N.C.P.I.—Civil 845.05

NOTE WELL: Use this instruction where the parties did

not enter into a lease specifically providing for

automatic forfeiture and the landlord's right of reentry

if the tenant fails to pay rent. If there is such a lease

provision, use N.C.P.I.-Civil 845.00. Under N.C. Gen.

Stat. § 42-33, the tenant may tender the full amount of

rent due plus court costs at any time before judgment

is entered. If this occurs, the suit must be dismissed.

If there is an issue of whether defendant tendered the

rent, use N.C.P.I.-Civil 845.04 as the first issue. This

instruction would follow, to be answered if the jury

found that there was no tender.

This issue reads:

"Is the plaintiff entitled to possession of the leased premises?"

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, four

things:

First, that the defendant took possession of the premises under a

lease with the plaintiff.1 A lease is a contract for the exclusive

possession of a premises. A lease may be written or verbal.2

Second, that the parties agreed as part of the lease that the

defendant was to pay (state amount of periodic rent and date payment is

due).

Third, that the defendant failed to pay the full amount of rent on

the date it was due.

And fourth, that after the defendant failed to pay the rent as

agreed, the plaintiff demanded payment from the defendant at least ten

days before filing this lawsuit.3 This lawsuit was filed on (state date of

filing). A demand may be made verbally or in writing and must be a

clear, unequivocal statement by the plaintiff (or his agent) demanding

that the defendant pay all past due rent.4

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

is entitled to possession of the leased premises, 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.