N.C.P.I.—Civil 102.32

This issue reads:

"Was the plaintiff [injured] [damaged] by the negligence of the

defendant parent(s) in failing to control or supervise [his] [their] child?"

You are to answer this issue only if you have answered the (state

issue) issue as to the child's negligence in favor of the plaintiff.

On this issue the burden of proof is on the plaintiff. This means

that the plaintiff must prove, by the greater weight of the evidence, four

things:

First, that the defendant parent(s) knew or, in the exercise of

ordinary care, should have known that [his] [their] child [had engaged]

[was engaging] in negligent conduct,2

Second, that the defendant parent(s) had an opportunity or ability

to control or supervise [his] [their] child,3

Third, that, in the exercise of ordinary care under the same or

similar circumstances, a reasonable parent would have exercised

sufficient control or supervision over his child to stop or prevent the

child's dangerous behavior,4 and

Fourth, that the defendant parent(s) failed to exercise sufficient

control or supervision over [his] [their] child, which failure concurred with

the negligence of [his] [their] child and was a proximate cause of the

[injury] [damage] suffered by the plaintiff.5

Proximate cause is a real cause- a cause without which the claimed

[injury] [damage] would not have occurred, and one which a reasonably

careful and prudent person could foresee would probably produce such

[injury] [damage] or some similar injurious result.

There may be more than one proximate cause of [an injury]

[damage]. Therefore, the plaintiff need not prove that the [injury]

[damage]. The plaintiff must prove, by the greater weight of the

evidence, only that the defendant parent(s') negligence concurred with

the negligence of [his] [their] child and was a proximate cause of the

plaintiff's [injury] [damage], then it would be your duty to answer this

issue "Yes" in favor of the plaintiff.

If, on the other hand, you fail to so find, then it would be your duty

to answer this issue "No" in favor of the defendant parent(s).