Bindinglaw

UT · jury_instructions

MUJI 2d CV1010

Strict liability. Failure to warn. Presumption that a warning would have been read and followed.

activein force · 2026-08-21 – presentas-observed

You can presume that if [name of defendant] had provided an adequate warning, [name of plaintiff] would have read and followed it unless the evidence shows that [name of plaintiff] would not have read or followed such a warning.

Provenance

Source
legacy.utcourts.gov
Retrieved
2026-08-22
Edition
2026-08-21
Content hash
cf5ec6dd95b29c389324503d9cdda1d06aac4cc7a9e480c3226525c751463064
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.