Ill. Pattern Jury Instr. (Civil) 700.14

The law recognizes that sometimes, even though the plaintiff has met [his][her][its] burden

of proving that a contract exists, facts or circumstances may exist that would excuse the defendant

from being liable to the plaintiff. These facts or circumstances are called affirmative defenses.

In this lawsuit, the defendant [s] has [have] raised and has [have] the burden to prove the

following affirmative defense(s):

[Insert whichever affirmative defense(s) IPI 700.14A-IPI 700.14G is(are) applicable].

________________________________________________________________________________________________________

700.14A [1] Incompetence

The law provides if the defendant is not competent because [he][she][they] [is][are] a

minor(s) or because [he][she][they] [is][are] mentally ill or has insane delusions, then the contract

cannot be enforced against [him][her][them].

The defendant [s] [claims][claim] and [has][have] the burden of proving at the time

[he][she][they] entered into the contract, [he][she][they] did not have the mental competence or

capacity to understand the nature and consequences of the agreement.

In order to be excused from performing the contract, the defendant [s] [has][have]the

burden of proving one of the following:

at the time the contract was made the defendant[s] was under 18 years old.

OR

at the time the contract was made, the defendant [s] lacked the mental competence or

capacity to understand the nature and consequences of the agreement and was unable to

protect [his][her][their] own interests.

Plaintiff denies defendant's claim of incompetence.

You will address these issues in question ____ on your verdict.

________________________________________________________________________________________________________

700.14B [2] Duress

The law provides that if one party forces another party to enter into a contract by wrongful

acts or threats that deprive the other party of his own free will, the contract cannot be enforced

against the forced party.

The defendant[s] [claims][claim] and [has][have] the burden of proving [he][she][it][they]

[was][were] compelled to enter into the contract by a wrongful act or threat that deprived

[him][her][it][them] of the exercise of free will in entering into the contract.

Duress is intentional action by the plaintiff [or a third party] presenting such a serious threat

of loss or injury to the defendant that the defendant[s] felt that [he][she][it][they] had no reasonable

alternative or choice but to enter the contract.

The defendant [s] [claims][claim] and [has][have] the burden of proving that

[he][she][it][they] entered into the contract only because the plaintiff [s] [third party] subjected

[him][her][it][them] to duress as follows:

[state the alleged incidents of duress]

In order to prove a defense based upon duress, the defendant [s] must prove both of the

following by clear and convincing evidence:

[1] [he][she][it][they] entered into the contract only because the plaintiff [s] [third party]

subjected [him][her][it][them] to the circumstances listed above; and

[2] the circumstances left [him][her][it][them] with no reasonable choice but to enter the

contract.

Plaintiff denies defendant's claim of duress.

You will address these issues in question ____ on your verdict.

________________________________________________________________________________________________________

700.14C [3] Misrepresentation

[WITHDRAWN]

IPI 700.14C (formerly IPI 700.12C) is withdrawn. If fraudulent misrepresentation is an issue in

the case, use IPI 700.14D [4] Fraud.

Instruction withdrawn April 2016.

________________________________________________________________________________________________________

700.14D [4] Fraud

Alternative 1 - Clear and Convincing Evidence Only as to Certain Elements

Generally, the law provides if one party fraudulently by misrepresentation of a material

fact convinced another to enter into a contract, then that party cannot enforce that contract against

the other.

The defendant [s] [claims][claim] and [has][have] the burden of proving each of the

following propositions of fraud by clear and convincing evidence:

First, the plaintiff made the following statement[s]:

[Here insert or paraphrase the allegedly fraudulent statement or statements that the

plaintiff is claimed to have made.]

Second, the statement[s] [was a] [were] false statement[s] of material fact[s].

Third, [the plaintiff [knew [or] [believed] the statement[s] [was][were] false] [or] [the

plaintiff made the statement[s] in reckless disregard of whether [it was] [they were] true or false].

The defendant has the burden of proving that each of the following propositions is more

probably true than not true.

Fourth, the plaintiff made the statement[s] with the intent to induce the defendant to enter

into the contract;

Fifth, the defendant reasonably believed the statement[s] and [acted] in justifiable reliance

on the truth of the statement[s];

Sixth, the defendant entered into the contract based upon the defendant’s reliance on the

statements made by the plaintiff.

Plaintiff denies defendant’s claim of fraud.

You will address these issues in question ___________________ on your verdict.

Alternative 2 - Clear and Convincing Evidence on all Elements

Generally, the law provides if one party fraudulently by misrepresentation of material facts

convinced another to enter into the contract, then that party cannot enforce the contract against the

other.

The defendant [s] [claims][claim] and [has][have] the burden of proving each of the

following propositions of fraud by clear and convincing evidence:

________________________________________________________________________________________________________

First, the plaintiff made the following statement[s]:

[Here insert or paraphrase the allegedly fraudulent statement or statements that the

plaintiff is claimed to have made.]

Second, the statement[s] [was a] [were] false statement[s] of material fact[s].

Third, [the plaintiff [knew] [or] [believed] the statement[s] [was] [were] false [or] [the

plaintiff made the statement[s] in reckless disregard of whether [it was] [they were] true or false].

Fourth, the plaintiff made the statement[s] with the intent to induce the defendant to enter

into the contract;

Fifth, the defendant reasonably believed the statement[s] and [acted] in justifiable reliance

on the truth of the statement[s];

Sixth, the defendant entered into the contract based upon the defendant’s reliance on the

statements made by the plaintiff.

Plaintiff denies defendant’s claim of fraud.

You will address these issues in question ___________________ on your verdict.

Instruction revised April 2016. Notes on Use and Comment created April 2016.