure #XtXX?XtT#?XtXXXt  !   #XtXX?XtU#?XtXXXt  Generalmaritimelawrequiresashipownertopayaninjuredseamanmaintenanceand j"  cureirrespectiveofanyfindingofanyliabilityundertheJonesActorgeneralmaritimelaw;this P# dutyarisesmerelyundertheemploymentcontract.#XtXX?XtdU#?XtXXXtCalmarS.S.Corp.v.Taylor#XtXX?XtV#?XtXXXt,303U.S.525, 6$ 527(1938);#XtXX?Xt'W#?XtXXXtBritton#XtXX?XtW#?XtXXXt,302F.3dat815;#XtXX?XtW#?XtXXXtWactorv.SpartanTransp.Corp.#XtXX?Xt@X#?XtXXXt,27F.3d347,35152(8th %  Cir.1994)(defining maintenanceand cure;failureofseamantodisclosemedical & informationbeforeemploymentmaybeadefensetomaintenanceandcure);#XtXX?XtX#?XtXXXtStanislawskiv. ^ UpperRiverServs.,Inc.#XtXX?XtY#?XtXXXt,6F.3d537,540(8thCir.1993). D  #XtXX?XtaZ#?XtXXXt  Aseaman'sentitlementtomaintenanceandcureisindependentofentitlementto 0 damagesfornegligenceundertheJonesAct.#XtXX?XtZ#?XtXXXtBritton#XtXX?Xt[#?XtXXXt,302F.3dat816.Therecoveryof t  compensatorydamages,however,cannotduplicatemoneysalreadyrecoveredasmaintenance Z  andcure.#XtXX?Xt\#?XtXXXtStanislawski#XtXX?Xt]#?XtXXXt,6F.3dat540.Maintenanceisanamountsufficienttoprovidethesick @  orinjuredseamanwithfoodandlodgingcomparabletothatheorshewouldhavereceivedon &  hisorhervessel.#XtXX?XtW]#?XtXXXtGardinerv.SeaLandServ.,Inc.#XtXX?Xt~^#?XtXXXt,786F.2d943,946(9thCir.1986).Cureis   reasonablemedicaltreatmentandservicesneededduringtheseaman'srecovery.#XtXX?Xt^#?XtXXXtCalmarS.S.   Corp.v.Taylor#XtXX?Xt_#?XtXXXt,303U.S.at528. z  #XtXX?Xt.`#?XtXXXt  Maintenanceandcuremightnotbeavailable,iftheseamanwasrequiredtoprovide "  preemploymentmedicalinformationandfailedtodosoorconcealedmaterialfactsregardingthe   partoftheplaintiff'sbodyallegedlyinjured.#XtXX?Xt`#?XtXXXtBritton#XtXX?Xta#?XtXXXt,302F.3dat816;#XtXX?XtAb#?XtXXXtWactor#XtXX?Xtb#?XtXXXt,27F.3dat352.   Beforemaintenanceandcureisdenied, theemployermustshowthatthenondisclosedmedical v  informationwasmaterialtoitsdecisiontohire.#XtXX?Xtb#?XtXXXtBritton#XtXX?Xtc#?XtXXXt,302F.3dat816.Maintenanceand \  curealsomaybedeniediftheseamanpersonallydidnotincuractualexpensesforfoodand B lodging.#XtXX?XtGd#?XtXXXtHallv.NobleDrilling(U.S.)Inc.#XtXX?Xt>e#?XtXXXt,242F.3d582,588(5thCir.2001). ( & 0 #XtXX?Xte#?XtXXXt  #XtXX?Xt,f#?XtXXXtMitigationofDamages #XtXX?Xtf#?XtXXXt'0e    #XtXX?Xtf#?XtXXXt  Aninjuredseamanorothermaritimeworkermustmitigatehisorherdamagesby d obtainingreasonablemedicaltreatment.#XtXX?XtTg#?XtXXXtSee#XtXX?Xt1h#?XtXXXtԀ#XtXX?Xtyh#?XtXXXtHagertyv.L&LMarineServ.,Inc.#XtXX?Xth#?XtXXXt,788F.2d315, J 319(5thCir.1986);#XtXX?Xt'i#?XtXXXtYoungv.Am.ExportIsbrandtsenLines,Inc.#XtXX?Xti#?XtXXXt,291F.Supp.447,450(S.D. 0 N.Y.1968).  #XtXX?Xtj#?XtXXXt  #XtXX?Xtj#?XtXXXtComparativeFaultandtheSettlingDefendant(s) #XtXX?Xtj#?XtXXXt L   #XtXX?Xtuk#?XtXXXt  TheFifthCircuitin#XtXX?Xtk#?XtXXXt_Gautreaux_Ԁv._Scurlock_ԀMarine,Inc.#XtXX?XtDl#?XtXXXt,107F.3d331,339(5thCir.  1997)(enbanc),repudiateditsearliercasestothecontrary,andheldthatundertheJonesActan  | employerhasthedutytoactwithordinaryprudencetoprovideitsemployeesasafework !b environment,thatis,toactaswouldareasonableemployerinlikecircumstances.Thecourtalso "H heldthataseamanisobligatedundertheJonesActtoactwithordinaryprudenceundersimilar #. circumstancestoprotecthimselffromthenegligenceofhisemployer.107F.3dat339.#XtXX?Xtl#?XtXXXtSee#XtXX?Xto#?XtXXXtԀ#XtXX?Xto#?XtXXXt5th#XtXh?Xtp#?XtXXXt r$ Cir.Civ.JuryInstr.#XtXX?Xtdp#?XtXXXtԀ4.6(West2009).#XtXX?Xtp#?XtXXXt X% #XtXX?Xt&q#?XtXXXt  Inanadmiraltyaction,whenaplaintiffsettleswithoneofseveraljointtortfeasors,a &D  nonsettlingtortfeasorisresponsibletotheinjuredpartyforthenonsettlingtortfeasor's '*!! proportionateshareofthefaultorresponsibilityincausingtheinjury.#XtXX?Xt}q#?XtXXXtMcDermott,Inc.v. n("" AmClyde&RiverDonCastings,Ltd.#XtXX?Xtr#?XtXXXt,511U.S.202,20809(1994).#XtXX?Xts#?XtXXXtSeeinfra#XtXX?Xts#?XtXXXtԀSpecial T)"# Interrogatories,8.90. :*#$ #XtXX?Xt8t#  +&%%  @G G  %   8.10NEGLIGENCECLAIMUNDERTHEJONESACT nu  ^ ?XtXXXt?\X?Xt  Thelawprovidesaremedytoanyseamanwhosufferspersonalinjuryinthe  courseof[(his)(her)]employmentduetothenegligenceof[(his)(her)]employer.The i  plaintiffhasbroughtapersonalinjuryclaiminthisactionundertheJonesAct.   #\?\ޏu#?\\  TheJonesAct,however,doesnotmaketheemployertheaccidentinsurerofthe  ] seaman.NegligenceonthepartoftheemployerisnecessarytorecoverundertheAct. 2  #\?\.w#?\\  #\?\Jx#?\\CommitteeComments #\?\ޜx#?\\     #\?\x#?\\  TheFifthCircuitin#\?\hy#?\\_Gautreaux_Ԁv._Scurlock_ԀMarine,Inc.#\?\y#?\\,107F.3d331,339(5th e Cir.1997)(enbanc),repudiateditsearliercasestothecontrary,andheldthatunderthe _ JonesActanemployerhasthedutytoactwithordinaryprudencetoprovideits Y employeesasafeworkenvironment,thatis,toactaswouldareasonableemployerinlike S circumstances.ThecourtalsoheldthataseamanisobligatedundertheJonesActtoact M withordinaryprudenceundersimilarcircumstancestoprotecthimselffromthe G negligenceofhisemployer.107F.3dat339.#\?\uz#?\\See#\?\&}#?\\Ԁ#\?\n}#?\\5th#\?\ޱ}#?\\ԀCir.Civ.JuryInstr.#\?\}#?\\Ԁ4.6(West A 2009).#\?\W~##XtX\ޮu#   ;    @ %   8.10ANEGLIGENCECLAIMUNDERTHEJONESACTELEMENTS nN  ^   ?XtXXXt?\X?XtYourverdictmustbefortheplaintiff[andagainstthedefendant]#\?\#?\\1#\?\ށ#?\\Ԁontheplaintiff's  JonesActclaimifallthefollowingelementshavebeenproved#\?\ǀ#?\\2#\?\r#?\\: i  #\?\޸#?\\  #\?\#?\\First#\?\a#?\\,theplaintiffwasemployedbythedefendantasaseamanonavessel#\?\ޫ#?\\3#\?\5#?\\; D  #\?\{#?\\  #\?\Ӄ#?\\Second#\?\$#?\\,duringthecourseoftheplaintiff'semploymentasaseaman,thedefendant  [heredescribethesubmittedactoromission];and 8  #\?\o#?\\  #\?\Y#?\\Third#\?\ު#?\\,thedefendantinanyoneormoreoftherespectssubmittedinparagraph q  Secondwasnegligent;and   #\?\#?\\  #\?\†#?\\Fourth#\?\#?\\,suchnegligence #\?\^#?\\Ԁ #\?\޴#?\\playedanypartincausinginjurytotheplaintiff. e    #\?\#?\\NotesonUse #\?\ޥ#?\\ @   #\?\#?\\  1.Usethisphraseifthereismorethanonedefendant.  #\?\Y#?\\  2.ModelInstruction3.04(BurdenofProof)tellsthejurythatsomethingis Z provedonlyifthejuryfindsitismorelikelytruethannottrue.Thephrase greater T weightoftheevidenceisnotnecessaryhere.ItcanbeincludedinInstruction3.04if N desiredbythecourt. H #\?\#?\\  3.#\?\ޯ#?\\Seeinfra#\?\#?\\ԀModelInstructions8.158.16(defining seamanonavessel). H   #\?\R#?\\CommitteeComments #\?\#?\\    #\?\S#?\\  #\?\޶#?\\See#\?\#?\\Ԁ#\?\O#?\\Showsv.Harber#\?\ޕ#?\\,575F.2d1253,1254(8thCir.1978); #\?\#?\\ Pettyv.DakotaBarge b  Serv.#\?\X#?\\,730F.Supp.983,985(D.Minn.1989). \!  d#\?\Ϗ#?\\  TheFifthCircuitin#\?\d#?\\_Gautreaux_Ԁv._Scurlock_ԀMarine,Inc.#\?\ʐ#?\\,107F.3d331,339(5th "\ Cir.1997)(enbanc),repudiateditsearliercasestothecontrary,andheldthatunderthe #V JonesActanemployerhasthedutytoactwithordinaryprudencetoprovideits $P employeesasafeworkenvironment,thatis,toactaswouldareasonableemployerinlike %J circumstances.ThecourtalsoheldthataseamanisobligatedundertheJonesActtoact &D  withordinaryprudenceundersimilarcircumstancestoprotecthimselffromthe '>!! negligenceofhisemployer.107F.3dat339.#\?\q#?\\See#\?\%#?\\Ԁ#\?\m#?\\5th#\?\޳#?\\ԀCir.Civ.JuryInstr.#\?\#?\\Ԁ4.6(West (8"" 2009). #\?\Y#?\\ )2##  #\?\Õ#?\\ *,$$ #\?\$#?\\   TheissuesofactionablenegligenceandcausationunderF.E.L.A.recently ^  receivedsomeattention.OnJune23,2011,theSupremeCourtdecided#\?\{#?\\CSX X Transportation,Inc.v.McBride#\?\~#?\\,,#\?\#?\\ԄU.S.,131_S.Ct_.2630(2011).Thequestion R presentedtotheCourtwaswhethertheFederalEmployersLiabilityActrequiresproof L  ofproximatecausation.ThisisimportanttoJonesActcasesbecausetheJonesAct F  incorporatesF.E.L.A.standardsinseamenspersonalinjurysuits.46U.S.C.30104. @  TheF.E.L.A.statutorystandardusesthelanguage: :   X XB.` hp x XB#\?\F#?\\forsuchinjuryordeathresultinginwholeorinpartfromthenegligenceof . anyoftheofficers,agents,oremployeesofsuchcarrier,orbyreasonof (  anydefectorinsufficiency,duetoitsnegligence,inits...equipment. "   X XE+ ` hp x X E#\?\ߚ#?\\45U.S.C.51.   #\?\ޤ#?\\  In#\?\#?\\CSX,#\?\b#?\\ԀtheSupremeCourtmaintaineditsearlierrulingin#\?\ޱ#?\\Rogersv.Missouri    PacificR.Co.#\?\*#?\\,352U.S.500(1957).Justice_Ginsburg_,writingfortheCourtin#\?\ު#?\\CSX#\?\R#?\\,  summarizedtheCourtsholding:   X XB.` hp x XB#\?\ޠ#?\\[W]econcludethat[F.E.L.A.]doesnotincorporate proximatecause  standardsdevelopedin_nonstatutory_Ԁcommonlawtortactions.Thecharge  properinFELAcases,wehold,simplytracksthelanguageCongress  employed,informingjuriesthatadefendantrailroadcausedorcontributed  toaplaintiffemployeesinjuryiftherailroadsnegligenceplayedanypart | inbringingabouttheinjury. v  X XE+ ` hp x X E#\?\ގ#?\\Id.at2634.AlsoofnoteintheCSXopinionarethestatementsthatitisunnecessaryto j usethelabel proximatecausewheninstructingthejury,#\?\^#?\\id.#\?\_#?\\Ԁat2636,andthatthe d followinglanguageisalsoappropriatewheninstructingthejuryoncausationina  ^ F.E.L.A.case: !X  X XB.` hp x XB#\?\ޭ#?\\Juriesinsuchcasesareproperlyinstructedthatadefendantrailroad #L  causedorcontributedtoarailroadworkersinjury if[therailroads] $F negligenceplayedapartnomatterhowsmallinbringingaboutthe %@  injury. &: !  X XE+ ` hp x X E#\?\#?\\Id.#\?\#?\\Ԁat2636.  (."#  #\?\6##XtX\#  )(#$ @   %   8.11JONESACT COURSEOFEMPLOYMENTDEFINED n   ^   UndertheJonesActaseamanisinjuredinthecourseof[(his)(her)]employmentwhen, * atthetimeofinjury,[(he)(she)]wasdoingtheworkof[(his)(her)]employer,thatis,[(he)  % (she)]wasworkingintheserviceofthevesselasamemberofhercrew.  ~  @--! CommitteeComments  5    See11thCir.Civ.JuryInstr.6.1(West2005).   0   @  %   8.12JONESACT NEGLIGENCEDEFINED pr  ^   ?XtXXXt?\X?XtTheterms negligentand negligence,asusedintheseinstructions,meanthe * failuretousethatdegreeofcarethatareasonablycarefulpersonwoulduseunderthe  C sameorsimilarcircumstances.Negligencemayconsisteitherindoingsomethingthata   reasonablycarefulpersonwouldnotdounderthesameorsimilarcircumstances,orin  1 failingtodosomethingthatareasonablycarefulpersonwoulddounderthesameor   similarcircumstances. }   d   #\?\m#?\\CommitteeComments #\?\J#?\\     #\?\ޡ#?\\  #\?\#?\\See#\?\U#?\\ԀModelInstruction7.09;#\?\ޝ#?\\9th#\?\#?\\Cir.Civ.JuryInstr.#\?\G#?\\Ԁ7.3(#\?\ޡ#?\\West#\?\#?\\Ԁ2007). R   #\?\/#?\\  TheFifthCircuitin#\?\ސ#?\\_Gautreaux_Ԁv._Scurlock_ԀMarine,Inc.#\?\#?\\,107F.3d331,339(5th R  Cir.1997)(enbanc),repudiateditsearliercasestothecontrary,andheldthatunderthe L JonesActanemployerhasthedutytoactwithordinaryprudencetoprovideits F employeesasafeworkenvironment,thatis,toactaswouldareasonableemployerinlike @ circumstances.ThecourtalsoheldthataseamanisobligatedundertheJonesActtoact : withordinaryprudenceundersimilarcircumstancestoprotecthimselffromthe 4 negligenceofhisemployer.107F.3dat339.#\?\ޠ#?\\See#\?\T#?\\Ԁ#\?\ޜ#?\\5th#\?\#?\\ԀCir.Civ.JuryInstr.#\?\-#?\\Ԁ4.6(West . 2009).#\?\ވ#?\\ ( #\?\##XtX\ތ#   @DD %   8.13JONESACTCAUSATION pr  ^   ?XtXXXt?\X?XtIfyoufindfromtheevidenceinthecasethatthedefendantwasnegligent,then  youmustdecidewhetherthatnegligenceplayedanypartincausinganyinjuryor i  damagessufferedbytheplaintiff.Negligencemaycausedamageorinjury,evenifit   operatesincombinationwiththeactofanotherorsomenaturalcause,aslongasthe W  negligenceplayedanypartincausingthedamageorinjury. p  #\?\'#?\\  [Thisstandardisdifferentfromthecausationrequiredforaclaimof K  unseaworthinessofavessel.Anunseaworthyconditionofavesselcauseddamageor    injuryifthatunseaworthyconditionplayedasubstantialpartinbringingabouttheinjury 9  ordamage,theinjuryordamagewaseitheradirectresultoforareasonablyprobable  consequenceofthecondition,andexceptfortheunseaworthyconditionofthevesselthe ' injuryordamagewouldnothaveoccurred.Unseaworthinessmaybea #\?\x#?\\ causeofdamage  orinjury,eventhoughitoperatesincombinationwiththeactofanotherorsomenatural s cause,aslongastheunseaworthinesscontributessubstantiallytoproducingthedamage  orinjury.]#\?\#?\\1#\?\i#?\\ a    #\?\ޯ#?\\NotesonUse #\?\'#?\\ <   #\?\x#?\\  1.Usethebracketedparagraph,ifaclaimforunseaworthinessissubmittedtothe < juryalongwithaJonesActclaim.  6    #\?\#?\\CommitteeComments #\?\#?\\ !!   #\?\.#?\\  #\?\ޑ#?\\See#\?\#?\\ԀIntroductionto7andModelInstruction7.01n.9(causationunder P#" F.E.L.A.);#\?\*#?\\9th#\?\#?\\ԀCir.Civ.JuryInstr.#\?\#?\\Ԁ7.4and7.7(#\?\v#?\\West#\?\#?\\Ԁ2007);#\?\ #?\\11th#\?\X#?\\Cir.Civ.JuryInstr.#\?\ޥ#?\\Ԁ1.12 J$# (#\?\#?\\West#\?\\#?\\Ԁ2005).#\?\ޢ#?\\Seealso#\?\#?\\Ԁ#\?\=#?\\Alholmv.Am.SteamshipCo.#\?\ރ#?\\,144F.3d1172,118081(8thCir. D%$ 1998). >&%  d#\?\#?\\  TheissuesofactionablenegligenceandcausationunderF.E.L.A.recently '>!& receivedsomeattention.OnJune23,2011,theSupremeCourtdecided#\?\ލ#?\\CSX (8"' Transportation,Inc.v.McBride#\?\ރ#?\\,#\?\#?\\ԄU.S.,131_S.Ct_.2630(2011).Thequestion )2#( presentedtotheCourtwaswhethertheFederalEmployersLiabilityActrequiresproof *,$) ofproximatecausation.ThisisimportanttoJonesActcasesbecausetheJonesAct +&%* incorporatesF.E.L.A.standardsinseamenspersonalinjurysuits.46U.S.C.30104. ^ TheF.E.L.A.statutorystandardusesthelanguage: X    ` X XB.` hp x XB#\?\I#?\\forsuchinjuryordeathresultinginwholeorinpartfromthenegligenceof L  anyoftheofficers,agents,oremployeesofsuchcarrier,orbyreasonof F  anydefectorinsufficiency,duetoitsnegligence,inits...equipment. @   X XE+ ` hp x X E#\?\#?\\45U.S.C.51. 4  #\?\#?\\   In#\?\*#?\\CSX,#\?\ބ#?\\ԀtheSupremeCourtmaintaineditsearlierrulingin#\?\#?\\Rogersv.Missouri (  PacificR.Co.#\?\L#?\\,352U.S.500(1957).Justice_Ginsburg_,writingfortheCourtin#\?\#?\\CSX#\?\t#?\\, "  summarizedtheCourtsholding:    X XB.` hp x XB#\?\#?