Free Proposed Jury Instructions - District Court of Arizona - Arizona

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

Stephen Paul Forrest (No. 006341) HOLLOWAY ODEGARD FORREST KELLY & KASPAREK, P.C. 3101 N. Central Avenue, Suite 1200 Phoenix, Arizona 85012 Phone: (602) 240-6670 Facsimile: (602) 240-6677 Dennis E. O'Connell BRYAN CAVE LLP 211 N. Broadway, Suite 3600 St. Louis, Missouri 63102 Telephone: (314) 259-2000 Facsimile: (314) 259-2020 Margaret B. LaBianca (No. 019169) BRYAN CAVE LLP (No. 00145700) Two North Central Avenue, Suite 2200 Phoenix, Arizona 85004-4406 Telephone: (602) 364-7000 Attorneys for Defendants Correctional Medical Services, Inc. Lorraine Lopez-Moreno, Trina Carrasco, and Jacqueline Cornwell

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA Northland Insurance Company, a Minnesota Corporation, Plaintiff, vs. Correctional Medical Services, Inc., a Missouri Corporation, Dr. Antonio DiMaano, Dr. Reynaldo Figueroa, Nurse Lorraine Lopez-Moreno, Nurse Trina Carrasco, Nurse Jacqueline Cornwell, and ABC Insurance Company, Defendants. DEFENDANT CMS' PROPOSED FORM OF JURY INSTRUCTIONS The Honorable Frederick J. Martone

No. CV-04-347 PHX FJM

Case 2:04-cv-00347-FJM

Document 141

Filed 02/24/2006

Page 1 of 15

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Defendant CMS submit the following jury instructions: I. Arizona Recommended Jury Instructions (R.A.J.I) Civil 4A:

1. Preliminary Instructions: 1-9. 2. Standard instructions: 1-9, 11, 12. 3. Fault instructions: 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11. 4. Medical Negligence Instructions: 1. 5. Contract Jury Instructions: 1, 2, 3, 17, 23. II. Non-uniform instructions (Attached):

1. Nurse's personal preference. 2. Medical records as business records.
11

3. Medical probabilities.
12

4. Standard of care proven by expert testimony.
13

5. Plaintiff's burden to mitigate damages.
14

6. Patient follows nurse's orders.
15

7. Experts familiar with standard of care in community.
16

8. Habit.
17

9. Nurse's using an approved method.
18

10. Damages must not be speculative.
19

11. Hindsight or acquired knowledge.
20 21 22 23 24 25 26

Case 2:04-cv-00347-FJM

Document 141- 2 -Filed 02/24/2006

Page 2 of 15

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

DATED this 24th day of February, 2006. HOLLOWAY ODEGARD FORREST KELLY & KASPAREK, P.C.

By:___/s/_____________________________ Stephen Paul Forrest 3101 N. Central Avenue, Suite 1200 Phoenix, Arizona 85012 Attorneys for Defendant Correctional Medical Services, Inc., Lorraine LopezMoreno, Trina Carrasco, and Jacqueline Cornwell

Case 2:04-cv-00347-FJM

Document 141- 3 -Filed 02/24/2006

Page 3 of 15

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

DEFENDANTS' REQUESTED JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 1 The testimony by other nurses that they would have followed a different procedure or treatment than that followed by defendant nurse is not sufficient to establish medical negligence, unless the procedure or treatment followed by defendant physician deviated from the applicable standard of care. The personal and individualistic method or practice of one particular nurse is not a sufficient basis to establish the standard of care in Arizona.

Source:

Evans v. Bernhard, 23 Ariz.App. 413, 416, 533 P.2d 721 (1975).

GIVEN _____________

REFUSED ___________

MODIFIED __________ _____________________________ Judge

Case 2:04-cv-00347-FJM

Document 141- 4 -Filed 02/24/2006

Page 4 of 15

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

DEFENDANTS' REQUESTED JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 2 The medical records that have been introduced into evidence as business records may be considered by you as evidence of the happening of events recorded in the record.

Source:

ARIZ. R. EVID., Rule 803(6).

