ID · jury_instructions
IDJI 10.02.1
Product Liability – Manufacturer – general case
In order to prove the claim of product liability by a manufacturer, the plaintiff has the burden of proving each of the following propositions:
The defendant is, or was during the relevant time in question, a “manufacturer” of the product, as explained in these instructions;
The product was “defective,” as explained in these instructions;
The defect existed when the product left the defendant’s control;
The defect was a proximate cause of injury to the plaintiff; and
The nature and extent of the injuries, the elements of damages, and the amount thereof.
You will be asked the following question on the jury verdict form:
[Insert verdict question verbatim.]
If you find from your consideration of all of the evidence that each of these propositions has been proved, then on the verdict form, you should answer the question “Yes.” If you find that any of these propositions has not been proved, you should answer the question “No.”
Comments:
Puckett v. Oakfabco, Inc., 132 Idaho 816, 979 P.2d 1174 (1999).
Provenance
- Source
- isc.idaho.gov
- Retrieved
- 2026-08-21
- Edition
- 2026-08-20
- Content hash
2918c1cb28f8e0dd18a8513b48eebc3412098f9bbfa7fee665af6dd0349eb493
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.