\\[W]econcludethat[F.E.L.A.]doesnotincorporate proximatecause   standardsdevelopedin_nonstatutory_Ԁcommonlawtortactions.Thecharge    properinFELAcases,wehold,simplytracksthelanguageCongress  employed,informingjuriesthatadefendantrailroadcausedorcontributed  toaplaintiffemployeesinjuryiftherailroadsnegligenceplayedanypart  inbringingabouttheinjury.   X XE+ ` hp x X E#\?\ް#?\\Id.at2634.AlsoofnoteintheCSXopinionarethestatementsthatitisunnecessaryto  usethelabel proximatecausewheninstructingthejury,#\?\ހ#?\\id.#\?\ށ#?\\Ԁat2636,andthatthe  followinglanguageisalsoappropriatewheninstructingthejuryoncausationina | F.E.L.A.case: v  X XB.` hp x XB#\?\#?\\Juriesinsuchcasesareproperlyinstructedthatadefendantrailroad j  causedorcontributedtoarailroadworkersinjury if[therailroads] d negligenceplayedapartnomatterhowsmallinbringingaboutthe  ^ injury. !X  X XE+ ` hp x X E#\?\%#?\\Id.#\?\ #?\\Ԁat2636. #\?\X##XtX\F# #L   $F @  %   8.14JONESACTCONTRIBUTORYNEGLIGENCE ^ @AA!(COMPARATIVEFAULT) pr.  D   ?XtXXXt?\X?XtAseaman #\?\#?\\ hasadutytousethecarethatareasonablycarefulseamanwoulduse   underthesameorsimilarcircumstances.  ) #\?\W#?\\  Ifyoufindinfavorofthe[nameofplaintiff]underInstructionNo.___(here   insertthenumberoftheplaintiff'selementsinstructionorverdictdirector),youmust u   considerwhether[(nameofplaintiff)or(nameofplaintiffsdecedent)]wasalso   negligent.Underthisinstruction,ontheplaintiff's(hereidentifytheclaimtowhichthis c  instructionapplies)claim,youmustassessto[nameofplaintiff] #\?\3#?\\ apercentageofthetotal |  negligence,ifallthefollowingelementshavebeenproved#\?\s#?\\1#\?\##?\\: Q  #\?\i#?\\  #\?\#?\\First#\?\#?\\,[(nameofplaintiff)or(nameofplaintiffsdecedent)](describethe #\?\\#?\\ negligent j conduct);and ? #\?\#?\\  #\?\p#?\\Second#\?\#?\\,[(nameofplaintiff)or(nameofdecedent)]wastherebynegligent;and X #\?\ #?\\  #\?\ޫ#?\\Third#\?\#?\\, #\?\F#?\\ this #\?\ލ#?\\negligenceof[(nameofplaintiff #\?\#?\\)or(nameofplaintiffsdecedent #\?\E#?\\)] - playedapartincausing[(his)(her)]owninjuryordamage. F #\?\޲#?\\  Thetotalpercentagesofthenegligenceof[(nameofplaintiff)or(nameof  plaintiffsdecedent)]andofthedefendantforcausing[(theplaintiff's)or(decedents)] 4 injurymustequal100percent.  !  d   #\?\\#?\\NotesonUse #\?\#?\\  "#   #\?\=#?\\  1.ModelInstruction3.04(BurdenofProof)tellsthejurythatsomethingis !$ provedonlyifthejuryfindsitismorelikelytruethannottrue.Thephrase greater "z% weightoftheevidenceisnotnecessaryhere.ItcanbeincludedinInstruction3.04if #t& desiredbythecourt. $n'   #\?\ޠ#?\\CommitteeComments #\?\j#?\\ *&(   #\?\#?\\  #\?\$#?\\See#\?\u#?\\ԀModelInstruction7.03(regardingFELAclaims);#\?\޽#?\\9th#\?\2#?\\ԀCir.Civ.JuryInstr.#\?\}#?\\Ԁ7.9 '*!) (#\?\#?\\West#\?\4#?\\Ԁ2007).#\?\z#?\\Seealso#\?\#?\\Ԁ#\?\#?\\Ballardv.RiverFleets,Inc.#\?\[#?\\,149F.3d829,83132(8thCir. ($"* 1998);#\?\޽#?\\Alholmv.Am.SteamshipCo.#\?\>#?\\,144F.3d1172,1179(8thCir.1998). |)#+  d#\?\ޞ#?\\  #\?\1#?\\TheFifthCircuitin#\?\#?\\_Gautreaux_Ԁv._Scurlock_ԀMarine,Inc.#\?\#?\\,107F.3d331,339(5th *|$, Cir.1997)(enbanc),repudiateditsearliercasestothecontrary,andheldthatunderthe +v%- JonesActanemployerhasthedutytoactwithordinaryprudencetoprovideits ^ employeesasafeworkenvironment,thatis,toactaswouldareasonableemployerinlike X circumstances.ThecourtalsoheldthataseamanisobligatedundertheJonesActtoact R withordinaryprudenceundersimilarcircumstancestoprotecthimselffromthe L  negligenceofhisemployer.107F.3dat339.#\?\ހ#?\\See#\?\4#?\\Ԁ#\?\|#?\\5th#\?\#?\\ԀCir.Civ.JuryInstr.#\?\ #?\\Ԁ4.6(West F  2009).#\?\h#?\\ @  #\?\#?\\#\?\&#?\\  TheissuesofactionablenegligenceandcausationunderF.E.L.A.recently 4  receivedsomeattention.OnJune23,2011,theSupremeCourtdecided#\?\i#?\\CSX . Transportation,Inc.v.McBride#\?\_#?\\,#\?\#?\\ԄU.S.,131_S.Ct_.2630(2011).Thequestion (  presentedtotheCourtwaswhethertheFederalEmployersLiabilityActrequiresproof "  ofproximatecausation.ThisisimportanttoJonesActcasesbecausetheJonesAct   incorporatesthestandardsofF.E.L.A.inseamenspersonalinjurysuits.46U.S.C.   30104.TheF.E.L.A.statutorystandardusesthelanguage:    X XB.` hp x XB#\?\%#?\\forsuchinjuryordeathresultinginwholeorinpartfromthenegligenceof  anyoftheofficers,agents,oremployeesofsuchcarrier,orbyreasonof  anydefectorinsufficiency,duetoitsnegligence,inits...equipment.   X XE+ ` hp x X E#\?\#?\\45U.S.C.51.  #\?\ފ#?\\    In#\?\#?\\CSX,theSupremeCourtmaintaineditsearlierrulingin#\?\T#?\\Rogersv.Missouri  PacificR.Co.#\?\#?\\,352U.S.500(1957).Justice_Ginsburg_,writingfortheCourtin#\?\Z#?\\CSX#\?\#?\\, | summarizedtheCourtsholding: v  X XB.` hp x XB#\?\P#?\\[W]econcludethat[F.E.L.A.]doesnotincorporate proximatecause j standardsdevelopedin_nonstatutory_Ԁcommonlawtortactions.Thecharge d properinFELAcases,wehold,simplytracksthelanguageCongress  ^ employed,informingjuriesthatadefendantrailroadcausedorcontributed !X toaplaintiffemployeesinjuryiftherailroadsnegligenceplayedanypart "R inbringingabouttheinjury. #L  ` X XE+ ` hp x X E#\?\>#?\\Id.at2634.AlsoofnoteintheCSXopinionarethestatementsthatitisunnecessaryto %@  usethelabel proximatecausewheninstructingthejury,#\?\#?\\id.#\?\#?\\Ԁat2636,andthatthe &: ! followinglanguageisalsoappropriatewheninstructingthejuryoncausationina '4!" F.E.L.A.case: (."#  X XB.` hp x XB#\?\i#?\\Juriesinsuchcasesareproperlyinstructedthatadefendantrailroad *"$%  causedorcontributedtoarailroadworkersinjury if[therailroads] z+%& negligenceplayedapartnomatterhowsmallinbringingaboutthe ^ injury. X  X XE+ ` hp x X E#\?\޿#?\\Id.#\?\ޤ#?\\Ԁat2636. #\?\##XtX\ # L    F  @ %   8.15_ SEAMAN_ԀDEFINED mu  ^   A_ seaman_Ԁisa[(sea)or(river)or(lake)]1basedmaritimeemployeewhosework * regularlyexposes[(him)(her)]tothespecialhazardsanddisadvantagestowhichtheywhogo  % downtothe[(sea)or(rivers)or(lakes)]2inshipsaresubjected.Theterm_ seaman_Ԁdoesnot  ~ includealandbasedworkerwhohasonlyatemporaryconnectiontoavessel,andtherefore 5  whoseemploymentdoesnotregularlyexpose[(him)(her)]totheperilsofthe[(sea)or(river)or  0  (lake)].3Rather,a_ seaman_Ԁisamemberofacrewofavessel.     Youmustfindthattheplaintiffwasa_ seaman,_Ԁifithasbeenproved4thatatthetimeof @  theincidentforwhichtheplaintiffisclaiming[(he)(she)]wasinjured: ;    First,theplaintiffhadanemploymentrelatedconnectiontoavessel[ortoanidentifiable   groupofsuchvessels]5thatwassubstantialintermsofbothitsduration(inthatitoccupiedat K  least30percentoftheplaintiff'sworktime)andnature;and F   Second,theplaintiff'sworkdutiescontributedto[(thefunctionofthevessel)or(the  functionofanidentifiablegroupofvessels)6or(theaccomplishmentof(its)or(their))]7 V mission)]. Q  @$ NotesonUse     1.Althoughthecaselawrefersto_ sea_Ԁtoincludealltypesofnavigablewater,toavoid a  juryconfusionthetermbestdescribingthenavigablewateratissueinthecaseshouldbeusedin G! thisinstruction. -"   2.Seefootnote1above. ($   3.Seefootnote1above.  &   4.ModelInstruction3.04(BurdenofProof)tellsthejurythatsomethingisprovedonly 8"( ifthejuryfindsitismorelikelytruethannottrue.Thephrase greaterweightoftheevidence #) isnotnecessaryhere.ItcanbeincludedinInstruction3.04ifdesiredbythecourt. $*   5.Includethe_ identifiable_Ԁ_group_Ԁlanguageofthedefinitiononlyiftheevidence ]%, supportssuchaninstruction. C&-   6.Seefootnote5above. '>!/   7.Theword_ their_Ԁshouldbeused,ifthejuryisinstructedonanidentifiablegroupof ("1  vessels.Seefootnote5above. )}#2 &      @--! CommitteeComments  ^   SeesupraIntroductionat5;HarborTug&BargeCo.v.Papai,520U.S.548,554 Y (1997);Chandris,Inc.v.Latsis,515U.S.347,36872(1995);Rothv.U.S.S.GreatLakesFleet, ? ' ^tInc.,25F.3d707,70809(8thCir.1994);Millerv.PattonTullyTransp.Co.,Inc.,851F.2d202,  % 204(8thCir.1988);Slattonv.MartinK.EbyConstr.Co.,506F.2d505,510(8thCir.1974); i  OffshoreCo.v.Robison,266F.2d769,775(5thCir.1959).SeealsoStewartv.DutraConstr. O  Co.,543U.S.481(2005). 5     `     @  %   8.16JONESACT VESSELDEFINED mu  ^   ForclaimsundertheJonesAct,theterm vesselmeansanystructurethatispractically * capableoftransportingpersonsorpropertyonnavigablewaters.  %  @--! CommitteeComments   ~   See1U.S.C.3;Introduction,Vessel,above.Thedefinitionof vesselforclaims 5  undertheJonesActandforclaimsundertheLongshoreandHarborWorkers'CompensationAct    relatestowhethertheplaintiffisaseamanandtowhetheroneortheotherofthesestatutes   applies.Seamanstatusdependsuponthenatureoftheworkperformedbytheplaintiffatthe   timeoftheallegedincident.Inthisrespect,thescopeoftheterm vesselundertheLongshore o  andHarborWorkers'CompensationActisthesameasthatundertheJonesAct.SeeStewartv. U  DutraConstr.Co.,543U.S.481(2005).  ;   @c c  %   8.20UNSEAWORTHINESSCLAIMAGAINSTEMPLOYER mu  ^   Undermaritimelaw,everyshipowneroroperatorowestoeveryseamanemployed * aboardthevesselthenondelegabledutytokeepandmaintainthevessel,andalldecksand  % passageways,appliances,gear,tools,andequipmentofthevessel,inaseaworthyconditionatall  ~ times. 5    Tobeina seaworthyconditionmeanstobeinaconditionreasonablysuitableandfitto  0  beusedforthepurposeortheuseforwhichthevesselwasprovidedorintended.An   unseaworthyconditionmayresultfromthelackofanadequatecrew,thelackofadequate @  manpowertoperformaparticulartaskonthevessel,ortheimproperuseofotherwiseseaworthy ;  equipment.     Liabilityforanunseaworthyconditiondoesnotinanywaydependuponnegligenceor K  faultorblame.Thatistosay,theshipowneroperatorisliableforallinjuriesanddamages F substantiallycausedbyanunseaworthyconditionexistingatanytime,eventhoughtheowneror  operatormayhaveexercisedduecareunderthecircumstances,andmayhavehadnonoticeor V knowledgeoftheunseaworthyconditionwhichsubstantiallycausedtheinjuryordamage. Q   However,ashipownerisnotrequiredtofurnishanaccidentfreevessel.Avesselisnot  requiredtohavethebestequipmentorthefinestcrew,butonlyequipmentwhichisreasonably a  fitforitsintendedpurposeandacrewwhichisreasonablyadequateandcompetent. \"  & % @--! CommitteeComments  $   SeeMitchellv.TrawlerRacer,Inc.,362U.S.539,550(1960);5thCir.Civ.JuryInstr. l & 4.11'%%(West2009);9thCir.Civ.JuryInstr.7.11(West2007).  R!'  @ %   8.21UNSEAWORTHINESSCLAIMAGAINSTEMPLOYERELEMENTS w4'  ^   Yourverdictmustfortheplaintiff[andagainstdefendant(nameofthedefendant)]1on * theplaintiff'sclaimofunseaworthiness,ifallthefollowingelementshavebeenproved2:  %   First,theplaintiffwasemployedbythedefendantasaseamanonavessel3atthetime  ~ [(he)(she)]sufferedinjury;and 5    Second,thevesselonwhichtheplaintiffwasinjuredwas[(owned)(operated)]by[(his)  0  (her)]employer;and     Third,thedefendant'svesselwas[____________________];4and @    Fourth,thedefendant'svesselwastherebyrenderedunseaworthy;and ;    Fifth,theunseaworthyconditionofthevesselwasasubstantialfactorincausingthe   injuryordamagetotheplaintiff. K   @$ NotesonUse  F   1.Usethisphraseifthereismorethanonedefendant.    2.ModelInstruction3.04(BurdenofProof)tellsthejurythatsomethingisprovedonly V ifthejuryfindsitismorelikelytruethannottrue.Thephrase greaterweightoftheevidence < isnotnecessaryhere.ItcanbeincludedinInstruction3.04ifdesiredbythecourt. "   3.SeeModelJuryInstructions,8.158.17(defining seamanonavessel). {   4.Herestatethesubmittedconditionofthevessel. v  @--! CommitteeComments  -"   SeeModelInstruction7.0;5thCir.Civ.JuryInstr.4.5(West2009);9thCir.Civ.Jury ($ Instr.7.11(West2007);11thCir.Civ.JuryInstr.6.1(West2005).  l %  @   %   8.22UNSEAWORTHINESSCLAIM!CAUSATION 0  ^   _?XtXXXt?\X?XtAnunseaworthyconditionofavesselcauseddamageorinjury,if:  #\?\ޟ0#?\\ *  #\?\M1#?\\(a)#\?\ު1#?\\  itplayedasubstantialpartinbringingabouttheinjuryordamage,  C  #\?\1#?\\ (b) #\?\ޝ2#?\\  #\?\2#?\\Ԁtheinjuryordamagewaseitheradirectresultoforareasonablyprobable   consequenceofthecondition,and  1 #\?\<3#?\\(c) #\?\4#?\\  #\?\^4#?\\ theinjuryordamagewouldnothaveoccurred #\?\޲4#?\\ exceptfortheunseaworthy   conditionofthevessel#\?\'5#?\\. }  #\?\޲5#?\\  Unseaworthinessmaybea #\?\ 6#?\\ causeofdamageorinjury,eventhoughitoperatesin   combinationwiththeactofanotherorsomenaturalcause,aslongastheunseaworthiness k  contributessubstantiallytoproducingthedamageorinjury.   #\?\v6#?\\  [ThisstandardisdifferentfromthecausationrequiredforaclaimundertheJones Y Act.UnderaJonesActclaim,ifyoufind #\?\7#?\\ thatthedefendantwasnegligent,thenyou r mustdecidewhether #\?\ި8#?\\ this #\?\C9#?\\negligenceplayedanypartincausingtheinjuryordamages G sufferedbytheplaintiff. #\?\ޓ9#?\\]#\?\E:#?\\1#\?\ދ:#?\\ `  d   #\?\:#?\\NotesonUse #\?\_;#?\\ 5   #\?\ް;#?\\  1.Usethebracketedparagraph,ifaclaimundertheJonesActissubmittedtothe 5 juryalongwithanunseaworthinessclaim. /   #\?\<#?\\CommitteeComments #\?\=#?\\    #\?\m=#?\\  #\?\=#?\\See#\?\!>#?\\ԀModelInstructions7.0and7.01n.9(causationunderFELA)(2007);#\?\i>#?\\9th#\?\>#?\\Cir. I   Civ.JuryInstr.#\?\=?#?\\Ԁ7.4and7.7(#\?\ޫ?#?\\West#\?\?#?\\2007);#\?\B@#?\\11th#\?\ގ@#?\\Cir.Civ.JuryInstr.#\?\@#?\\Ԁ6.1(#\?\5A#?\\West#\?\}A#?\\2005).#\?\A#?\\See C!! also#\?\B#?\\Ԁ#\?\rB#?\\Brittonv.U.S.S.GreatLakesFleet,#\?\޸B#?\\Inc.,302F.3d812,818(8thCir.2002);#\?\"C#?\\ԀAlholm ="" #\?\ތC#?\\v.Am.SteamshipCo.#\?\C#?\\,144F.3d1172,118081(8thCir.1998). 7## #\?\FD#?\\  TheissuesofactionablenegligenceandcausationunderF.E.L.A.recently $7$ receivedsomeattention.OnJune23,2011,theSupremeCourtdecided#\?\D#?\\CSX %1% Transportation,Inc.v.McBride#\?\޼E#?\\,___U.S.___,131S.Ct.2630#\?\>F#?\\(2011).Thequestion &+ & presentedtotheCourtwaswhethertheFederalEmployersLiabilityActrequiresproof '%!' ofproximatecausation.ThisisimportanttoJonesActcasesbecausetheJonesAct }("( incorporatesthestandardsofF.E.L.A.inseamenspersonalinjurysuits.46U.S.C. w)#)  30104.TheF.E.L.A.statutorystandardusesthelanguage :_ q*$*  X XB.` hp x XB#\?\ޞF#?