N.C.P.I.—Civil 803.00

The (state number) issue reads:

“Did the defendant intentionally use process to accomplish an

ulterior purpose?”

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, three

things:1

First, that process was invoked against the [plaintiff] [plaintiff's

property] in the [court] [administrative] proceeding entitled [name

proceeding]. “Process” is the means in such a proceeding by which [a

person is made to do or refrain from doing certain things] [the property of

a person is restrained or affected]. Process includes (here identify the

process involved as supported by the evidence, e.g., summons,

subpoena, an order to show cause, a discovery request, a notice of lis

pendens, temporary restraining order, or name other order or process).

Second, that the defendant had an ulterior purpose. A purpose is

ulterior when it is separate from, or collateral to, the normal and regular

purpose of the process. The normal and regular purpose of (identify

process involved as supported by the evidence) is to (state regular

purpose of process so identified).

And Third, that, after the process was issued,2 the defendant

intentionally3 used the process invoked against [the plaintiff] [the

plaintiff's property] to accomplish the defendant's ulterior purpose; that

is, the defendant intentionally sought to use the process to gain

advantage over the plaintiff as to some matter that is separate from or

collateral to the proceeding.

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

defendant intentionally used process to accomplish an ulterior purpose,

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.