Alaska Civil Pattern Jury Instruction 24.08D

[Defendant] claims that the contract is void because [plaintiff’s] wrongful conduct put [defendant] into a position where [defendant] had no choice but to accept the contract on [plaintiff’s] terms. To find in [defendant’s] favor on this defense, you must conclude that each of the following elements has been established by clear and convincing evidence:

(1) [Defendant] entered into the contract because [he she it] believed that [he she it] did not have any reasonable alternative to agreeing to the contract terms proposed by [plaintiff];

(2) [Plaintiff] engaged in wrongful conduct in connection with [describe relevant transaction with defendant]; and

(3) [Plaintiff’s] wrongful conduct put [defendant] in a position where [he she it] did not have any reasonable alternative to agreeing to the contract terms proposed by [plaintiff].

Wrongful conduct may be illegal conduct, conduct that is intended to harm another person, conduct that does not observe standards of reasonable care, or conduct that is morally wrong.

An alleged fact is established by clear and convincing evidence if the evidence leads you to believe that the alleged fact is highly probable. It is not necessary that the alleged fact be certainly true or true beyond a reasonable doubt or conclusively true. However, it is not enough to show that the alleged fact is more likely true than not true.

If you decide that all three elements have been established by clear and convincing evidence, the contract between [plaintiff] and [defendant] is void and you must return a verdict for [defendant].

Otherwise, the contract is not void and you must decide other questions that I will explain to you.