\\forsuchinjuryordeathresultinginwholeorinpartfromthenegligenceof ^  anyoftheofficers,agents,oremployeesofsuchcarrier,orbyreasonof X anydefectorinsufficiency,duetoitsnegligence,inits...equipment. R  X XE+ ` hp x X E#\?\!I#?\\45U.S.C.51.  R #\?\J#?\\  In#\?\XK#?\\CSX,#\?\ެK#?\\theSupremeCourtmaintaineditsearlierrulingin#\?\K#?\\Rogersv.Missouri   PacificR.Co.#\?\rL#?\\,352U.S.500(1957).Justice_Ginsburg_,writingfortheCourtin#\?\L#?\\CSX#\?\ޔM#?\\,   summarizedtheCourtsholding:    X XB.` hp x XB#\?\M#?\\[W]econcludethat[F.E.L.A.]doesnotincorporate proximatecause ` standardsdevelopedin_nonstatutory_Ԁcommonlawtortactions.Thecharge Z properinFELAcases,wehold,simplytracksthelanguageCongress T  employed,informingjuriesthatadefendantrailroadcausedorcontributed N  toaplaintiffemployeesinjuryiftherailroadsnegligenceplayedanypart H  inbringingabouttheinjury. B   X XE+ ` hp x X E#\?\N#?\\Id.at2634.AlsoofnoteintheCSXopinionarethestatementsthatitisunnecessaryto B  usethelabel proximatecausewheninstructingthejury,#\?\ޛQ#?\\id.#\?\ޙR#?\\Ԁat2636,andthatthe < followinglanguageisalsoappropriatewheninstructingthejuryoncausationina 6 F.E.L.A.case: 0  X XB.` hp x XB#\?\R#?\\Juriesinsuchcasesareproperlyinstructedthatadefendantrailroad   causedorcontributedtoarailroadworkersinjury if[therailroads]  negligenceplayedapartnomatterhowsmallinbringingaboutthe  injury. |  X XE+ ` hp x X E#\?\9T#?\\Id.#\?\V#?\\Ԁat2636.#\?\eV##XtX\޾0# 8   8 @HH %   8.30LONGSHOREANDHARBORWORKERS'COMPENSATIONACT ^ @U U 905(b)TURNOVERCLAIMNEGLIGENCESTANDARD 5W  J   _?XtXXXt?\X?Xt[Nameofdefendant]#\?\*X#?\\1#\?\ޡX#?\\Ԁdoesnotowetheplaintiffthedutytoprovideaseaworthy <  vessel;[nameofthedefendant]isliableonlyif[(he)(she)(it)]wasnegligentandthat  U negligencewastheproximatecauseofthe[nameofplaintiff's]injury. *  #\?\X#?\\  Negligenceisthefailuretoexercisereasonablecareunderthecircumstances.A   vesseloperatorsuchasdefendant[nameofthedefendant]mustexercisereasonablecare |  beforetheplaintiff'semployerbeganthedefendant'soperationsonthevessel.Thismeans   thatdefendant[nameofthedefendant]mustusereasonablecaretohavethevesselandits j  equipmentinsuchconditionthatanexpertandexperienced[here,insertthetypeof  maritimeemploymentinwhichtheplaintiff'semployerwasengagedonthevessel] X wouldbeable,bytheexerciseofreasonablecare,tocarryonits #\?\DZ#?\\ [his][her]#\?\U]#?\\Ԁworkonthe q vesselwithreasonablesafetytopersonsandproperty. F #\?\ޥ]#?\\  [Nameofthedefendant]mustwarntheplaintiff'semployerofahazardonthe ! vessel,orahazardwithrespecttothevessel'sequipment,if #\?\T^#?\\: :  #\?\E_#?\\Ԁ(1)[nameofthedefendant]knewaboutthehazard,orshouldhavediscovereditinthe s exerciseofreasonablecare,and  #\?\ަ_#?\\(2)thehazardwasonewhichwaslikelytobeencounteredbytheplaintiff'semployerin !g! thecourseofitsoperationsinconnectionwiththedefendant'svessel,and <## #\?\ފ`#?\\Ԁ(3)thehazardwasonewhichtheplaintiff'semployerdidnotknowabout,andwhich %% wouldnotbeobvioustooranticipatedbyareasonablycompetent[here,insertthetypeof &0 ' maritimeemploymentinwhichtheplaintiff'semployerwasengagedonthevessel]inthe (!)  performanceofits#\?\ޙa#?\\[his][her]#\?\&' @ %   8.41GENERALMARITIMELAWNONEMPLOYEEINVITEE'SCLAIM ^ @/ / CONTRIBUTORYNEGLIGENCE(COMPARATIVEFAULT) '  D   ?XtXXXt?\X?XtIfyoufindinfavoroftheplaintiffunderInstructionNo.___(hereinsertthe   numberoftheplaintiff'selementsinstructionorverdictdirector),youmustconsider  ) whether[(nameofplaintiff)or(nameofdecedent)]wasalsonegligent.Underthis   Instruction,onthe[nameofplaintiff's][hereidentifytheclaimtowhichthisinstruction u   applies]claim,whetherornotthedefendantwaspartlyatfault,youmustassesstothe   [(nameofplaintiff)or(nameofdecedent)]apercentageofthetotalnegligence,ifallthe c  followingelementshavebeenproved#\?\ #?\\1#\?\#?\\: |  #\?\_#?\\  #\?\޷#?\\First#\?\#?\\,[(nameofplaintiff)or(nameofdecedent)](describethe #\?\R#?\\ negligentconduct#\?\#?\\); Q  and j #\?\)#?\\  #\?\ޚ#?\\Second#\?\#?\\,[(nameofplaintiff)or(nameofdecedent)]wastherebynegligent#\?\6#?\\1#\?\޾#?\\;and ? #\?\#?\\  #\?\a#?\\Third#\?\޲#?\\,thatnegligenceof[(theplaintiff)or(nameofdecedent)] #\?\#?\\ playedapartin X [(his)(her)]owninjuryordamage. - #\?\~#?\\  Thetotalofthenegligenceof[(nameofplaintiff)or(nameofdecedent)]andof F thenegligenceofthedefendantforcausing[(plaintiff's)or(decedents)injurymust  equal100percent. 4  d   #\?\"#?\\NotesonUse #\?\ޣ#?\\  !   #\?\#?\\  1.ModelInstruction3.04(BurdenofProof)tellsthejurythatsomethingis g " provedonlyifthejuryfindsitismorelikelytruethannottrue.Thephrase greater a!# weightoftheevidenceisnotnecessaryhere.ItcanbeincludedinInstruction3.04if ["$ desiredbythecourt. U#% #\?\W#?\\  2.Define negligenceundertheordinaryreasonablecarestandard.#\?\#?\\See#\?\ޯ#?\\Ԁ#\?\#?\\supra#\?\=#?\\ $U& ModelInstructions7.097.11withoutthebracketedlanguage.#\?\އ#?\\Seealso#\?\#?\\Ԁ#\?\l#?\\Kermarecv. %O' CompagnieGeneraleTransatlantique#\?\޲#?\\,358U.S.625,632(1959). &I (   #\?\9#?\\CommitteeComments #\?\޺#?\\ (!)   #\?\#?\\  #\?\t#?\\See#\?\#?\\Ԁ#\?\ #?\\Ballardv.RiverFleets,Inc.#\?\S#?\\,149F.3d829,831(8thCir.1998). c)#*  d#\?\޵##XtX\*#  *c$+ @  %   8.81COMPENSATORYDAMAGES   ^   ?XtXXXt?\X?XtIfyoufindtheissuesinfavorofthe[nameofplaintiff],youmustawardan * amountthatwillfairlyandjustlycompensate#\?\)#?\\[(him)or(her)]#\?\#?\\Ԁforanydamagesyou  C believe[(he)(she)]sustained[andisreasonablycertaintosustaininthefuture]asadirect   resultoftheoccurrencementionedintheevidence.  1 #\?\l#?\\  Youshouldconsiderthefollowingelementsofdamages:   #\?\ޓ#?\\(a)#\?\-#?\\  #\?\r#?\\Ԁphysicalpainandsuffering; }  #\?\#?\\(b)#\?\5#?\\  #\?\z#?\\mentalanguish;   #\?\#?\\(c)#\?\/#?\\  #\?\t#?\\incomelossinthepast; k  #\?\#?\\(d)#\?\2#?\\  #\?\w#?\\impairmentofearningcapacityorabilityinthefuture;and   #\?\#?\\(e)#\?\Y#?\\  #\?\ޞ#?\\thereasonablevalue,notexceedingtheactualcosttotheplaintiff,ofmedicalcare Y thatyoufindwillbereasonablycertaintoberequiredinthefutureasaproximateresult r oftheinjuryinquestion. G  d#\?\#?\\  #\?\a#?\\Damagescannotbebasedonspeculation. `  d#\?\޻#?\\_#\?\O##XtX\H#_     @7 7  %   8.81ACOMPENSATORYDAMAGES ^ @ (COMPARATIVEFAULTALTERNATE) I  D   Ifyoufindinfavorofthe[nameofplaintiff],thenyoumustdeterminetheentireamount   thatwillfairlyandjustlycompensate[himorher]foranydamagesyoubelieve[(he)(she)] i  sustained[andisreasonablycertaintosustaininthefuture]asaresultoftheincidentmentioned  d intheevidence.Ifliabilityisdetermined,youwillthenassessthepercentagesoffault(from    zeroto100percent)forwhicheachpartyisresponsiblewhichcausedthe[nameofplaintiffs] t  damagesdetermined.Donotreduceorincreaseanyamountofdamagesyoufindbyany o  percentageoffaultthatyoufind. &    Youshouldconsiderthefollowingelementsofdamages:physicalpainandsuffering; !  mentalanguish;incomelossinthepast;impairmentofearningcapacityorabilityinthefuture; z  andthereasonablevalue,notexceedingtheactualcosttotheplaintiff,ofmedicalcarethatyou 1 findwillbereasonablycertaintoberequiredinthefutureasaproximateresultoftheinjuryin , question.    Damagescannotbebasedonspeculation.  < @ %   8.81BPUNITIVEDAMAGES hev  ^   ?XtXXXt?\X?XtIfyoufindinfavorof(nameofplaintiff)andagainst(nameofdefendant)under * Instruction(s)_____,andifyoufurtherfindthat(nameofdefendant)actedwillfullyand  C wantonlywithrecklessorcallousdisregardfortherightsofothers,oractedwithgross   negligenceoractualmaliceorcriminalindifference,thenyoumay,butarenotrequired  1 to,awardpunitivedamagesagainstthatdefendant.Thepurposeofanawardofpunitive   damagesistopunishthe #\?\#?\\ defendantandtodeter[(it)(him)(her)]andothersfromacting }  as[(it)(he)(she)]did.    d   #\?\~#?\\CommitteeComments #\?\#?\\ k    #\?\#?\\  #\?\9#?\\SeeFifthCircuitPatternJuryInstructions(Civil)#\?\ފ#?\\,4.10(#\?\#?\\W#\?\Q#?\\est #\?\ޔ#?\\2009Revision) k  and#\?\#?\\GammaPlastics,Inc.v.AmericanPlasticsLines,Ltd#\?\L#?\\,32F.3d1244,1254(#\?\#?\\8thCir. e 1994).Thisinstructionmaybeusedinanycaseofpropertydamagethatwould _ otherwisequalifyunder28U.S.C.1333,butisbeforethecourtondiversity Y jurisdiction,eitherasanoriginalactionorasaresultofbeingremoved,andajury S demandhasbeenmade. M #\?\#?\\  ThisinstructionisincludedbecauseoftheSupremeCourtopinioninamassive   pollutioncaseapprovingpunitivedamagesunderthegeneralmaritimelaw,butonlyinan  amountnottoexceedcompensatorydamages.#\?\#?\\ExxonShippingCo.v.Baker#\?\)#?\\,554U.S.  471(2008).The#\?\މ#?\\Exxon#\?\#?\\Ԁcasedoesnot,however,necessarilyresolvetheissueofwhether  generalmaritimelawpermitsrecoveryofpunitivedamagesbynonseamenwhosuffer  personalinjuryordeath.  #\?\H#?\\  Thereispresentlyasplitofauthorityontheissue. #\?\w#?\\ #\?\#?\\InreHorizonCruises I  Litigation#\?\N#?\\,2000WL685365(S.D.N.Y.2000)(acknowledgessplitamongcourts);#\?\#?\\contra C! InreDiamondBMarineServices,Inc.#\?\P#?\\,2000WL222847(E.D.La.2000);#\?\#?\\O'Harav. =" CelebrityCruises#\?\<#?\\,979F.Supp.254(S.D.N.Y.1997).#\?\ް#?\\Ԁ #\?\#?\\ The#\?\_#?\\GammaPlastics#\?\ޮ#?\\Ԁcase 7#  involveddamagetocargoonlyanditsdiscussionofpunitivedamagesisdicta. 1$! Nevertheless,thediscussionoftheissuein#\?\#?\\Gamma#\?\#?\\ԀisanindicationthattheEighth +%" Circuitwouldpermitrecoveryofpunitivedamagesinnonseamanwrongfuldeathcases %&# becausetheopinionitcites,#\?\;#?\\Churchillv.F/UFJORD#\?\=#?\\,892F.2d763(9thCir.1988),is ' $ suchacase. (!% #\?\ޘ#?\\  Punitivedamagesareavailableundergeneralmaritimelawforawillfulfailureto w)#& payaninjuredseamanmaintenanceandcure.#\?\4#?\\See#\?\#?\\Ԁ#\?\a#?\\AtlanticSoundingCo.,Inc.v. q*$' Townsend#\?\ާ#?\\,___U.S.___, #\?\'#?\\ 129S.Ct.2561#\?\#?\\,2009WL17894669( #\?\#?\\2009). k+ %( #\?\1#?\\  ThisinstructionisnottobeusedinseamancasesundertheJonesActorin ^ unseaworthinesssuitsundergeneralmaritimelaw.#\?\ގ#?\\Cf.#\?\s#?\\Ԁ#\?\޻#?\\Milesv.ApexMarineCorp.,#\?\#?\\Ԁ498 X U.S.19,28,32(1990);#\?\a#?\\AtlanticSoundingCo.,Inc.v.Townsend,#\?\#?\\Ԁ___U.S.___,129S.Ct. R 2561(2009).  L  A#\?\D##XtX\#@[ [  %   8.82PRESENTVALUEOFFUTUREDAMAGES /  ^   ?XtXXXt?\X?XtIfyou #\?\ެ# ?\\findthattheplaintiff#\?\#?\\willsustain[specifydamagessubjecttopresentvalue  reduction,suchas, lostfutureearningsor futuremedicalexpenses],#\?\u#?\\then #\?\X#?\\ you #\?\ޢ# ?\\must i   #\?\#?\\ reducethosefuturedamagestotheirpresentvalue.   #\?\O # ?\\  #\?\ #?\\Thepresentvalueoffuturedamagesistheamountofmoneythatwillfully  ] compensatetheplaintiffforfuturedamages,assumingthatamountisinvestednowand 2  willearnareasonablyriskfreerateofinterestforthetimethatwillpassuntilthefuture K  damagesoccur.#\?\1 #?\\    #\?\޽ #?\\  #\?\ #?\\Youmustnotreducetopresentvalueanynoneconomicdamagesyoufindthat   plaintiffisreasonablycertaintosustaininthefuture,suchasforpainandsuffering,or r mentalanguish.#\?\b #?\\1#\?\އ #?\\  #\?\ #?\\  #\?\$#?\\ NotesonUse A  #\?\s#?\\    1.0 ` #\?\#?\\Cranev.CrestTankers,Inc.#\?\G#?\\Ԁ47F.3d292,295n.5(8thCir.1995).#\?\ި#?\\z` (#` (# #\?\#?\\  CommitteeComments #\?\q#?\\ U #\?\#?\\  #\?\>#?\\Themethodsofprovingtheamountoffuturedamagesandofreducingthat 0  amounttopresentvaluecanvarywiththefactsofeachcaseandwiththeexpertopinions *! andcalculationsreceivedintoevidenceineachcase.#\?\ޞ#?\\E.g.,#\?\#?\\Beall,CharlesF.,#\?\1#?\\Economic $"  DamagesinPersonalInjuryCases#\?\މ#?\\,FloridaCivilPracticeDamages,Ch.3(TheFlorida #! Bar2005);_Landsea_,WilliamF.,andRoberts,DavidL.,#\?\ #?\\InflationandthePresentValue $" ofFutureEconomicDamages#\?\#?\\,37U.MiamiL.Rev.93(Nov.1982).#\?\ރ#?\\ %# #\?\#?\\  TheEighthCircuithascommented: p& $  X XT@` hp x XT#\?\A#?\\Therearenumerouswaysofpresentingacaseinvolvingfuturedamages. ,)"& Typicallythedistrictcourtwill...takejudicialnoticeoftheplaintiffslife &*#' expectancy.Ifthecaseinvolvesanissueoffuturelostwages,generallyan  +$( expertwitnessisemployedwho,oncequalified,opinesonvariousissues ,%) includingworklifeexpectancy,futuredamages,andmethodsof ^ discountingthesametopresentvalue. X  X XN+ ` hp x X N#\?\6#?\\SeeCranev.CrestTankers,Inc.,#\?\#?\\47F.3d292,295(8thCir.1995).#\?\b#?\\Ԁ#\?\#?\\Ԁ#\?\#?\\SeealsoJones& X LaughlinSteelCorp.v._Pheifer_#\?\U#?\\,462U.S.523,54546(1983);#\?\#?\\Cranev.CrestTankers,  R Inc.#\?\b#?\\,47F.3d292,295n.4(8thCir.1995)( Ithaslongbeenheldthatlifeexpectancy  L tablesareadmissibleindamageactionsfortheconsiderationoftheprobabilitiesof  F damageoveraperiodofyears)(#\?\#?\\quotingContinentalCasualtyCompanyv.Jackson#\?\#?\\,400  @ F.2d285,293(8thCir.1968)).#\?\ލ#?\\  : #\?\#?\\  #\?\_#?\\TheCommitteebelievesitissufficientforthetrialjudgetoinstructthejuryabout  itsbasicdutiesofdeterminingtheamountoffuturedamagesandofreducingtopresent   value,withoutselectingandinstructingthejuryonaspecificmethodology.#\?\ޭ#?\\   #\?\!##XtX\#  H  bA   8.83COMPENSATORYDAMAGESNOTTAXABLE  ^ !  ?XtXXXt?\X?XtIntheeventthatyou #\?\3"#?\\ awardthe(nameofplaintiff)moneydamages,youare J instructedthattheawardisnotsubjecttoanyfederalorstateincometaxes.Therefore,   youmaynotconsidertaxesinconsideringanyawardofdamages.  8 #\?\ޭ"#?\\   #\?\##?\\CommitteeComments #\?\c$#?\\ L    #\?\޺$#?\\  #\?\%#?\\See#\?\n%#?\\Ԁ#\?\޶%#?\\Norfolk&WesternRy.Co.v.Liepelt#\?\%#?\\,444U.S.490(1980)(instructionis L  mandatory);#\?\e&#?\\Fanettiv.HellenicLines,Ltd.#\?\&#?\\,678F.2d424,431(2ndCir.1982);#\?\T'#?\\cf.#\?\޾'#?\\ F  #\?\(#?\\Flaniganv.BurlingtonN.,Inc.#\?\`(#?\\,632F.2d880,889(8thCir.1980) #\?\(#?\\Ԁ (withoutevidenceof @  anexcessiveverdict,thefailuretogiveinstructionwasnotprejudicial).#\?\,)#?\\ :   d#\?\)#?\\#\?