Free Jury Instructions - District Court of Arizona - Arizona

-.-_ Page ‘e ____ L-oogligu
I James W. Field -—-— RECEIVED _____ cgpy
· ‘ 120. Box 248
2 seam, Az. 85348 JAN 1 8 ZUU? -
CLERK LJ 8 0:*10* o . 1
3 BY DIS rem- ge ;IF_,l;§?!Q0T I
---- ee-ze --- ei.;-.. --.5 000 r I
4 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRI ` “`”"*"“‘°`”""“’““"*"”"*II—|»II-
5 FOR TI-IE DISTRIVCT OF ARIZONA, PHOENIX DIVISION
6
7 James W. Field, ) Case N0.: CV03-2214-PHX-SRB
)
8 Plaintittl )
)
9 vs. )
) PLAINTIFFS' SUPPLEMENTAL
I0 Brad Weekley et. al., ) PURPOSED JURY INSTRUCTION
I
ll Defendant )

12
I3 Comes now Plaintiff, James W. Field, to Supplement Plaintmfr ’ Purposed Jury Instructions
I4 filed prior to the First Trial of June 13 through Jtme 16, 2006.
I5 Respectfully Submitted this / ? day of January , 2007.
16 I U I
Se Plaintili, James W. Field
17
Ig ORIGINAL and One Copy ofthe foregoing U
19 Filed this [7** day of January 2007 with
Sandra Day O’Cor1nor Federal Courthouse
20 suite 130
401 W. Washington St.SPCI
Z] Phx. A2. 85003
22 A Copy ofthe foregoing sent
23 This ;7V" day of January 2007 to
24 Jones, Skelton & Hochuli
2901 N. Central Ave. By sig
25 Suite 800 Tammy Doud
Phx. A-Z. 85012 PlaintiH`s’ Assistant
-1-
Case 2:03—cv—02214—SFlB Document 307 Filed O1/18/2007 Page 1 of 3

` 1 PLAINTIFFS’ PURPOSED JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 1
L 2
3
4 If you find that the Arizona Corporation Commission grants authority to govemmental
5 agencies with jurisdiction to Order Public Utilities to disconnect service to consumers properties
6 specihcally R14-2-211 (C) (1) (i)
7 R14-2-21] (C) (1) (t) which is
8 "R14-2-21l(C)(l) (in pertinent part) a utility may disconnect service to any
9 consumer for any reason stated below provided the utility has meet the
notice requirement established by the commissnon
I0 (i) When necessary for the Utility to comply with an order of any
H governmental agency bag g such ;`urisdicti0n."
12 and that La Paz County is such a governmental agency then you must find for the Plaintiff
13
14 .
15
16 I
18 I `il
19 1 C
20 r U
21
22 Arizona Corporate Commission No. R14—2-211 (C) (1) (t)
23 `
24 Given
y 25 Reiinsed
2 _%__ Modified
Case 2:03-cv-02214-SRB Document 30%- Filed O1/18/2007 Page 2 of 3

1 éggment ·
2 This instruction is not being asked to be given in reference to the previous APS Defendants, it
3 is being asked to be given in reference to Gorman and Weekley showing that they did have the
4 authority to Order APS to Disconnect the Electrical Service to Plaintiffs property.
5
6 In an email from D.L.Wilson it specifically states:
"again per the Administrative Code “The utility shall not be required
7 to restore service until the condition which resulted in the termination
have been corrected to the satisfaction of the utility". As the conditions
8 which warranted the termination of service were primarily customer
9 wiring APS does not have jurisdiction for Electrical Code or Building
Code compliance. Before the standards that these conditions "have been
10 corrected to the satisfaction of the utility" is clearance from the authority
having the jurisdiction which in this case is La Paz County plus an inspection
H of the meter panel by APS personnel after the County clearance is issued to
insure compliance with APS requirements?
12
This instruction should be given because if the Jury tinds that the County had the Authority to
13
Order APS to terminate the electrical services then the County is Liable and if the Jury is not apprised
14
to this fact they may not them selves even look through all the Arizona Corporate Commissions rules
15
because they are so numerous and iind that some governmental agency do actually have the authority
16
to order the power cut to a individuals property.
17
18
I9
20
21
22
23
24
25
-3-
Case 2:03-cv-02214-SRB Document 307 Filed O1/18/2007 Page 3 of 3

Case 2:03-cv-02214-SRB

Document 307

Filed 01/18/2007

Page 1 of 3

Case 2:03-cv-02214-SRB

Document 307

Filed 01/18/2007

Page 2 of 3

Case 2:03-cv-02214-SRB

Document 307

Filed 01/18/2007

Page 3 of 3