Bindinglaw

NC · jury_instructions

N.C.P.I.—Motor Vehicle 106.91

PUNITIVE DAMAGES-ISSUE OF EXISTENCE OF MALICIOUS, WILLFUL OR WANTON, OR GROSSLY NEGLIGENT CONDUCT-WRONGFUL DEATH CASES.

activein force · 1997-05-01 – presentas-observed

NOTE WELL: Use this instruction in conjunction with

wrongful death punitive damages claims arising prior to

January 1, 1996. Wrongful death punitive damages

claims arising on or after January 1, 1996 are governed

by new standards.1 See N.C. Gen. Stat. §§ 28A-18-2(b)

(5) and 1D-1, et seq.

The (state number) issue reads:

"Did the defendant cause the death of the decedent through

maliciousness, willful or wanton injury, or gross negligence?"

You are to answer this issue only if you have answered (identify

issues and specify answers necessary for a consideration of this issue).

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 caused the death of the decedent through maliciousness,

willful or wanton injury, or gross negligence.2

[An act is malicious when the defendant is motivated by personal ill

will or spite.3]

[An act is willful if the defendant intentionally fails to carry out

some duty imposed by law or contract which is necessary to protect the

safety of the person or property to which it is owed.4 An act is wanton if

the defendant acts in conscious or reckless disregard for the rights and

safety of others.5]

[An act is grossly negligent when the defendant lacks even slight

care, when he shows indifference to the rights and welfare of others, or

when his negligence is of an aggravated character.6]

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 caused the death of the decedent through maliciousness,

willful or wanton injury, or gross negligence, 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.

History

N.C.P.I.—Motor Vehicle 106.91 (May 1997). N.C. Gen. Stat. § 28A-18-2(b)(5). Prepared by the North Carolina Conference of Superior Court Judges' Committee on Pattern Jury Instructions, assisted by the UNC School of Government; published by the School of Government.

Provenance

Source
sog.unc.edu
Retrieved
2026-09-25
Edition
2026-09-24
Content hash
f4571a31b94a1fe2d2ddbcae7d5c35f05c7d41f6b36f19d46d9385303373f5aa
View the official source →

The link goes to the issuing authority’s own document — the one we read to produce this record. Where a source publishes whole titles rather than sections, your browser may need a moment to jump to the provision.

Unofficial copy of government-published law, reproduced from official sources with full provenance. Not an official publication; verify against official sources before relying on it in a filing. Records in the 'guidance' corpus, and only that corpus, are sub-regulatory (interpretive guidelines, survey procedures) and are not binding law. Validity bounds follow each jurisdiction's declared temporalBasis.

Coverage · API docs

Bindinglaw

Point-in-time US law with the receipt attached. Source URL, retrieval time, content hash, and validity dates on every answer.

curl api.binding.law/v1/law/coverage

© 2026 binding.law · a Jubal, Inc. productAttorneys and firms never pay. Ever.