GIVEN _____________

REFUSED ___________

MODIFIED __________ _____________________________ Judge

Case 2:04-cv-00347-FJM

Document 141- 5 -Filed 02/24/2006

Page 5 of 15

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

DEFENDANTS' REQUESTED JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 3 The lawyers and some witnesses have used the term "reasonable degree of medical probability." This is a legal term that refers to medical probability. In other words, if something is true "to a reasonable degree of medical probability," this is more probably true than not true. Source: Riedisser v. Nilson, 111 Ariz. 542, 534 P.2d 1052 (1975); Gurr v. V. I. Wilcutt, 146 Ariz. 575, 707 P.2d 979 (App. 1985).

GIVEN _____________ REFUSED ___________ MODIFIED __________ _____________________________ Judge

Case 2:04-cv-00347-FJM

Document 141- 6 -Filed 02/24/2006

Page 6 of 15

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

DEFENDANTS' REQUESTED JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 4 The law requires that the Arizona standard of care to be applied in this case be established by expert testimony. The law does not allow you to set up your own standards of what you feel should or should not have been done in this case. In other words, you may not establish lay standards to be applied to the care in this case. Source: Miller v. Palmer, 143 Ariz. 84, 691 P.2d 1112 (App. 1984); Riedisser v. Nelson, 111 Ariz. 541, 534 P.2d 1052 (1975); Hunter v. Benchimol, 123 Ariz. 516, 601 P.2d 279 (1979); Alexanders' Jury Instructions on Medical Issues (2nd Ed.), Nos. 2-26.

GIVEN _____________ REFUSED ___________ MODIFIED __________ _____________________________ Judge

Case 2:04-cv-00347-FJM

Document 141- 7 -Filed 02/24/2006

Page 7 of 15

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

DEFENDANTS' REQUESTED JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 5 It is the duty of Plaintiffs to mitigate damages, that is, to use reasonable diligence and reasonable means under the circumstances to reduce or minimize their losses or damages, and to prevent the aggravation of their injuries. Plaintiffs are not entitled to recover for any losses or damages that they could have avoided by the use of reasonable diligence and reasonable means. Thus, if you find Plaintiffs failed to mitigate their damages, you must subtract from any award or damages that amount that you find Plaintiffs could have avoided with reasonable effort. Source: Chancellor v. Taylor, 147 Ariz. 521, 523, 711 P.2d 660, 662 (App. 1985); Restatement (Second) of Torts, §918 (1979); RAJI Contracts No. 16.

GIVEN _____________ REFUSED ___________ MODIFIED __________ _____________________________ Judge

Case 2:04-cv-00347-FJM

Document 141- 8 -Filed 02/24/2006

Page 8 of 15

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

DEFENDANTS' REQUESTED JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 6 It is the duty of a patient to follow reasonable instructions given to him by the practitioner undertaking his or her care and treatment. If the patient fails to follow such instructions, you may consider this with respect to the issue of Mr. Perez' negligence.

Source:

James v. Krpan, 116 Ariz. 216, 568 P.2d 1114 (App. 1977);

Alexanders' Jury Instructions on Medical Issues (2nd Ed.), Nos. 3-58.

GIVEN _____________ REFUSED ___________ MODIFIED __________ _____________________________ Judge

Case 2:04-cv-00347-FJM

Document 141- 9 -Filed 02/24/2006

Page 9 of 15

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

DEFENDANTS' REQUESTED JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 7 You have heard expert medical testimony as to the proper standard of care to be expected of individual defendant physician. In evaluating such testimony, you should bear in mind that the weight to be accorded to it, to any opinion that is expressed as to each individual defendant physician's deviation from the standard, depends on the witness' degree of familiarity with the standards of such communities as the one in which each individual defendant physician has in his practice. Source: Alexanders' Jury Instructions on Medical Issues (2nd Ed.), Nos. 2-22.

GIVEN _____________ REFUSED ___________ MODIFIED __________ _____________________________ Judge

Case 2:04-cv-00347-FJM

Document 141- 10Filed 02/24/2006 -

Page 10 of 15

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

DEFENDANTS' REQUESTED JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 8 Evidence of habit and custom of a person or the routine practice under certain circumstances is relevant to prove that their conduct on a particular occasion was in conformity with their habit or routine practice.