\S*##XtX\R"#   `     h    ^ b@   %    8.84DUTYTOMINIMIZEDAMAGES roO+  ^   Itisthedutyofanypersonwhohasbeeninjuredtousereasonablediligenceand * reasonablemeans,underthecircumstances,topreventtheaggravationof[(his)(her)]injury;to  % actinawaythatbringsaboutarecoveryfromtheinjury;andtotakeadvantageofany  ~ reasonableopportunity[(he)(she)]mayhavetoreduceorminimizelossordamage.[(He) 5  (She)]isrequiredtoobtainreasonablemedicalcareandfollow[(his)(her)]doctor'sreasonable  0  adviceandtoseekoutortakeadvantageofabusinessoremploymentopportunitythatwas   reasonablyavailableto[(him)(her)]underallthecircumstancesshownbytheevidence.You @  shouldreducetheamountoftheplaintiff'sdamagesbytheamount[(he)(she)]couldhave ;  avoidedbyobtainingandfollowingreasonablemedicalcareandadviceortheamountthatthe   plaintiffcouldhavereasonablyrealizedif[(he)(she)]hadtakenadvantageofsuchbusinessor K  employmentopportunity,butdidnotdoso. F  @--! CommitteeComments     ?XtXXXt?\X?XtSee#\?\0#?\\Ԁ #\?\@1#?\\ AmericanMill.Co.v.TrusteeofDistribution#\?\މ1#?\\Trust,623F.3d570,575(8th V Cir.2010)( Apartyinadmiraltycanhavealegaldutytomitigatedamages);#\?\1#?\\Rapisardi P #\?\2#?\\v.UnitedFruitCo.#\?\+3#?\\,441F.2d1308,1312(2dCir.1971);#\?\ރ3#?\\Saleebyv.KingswayTankers, J Inc.#\?\3#?\\,531F.Supp.879,891(S.D.N.Y.1981). D  #\?\h4##XtX\0#  ] @H H  %    8.85_ MAINTENANCE_ԀAND_ CURE_ԀDEFINED rot5  ^   Asusedintheseinstructions,theterm_ maintenance_Ԁmeansthecostoffoodandlodging * thattheplaintiffhasactuallyincurredthatisreasonableforapersonin[(his)(her)]community  % orisreasonablynecessaryforsurvival,whicheverisless,andthereasonablecostofany  ~ necessarytransportationtoandfromamedicalfacility. 5    Asusedintheseinstructions,theterm_ cure_Ԁmeansthecostofnecessarymedical  0  attention,includingtheservicesofphysiciansandnursesaswellthecostofhospitalization,   medicinesandmedicalequipment. @   @--! CommitteeComments  ;    SeeIntroductionat1112;CalmarS.S.Corp.v.Taylor,303U.S.525,527(1938);Hallv.   NobleDrilling(U.S.)Inc.,242F.3d582(5thCir.2001);Wactorv.SpartanTransp.Corp.,27 z  F.3d347,35152(8thCir.1994)(definitionsof_ maintenance_Ԁand_ cure;_Ԁfailureofseamanto ` disclosemedicalinformationbeforeemploymentmaybeadefensetomaintenanceandcure); F Stanislawskiv.UpperRiverServs.,Inc.,6F.3d537,540(8thCir.1993);Gardinerv.SeaLand , Serv.,Inc.,786F.2d943,946(9thCir.1986).  p   @r r  %    8.86MAINTENANCEANDCURESUPPLEMENTAL ro<  ^   Aseamanisentitledtorecovermaintenanceandcure,if[(he)(she)]becomesinjuredor * ill,withoutwillfulmisbehavioron[(his)(her)]part,whileintheserviceof[(his)(her)]  % employer'svessel.Aseamanisentitledtomaintenanceandcureeventhough[(he)(she)]was  ~ notinjuredasaresultofanynegligenceonthepartof[(his)(her)]employerorasaresultofthe 5  unseaworthinessoftheemployer'svessel.Moreover,theseaman'sinjuryorillnessneednotbe  0  workrelated.Itneedonlyoccurwhiletheseamanwasintheserviceof[(his)(her)]employer's   vessel.Furthermore,anawardformaintenanceandcuremustnotbereducedbecauseofany @  negligenceonthepartoftheplaintiff. ;    Aseamanisentitledtoreceivemaintenanceandcurefromthedate[(he)(she)]leavesthe   vesseluntil[(he)(she)]reaches_ maximum_Ԁmedical_cure._ԀTheterm_ maximum_Ԁmedical_cure_ K  meansthepointatwhichnofurtherimprovementintheseaman'smedicalconditionis F reasonablyexpected.Thus,ifitappearsthataseaman'sconditionisincurable,orthattreatment  willonlyrelievepainorprovidecomfortbutwillnotimprovetheseaman'sphysicalcondition, V [(he)(she)]hasreachedmaximummedicalcure. Q   Ifyoufindthattheplaintiffisentitledtoanawardofdamagesunder[either]theJones  Act[oronanunseaworthinessclaim]andifyouaward[(him)(her)]lostwagesormedical a  expenses,thenyoumaynotalsoawardtheplaintiffmaintenanceandcureforthesameperiodof \" time,becausetheplaintiffmaynotrecovertwiceforthesamelostwagesormedicalexpenses. $  @--! CommitteeComments  l &   Aseaman'sclaimformaintenanceandcureisseparateanddistinctfromaclaimunder !g( theJonesActorfortheunseaworthinessofavessel.Aguilarv.StandardOilCo.ofN.J.,318 "M) U.S.724(1943);Brittonv.U.S.S.GreatLakesFleet,Inc.,302F.3d812,81618(8thCir.2002).  #3*    @` `  %    8.90SPECIAL_INTERROGATORIES roG _Ԉ ^ @) I.  * @" NEGLIGENCECLAIM       `    ?XtXXXt?\X?Xt1. ` Was(nameoftheplaintiffordecedent)aseamanatthetimeoftheincident  d shownintheevidence?  ^ #\?\H#?\\#\?\I#?\\  Answer: ______(YesorNo) R  #\?\1J#?\\#\?\޹J#?\\[IftheanswertoInterrogatoryNo.1is Yes,proceedtoInterrogatoryNo.2.Ifthe F  answertoNo.1is No,donotansweranymoreinterrogatoriesonthisform.The @  Forepersonmustsignthisformandreturnitintocourt.] :  #\?\J#?\\#\?\kL#?\\  2. ` Was(nameoftheplaintiffordecedent)injuredinthecourseof[(his)(her)] . employmentasaseaman? ( #\?\ޮL#?\\#\?\ޚM#?\\  Answer: ______(YesorNo) z #\?\M#?\\#\?\eN#?\\[IftheanswertoInterrogatoryNo.2is Yes,proceedtoInterrogatoryNo.3.Ifthe n answertoNo.2is No,donotansweranymoreinterrogatoriesonthisform #\?\ިN#?\\. T#\?\ޱO#?\\he h  Forepersonmustsignthisformandreturnitintocourt.] b #\?\O#?\\#\?\ޡP#?\\  3. ` Didthedefendant[heredescribetheactoromissionsubmittedbythe V plaintiff]? P #\?\P#?\\#\?\޺Q#?\\  Answer: ______(YesorNo) D  #\?\Q#?\\#\?\ޅR#?\\[IftheanswertoInterrogatoryNo.3is Yes,proceedtoInterrogatoryNo.4.Ifthe 8" answertoNo.3is No,donotanswerNo.4,butproceedtoNo.7.] 2# #\?\R#?\\#\?\S#?\\  4. ` Wastheact #\?\T#?\\ oromission#\?\ފT#?\\ofthedefendant #\?\T#?\\ [#\?\1U#?\\heredescribetheactoromission &%  submittedbytheplaintiff#\?\wU#?\\]#\?\ V#?\\Ԁ#\?\LV#?\\[#\?\ޏV#?\\foundwithrespectto#\?\V#?\\theanswerto#\?\*W#?\\No.3#\?\zW#?\\]#\?\W#?\\Ԁnegligent?  &! #\?\X#?\\#\?\fX#?\\  Answer: _______(YesorNo) (!# #\?\ީX#?\\#\?\2Y#?\\[IftheanswertoInterrogatoryNo.4is YesproceedtoInterrogatoryNo.5.Ifthe *#% answertoNo.4is No,donotanswerNo.5,butproceedtoNo.7.] +$& #\?\uY#?\\ +%' #\?\އZ#?\\#\?\Z#?\\  #\?\![#?\\5. ` Did #\?\o[#?\\ (nameofdefendants) #\?\[#?\\ negligence[#\?\'\#?\\heredescribetheactoromission X submittedbytheplaintiff#\?\x\#?\\]#\?\ ]#?\\Ԁ#\?\M]#?\\[#\?\ސ]#?\\foundwithrespectto #\?\]#?\\ theanswerto#\?\.^#?\\No.#\?\ށ^#?\\3 #\?\^#?\\]#\?\_#?\\Ԁ#\?\S_#?\\causeinjuryto R (nameofplaintiff)? L  #\?\ޖ_#?\\#\?\%`#?\\  Answer: ______(YesorNo) @  #\?\h`#?\\#\?\`#?\\[IftheanswertoInterrogatoryNo.5is Yes,proceedtoInterrogatoryNo.6.Ifthe 4  answertoNo.5is No,donotanswerNo.6,butproceedtoNo.7.] . #\?\3a#?\\#\?\Fb#?\\  6. ` #\?\މb#?\\ State#\?\b#?\\Ԁthetotalamountofdamagesthattheplaintiffhassuffered[andis "  reasonablycertaintosufferinthefuture]asaresultoftheincidentestablishedinthe   evidence #\?\2c#?\\. #\?\Gd#?\\   #\?\ލd#?\\#\?\d#?\\  Answer:_______________________________________Dollars    ($_______________).  #\?\'e#?\\&    #\?\e#?\\II. #\?\Gf#?\\    #\?\ޏf#?\\' f&    #\?\f#?\\UNSEAWORTHINESSCLAIM #\?\fg#?\\'%g    #\?\g#?\\#\?\9h#?\\  7. ` Atthetimeandplaceestablishedintheevidence,wasthevessel(here  namethesubjectvessel)inanunseaworthyconditioninthatit(herestateconditionof | vesselsubmittedbytheplaintiff)? v #\?\|h#?\\#\?\i#?\\  Answer: ______(YesorNo) j #\?\j#?\\#\?\ޤj#?\\[IftheanswertoInterrogatoryNo.7is YesproceedtoInterrogatoryNo.8.Ifthe  ^ answertoNo.7is No,proceedtoNo.10.] !X #\?\j#?\\#\?\k#?\\  8. ` Wastheunseaworthyconditionofthe #\?\$l#?\\ [herenamethe#\?\ިl#?\\subjectvessel#\?\l#?\\]#\?\Lm#?\\,with #L respecttoNo.7,asubstantialfactorincausinganyinjuryordamagesustainedbythe $F plaintiff? %@  #\?\ޏm#?\\#\?\wn#?\\  Answer: ______(YesorNo) '4!" #\?\޺n#?\\#\?\Bo#?\\[IftheanswertoInterrogatoryNo.8is Yes,proceedtoInterrogatoryNo.9.Ifthe )(#$ answertoNo.8is No,donotanswerNo.9,butproceedtoNo.10.] *"$% #\?\ޅo#?\\ z+%& _#\?\ޙp#?\\  9.#\?\q#?\\ ` #\?\Pq#?\\ State#\?\ޡq#?\\Ԁthetotalamountofdamagesthat(nameofplaintiff)hassuffered[and ^ isreasonablycertaintosufferinthefuture]asaresultoftheincidentestablishedinthe X evidence #\?\q#?\\. #\?\s#?\\ R #\?\Ls#?\\#\?\ޣs#?\\  Answer:_______________________________________Dollars F  ($_______________). @  #\?\s#?\\   `    &    #\?\ިt#?\\III. #\?\6u#?\\ 4    #\?\u#?\\  #\?\u#?\\COMPARATIVENEGLIGENCEDEFENSE #\?\7v#?\\ (  #\?\ޝv#?\\(Plaintiff'4 t#\?\v#?\\) "    #\?\Sw#?\\&    #\?\޷w#?\\ 10(a).#\?\x#?\\0 ` Doyou #\?\ax#?\\ findthat(nameofplaintiff#\?\޹x#?\\]  #\?\y#?\\Ԁ[#\?\iy#?\\describeactoromission#\?\ޭy#?\\]#\?\z#?\\? ` (#` (# #\?\Jz#?\\#\?\ެz#?\\  Answer:________(YesorNo)'w    #\?\z#?\\#\?\ނ{#?\\[#\?\{#?\\Note:IftheanswertoInterrogatoryNo.#\?\|#?\\10#\?\t|#?\\(a)is Yes,answerNo.#\?\޹|#?\\10#\?\}#?\\(b).Ifthe  answertoNo.#\?\^}#?\\10#\?\}#?\\(a)is No,donotanswerNo.10#\?\~#?\\(b),butproceedtoanswerNo.#\?\|~#?\\11#\?\~#?\\(a).]  #\?\!#?\\#\?\}#?\\  #\?\#?\\10#\?\#?\\(b#\?\S#?\\). ` Doyoufindthat#\?\ޗ#?\\theactoromissionof#\?\#?\\(nameofplaintiff)#\?\Q#?\\[#\?\ާ#?\\describeactor  omission#\?\#?\\]#\?\X#?\\Ԁwasnegligent?  #\?\ޛ#?\\#\?\#?\\  Answer:________(YesorNo) v #\?\D#?\\#\?\ă#?\\[#\?\#?\\Note:#\?\J#?\\ԀIftheanswertoInterrogatoryNo. #\?\ޑ#?\\ 10(b)is Yes,answerNo. #\?\#?\\ 10(c)#\?\e#?\\.Ifthe j answertoNo.1#\?\ޯ#?\\0(b) #\?\#?\\Ԁis No,donotanswerNo.#\?\j#?\\10(c) #\?\Ά#?\\,butproceedtoanswerNo.#\?\#?\\11 #\?\y#?\\(a).] d #\?\ɇ#?\\#\?\%#?\\  #\?\i#?\\10(c) #\?\޷#?\\. ` Doyoufindthatthenegligenceof(nameofplaintiff),foundintheanswer "R toNo. #\?\#?\\ 10(a)caused,inwholeorinpart,hisowndamageorinjury? #L #\?\޽#?\\#\?\S#?\\  Answer:_______(YesorNo) %@  #\?\ޖ#?\\ #\?\#?\\  #\?\^#?\\COMPARATIVENEGLIGENCE_DEFENSE#\?\ޭ#?\\ (."# #\?\ #?\\(SettlingDefendant) )(#$    #\?\w#?\\#\?\#?\\  #\?\4#?\\11#\?\ނ#?\\(a). ` Doyou #\?\ƍ#?\\ findthat(nameofsettlingdefendant#\?\"#?\\)[#\?\ތ#?\\describeactoromission#\?\ю#?\\]? z+%& #\?\+#?\\#\?\ބ#?\\  Answer:________(YesorNo) X #\?\Ǐ#?\\#\?\G#?\\[#\?\ފ#?\\Note:IftheanswertoInterrogatoryNo.#\?\͐#?\\11#\?\9#?\\(a)is Yes,answerNo.#\?\}#?\\11#\?\ޑ#?\\(b).Iftheanswer L  toNo. #\?\"#?\\ 11#\?\ޖ#?\\(a)is No,donotanswerNo.#\?\ݒ#?\\11#\?\D#?\\(b),butproceedtoanswerNo.#\?\ވ#?\\12#\?\#?\\.] F  #\?\-#?\\#\?\ކ#?\\  #\?\ɔ#?\\11(b)#\?\#?\\. ` Doyoufindthat #\?\^#?\\ [nameofsettlingdefendant#\?\#?\\]#\?\!#?\\Ԁwasnegligentin[#\?\d#?\\describeact :  oromission#\?\޹#?\\]#\?\'#?\\? 4  #\?\j#?\\#\?\—#?\\  Answer:________(YesorNo) (  #\?\#?\\#\?\ޅ#?\\[#\?\Ș#?\\Note:IftheanswertoInterrogatoryNo.#\?\ #?\\11(b)#\?\x#?\\is Yes,answerNo.#\?\#?\\11(c)#\?\#?\\.Ifthe   answertoNo.11(b)#\?\d#?\\Ԁis No,donotanswerNo.#\?\ך#?\\11(c)#\?\:#?\\,butproceedtoanswerNo.#\?\ށ#?\\12#\?\ߛ#?\\.]   #\?\##?\\#\?\|#?\\#\?\޿#?\\  #\?\#?\\11(c)#\?\P#?\\. ` Doyoufindthatthenegligenceof#\?\ޗ#?\\(namesettlingdefendant),foundinthe  answertoNo.11(b)caused,inwholeorinpart,damageorinjuryto(nameofplaintiff)?  #\?\ #?\\#\?\#?\\  Answer: _______(YesorNo).  #\?\8#?\\#\?\Ÿ#?\\#\?\#?\\  #\?\H#?\\12.Statethepercentage(s)oftherelativefault,ifany,fortheplaintiff'sdamages  tothefollowing: | #\?\ޖ#?\\  <(` ` hp x X<#\?\l#?\\(a) ` (#\?\#?\\nameofthedefendant#\?\Y#?\\)  0  0p(#(#______%pp(#p(#   ?+ ` hp x ` X?#\?\ް#?\\  <(p ` hp x X<#\?\ޠ#?\\(b) ` (#\?\;#?\\nameoftheplaintiff#\?\ލ#?\\)  0  0p(#(#______%dp(#p(#   ?+ ` hp x pX?#\?\#?\\  h<( ` hp x X<#\?\ԥ#?\\(c) ` (#\?\o#?\\nameofthesettlingdefendant#\?\#?\\)#\?\!#?\\  #\?\g#?\\ p ______%. !X  ` 0 0 (# (#0h(#(#0h(#h(#0(#(#0p(#(# _________ "Rp(#p(#   h?+ ` hp x X?#\?\޸#?\\ X<( ` hp x X<#\?\(#?\\[TOTALMUSTEQUAL100%]     p 1000  %$F(#(#  X?+ ` hp x X?#\?\޵#?\\    _______________________________#\?\ޯ#?\\ '4!"  X?+ ` hp x X?#\?\X#?\\ ` (FOREPERSON) (."# #\?\#?\\#\?\k#?\\_______________________________ *"$%  ` (DATE)#\?\ޮ#?\\ z+%& Ї#\?\6##XtX\I#0}0   @&%    9.DEFINITIONS  7Ԉ  ` @' %   9.01AGENCY 4Ү  ^  ` Acorporationactsonlythroughitsagentsoremployeesandanyagentor * employeeofacorporationmaybindthecorporationbyactsandstatementsmadewhile  % actingwithinthescopeoftheauthoritydelegatedtotheagentbythecorporation,or  ~ withinthescopeof[(his)(her)]dutiesasanemployeeofthecorporation. 5   & ? @YY$ CommitteeComments   0  '?  ` ThisinstructionisamodificationofKevinF.OMalley,etal.,3FEDERALJURY   PRACTICEANDINSTRUCTIONS:Civil108.01(5thed.2000). o   ` Theauthorityofanagenttospeakfortheprincipalmayvaryfromstatetostate &  anddifferfromfederallaw.      @  %   9.02COLOROFSTATELAW(42U.S.C.1983)    ^  ` Actsaredoneundercoloroflawwhenapersonactsorpurportstoactinthe * performanceofofficialdutiesunderanystate,countyormunicipallaw,ordinanceor  % regulation.  ~  & % @YY$ CommitteeComments  5   ` Adoptedfrom9thCir.Civ.JuryInstr.9.2(2007).SeeMonroev.Pape,365U.S.  0  '%5 167(1961),overruledinpart,Monellv.DepartmentofSocialServices,436U.S.658 t  (1978);Screwsv.UnitedStates,325U.S.91(1945);UnitedStatesv.Classic,313U.S. Z  299,reh'gdenied,314U.S.707(1941).Thecourtshould,ifpossible,ruleontherecord @  whethertheconductofthedefendant,ifitoccurredasclaimedbytheplaintiff, &  constitutesactsundercolorofstate(county,municipal)lawandnoteveninstructthejury    onthisissue.Inmostcases,thecolorofstatelawissueisnotchallengedandthejury   neednotbeinstructedonit.Ifitmustbeinstructed,thisinstructionshouldnormallybe z  sufficient. `  `       @v v  %   9.03DELIBERATEINDIFFERENCE-CONVICTEDPRISONERS ^ @$(42U.S.C.1983)  O  D  ` Deliberateindifferenceisestablishedonlyifthereisactualknowledgeofa   substantialriskthattheplaintiff(describeseriousmedicalproblemorotherseriousharm i  thatthedefendantisexpectedtoprevent)andifthedefendantdisregardsthatriskby  d intentionallyrefusingorfailingtotakereasonablemeasurestodealwiththeproblem.    