pjc-oil-and-gas-2022-lib

I NTRODUCTION

See Tex. R. Civ. P. 277–78. For further discussion, see PJC 314.2 regarding broad-form issues and the Casteel doctrine. b. Simplicity. The Committee has sought to be as brief as possible and to use lan guage that is simple and easy to understand. c. Definitions and instructions. The supreme court has disapproved the practice of embellishing standard definitions and instructions, Lemos v. Montez , 680 S.W.2d 798 (Tex. 1984), or of adding unnecessary instructions, First International Bank v. Roper Corp. , 686 S.W.2d 602 (Tex. 1985). The Committee has endeavored to adhere to stan dard definitions and instructions stated in general terms rather than terms of the particu lar parties and facts of the case. If an instruction in general terms would be unduly complicated and confusing, however, reference to specific parties and facts is suggested. d. Placement of definitions and instructions in the charges. Definitions and instructions that apply to a number of questions should be given immediately after the general instructions required by Tex. R. Civ. P. 226a. 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 definitions and instructions can be found in the individual PJCs and comments. e. Burden of proof. As authorized by Tex. R. Civ. P. 277, 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 instruc tions contain the following instruction, applicable to all questions: 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 a fact to be proved by a preponderance of the evidence, you must find that the fact is more likely true than not true. f. Hypothetical examples. The names of hypothetical parties and facts have been italicized to indicate that the names and facts of the particular case should be substituted. In general, the name Paul Payne has been used for the plaintiff and Don Davis for the defendant. Larry Lessee refers to the lessee, and Suzie Surface Owner refers to the sur-

xxvi