N.C.P.I.—Civil 814.04

The (state number) issue reads:

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

defendant?"

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

number) issue "Yes" in favor of the plaintiff.)1

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].

Negligence refers to a person's failure to follow a duty of conduct

imposed by law. Every person is under a duty to use ordinary care to

[inspect and maintain the safe condition of bailment property]2 [give a

person receiving bailment property reasonable warnings of hidden

dangers of which he knows or, in the exercise of ordinary care, should

have known].3 Ordinary care means that degree of care which a

reasonable and prudent person would use under the same or similar

circumstances to protect himself and others from [injury] [damage] from

bailment property. A person's failure to use ordinary care is negligence.4

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 (one or more of) the following way(s):

(Read all contentions of negligence supported by the

evidence.)

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 (each of) the plaintiff's contention(s),

(Give law as to each contention of negligence included

above.)

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 was negligent in any one or more of the ways 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.