AK · jury_instructions
Alaska Civil Pattern Jury Instruction 7.08A
Strict Liability in Tort - Superseding Cause
The defendant claims that if the product was defective, the defect in the product was not a legal cause of plaintiff's harm because another act or occurrence was a superseding cause of the plaintiff's harm. A defect in a product is not a legal cause of harm if some other act or occurrence is a superseding cause of the harm.
Another act or occurrence may be a superseding cause if both of the following statements are more likely true than not true:
(1) the other act or occurrence was outside the scope of the foreseeable risk posed by the defect in the product, and had no reasonable connection to it; and
(2) in hindsight, it is highly extraordinary that the defect in the product would bring about the plaintiff's harm.
If you find that either one or both of these statements is untrue, then the other act or occurrence is not a superseding cause. However, if you find that both of these statements are true, then you may find that the other act or occurrence is a superseding cause and that the defect in the product was not a legal cause of the plaintiff's harm.
History
Alaska Civil Pattern Jury Instructions 7.08A, dated (Rev. 2000). Prepared by the Alaska Civil Pattern Jury Instructions Committee; published by the Alaska Court System. The Alaska Court System states that these instructions "have not been approved or promulgated by any court or the Alaska Bar Association."
Provenance
- Source
- courts.alaska.gov
- Retrieved
- 2026-09-24
- Edition
- 2026-09-24
- Content hash
39436fe40af8592f33b8abe0238c0ebcf546f516c3db1fb3d17d39c60f4e5dfa
The link goes to the issuing authority’s own document — the one we read to produce this record. Where a source publishes whole titles rather than sections, your browser may need a moment to jump to the provision.
Unofficial copy of government-published law, reproduced from official sources with full provenance. Not an official publication; verify against official sources before relying on it in a filing. Records in the 'guidance' corpus, and only that corpus, are sub-regulatory (interpretive guidelines, survey procedures) and are not binding law. Validity bounds follow each jurisdiction's declared temporalBasis.