Merenegligenceorinadvertencedoesnotconstitutedeliberateindifference. t   & ? @YY$ CommitteeComments  o   ` SeeFarmerv.Brennan,511U.S.825(1994)(clearlylimiting'?Ldeliberate &  indifferencetointentional,knowingorrecklessnessinthecriminallawcontextwhich    requiresactualknowledgeofaseriousrisk).Wilsonv.Seiter,501U.S.294(1991).The   courtislimitingEighthAmendmentclaimstothoseinwhichtheplaintiffcanshow z  actualsubjectiveintentratherthanjustrecklessnessinthetortsense.InWilson,thecourt ` characterizedasEighthAmendmentviolationsonlyactswhichare_ deliberate_Ԁacts F intendedtochastiseor_deter_Ԁ(emphasisadded)or_ punishment_Ԁwhichhasbeen , administeredforadisciplinary_purpose_Ԁ(emphasisadded).Wilson,501U.S.at300. p Thecourt,continuingtofollowthedeliberateindifferencestandard,clearlystatedthat V negligencewasnotsufficient. <  ` TheCommitteebelievethephrase_ deliberate_Ԁ_indifference_Ԁshouldprobablybe 7 definedinmostcases,althoughEighthCircuitcaselawdoesnotrequireit.  {  @" %   9.04MOTIVATINGFACTOR gй  ^  ` Asusedintheseinstructions,theplaintiffs(sex,gender,race,nationalorigin, * religion,disability)1wasa_ motivating_Ԁ_factor,_Ԁiftheplaintiffs(sex,gender,race,  % nationalorigin,religion,disability)playedapart2[orarole3]4inthedefendantsdecision  ~ to__________5theplaintiff.However,theplaintiffs(sex,gender,race,nationalorigin, 5  religion,disability)neednothavebeentheonlyreasonforthedefendantsdecisionto  0  __________theplaintiff.    @' NotesonUse  @   ` 1.Herestatetheallegedunlawfulconsideration. ;   ` 2.SeeEstesv.DickSmithFord,Inc.,856F.2d1097,110102_(8th_ԀCir.1988).    ` 3.SeeHazenPaperCo.v.Biggins,507U.S.604,609(1993)_( Whatever_Ԁthe K  employersdecisionmakingprocess,adisparatetreatmentclaimcannotsucceedunless 1 theemployeesprotectedtraitactuallyplayedaroleinthatprocessandhada  determinativeinfluenceonthe_outcome.)_   ` 4.Caselawsuggeststhatotherlanguagecanbeusedproperlytodefine V _ motivating_Ԁ_factor._ԀAjudgemaywishtoconsiderthefollowingalternatives: <  ` Theterm motivatingfactor,asusedintheseinstructions,meansareason,alone 7 orwithotherreasons,onwhichthedefendantreliedwhenit__________theplaintiff[, { PriceWaterhousev.Hopkins,490U.S.228,24142(1989);]orwhichmovedthe a defendanttowarditsdecisionto__________theplaintiff[,id.at241;]orbecauseof G whichthedefendant__________theplaintiff[,29U.S.C.623(a)(1)(ADEA);42 -  U.S.C.2000e2(TitleVII);42U.S.C.12112(a)(ADA)]. !  ` 5.Herestatetheallegedadverseemploymentaction. l #  ` 6._ Determining_Ԁ_factor_Ԁisappropriatetosignifythesolecauseinanindirect !g% evidence,pretextcasebroughtunderthedecisionalformatofMcDonnellDouglasCorp. "M& v.Green,411U.S.792(1973);Estesv.DickSmithFord,Inc.,856F.2d1097,110102 #3' _(8th_ԀCir.1988)._ Motivating_Ԁisoftenusedinadirectevidence,mixedmotivecase w$( broughtunderPriceWaterhousev.Hopkins,490U.S.228(1989),tosignifythemultiple ]%) factors,atleastoneofwhichisassertedlyunlawful,whichcausedtheadverse C&* employmentdecision.42U.S.C.2000e2(m);Hennessyv.PenrilDatacommNetworks, )' + Inc.,69F.3d1344,135051_(8th_ԀCir.1995);Partonv.GTENorth,Inc.,971F.2d150, (!, 153_(8th_ԀCir.1992);Fosterv.UniversityofArk.,938F.2d111,114_(8th_ԀCir.1991). ("- _ Determining_Ԁ_factor_Ԁalsohasbeenusedinamixedmotivecase.Williamsv.Fermenta )}#. AnimalHealthCo.,984F.2d261,265_(8th_ԀCir.1993)._ Substantial_Ԁ_factor_Ԁand *c$/ _ motivating_Ԁ_factor_Ԁhavebeenusedtoconveythesamelegalstandard.Mt.HealthyCity +I%0 SchoolDist.Bd.ofEduc.v.Doyle,429U.S.274,287(1977);Gloverv.McDonnell ^ DouglasCorp.,981F.2d388,39395(8thCir.),vacatedandremandedonother D grounds,510U.S.802(1993),12F.3d845(8thCir.1994). Motivatingfactorhasbeen * usedwith determiningfactorinthedecisionalcalculusofasinglecause,pretextcase.   Nelsonv.BoatmensBancshares,Inc.,26F.3d796,801(8thCir.1994). Discernible   factorhasbeenequatedwith motivatingfactorinamixedmotivecase.Estes,856  ~ F.2dat1102.  d  ` 7. Motive(therootof motivating)isdefinedas somethingthatcausesa   persontoactinacertainway,doacertainthing,etc.RandomHouseCompact   UnabridgedDictionary,Motive,p.1254(SpecialSecondEdition,1996).    ` 8.TheAgeDiscriminationinEmploymentAct,at29U.S.C.623(a)(1),and @  TitleVIIoftheCivilRightsActof1964,asamended,at42U.S.C.2000e2(a),alsouse &  thephrase becauseoftodescribetheprohibitedcausalrelationshipbetweenthe    defendantsintentionandfactorswhichmaynotbeusedinmakinganemployment   decision. z  @YY$ CommitteeComments  1  ` Forthetrialsofdisparatetreatmentcases,theCommitteehasselectedtheterm ,  motivatingfactortoconstitutethesubjectmatterofthedefendantsasserted,unlawful p stateofmindwhentheactionsueduponoccurred.Whetherthistermoranotherterm6is V selectedisimmaterialaslongasthetermusedsignifiestheproperlegaldefinitionforthe < jury.Acourtmaydecidethattheterm motivatingfactorneednotbedefinedexpressly " becauseitscommondefinition7isalsotheapplicablelegaldefinition.   ` TheAmericansWithDisabilitiesActprohibitseach coveredentityfrom a discriminatingagainsta qualifiedindividualwithadisabilityinanemploymentcontext G  becauseof8thedisability.See42U.S.C.12112(a).Thegistoftheterm_ because_Ԁ_of_ - isintentionaldiscriminationwhichresultedintheemploymentdecisionadversetothe  plaintiff,whetherinasolecause,pretextcontextorinamixedmotivecontext.The  burdenontheplaintiff,inbothasolecauseandamixedmotivecase,istoprovetothe    factfinderthattheadverseemploymentdecisionresultedfromtheunlawfulmotive,Price !g! Waterhousev.Hopkins,490U.S.228,258(1989);St.MarysHonorCenterv.Hicks, "M" 509U.S.502,___,113S.Ct.2742,275152(1993),andtheburdenofproofonthe #3# defendantinamixedmotivecaseistoprove,asanaffirmativedefense,thatthesame w$$ decisionwouldhavebeenmadeabsenttheunlawfulmotive.PriceWaterhouse,490U.S. ]%% at258.Theevidenceofferedinwhatstartsoutasthetrialofasolecausecasemay C&& supportafindingofamixedmotiveliability.SeeNelsonv.BoatmensBancshares,Inc., )' ' 26F.3d796,801(8thCir.1994)(theemployersprofferednondiscriminatory (!( explanationmaypermitaninferenceoftheexistenceofanunlawfulmotivatingfactor). (") Inbothcontexts,theplaintiffsultimateburdenistopersuadethefactfinderthatthe )}#* defendantintentionallyactedadverselytotheplaintiffforaproscribedreason.St. *c$+ MarysHonorCenterv.Hicks,509U.S.at___,113S.Ct.at2747. +I%,  ` Eachofthedefinitionsof_ motivating_Ԁ_factor_Ԁsetoutinthissectionaccurately ^ statesthelaw.0ɭ  D  08tXdXXd8  @L L %   10.THEFAIRLABORSTANDARDSACT(FLSA) 0 @'Introduction  PԈ    ` ThefollowinginstructionsareforuseinFairLaborStandardsAct( FLSA) b caseswherefailuretopayminimumwageorovertimecompensationisalleged.29 H U.S.C.201,etseq.  TheFLSAisaremedialstatutethatwasenactedtoeliminate the .   existence...oflaborconditionsdetrimentaltothemaintenanceoftheminimum    standardoflivingnecessaryforhealth,efficiency,andgeneralwellbeingofworkers.  z  Id.202(a).GenerallyundertheFLSA,employersmustpayemployeestheapplicable  `  minimumwageforeachhourworked,andmustpay1timestheregularrateforall  F  hoursworkedinexcessoffortyinoneweek.Id.206,207.TheFLSAcontains  ,  numerousexemptionsandexceptionstothesegeneralrules.    ` Thefollowinginstructionsareintendedforuseincasesinvolvingone(orafew) k  plaintiffs.Section216(b)oftheFLSAalsoprovidesforcollectiveactions,aunique Q multiplaintifflitigationprocess.Asageneralmatter,section216(b)allowscourts,ina 7 singleproceeding,tohearclaimsbroughtbymultipleplaintiffsagainstthesame  employerifthoseplaintiffsarefoundtobe similarlysituated.Id.216(b);see  HoffmannLaRochev.Spearling,493U.S.165(1989).Thecollectiveactionprocessis i distinctinseveralcriticalrespectsfromtheclassactionsproceduresofRule23,Federal O RulesofCivilProcedure.Perhapschiefamongthedifferencesisthatcollectiveaction 5 plaintiffsjointhelawsuitbyaffirmativelyandindividually optinginratherthanby  choosingnotto optoutasisthecaseinRule23classactions.See29U.S.C.216(b)  ( Noemployeeshallbeaplaintifftoanysuchactionunlesstheemployeegivesconsent g inwritingtobecomeapartyandconsentisfiledinthecourtinwhichtheactionis M brought.).Thefulleffectoftheseproceduraldifferencescontinuestobeexploredby 3 thecourts,anddisputesoftenariseconcerningtheextenttowhichevidencemaybe  presentedonarepresentativebasis.Districtcourtsshouldcarefullyconsiderthemanner  inwhichtheseinstructionsmaymodifiedforuseincollectiveactions. e  @!!" GeneralConsiderations  >"  ` AlthoughtherearecommonthemesinFLSAcases,claimsoftenturnonspecific  $ provisionsofthestatute,regulations,caselawandotherauthority.Consequently,  }% althoughcertainbasicinstructionsassetforthinthissectionmaybeuseful,district !c& courtsmustcarefullyconsidertheprecisenatureoftheissuestobetriedineachcase,and "I ' adopt,reject,modify,and/orsupplementtheseinstructionsasappropriateforthecase. #/!(  ` Incraftingappropriateinstructions,courtsmustalsocarefullyconsiderthenature %"* ofrelevantauthority.Forexample,withrespecttomatterssuchascertainminimum %n#+ wageandovertimeexemptions,theSecretaryofLaborhaspromulgatedregulations &T$, pursuanttoexpressdelegationofstatutoryauthority.See,e.g.,29C.F.R.541.In ':%- addition,theSecretaryofLaborandDepartmentofLaborsWageandHourDivision ( &. haveestablishedasubstantialbodyof interpretiveguidance.Muchofthisguidanceis )'/ publishedintheCodeofFederalRegulations.See,e.g.,29C.F.R.ch.531subpartC,ch. l*'0 77594.Otherguidanceappearsintheformofinterpretivebulletinsandprivateopinion R+(1 letters.Whenconsideringagencyinterpretations, acourtmustfirstaskwhether 8,)2 Congresshasdirectlyspokentotheprecisequestionatissue.Gloverv.Standard ^ FederalBank,283F.3d953,961(8thCir.2002)(citingChevronU.S.A.,Inc.v.Natural D ResourcesDefenseCouncil,Inc.,467U.S.837,842(1984)). [T]heplainmeaningofa * statuteorregulationcontrols,ifthereisone,regardlessofanagencysinterpretation.   St.LukesMethodistHospitalv.Thompson,182F.Supp.2d765,775(N.D.Iowa2001)   (citingHennepinCountyMed.Ctr.v.Shalala,81F.3d743,748(8thCir.1996)).  ~  ` Wherethereisroomforagencyinterpretation,interpretiveguidancefromthe 5  SecretaryofLaborandWageandHourDivisionmay,incertaincircumstances,be   entitledtovaryingdegreesof deferenceor respectbycourts,dependingontheform   ofguidance.SeeChristensenv.HarrisCounty,529U.S.576,587(2000);Chevron,467   U.S.at842;Skidmorev.Swift&Co.,323U.S.134(1944). o  @(( EmployeeandEnterpriseCoverage  &   ` ToproveacaseforFLSAovertimeorminimumwageviolations,aplaintiffmust !  proveheorshewasemployedbyacovereddefendantandthatdefendantfailedtopay e  plaintiffminimumwageorovertimeasrequiredbylaw.Hensleyv.MacMillanBloedel K  Containers,Inc.,786F.2d353_(8th_ԀCir.1986). 1  ` Asathresholdmatter,FLSAplaintiffsmustprovethatanemployment , relationshipexistedwiththedefendant.Reichv.ConAgra,Inc.,987F.2d1357,1360 p (8thCir.1993).Employeeisdefinedbysection203(e)(1)as anyindividualemployed V byanemployer.Thisdefinitionhasbeeninterpretedasbroadandexpansive.See < UnitedStatesv.Rosenwasser,323U.S.360,363(1945). Employerisdefinedin " Section203(d)as anypersonactingdirectlyorindirectlyintheinterestofanemployer  inrelationtoanemployee.Id.Theterm employisdefinedinsection203(g)  expansivelyas tosufferorpermittowork.Id.TheSupremeCourthasrejectedthe v commonlaw righttocontroltestandconcludedthatthe economicrealitytestmore \ appropriatelysatisfiestheintendedbroadapplicationofthestatutesprotections.See, B e.g.,NLRBv.HeartPublications,322U.S.111(1944).Althoughtheexistenceofan ( employmentrelationshipisoftennotdisputed,commonexamplesofworkerswhodonot l  satisfytherequirementofanemploymentrelationshipareindependentcontractors, R!  trainees,andvolunteers. 8"!  ` Additionally,tosatisfycoveragerequirements,aplaintiffmustproveeither #3# individualemployeecoverageorenterprisecoverage.Blairv.Wills,420F.3d823,829 w$$ (8thCir.2005).Individualcoverageisestablishedwhentheplaintiff,inhisorherwork ]%% forthedefendant,isengagedincommerceortheproductionofgoodsforcommerce.29 C&& U.S.C.206(a),207(a)(1),212(c).Enterprisecoveragerequiresthatthedefendantis )' '  anenterpriseengagedincommerceortheproductionofgoodsforcommercethathad (!( annualgrosssalesofatleast$500,000.29U.S.C.203(s)(1). (")  @# CommonTypesofCases  N*#+  ` ThethreemostcommontypesofFLSAwagedisputesinvolve(1) ^  misclassification,(2)offtheclock,and(3)payrollandcompensationpractices. D &   @cc"MisclassificationCases ?  ` FLSAlitigationfrequentlyinvolvesstatutoryexemptionsfromtheminimum   wageand/orovertimerequirements.Insuchcases,theemployerisallegedtohave  ~  misclassifiedemployees' asexemptfromtheFLSA.Thesecasesofteninvolve  d exemptionsknownas whitecollarexemptions,whichincludeindividualsemployedin  J abonafideexecutive,administrative,professional,oroutsidesalesposition.29U.S.C.  0  213(a)(1);29C.F.R.541.Exemptionsaretobenarrowlyconstruedagainstthe t  employerandtheemployercarriestheburdenofprovinganexemptionapplies. Z  McDonnellv.CityofOmaha,999F.2d293,295(8thCir.1993)(Employershavethe @  burdenofprovingthattheexemptionapplies,andtheymustdemonstratethattheir &  employeesfit_ plainly_Ԁandunmistakablywithintheexemption'stermsand_spirit.)._Ԁ     ` Misclassificationcasesalsoofteninvolveofftheclock/payrollpracticeissues e  duetotheemployersfailuretotrackandrecordtimeworked.Therefore,whereitis K  determinedthatanemployermisclassifiedplaintiff,analysisundertheothertwomajor 1 typesofcaseslikelywillbenecessary.  @$OfftheClockCases p  ` Ordinarilyinofftheclockcasesemployershavefailedtokeeprecordsofthe k plaintiffemployeestimeworkedorotherwiseimproperlyrecordedtimeworked. Q Reasonsforthefailuretorecordallhoursworkedvaryand,forexample,maybedueto 7 misclassificationasexemptortheemployersbeliefthattheactivityatissueisnot { compensable.Suchinstancesmayincludepreparatoryandconcludingactivitiessuchas a _ donning_Ԁand_doffing,_Ԁtraveltime,waitingtime,andrestormealperiods. G @<<PayrollPractices/Calculations B  ` Payrollpracticesaregenerallyatissuewhenemployeespaywasallegedly   calculatedimproperly.Commonissuesincludetheallegedlyimpropercalculationofthe  ! regularrateforovertimepurposessuchaswhencertainbonusesorcommissionsarenot !g" includedinthecalculation.Othercommonissuesinvolvetippedemployeesand "M# employeespaidbythejob,piece,ortask.Payrollpracticesthatinvolveunlawful #3$ deductionscompriseanothercommonlylitigatedissue.Deductionconcernstypically w$% arisewhenanemployerreducesemployeespaychecksinamountsmeantforitemssuch ]%& asuniforms,shortagesorotherdebts. C&' @   SignificanceofRecordkeeping  '>!)  ` Section211(c)oftheFLSArequiresemployersto_ make,_Ԁkeepandpreserve ("+ _records_Ԁofemployees_ wages,_Ԁhours,andotherconditionsandpracticesof )}#, _employment._ԀId.;29C.F.R.516(1).Althoughthereisnoprivatecauseofaction *c$- againstanemployerfornoncompliancewithrecordkeepingobligations,improper +I%. recordkeepingpracticesmayhaveasignificantevidentiaryimpactinFLSAcases. ^ Whereanemployerhasnotkeptadequaterecordsofwagesandhours,employees D generallymaynotbedeniedrecoveryofbackwagesonthegroundthatthepreciseextent * oftheiruncompensatedworkcannotbeproved.Dolev.AlamoFoundation,915F.2d   349,351(8thCir.1990).Instead,theemployees aretobeawardedcompensationonthe   mostaccuratebasispossible.Id.(citingAndersonv.Mt.ClemensPotteryCo.,328U.S.  ~ 680,68788(1946)).Theplaintiffmustestablish ajustandreasonableinferenceasto  d theuncompensatedworkperformed.Anderson,328U.S.at68788.Plaintiffsmay  J satisfythisrequirementwithevidenceoftheirregularworkschedulesorworkhabits,  0 e.g.,suchascalendars,computerrecords,parkingrecords,orcoworkertestimony.Once t  theplaintiffhasproducedsuchevidenceofuncompensatedlabor, theburdenthenshifts Z  totheemployertocomeforwardwithevidenceofthepreciseamountofworkperformed @  orwithevidencetonegativethereasonablenessoftheinferencetobedrawnfromthe &  employee'sevidence.Id.    &   @??( Retaliation  e   ` Itisunlawful todischargeorinanyothermannerdiscriminateagainstany ` employeebecausesuchemployeehasfiledanycomplaint...underorrelatedtothis F chapter.Id.' e215(a)(3);Greyv.CityofOakGrove,396F.3d1031,103435_(8th_ԀCir. , 2005);Brennanv.MaxeysYamaha,513F.2d179_(8th_ԀCir.1975).Seesection5.60of p thisManualforinstructionsrelatingtoretaliationclaims. V @qq" StatuteofLimitations  Q  ` Ordinarily,FLSAclaimsmustbebroughtwithintwoyears,butthestatuteof  limitationsisextendedtothreeyearsifitisproventhattheemployer_ willfully_Ԁviolated  thelaw.See29U.S.C.255(a).Aviolationis willfulwhere theemployereither v kneworshowedrecklessdisregardforthematterofwhetheritsconductwasprohibited \ bythestatute.McLaughlinv.RichlandShoeCo.,486U.S.128,133(1988).The B recoveryperiodgenerallyiscalculatedbackwardfromthedatethatthelawsuitisfiledor ( fromthedateaconsenttojoinformisfiledonbehalfofanoptinplaintiffinacollective l  actionpursuantto29U.S.C.216(b). R!  @* Damages  "M"  ` Backpaydamagesaregenerallycalculatedasthedifferencebetweenwhatthe $$ employeeshouldhavebeenpaidhadtheemployercompliedwiththeFLSAandthe $% amounttheemployeeactuallywascompensated.Inaddition,liquidateddamagesinan %r& amountequaltotheamountofbackpaywillbeawardedunlesstheemployerprovesthat &X ' itactedingoodfaithandhadreasonablegroundsforbelievingthatitwasnotinviolation '>!( oftheFLSA.29U.S.C.216(b);Jarrettv.ERCProperties,Inc.,211F.3d1078,1083 ($") _(8th_ԀCir.2000).Theburdenisontheemployertoproveitactedingoodfaith.Broadus h) #* v.O.K.Industries,Inc.,226F.3d937,944_(8th_ԀCir.2000)(EqualPayAct).This N*#+ determinationismadebythecourt.SeeBraswellv.CityofElDorado,187F.3d954, 4+$, 957(8thCir.1999). Thejurysdecisiononwillfulness[forstatuteoflimitations ,%- purposes]isdistinctfromthedistrictjudge'sdecisiontoawardliquidateddamages,id., ^ but itishardtomountaseriousargument...thatanemployerwhohasactedin D recklessdisregardofitsobligationshasnonethelessactedingoodfaith.Jarrett,211 * F.3dat1084.      @xx" %   10.01FLSA!ELEMENTS  *  ^  ` Yourverdictmustbeforplaintiff[andagainstdefendant________]1[on * plaintiffsFLSAclaim]2ifallthefollowingelementshavebeenproved:  %  ` First,plaintiffwasemployedbydefendantonorafter_________;3  ~  ` Second,inplaintiffsworkfordefendant,plaintiff[wasengagedincommerceor 5  intheproductionofgoodsforcommerce][wasemployedbyanenterpriseengagedin  0  commerceortheproductionofgoodsforcommercethathadannualgrosssalesofatleast   $500,000];4and @   ` Third,defendantfailedtopayplaintiff[minimumwageforallhoursworkedby ;  plaintiffinoneormoreworkweeks][overtimepayforallhoursworkedbyplaintiffin   excessof40inoneormoreworkweeks].5 K   ` [Theterm commercemeansanytrade,commerce,transportation,transmission F orcommunicationbetweenanystateandanyplaceoutsidethatstate.]   ` [Apersonorenterpriseisconsideredtohavebeen engagedintheproductionof V goodsifthepersonorenterpriseproduced,manufactured,mined,handled,transported, Q orinanyothermannerworkedonsuchgoodsorworkedinanycloselyrelatedprocessor  occupationdirectlyessentialtotheproductionofthegoods.]  a  @' NotesonUse  \"  ` 1.Usethisphraseiftherearemultipledefendants. $  ` 2.Thebracketedlanguageshouldbeinsertedwhentheplaintiffsubmitsmore l & thanoneclaimtothejury. R!'  ` 3.Thisparagraphshouldbeusedonlyifemployeestatusordatesofemployment "M) aredisputed.Insertthedateordatesofrelevantrecoveryperiod. #3*  ` 4.Thisparagraph,andtheappropriatebracketedlanguage,shouldbeinserted $, onlywhenapplicabilityoftheFLSAisindispute. %r-  ` 5.Selecttheappropriatebracketedlanguage.  )' / !  @[ [  %   10.02FLSA! HOURSWORKEDDEFINITION ir4 1 ^  ` Thephrase hoursworkedincludesalltimespentbyanemployeethatwas * primarilyforthebenefitoftheemployerortheemployersbusiness.2Suchtime  % constitutes hoursworkediftheemployerkneworshouldhaveknownthatthework  ~ wasbeingperformed.3Periodsduringwhichanemployeeiscompletelyrelievedofduty 5  thatarelongenoughtoenabletheemployeetousethetimeeffectivelyforhisown  0  purposesarenot hoursworked.4    @' NotesonUse  @   ` 1.Thisinstructionisintendedforuseonlywhenthereisadisputeastowhether ;  certainactivitiesconstitutehoursworked,orthereisadisputeastothenumberofhours !  worked.Thelanguageshouldbemodifiedtoreflectthespecificcircumstancesofthe e  casebasedoncaselawandtheDepartmentofLaborguidancepublishedat29C.F.R.part K  785. 1  ` 2.TheFLSAdoesnotdefine workbutusestheterminitsdefinitionof ,  employ.See29U.S.C.254.UndertheAct, employmeans tosufferorpermitto p work.29U.S.C.203(g);seealso29C.F.R.785.6.The sufferorpermittest V providesthattimespentona principalactivityforthebenefitoftheemployer,withthe < employersknowledge,isconsideredtobehoursworkedandthereforeiscompensable. " Id.;seeBlairv.Wills,420F.3d823,829(8thCir.2005).   ` 3.Anemployermustknoworhavereasontobelievethattheemployeeis a working.29C.F.R.785.11;seeDonovanv.WilliamsChem.Co.,682F.2d185,188 G (8thCir.1982).Anemployerwhohassuchknowledgecannotpassivelyallowan - employeetoworkwithoutpropercompensation,eveniftheworkhasnotbeendoneat   therequestoftheemployer. !  ` 4.TheSupremeCourtinAndersonv.MountClemensPotteryCo.,328U.S.680, R!# 598(1946),statedthatthereneednotbephysicalormentalexertionatallonthepartof 8"$ theemployeeandthat,whentheemployeeisrequiredtogiveupasubstantialmeasureof #% hisorhertimeandeffort,thetimeishoursworked.Accordingly,theworkweek $& typicallyincludes allthetimeduringwhichanemployeeisnecessarilyrequiredtobeon $' theemployerspremises,ondutyorataprescribedworkplace.Id.at69091.Periods %r( duringwhichanemployeeiscompletelyrelievedofdutythatarelongenoughtoenable &X ) theemployeetousethetimeeffectivelyforhisorherownpurposes,however,arenot '>!* considered hoursworked.Anemployeeisnotcompletelyrelievedfromdutyunless ($"+ theemployeeistoldheorshecanceaseworkuntiladefinitelyspecifiedtime.For h) #, example,amealperiodofatleast30minutesduringwhichanemployeeiscompletely N*#- relievedfromdutiesdoesnotordinarilyconstitutehoursworked,eveniftheemployeeis 4+$. notpermittedtoleavetheemployerspremises.29C.F.R.785.19.Additionally,restor ,%/ breakperiodsof20minutesorlessmustbeincludedin hoursworked.29C.F.R. ^ 785.18.  D "! @: :  %   10.03FLSA!DETERMININGHOURSWORKED FD 1 ^  ` Youmustdeterminethenumberofhoursworkedbyplaintiffbasedonallofthe * evidence.Thedefendantislegallyrequiredtomaintainaccuraterecordsofits  % employeeshoursworked.Ifyoufindthatthedefendantfailedtomaintainrecordsofthe  ~ plaintiffshoursworkedorthattherecordskeptbythedefendantareinaccurate,you 5  mustacceptplaintiffsestimateofhoursworked,unlessyoufindittobeunreasonable.  0   @' NotesonUse     ` 1.Usethisinstructiononlywhenthenumberofhoursworkedisindispute. @  @YY$ CommitteeComments  ;   ` TheFLSArequiresemployersto make,keepandpreservesuchrecordsofthe   personsemployedbyhimandofwages,hours,andotherconditionsandpracticesof z  employmentmaintainedbyhim,andshallpreservesuchrecordsforsuchperiodsoftime, ` andshallmakesuchreportstherefromtotheAdministrator[oftheDepartmentof F LaborsWageandHourDivision]asheshallprescribebyregulationororder....29 , U.S.C.211(c).TheDepartmentofLaborsrecordkeepingregulationsmaybefoundat p 29C.F.R.516.TheFLSAdoesnotcreateaprivatecauseofactionagainstanemployer V fornoncompliancewithrecordkeepingobligations.Whereanemployerhasnotkept < adequaterecordsofwagesandhours,however,employeesgenerallymaynotbedenied " recoveryofbackwagesonthegroundthatthepreciseextentoftheiruncompensated  workcannotbeproved.Dolev.AlamoFoundation,915F.2d349,351(8thCir.1990).  Instead,theemployees aretobeawardedcompensationonthemostaccuratebasis v possible.Id.(citingAndersonv.Mt.ClemensPotteryCo.,328U.S.680,68788 \ (1946)).Theplaintiffbearstheburdenofprovingtheextentofanyuncompensated B work,butmaysatisfythatburdenby justandreasonableinference.Anderson,328 (  U.S.at68788.Oncetheplaintiffhasproducedsuchevidenceofuncompensatedwork, l !  theburdenthenshiftstotheemployertocomeforwardwithevidenceoftheprecise R!" amountofworkperformedorwithevidencetonegativethereasonablenessofthe 8"# inferencetobedrawnfromtheemployee'sevidence.Id.TheCommitteebelievesthe #$ proposedinstructionproperlyallocatestherelativeburdensofproofconsistentwith $% Anderson,withouttheriskofconfusionthatmaybeassociatedwithaninstructionthat $& incorporatestheexactlanguageoftheAndersondecision.  %r' #" @55  %   10.04FLSA!MINIMUMWAGE F%R 1 ^  ` Anemployermustpayatleastminimumwageforallhoursworkedbyan * employeeeachworkweek.Theminimumwagerateapplicableinthiscaseisasfollows:  %  ` [__________toJuly23,2007!$5.15perhour  ~  ` July24,2007toJuly23,2008!$5.85perhour 5   ` July24,2008toJuly23,2009!$6.55perhour  0   ` July24,2009to___________!$7.25perhour.]    ` Youmayhaveheardaboutotherminimumwageratesthatmaybeapplicablein @  certainstates.Youmustnotconsideranyminimumwageratesotherthanthoselisted ;  above.    @' NotesonUse  K   ` 1.Thisinstructionisintendedforuseonlywhentheplaintiffclaimsunpaid F minimumwage.Selecttheminimumwagerate(s)applicabletotheperiodoftimeat , issue.  p $# @== %   10.05FLSA!MINIMUMWAGECREDITFORBOARDANDLODGING F!/  ` 5.Exclusiveofboard,lodgingorotherfacilities.See29C.F.R.541.606(b). ("1  ` 6.Generally,managementincludesactivitiessuchasinterviewing,selecting,and N*#3 trainingofemployees;settingandadjustingemployeeratesofpayandhoursofwork; 4+$4 directingtheworkofemployees;maintainingproductionorsalesrecordsforusein ,%5 supervisionorcontrol;appraisingemployees'productivityandefficiencyforthepurpose ^ ofrecommendingpromotionsorotherchangesinstatus;handlingemployeecomplaints D andgrievances;discipliningemployees;planningthework;determiningthetechniques * tobeused;apportioningtheworkamongtheemployees;determiningthetypeof   materials,supplies,machinery,equipmentortoolstobeusedormerchandisetobe   bought,stockedandsold;controllingtheflowanddistributionofmaterialsor  ~ merchandiseandsupplies;providingforthesafetyandsecurityoftheemployeesorthe  d property;planningandcontrollingthebudget;andmonitoringorimplementinglegal  J compliancemeasures.29C.F.R.541.102.  0  ` 7.Selectthebracketedlanguageasappropriatefortheclaimedexemption.    (' @J J  %   10.21FLSA!ADMINISTRATIVEEMPLOYEEEXEMPTION nt v  ^  ` Yourverdictmustbefordefendant[onplaintiffsFLSAclaim]Nifallofthe * followingelementshavebeenproved:  %  ` First,plaintiffwascompensatedonasalarybasis2asdefinedinInstructionNo.  ~ ___3ataratenotlessthan$4554,5perweek6,7;and 5   ` Second,plaintiffsprimarydutywastheperformanceofofficeornonmanual  0  workdirectlyrelatedtothemanagementorgeneralbusinessoperations8ofdefendantor   defendantscustomers;and @   ` Third,plaintiffsprimarydutyincludedtheexerciseofdiscretionandindependent ;  judgmentwithrespecttomattersofsignificance.9    ` Theterm primarydutymeanstheprincipal,main,majorormostimportantduty K  thatplaintiffperforms. F  @' NotesonUse    ` 1.Insertthebracketedlanguageifmorethanoneclaimissubmittedtothejury. V  ` 2.Compensationmayalsobeonafeebasis.Ifthecaseinvolvesafeebasisissue, Q thisinstructionshouldbemodifiedaccordingly.See29C.F.R.541.605. 7  ` 3.Insertthenumberofthe salarybasisinstruction.   ` 4.The$455perweekmaybetranslatedintoequivalentamountsforperiods G! longerthanoneweek.Therequirementismetifplaintiffiscompensatedbiweeklyona -" salarybasisof$910,semimonthlyonasalarybasisof$985.83,ormonthlyonasalary # basisof$1,971.66.Theshortestperiodofpaymentthatmeetsthecompensation $ requirementisoneweek.29C.F.R.541.600(b).  %  ` 5.Or$380perweek,ifemployedinAmericanSamoabyemployersotherthan 8"' theFederalGovernment. #(  ` 6.Exclusiveofboard,lodgingorotherfacilities.See29C.F.R.541.606(b). w$*  ` 7.Inthecaseofacademicadministrativeemployees,thecompensation %r, requirementalsomaybemetbycompensationonasalarybasisatarateatleastequalto &X - theentrancesalaryforateacherintheeducationalestablishmentwhereplaintiffis '>!. employed.29C.F.R.541.600(c).See29C.F.R.541.204(a)(1). ($"/  ` 8. Workdirectlyrelatedtomanagementorgeneralbusinessoperations )}#1 includesworkinfunctionalareassuchastax;finance;accounting;budgeting;auditing; *c$2 insurance;qualitycontrol;purchasing;procurement;advertising;marketing;research; +I%3 safetyandhealth;personnelmanagement;humanresources;employeebenefits;labor ^ relations;publicrelations,governmentrelations;computernetwork,internetanddatabase D administration;legalandregulatorycompliance;andsimilaractivities.29C.F.R. * 541.201(b).    ` 9.Factorstoconsiderwhendeterminingwhetheranemployeeexercises i  discretionandindependentjudgmentwithrespecttomattersofsignificanceinclude,but O  arenotlimitedto:whethertheemployeehasauthoritytoformulate,affect,interpret,or 5  implementmanagementpoliciesoroperatingpractices;whethertheemployeecarriesout   majorassignmentsinconductingtheoperationsofthebusiness;whethertheemployee   performsworkthataffectsbusinessoperationstoasubstantialdegree,evenifthe   employee'sassignmentsarerelatedtooperationofaparticularsegmentofthebusiness; o  whethertheemployeehasauthoritytocommittheemployerinmattersthathave U  significantfinancialimpact;whethertheemployeehasauthoritytowaiveordeviatefrom ;  establishedpoliciesandprocedureswithoutpriorapproval;whethertheemployeehas !  authoritytonegotiateandbindthecompanyonsignificantmatters;whetherthe e  employeeprovidesconsultationorexpertadvicetomanagement;whethertheemployee K  isinvolvedinplanninglongorshorttermbusinessobjectives;whethertheemployee 1 investigatesandresolvesmattersofsignificanceonbehalfofmanagement;andwhether  theemployeerepresentsthecompanyinhandlingcomplaints,arbitratingdisputesor  resolvinggrievances.29C.F.R.541.202(b).  @YY$ CommitteeComments  <  ` Ajobtitlealoneisinsufficienttoestablishtheexemptstatusofanemployee.The 7 exemptornonexemptstatusofanyparticularemployeemustbedeterminedonthebasis { ofwhethertheemployee'ssalaryanddutiesmeettherequirementsoftheregulations.29 a C.F.R.541.2. G  ` Thefollowingaretypesofpositionsthatmayqualifyfortheadministrative B employeeexemption:insuranceclaimsadjusters;employeesinthefinancialservices ( industry;anemployeewholeadsateamofotheremployeesassignedtocompletemajor l  projects(suchaspurchasing,selling,orclosingallorpartofthebusiness,negotiatinga R!  realestatetransactionoracollectivebargainingagreement,ordesigningand 8"! implementingproductivityimprovements);anexecutiveassistantoradministrative #" assistanttoabusinessownerorseniorexecutiveoflargebusiness;humanresources $# managerswhoformulate,interpretorimplementemploymentpolicies;management $$ consultantswhostudytheoperationsofabusinessandproposechangesinthe %r% organization;andpurchasingagentswithauthoritytobindthecompanyonsignificant &X & purchases.29C.F.R.541.203. '>!'  ` Thefollowingaretypesofpositionsthattypicallydonotqualifyforthe (") administrativeemployeeexemption:personnelclerkswhoscreenapplicantstoobtain )}#* dataregardingtheirminimumqualificationsandfitnessforemployment;ordinary *c$+ inspectionwork;examinersorgraders(suchasemployeesthatgradelumber); +I%, comparisonshoppingperformedbyanemployeeofaretailstorewhoreportstothebuyer ^ thepricesatthecompetitorsstore;publicsectorinspectorsorinvestigators,suchasfire D preventionorsafety,buildingorconstruction,healthorsanitation,environmentalorsoils * specialists;andsimilaremployees.29C.F.R.541.203.    )( @   %   10.22FLSA!LEARNEDPROFESSIONALEXEMPTION d  ^  ` Yourverdictmustbefordefendant[onplaintiffsFLSAclaim]Nifallofthe * followingelementshavebeenproved:  %  ` First,plaintiffwascompensatedonasalarybasis2asdefinedinInstructionNo.  ~ ___3ataratenotlessthan$4554,5perweek;6and 5   ` Second,plaintiffsprincipal,main,majorormostimportantdutywasthe  0  performanceofworkrequiringadvancedknowledgeinafieldofscienceorlearning.7    ` Theterm advancedknowledgemeansworkthatispredominantlyintellectualin @  character,andthatrequirestheconsistentexerciseofdiscretionandjudgment.Advanced ;  knowledgeiscustomarilyacquiredbyaprolongedcourseofspecializedintellectual   instruction. K   @' NotesonUse  F  ` 1.Insertthebracketedlanguageifmorethanoneclaimissubmittedtothejury.   ` 2.Compensationmayalsobeonafeebasis.Ifthecaseinvolvesafeebasis V issue,thisinstructionshouldbemodifiedaccordingly.See29C.F.R.541.605.The < salarybasisandminimumsalaryrequirementsareinapplicabletocertainemployees " engagedinteachingorthepracticeoflawormedicine.See29C.F.R.541.303and  304.   ` 3.Insertthenumberofthe salarybasisinstruction. G   ` 4.The$455perweekmaybetranslatedintoequivalentamountsforperiods B" longerthanoneweek.Therequirementismetifplaintiffiscompensatedbiweeklyona (# salarybasisof$910,semimonthlyonasalarybasisof$985.83,ormonthlyonasalary l $ basisof$1,971.66.Theshortestperiodofpaymentthatmeetsthecompensation R!% requirementisoneweek.29C.F.R.541.600(b). 8"&  ` 5.Or$380perweek,ifemployedinAmericanSamoabyemployersotherthan #3( theFederalGovernment. w$)  ` 6.Exclusiveofboard,lodgingorotherfacilities.See29C.F.R.541.606(b). %r+  ` 7. Fieldofscienceorlearningincludestraditionalprofessionsoflaw, )' - medicine,theology,accounting,actuarialcomputation,engineering,architecture, (!. teaching,varioustypesofphysical,chemicalandbiologicalsciences,pharmacyand ("/ othersimilaroccupationsthathavearecognizedprofessionalstatus.29C.F.R. )}#0 541.301(c).Thisinstructionshouldbemodified,asappropriate,foremployeesengaged *c$1 inteachingorthepracticeoflawormedicine.See29C.F.R.541.303and304. +I%2 &   @YY$ CommitteeComments  ^  ` Ajobtitlealoneisinsufficienttoestablishtheexemptstatusofanemployee.The Y exemptornonexemptstatusofanyparticularemployeemustbedeterminedonthebasis ? ofwhetherthe' ^֠employee'ssalaryanddutiesmeettherequirementsoftheregulations.29  % C.F.R.541.2. i   ` Thefollowingaretypesofpositionsthatmayqualifyforthelearnedprofessional  d exemption:registeredorcertifiedmedicaltechnologists,registerednurses,dental  J hygienists,physiciansassistants,certifiedpublicaccountants,executivechefsandsous  0  chefs,certifiedathletictrainers,andlicensedfuneraldirectorsandembalmers.29C.F.R. t  541.301(e). Z   ` Thefollowingaretypesofpositionsthattypicallydonotqualifyforthelearned U  professionalexemption:licensedpracticalnursesandothersimilarhealthcare ;  employees,accountingclerks,bookkeepersandotheremployeeswhonormallyperforma !  greatdealofroutinework,cookswhopredominantlyperformroutinemental,manual, e  mechanicalorphysicalwork,andparalegalsandlegalassistants.29C.F.R.541.301(e).  K  *) @  %   10.23FLSA!CREATIVEPROFESSIONALEXEMPTION on  ^  ` Yourverdictmustbefordefendant[onplaintiffsFLSAclaim]Nifallofthe * followingelementshavebeenproved:  %  ` First,plaintiffwascompensatedonasalarybasis2asdefinedinInstructionNo.  ~ ___3ataratenotlessthan$4554,5perweek;6and 5   ` Second,plaintiffsprincipal,main,majorormostimportantdutywasthe  0  performanceofworkrequiringinvention,imagination,originalityortalentina   recognizedfieldofartisticorcreativeendeavor.7 @   @' NotesonUse  ;   ` 1.Insertthebracketedlanguageifmorethanoneclaimissubmittedtothejury.    ` 2.Compensationmayalsobeonafeebasis.Ifthecaseinvolvesafeebasisissue, K  thisinstructionshouldbemodifiedaccordingly.See29C.F.R.541.605. 1  ` 3.Insertthenumberofthe salarybasisinstruction. ,  ` 4.The$455perweekmaybetranslatedintoequivalentamountsforperiods  longerthanoneweek.Therequirementismetifplaintiffiscompensatedbiweeklyona k salarybasisof$910,semimonthlyonasalarybasisof$985.83,ormonthlyonasalary Q basisof$1,971.66.Theshortestperiodofpaymentthatmeetsthecompensation 7 requirementisoneweek.29C.F.R.541.600(b). {  ` 5.Or$380perweek,ifemployedinAmericanSamoabyemployersotherthan v theFederalGovernment. \   ` 6.Exclusiveofboard,lodgingorotherfacilities.See29C.F.R.541.606(b). "  ` 7.Recognizedfieldsofartisticandcreativeendeavorincludemusic,writing, l $ actingandthegraphicarts.29C.F.R.541.302(b). R!% @YY$ CommitteeComments  "M'  ` Ajobtitlealoneisinsufficienttoestablishtheexemptstatusofanemployee.The $) exemptornonexemptstatusofanyparticularemployeemustbedeterminedonthebasis $* ofwhethertheemployee'ssalaryanddutiesmeettherequirementsoftheregulations.29 %r+ C.F.R.541.2. &X ,  ` Theperformanceofworkrequiringinvention,imagination,originalityortalentin (!. arecognizedfieldofartisticorcreativeendeavorisdistinguishedfromroutinemental, ("/ manual,mechanicalorphysicalwork.Theexemptiondoesnotapplytoworkwhichcan )}#0 beproducedbyapersonwithgeneralmanualorintellectualabilityandtraining.The *c$1 requirementof invention,imagination,originalityortalentdistinguishesthecreative +I%2 professionsfromworkthatprimarilydependsonintelligence,diligenceandaccuracy. ^ Thedutiesofemployeesvarywidely,andmaydependontheextentoftheinvention, D imagination,originalityortalentexercisedbytheemployee.29C.F.R.541.302(a)and * (b).    ` Thefollowingaretypesofpositionsthatmayqualifyforthecreativeprofessional i  exemption:actors,musicians,composers,conductors,andsoloists;painterswhoatmost O  aregiventhesubjectmatteroftheirpainting;cartoonistswhoaremerelytoldthetitleor 5  underlyingconceptofacartoonandmustrelyontheirowncreativeabilitytoexpressthe   concept;essayists,novelists,shortstorywritersandscreenplaywriterswhochoosetheir   ownsubjectsandhandinafinishedpieceofworktotheiremployers;andpersons   holdingthemoreresponsiblewritingpositionsinadvertisingagencies.29C.F.R. o  541.302(c). U   ` Journalistsmaysatisfythedutiesrequirementforthecreativeprofessional    exemptioniftheirprimarydutyisworkrequiringinvention,imagination,originalityor   talent;performingontheairradio,televisionorotherelectronicmedia;conducting z  investigativeinterviews;analyzingorinterpretingpublicevents;writingeditorials, ` opinioncolumnsorothercommentary;oractingasanarratororcommentator.29C.F.R. F 541.302(d). ,  ` Thecreativeprofessionalrequirementgenerallyisnotmetbyapersonwhois  employedasacopyist,asananimatorofmotionpicturecartoons,orasaretoucherof k photographs.29C.F.R.541.302(c).Employeesofnewspapers,magazines,television Q andothermediaarenotexemptcreativeprofessionalsiftheyonlycollect,organizeand 7 recordinformationthatisroutineoralreadypublic,oriftheydonotcontributeaunique { interpretationoranalysistoanewsproduct.See29C.F.R.541.302(d).  a +* @  %    10.24FLSA!COMPUTEREMPLOYEEEXEMPTION ona  ^  ` Yourverdictmustbefordefendant[onplaintiffsFLSAclaim]Nifallofthe * followingelementshavebeenproved:  %  ` First,plaintiffwascompensatedon[(asalarybasis2asdefinedinInstructionNo.  ~ ___3ataratenotlessthan$4554,5perweek6)or(ataratenotlessthan$27.63per 5  hour)];7and  0   ` Second,plaintiffwasemployedasacomputersystemsanalyst,computer   programmer,softwareengineerorothersimilarlyskilledworkerinthecomputerfield; @  and ;   ` Third,plaintiffsprincipal,main,majorormostimportantdutyconsistedofat   leastoneofthefollowing: K   0 ` A.0 ` (#` (#Theapplicationofsystemsanalysistechniquesandprocedures,including F consultingwithuserstodeterminehardware,softwareorsystem , functionalspecifications;p (# (# 0 ` B.0 ` (#` (#Thedesign,development,documentation,analysis,creation,testing, k modificationofcomputersystemsorprograms,includingprototypes, Q basedonandrelatedtouseorsystemdesignspecifications;7 (# (# 0 ` C.0 ` (#` (#Thedesign,documentation,testing,creationormodificationofcomputer  programsrelatedtomachineoperatingsystems;orv (# (# 0 ` D.0 ` (#` (#Acombinationoftheaforementionedduties,theperformanceofwhich -! requiresthesamelevelofskills." (# (# @' NotesonUse  l $  ` 1.Insertthebracketedlanguageifmorethanoneclaimissubmittedtothejury. !g&  ` 2.Compensationmayalsobeonafeebasis.Ifthecaseinvolvesafeebasis #( issue,thisinstructionshouldbemodifiedaccordingly.See29C.F.R.541.605. $)  ` 3.Insertthenumberofthe salarybasisinstruction. ]%+  ` 4.The$455perweekmaybetranslatedintoequivalentamountsforperiods &X - longerthanoneweek.Therequirementismetifplaintiffiscompensatedbiweeklyona '>!. salarybasisof$910,semimonthlyonasalarybasisof$985.83,ormonthlyonasalary ($"/ basisof$1,971.66.Theshortestperiodofpaymentthatmeetsthecompensation h) #0  requirementisoneweek.29C.F.R.541.600(b). N*#1  ` 5.Or$380perweek,ifemployedinAmericanSamoabyemployersotherthan ^  theFederalGovernment. D  ` 6.Exclusiveofboard,lodgingorotherfacilities.See29C.F.R.541.606(b). ?  ` 7.Selectthebracketedlanguagethatcorrespondstoplaintiffscompensation.    ,+ @  % 5  10.30FLSA!SALARYBASIS ce  ^  ` Anemployeeispaidona salarybasisiftheemployeeisregularlypaid,ona * weeklyorlessfrequentbasis,apredeterminedamountconstitutingallorpartofthe  % employeescompensation,andtheamountisnotsubjecttoreductionbecauseof  ~ variationsinthequalityorquantityoftheworkperformed.1[Anemployeeispaidona 5  salarybasiseveniftheemployeessalaryissubjecttoreductionforoneormoreofthe  0  followingreasons:(insertpermissiblededuction(s)atissue)].2    @' NotesonUse  @   ` 1.29C.F.R.541.602(a). ;   ` 2.Permissibledeductionsfromanemployeessalaryinclude:    `  A.0  Deductionswhenanemployeeisabsentfromworkforoneor K  morefulldaysforpersonalreasonsotherthansicknessor 1 disability.29C.F.R.541.602(b)(1).