CA · jury_instructions
CACI No. 721
Motor Vehicle Owner Liability—Affirmative Defense—Use
Beyond Scope of Permission
[Name of defendant] claims that [he/she/ nonbinary pronoun] is not
responsible for [name of plaintiff]’s harm because [name of driver]’s use of
the vehicle exceeded the scope of the permission given. To succeed, [name
of defendant] must prove both of the following:
1. That [name of defendant], by words or conduct, gave permission to
[name of driver] to use the vehicle for a limited time, place, or
purpose; and
2. That [name of driver]’s use of the vehicle substantially violated the
time, place, or purpose specified.
New September 2003
Provenance
- Source
- courts.ca.gov
- Retrieved
- 2026-08-20
- Edition
- caci-2025
- Content hash
9b987287e3dcfbfd7764ed6b95f8a4e49589782fae31f209e962be32bc812822
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.