N.C.P.I.—Motor Vehicle 108.10

The (state number) issue reads:

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

plaintiff?"

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

that the defendant must prove, by the greater weight of the evidence,

that the plaintiff was negligent and that such negligence was a proximate

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

As I have already instructed you, negligence refers to a person's

failure to follow a duty of conduct imposed by law. The test of what is

negligence, as it has been defined for you, is the same for the plaintiff as

for the defendant.

The defendant not only has the burden of proving that the plaintiff

was negligent, but also that such negligence was a proximate cause of

the defendant's [injury] [damage].

You will remember the definition of proximate cause, which is also

applicable here.

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

the plaintiff was negligent in one or more of the following ways:

(Read all contentions of negligence supported by the

evidence. Such contentions must be identical to those

stated in the contributory negligence issue above.)

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

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

[damage].

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

fact of [injury] [damage].

(Give law as to each contention of negligence included

above.)