N.C.P.I.—Civil 800.27

NOTE WELL: For actions arising from acts occurring

prior to October 1, 2009, use this instruction. For

actions arising from acts occurring on or after October

1, 2009, see N.C.P.I-Civil 800.27A (“Criminal

Conversation - Statute of Limitations”).

The (state number) issue reads:

“Did the plaintiff file this action within three years of the date it

became apparent or ought reasonably to have become apparent to the

plaintiff that the defendant had committed criminal conversation with the

plaintiff’s spouse?”1

If you have answered the (state number) issue “Yes” in favor of the

plaintiff, the plaintiff's claim may nonetheless be legally barred by what

is called the statute of limitations.2 The law provides that a lawsuit

claiming criminal conversation must be filed within three years after the

date the plaintiff discovered or ought reasonably to have discovered,

whichever event first occurred, that the defendant committed criminal

conversation with the plaintiff’s spouse. 3 The plaintiff filed the present

lawsuit on (state date of filing of criminal conversation action).

On this issue, the burden of proof is on the plaintiff. 4 This means

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

the plaintiff filed this action within three years after the date it became

apparent or ought reasonably to have become apparent to the plaintiff,

whichever event first occurred, that the defendant had committed criminal

conversation with the plaintiff’s spouse. An event would have been or

would have become reasonably apparent to the plaintiff when it would

have been or would have become apparent to a reasonable and prudent

person in the same or similar circumstances as the plaintiff.

Finally, as to this issue on which the plaintiff has the burden of

proof, if you find by the greater weight of the evidence, that the plaintiff

filed this action within three years after the date it became apparent or

ought reasonably to have become apparent to the plaintiff, whichever

event first occurred, that the defendant had committed criminal

conversation with the plaintiff’s spouse, 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.