(#(#  `  B.0  Deductionsforabsencesofoneormorefulldaysoccasionedby p sicknessordisability(includingworkrelatedaccidents)ifthe V deductionismadeinaccordancewithabonafideplan,policyor < practiceofprovidingcompensationorlossofsalaryoccasionedby " sicknessordisability.Deductionsforfulldayabsencesalsomay  bemadebeforetheemployeehasqualifiedundertheplan,policy  orpractice,andaftertheemployeehasexhaustedtheirleave v allowance.Similarly,anemployermaymakeadeductionfrom \ payforabsencesofoneormorefulldaysifsalaryreplacement B  benefitsareprovidedunderastatedisabilityinsurancelawor (! underastateworkerscompensationlaw.29C.F.R. l " 541.602(b)(2).R!#(#(#  `  C.0  Whiletheemployermaynotmakedeductionsforanemployees "M% absenceoccasionedbyjuryduty,attendanceasawitnessor #3& temporarymilitaryleave,theemployermayoffsetanyamounts w$' receivedbytheemployeeasjuryfees,witnessfeesormilitarypay ]%( foraparticularweekagainstthesalaryforthatparticularweek C&) withoutlossoftheexemption.29C.F.R.541.602(b)(3).)' *(#(#  `  D.0  Deductionsforpenaltiesimposedingoodfaithforinfractionsof ($", safetyrulesrelatingtothepreventionofseriousdangerinthe h) #-  workplaceortootheremployees.29C.F.R.541.602(b)(4).N*#.(#(#  `  E.0  Deductionsforunpaiddisciplinarysuspensionsofoneormorefull ^  daysimposedingoodfaithforinfractionsofworkplaceconduct D rulespursuanttoawrittenpolicyapplicabletoallemployees.29 * C.F.R.541.602(b)(5). (#(#  ` 0 F.0 (# (#Intheinitialandfinalweekofemployment,theemployermaypay i  aproportionatepartofanemployeessalaryforthetimeactually O  worked.29C.F.R.541.602(b)(6).5 (#(#  ` 0 G.0 (# (#WhenanemployeetakesanunpaidleaveundertheFamilyand  0  MedicalLeaveAct,anemployermaypayaproportionatepartof t  thefullsalaryfortimeactuallyworked.29C.F.R. Z  541.602(b)(7). @ (#(# -, @# % 6  10.40FLSA!DAMAGES ci^  ^  ` IfyoufindinfavorofplaintiffunderInstructionNo.___[andyoufindagainst * defendantunderInstructionNo.__],1youmustawardplaintiffdamagesintheamount  % thatplaintiffshouldhavebeenpaidin[minimumwagesand/orovertimecompensation],  ~ lesswhatdefendantactuallypaidplaintiff. 5   ` [Theminimumwageamountthatshouldhavebeenpaidisthenumberofhours  0  workedineachworkweekupto40hours,timestheminimumwageapplicabletothat   workweek,assetforthinInstructionNo.__.]2 @   ` [Theovertimecompensationamountthatshouldhavebeenpaidisthenumberof ;  hoursworkedinexcessof40hoursineachworkweek,timestheregularrateforthat   workweek,timesoneandonehalf,assetforthinInstructionNo.__.]3 K   ` Youmustcalculatethisamount[theseamounts]separately[foreachplaintiff]for F eachworkweek.   ` Indeterminingtheamountofdamages,youmaynotincludeoraddtothe V damagesanysumforthepurposeofpunishingdefendant. Q  @' NotesonUse    ` 1.Insertthebracketedlanguageifdefendanthasassertedanexemptiondefense. a   ` 2.Insertthebracketedlanguageiftheplaintiffclaimsdamagesforaminimum \" wageviolation. B#  ` 3.Insertthebracketedlanguageiftheplaintiffclaimsdamagesforanovertime % payviolation.   & .- @ee % 7  10.41FLSA!DAMAGES(ONLYHOURSWORKEDSUBMITTEDTOJURY) p41  ^  ` IfyoufindinfavorofplaintiffunderInstructionNo.___[andyoufindagainst * defendantunderInstructionNo.__],2youmustdeterminethenumberofhoursworked  % ineachworkweek.  ~  @' NotesonUse  5   ` 1.Usethisinstructiononlywherethepartieshaveagreedorthecourtdetermines  0  thatthejurywillbeaskedtodecidethenumberofhoursworked,butwillnotbeaskedto t  calculatedamages.Suchaninstructionmaybeappropriatewhere,forexample,the Z  appropriaterateofpayisnotindisputeanddamagesmaybecalculatedasamatterof @  lawoncethenumberofhoursworkedisdeterminedbythejury. &   ` 2.Insertthebracketedlanguageifdefendanthasassertedanexemptiondefense.  !  /. @kk % 8  10.42FLSA!WILLFULVIOLATION p  ^  ` IfyoufindinfavorofplaintiffunderInstructionNo.___[andyoufindagainst * defendantunderInstructionNo.__],1youmustdeterminewhetherdefendantsfailureto  % pay[minimumwageand/orovertime]waswillful.Defendantsfailuretopay[minimum  ~ wageand/orovertime]waswillfulifithasbeenprovedthatdefendantknewthatits 5  conductwasprohibitedbythe[federal]2lawregarding[minimumwageand/orovertime  0  pay],orshowedrecklessdisregardforwhetheritsconductwasprohibitedbythe[federal]   lawregarding[minimumwageand/orovertimepay]. @   @' NotesonUse  ;   ` 1.Selectminimumwageand/orovertimeasappropriatefortheclaim.    ` 2.Insertthebracketedlanguageonlyifthereispotentialriskofconfusiontothe K  jurorsduetoevidenceorargumentregardingstatelaw.  1 0/ @  % 9  10.43FLSAGENERALVERDICTFORM p  ^ @hh*VERDICT *  Note: 0 ` Completethefollowingparagraphbywritinginthenamerequiredbyyour   verdict. ~` (#` (#  ` 1.Onthe[(minimumwage)or(overtime)]1claimofplaintiff[______]2against  J defendant[_____],3wefindinfavorof:   @44 __________________________________________________________________ U  @ (Plaintiff__________)or(Defendant__________) ;   Note: 0 ` AnswerQuestion2onlyiftheabovefindingisinfavorofplaintiff[______]2.If e  theabovefindingisinfavorofdefendant[_____],3haveyourforepersonsign K  anddatetheformbecauseyouhavecompletedyourdeliberationsonthisclaim.1` (#` (#  ` [2.Hasitbeenprovedthatthedefendanteitherknewitsconductwasprohibited  bytheFairLaborStandardsActorshowedrecklessdisregardforwhetheritsconduct V wasprohibitedbytheFairLaborStandardsAct? Q @_______Yes_______No a  Note: 0 ` IfyouansweredyestoQuestion2,youshouldawarddamagesfortheperiodfrom - [____to_____].5IfyouanswerednotoQuestion2,youshouldawarddamages  fortheperiodfrom[____to_____].6]7 ` (#` (#  ` 3.Wefindthattheplaintiffshouldbeawardeddamagesintheamountof: !g" @ $_____________________(statingtheamount) #3$  `     h     ________________________________ C&' 0 ` 0 ` (#` (#0 (# (#0h(#(#0h(#h(#0(#(#Foreperson)' ((#(# Dated:_____________________  ("*  @' NotesonUse  ^  ` 1.Thisphraseshouldbeusedwhentheplaintiffsubmitsmultipleclaimstothe Y jury. ?  ` 2.Insertthenameoftheplaintiff.    ` 3.Insertthenameofthedefendant. O   ` 4.ModelInstruction___(BurdenofProof)tellsthejurythatsomethingis  J  provedonlyifthejuryfindsitismorelikelytruethannottrue.Thephrase greater  0  weightoftheevidenceisnotnecessaryhere.ItcanbeincludedinInstruction3.04if t  desiredbythecourt. Z   ` 5.Insertthedateonwhichtheplaintiffscauseofactionaccrued,orthedate U  threeyearspriortothedateonwhichtheplaintifffiledhisorhercomplaint,whicheveris ;  later.Insertthedatetheinstructionsaresubmittedtothejuryasthefinaldate. !   ` 6.Insertthedateonwhichtheplaintiffscauseofactionaccrued,orthedatetwo z  yearspriortothedateonwhichtheplaintifffiledhisorhercomplaint,whicheverislater. ` Insertthedatetheinstructionsaresubmittedtothejuryasthefinaldate. F  ` 7.Thisquestionisusedwhenthepartiesdisputethe willfulnessofthe  defendantsactions.Whenthepartiesdonotdispute willfulness,Question2maybe  eliminated.Question3shouldbecomeQuestion2withthefollowingrecommended k language: Q 0 ` Fortheperiodfrom______to______,wefindthattheplaintiffshouldbe  awardeddamagesintheamountof:` (#` (# @ $_____________________.(statingtheamount)  G 10 @  % :  10.44FLSASPECIALINTERROGATORIES(DAMAGES) st^  ^  ` Yourverdictinthiscasewillbedeterminedbyyouranswerstothefollowing * questions.Makesurethatyoureadthequestionsandnotescarefullybecausetheyexplain  % theorderinwhichthequestionsshouldbeansweredandwhichquestionsmaybe  ~ skipped. 5  0 ` [QuestionNo.1: h Wasplaintiffemployedbydefendantonorafter   ___________?Z ` (#` (# @GG!Yes____No____ U  @(Markan_ X_Ԁintheappropriatespace)] ;  0 ` [QuestionNo.2: h Inplaintiffsworkfordefendant,wasplaintiff[engagedin e  commerceorintheproductionofgoodsforcommerce][employedbyan ` enterpriseengagedincommerceortheproductionofgoodsforcommercethat  hadannualgrosssalesofatleast$500,000]?p` (#` (# @GG!Yes____No____ k @(Markan_ X_Ԁintheappropriatespace)] Q 0 ` QuestionNo.3: h Diddefendantfailtopayplaintiffminimumwage[and/or { overtimepay]forallhoursworkedbyplaintiff?v` (#` (# @GG!Yes____No____ -  @(Markan_ X_Ԁintheappropriatespace) !  Note: 0 ` Ifyouanswered Notoanyoftheabovequestions,youshouldhaveyour  # forepersonsignanddatethisformandturnitinbecauseyouhavecompletedyour !g$ deliberationsonthisclaim.Ifyouanswered Yestoalloftheabovequestions, "M% pleaseproceedtoQuestionNo.4.#3&` (#` (# 0 ` [QuestionNo.4: h DoyoufindfordefendantunderInstructionNo.___? ]%( [Exemption]&X *` (#` (# @GG!Yes____No____ (!, @(Markan_ X_Ԁintheappropriatespace) ("-   )}#.  Note: 0 ` Ifyouanswered YestoQuestionNo.4,youshouldhaveyourforepersonsign ^ anddatethisformbecauseyouhavecompletedyourdeliberationsonthisclaim. D Ifyouanswered NotoQuestionNo.4,pleaseproceedtoQuestionNo.5.]*` (#` (#  & d 0 ` QuestionNo.5: h Foreachworkweekontheattachedtable,stateplaintiffs   hoursworked,asthattermisdefinedinInstructionNo.___.O ` (#` (# @ _________________________________________________ӈ  J @!(Numberofhoursworked)  0  'd c 0 ` QuestionNo.6: h Foreachworkweekontheattachedtable,statetheamount Z  thatplaintiffshouldhavebeenpaidinminimumwage,assetforthinInstruction U  No._____.  ` (#` (# @ ____________________________________________________ӈ e  @44$(Statetheamount) K  0 ` QuestionNo.7: h Foreachworkweekontheattachedtable,statetheamount  thatplaintiffshouldhavebeenpaidinovertimecompensation,assetforthin p InstructionNo._____.k` (#` (# @Z Z _______________________________________________________ӈ " @44$(Statetheamount)  0 ` QuestionNo.8: h Foreachworkweekintheattachedtable,statetheamount v ofwagesthatyoufindplaintiffwasactuallypaidbydefendant.-` (#` (# @ ___________________________________________________________ӈ (! @44$(Statetheamount) l " 0 ` QuestionNo.9: h Foreachoftheperiodssetforthbelow,statetheamountof 8"$ plaintiffsdamagesasthattermisdefinedinInstructionNo._____:#3&` (#` (# 0 ` $______________ h fortheperiod[datethreeyearspriortofilingsuit]to[day $( beforedatetwoyearspriortofilingsuit]%r)` (#` (# 0 ` $______________ h [datetwoyearspriortofilingsuit]tothedateofyour '>!+ verdict.($",` (#` (#   h) #- &   0 ` QuestionNo.10: h Doyoufindthatdefendantsfailuretopay[minimumwage ^ and/orovertime]waswillfulasdefinedinInstructionNo.___?Y` (#` (# @GG!Yes____No____   @(Markan_ X_Ԁintheappropriatespace)    `     h     ___________________________________  d  `     h     Foreperson  J Date:____________________'^   0  *2&3 Vddd Xdd Xdd X(#(#,ZZ,YZZ,"ZZ,ZZ,0ZZ,ZZ+  1'^^ 1  Wor ^ kwee D k * Begi   nnin   g  ~ Date ' d  '  Wo ^ rkw D  eek *  End    ing    Dat  ~  e ' d  '  Ho ^ urs D W * ork   ed '   '  Minimu ^ m D Wage * That   Should   Have  ~ been  d Paid ' J  '  Overtime ^ Compensatio D nThat * ShouldHave   BeenPaid '    '  Wage ^! s D" Actua *# lly  $ Paid ?5 %   ?KQ(X 0K   ' 0&  '  ' 0'  '  ' 0(  '  ' 0)  '  ' 0*  '  ?5 0+   ?KQ(XtK  't,  '  't-  '  't.  '  't/  '  't0  '  ?5t1   ?KQ(XZK  'Z2  '  'Z3  '  'Z4  '  'Z5  '  'Z6  '  ?5Z7   ?KQ(X@ K  '@ 8  '  '@ 9  '  '@ :  '  '@ ;  '  '@ <  '  ?5@ =   ?KQ(X& K  '& >  '  '& ?  '  '& @  '  '& A  '  '& B  '  ?5& C   ?KQ(X  K  '  D  '  '  E  '  '  F  '  '  G  '  '  H  '  ?5  I   ?KQ(X K  ' J  '  ' K  '  ' L  '  ' M  '  ' N  '  ?5 O   ?KQ(Xz K  'z P  '  'z Q  '  'z R  '  'z S  '  'z T  '  ?5z U   ?KQ(X`K  '`V  '  '`W  '  '`X  '  '`Y  '  '`Z  '  ?5`[   ?KQ(XFK  'F\  '  'F]  '  'F^  '  'F_  '  'F`  '  ?5Fa   ?KQ(X, K  ',b  '  ',c  '  ',d  '  ',e  '  ',f  '  ?5,g   ?KQ(Xp K  'ph  '  'pi  '  'pj  '  'pk  '  'pl  '  ?5pm   ?KQ(XV K  'Vn  '  'Vo  '  'Vp  '  'Vq  '  'Vr  '  ?5Vs   ?KQ(X< K  '<t  '  '<u  '  '<v  '  '<w  '  '<x  '  ?5<y   ?KQ(X" K  '"z  '  '"{  '  '"|  '  '"}  '  '"~  '  ?5"   ?KQ(XK  '  '  '  '  '  '  '  '  '  '  ?5   ?KQ(XK  '  '  '  '  '  '  '  '  '  '  ?5   ?KQ(XvK  'v  '  'v  '  'v  '  'v  '  'v  '  ?5v   ?KQ(X\K  '\  '  '\  '  '\  '  '\  '  '\  '  -#!\    -  ( 41KQ(X^K@] ]  % <  10.45FLSASPECIALINTERROGATORIES(HOURSWORKED) ac<;  ^  ` Yourverdictinthiscasewillbedeterminedbyyouranswerstothefollowing * questions.Makesurethatyoureadthequestionsandnotescarefullybecausetheyexplain  % theorderinwhichthequestionsshouldbeansweredandwhichquestionsmaybe  ~ skipped. 5   ` QuestionNo.1: h Wasplaintiffemployedbydefendantonorafter  0  ___________?   @GG!Yes____No____ @  @(Markan Xintheappropriatespace) &  0 ` QuestionNo.2: h Inplaintiffsworkfordefendant,wasplaintiff[engagedin   commerceorintheproductionofgoodsforcommerce][employedbyan K  enterpriseengagedincommerceortheproductionofgoodsforcommercethat F hadannualgrosssalesofatleast$500,000]?` (#` (# @GG!Yes____No____ V @(Markan Xintheappropriatespace) < 0 ` QuestionNo.3: h Diddefendantfailtopayplaintiffminimumwage[and/or  overtimepay]forallhoursworkedbyplaintiff?a` (#` (# @GG!Yes____No____ \  @(Markan Xintheappropriatespace) B!  Note: 0 ` Ifyouanswered Notoanyoftheabovequestions,youshouldhaveyour l # forepersonsignanddatethisformbecauseyouhavecompletedyourdeliberations R!$ onthisclaim.Ifyouanswered Yestoeachoftheabovequestions,please 8"% proceedtoQuestionNo.4.#&` (#` (# 0 ` QuestionNo.4: h DoyoufindfordefendantunderInstructionNo.___? $( [Exemption]C&*` (#` (# @GG!Yes____No____ '>!, @(Markan Xintheappropriatespace) ($"-  Note: 0 ` Ifyouanswered YestoQuestionNo.4,youshouldhaveyourforepersonsign N*#/ anddatethisformbecauseyouhavecompletedyourdeliberationsonthisclaim. 4+$0 Ifyouanswered NotoQuestionNo.4,pleaseproceedtoQuestionNo.5.,%1` (#` (# Ї0 ` QuestionNo.5: h Foreachworkweekontheattachedtable,stateplaintiffs ^ hoursworked,asthattermisdefinedinInstructionNo.___.Y` (#` (# & J 0 ` QuestionNo.6: h Doyoufindthatdefendantsfailuretopay[minimumwage  % and/orovertime]waswillfulasdefinedinInstructionNo.___? ~` (#` (# @GG!Yes____No____ 5  @(Markan_ X_Ԁintheappropriatespace)    'J OG `     h     ___________________________________ U   `     h     Foreperson ;  Date:____________________  e  R5WGCz h p @X@E^xx^   (#(#                                                                                                                    (#(#  0