N.C.P.I.—Civil 809.20

(Use for claims arising on or after 1 October 2011.)

The (state number) issue reads:

“Was the plaintiff in an emergency medical condition when [the

defendant] [name defendant] [furnished] [or] [failed to furnish]2

professional services to him?”

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

that [the defendant] [name defendant] must prove by the greater weight

of the evidence that the plaintiff was in an emergency medical condition

when [the defendant] [name defendant] [furnished] [or] [failed to

furnish] professional services to him.

[An “emergency medical condition”3 is a medical condition

manifesting itself by acute symptoms of sufficient severity (including

severe pain) such that the absence of immediate medical attention could

reasonably be expected to result in:

[placing the health of the individual in serious jeopardy] [or]

[serious impairment to bodily functions] [or]

[serious dysfunction of any bodily organ or part] [or]

[placing the health of a pregnant woman in serious jeopardy] [or]

[placing the health of a pregnant woman's unborn child in serious

jeopardy] [or]

[placing the health of a pregnant woman and her unborn child in

serious jeopardy]].

In this case, the defendant contends, and the plaintiff denies, that

the plaintiff was in an emergency medical condition when [the defendant]

[name defendant] [furnished] [or] [failed to furnish] professional services

to him.

Finally, as to this (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 was in an emergency medical condition when [the

defendant] [name defendant] [furnished] [or] [failed to furnish]

professional services to him, 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.