PJC General Negligence 2022

I NTRODUCTION

Montez , 680 S.W.2d 798, 801 (Tex. 1984). The Committee has, in a few instances, attempted to simplify questions and instructions previously approved by the courts. c. Replacing questions with instructions. This volume also reflects Supreme Court of Texas precedents and Texas Rules of Civil Procedure amendments that have led to replacing questions with instructions for many theories and defenses. Rule 277 forbids inferential rebuttal questions (questions inquiring about facts that deny or rebut an ele ment of an opponent’s cause of action or defense). An inferential rebuttal, if appropriate, should be submitted by explanatory instruction. The use of instructions in chapter 3 for such rebuttals as “new and independent cause,” “emergency,” and “act of God” is con sistent with current Texas law. d. Definitions and instructions. The supreme court has disapproved the practice of embellishing standard definitions and instructions, Lemos , 680 S.W.2d 798, or adding unnecessary instructions, First International Bank v. Roper Corp. , 686 S.W.2d 602 (Tex. 1985). The Committee has endeavored to adhere to standard definitions and instructions. Also, definitions are stated in general terms rather than in terms of the particular event or names of the parties. A general form is deemed more appropriate for a definition and less likely to be considered a comment on the weight of the evidence. e. Placement of definitions and instructions in the charge. Definitions of terms that apply to a number of questions should be given immediately after the general instructions required by rule 226a of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure. See Woods v. Crane Carrier Co. , 693 S.W.2d 377 (Tex. 1985). However, if a definition or instruction applies to only one question or cluster of questions (e.g., damages questions), it should be placed with that question or cluster. Specific guidance for placement of instructions can be found in the comments to each PJC. f. Burden of proof. As authorized by rule 277 of the Texas Rules of Civil Proce dure, it is recommended that the burden of proof be placed by instruction rather than by inclusion in each question. When the burden is placed by instruction, it is not necessary that each question begin: “Do you find from a preponderance of the evidence that ...” The admonitory instructions contain the following instruction, applicable to all ques tions: Answer “yes” or “no” to all questions unless you are told otherwise. A “yes” answer must be based on a preponderance of the evidence [unless you are told otherwise]. Whenever a question requires an answer other than “yes” or “no,” your answer must be based on a pre ponderance of the evidence [unless you are told otherwise]. The term “preponderance of the evidence” means the greater weight of credible evidence presented in this case. If you do not find that a preponderance of the evidence supports a “yes” answer, then answer “no.” A preponderance of the evidence is not measured by the number of witnesses or by the number of documents admitted in evidence. For

34