N.C.P.I.—Civil 812.04

The (state number) issue reads:

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

defendant?"

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, that

the defendant was negligent and that such negligence was a proximate

cause of the plaintiff's [injury] [damage].

Every person is under a duty to follow standards of conduct enacted

as laws for the safety of the public. A standard of conduct established by

a safety ordinance2 must be followed. A person's failure to do so is

negligence in and of itself.3

The plaintiff not only has the burden of proving negligence, but also

that such negligence was a proximate cause of the [injury] [damage].

Proximate cause is a cause which in a natural and continuous

sequence produces a person's [injury] [damage], and is a cause which a

reasonable and prudent person could have foreseen 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 defendant's

negligence was the sole proximate cause of the [injury] [damage]. The

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

defendant's negligence was a proximate cause.

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

the defendant was negligent in that he violated a safety ordinance by

(here describe conduct violating ordinance).

The plaintiff further contends, and the defendant denies, that the

defendant's negligence was a proximate cause of the plaintiff's [injury]

[damage].

I instruct you that negligence is not to be presumed from the mere

fact of [injury] [damage].

With respect to the plaintiff's contention, a safety ordinance

enacted by (name political subdivision) provides that (quote or

summarize safety ordinance).

A violation of this safety ordinance is negligence in and of itself.

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

was negligent in the way contended by the plaintiff and that such

negligence 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.