N.C.P.I.—Civil 501.55

“Did the plaintiff take advantage of a position of trust and

confidence to induce the defendant to enter into the contract?”

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

number)1 issue “Yes” in favor of the plaintiff.)

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

that the defendant must prove, by the greater weight of the evidence,

two things:2

First, that a relationship of trust and confidence existed between

the defendant and the plaintiff. Such a relationship exists where one

person places special confidence in someone else who, in equity and

good conscience, must act in good faith and with due regard for such

person's interests.3

[(Use where a fiduciary relationship exists as a matter of law; for a

list of such relationships, see N.C.P.I.–Civil 900.10) In this case,

members of the jury, the plaintiff and the defendant had a relationship of

(name fiduciary relationship, e.g., attorney and client, trustee and

beneficiary, guardian and ward, agent and principal, etc.). You are

instructed that, under such circumstances, a relationship of trust and

confidence existed.]

And Second, that the plaintiff used his position of trust and

confidence to induce the defendant to enter into the contract to the

detriment of the defendant4 and for the benefit of the plaintiff.5

Finally, as to the (state number) issue on which the defendant has

the burden of proof, if you find, by the greater weight of the evidence,

that the plaintiff took advantage of a position of trust and confidence to

induce the defendant to enter into the contract, then it would be your

duty to answer this issue “Yes” in favor of the defendant.

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 plaintiff.