Source:

ARIZ. R. EVID., Rule 406.

GIVEN _____________ REFUSED ___________ MODIFIED __________ _____________________________ Judge

Case 2:04-cv-00347-FJM

Document 141- 11Filed 02/24/2006 -

Page 11 of 15

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

DEFENDANTS' REQUESTED JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 9 If there is only one approved method of diagnosing or treating a particular condition or ailment, a nurse is required to follow that method. If there are two or more approved methods of diagnosing or treating a particular condition or ailment, a nurse is required to select and follow one of the approved methods. If there are two or more methods of diagnosing a particular condition or ailment, a nurse does not commit medical negligence simply because he or she employs a method of diagnosis or course of treatment that other nurses do not find effective. If the disputed technique is approved by a respectable minority of nurses and so long as the defendant nurse properly employed that technique, he or she has not fallen below the standard of care. Source: R.A.J.I (Third), Medical Negligence 1. Comment 4 (Definition of Medical Negligence, Causation, Fault, Plaintiff's burden); Boyce v. Brown, 51 Ariz. 416, 77 P.2d 455 (1938); Leech v. Bralliar, 275 F.Supp. 897 (D. Ariz. 1967); Borja v. Phoenix General Hospital, Inc., 151 Ariz. 302, 727 P.2d 355 (App. 1986); Fridena v. Evans, 127 Ariz. 516, 622 P.2d 463 (1981).

GIVEN _____________ REFUSED ___________ MODIFIED __________ _____________________________ Judge

Case 2:04-cv-00347-FJM

Document 141- 12Filed 02/24/2006 -

Page 12 of 15

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

DEFENDANTS' REQUESTED JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 10 Plaintiff must establish damages with reasonable certainty. Damages that are speculative, remote or uncertain may not form the basis for your award. Speculations, guesses or estimates of witnesses are not appropriate basis for recovery.

Source:

Morton v. Rogers, 20 Ariz.App. 581, 514 P.2d 752 (1973); Coury

Bros. Ranches, Inc. v. Ellsworth, 103 Ariz. 515, 446 P.2d 458 (1968).

GIVEN _____________ REFUSED ___________ MODIFIED __________ _____________________________ Judge

Case 2:04-cv-00347-FJM

Document 141- 13Filed 02/24/2006 -

Page 13 of 15

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

DEFENDANTS' REQUESTED JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 11 In determining whether defendant Nurse Polen was negligent in treating Mr. Perez, you must consider that nurses judgment in the light of all of the attendant circumstances at the time Nurse Polen acted. You should not judge Nurse Polen in hindsight by acquired knowledge or by the result of the treatment.

Source: Foxton v. Woodmansee, 386 P.2d 659 (Ore. 1963); Meeks v. Marx, 550 P.2d 1158 (Wa. 1976).

GIVEN _____________ REFUSED ___________ MODIFIED __________ _____________________________ Judge

Case 2:04-cv-00347-FJM

Document 141- 14Filed 02/24/2006 -

Page 14 of 15

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

ORIGINAL of the foregoing electronically filed this 24th day of February, 2006, with: The Clerk of Court United States District Court 401 W. Washington Phoenix, AZ 85003 COPY of the foregoing hand-delivered this 24th day of February 2006, to: The Honorable Frederick J. Martone United States District Court Sandra Day O'Connor U.S. Courthouse 401 W. Washington Street Phoenix, Arizona 85003 COPY of the foregoing mailed This 24th day of February 2006, to: Karl M. Tilleman, Esq. Bruce Converse, Esq. Steptoe & Johnson, L.L.P. Collier Center 201 East Washington Street, Ste. 1600 Phoenix, Arizona 85004-2382 Attorneys for Plaintiff Northland

By

/s/ Tammy Carbajal

Case 2:04-cv-00347-FJM

Document 141- 15Filed 02/24/2006 -

Page 15 of 15