CT · jury_instructions
Conn. Civ. Jury Instr. 3.7-17
Falling Asleep While Driving
The plaintiff claims that the defendant was negligent in falling asleep while driving. As part of
the duty to use reasonable care in the operation of a motor vehicle, a driver must take very great
care to avoid falling asleep. Because sleep does not ordinarily come upon a driver of a car
without some warning of its approach, a driver who knows, or should know, that (he/she) is
becoming sleepy must either maintain a constant vigilance to stay awake or cease driving. Proof
that a driver of a car fell asleep while driving is, alone, a sufficient basis for finding the driver
negligent.
[<Give the following paragraphs if the defendant claims to have proven that there was an
unforeseen falling asleep or loss of consciousness caused by a circumstance that tends to excuse
or justify the conduct.> In this case, the defendant has claimed that (he/she) is not liable because
the falling asleep or loss of consciousness while driving was caused by <state the facts claimed
by the defendant to excuse or justify conduct>. A driver who falls asleep or loses consciousness
while driving may be found not to be negligent if such conduct was due to unforeseen sleep or
loss of consciousness resulting from a condition of which the driver was not and should not have
been aware.
In evaluating circumstances presented in this case, you should keep in mind that ordinarily sleep
does not come upon one without warning of its approach. Additionally, a driver who loses
control of a car due to a sudden condition or loss of consciousness is not automatically excused
from liability. Whether a driver is negligent or not under these circumstances depends upon
whether (he/she) was or should have been aware of the claimed condition. A driver is not
negligent when suffering a black-out, fainting spell, sudden attack or loss of consciousness when
it occurs without premonition or warning. In determining whether the defendant was negligent
under the circumstances of this case, you should consider the defendant's health history along
with all of the other evidence presented.]
Provenance
- Source
- jud.ct.gov
- Retrieved
- 2026-08-23
- Edition
- 2026-08-23
- Content hash
7c318e3fa37d51e4fa10de357e282c91c92c34de1bb96164af38620eba3ae58b
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.