Wis JI-Civil 3295

Question No. 1 of the verdict asks whether (plaintiff) "ingested" white lead carbonate.

The word "ingest" means to take into the body by mouth.

[give Wis JI-Civil 1500 Cause]

Question No. 3 of the verdict asks whether the defendants produced and marketed the

type of white lead carbonate ingested by (plaintiff). To answer this question "yes," you must

conclude that the products are of such a kind or nature that one specimen (or part) may be

used in place of another specimen (or equal part). This question asks whether the products

are interchangeable or capable of mutual substitution.

Chemical identity of the products is not necessary. Instead, you should consider the

following factors:

• The characteristic of the product's function at issue;

• The physical appearance of the product and the physical similarity of the product; and

• The risks posed by the product's use and whether such products have substantially

identical defects which pose a uniformity of risk.

Question No. 4 asks whether the defendant has proved that it did not produce or

market the white lead carbonate ingested by (plaintiff). Each defendant has the burden of

proof to satisfy you that the answer to the question as to that defendant should be "yes."

A defendant may not be held liable for (plaintiff)'s injuries unless the defendant's

product or conduct reasonably could have contributed to (plaintiff)'s alleged injury. A

defendant could not reasonably have contributed to (plaintiff)'s injury if the defendant proves

that its white lead carbonate pigment could not reasonably have reached the residence(s)

where (plaintiff) lived.

In making this determination, you should consider the following factors, if any,

established by the evidence:

• The time period during which the white lead carbonate pigments that allegedly

injured (plaintiff) were produced or marketed.

• The time period in which each manufacturer defendant produced or marketed

its white lead carbonate pigments.

• The geographic locations in which each manufacturer produced or marketed

the product at the time the product that allegedly injured (plaintiff) was

produced or marketed.

• Other relevant factors raised by the evidence in the case.

[In answering the questions on the verdict about each of the defendants, you should

consider only the evidence that was received for or against that defendant.]

[For Question No. 5, give Wis JI-Civil 1005; for Question No. 6, give Wis JI-Civil

1007; for Question No. 8, see Wis JI-Civil 1580 and 3290.]

If you are required to answer Question No. 9, you will determine to what extent, if

any, the conduct of each producer or marketer of white lead carbonate contributed to produce

the injury. Taking the conduct of the remaining producers or marketers as a whole, determine

whether each one made a larger, equal, or smaller contribution than the others. Considering

this question, some factors which you may but are not required to consider are:

• Testing for safety of the product;

• The market share of the producer-distributor in the relevant area;

• The role of the defendant in producing or marketing the product;

• Whether the defendant issued warnings about the dangers of the product;

• Whether the defendant produced or marketed the product after it knew or

should have known of the potential hazards the product presented to the

public; and

• Whether the defendant took any affirmative steps to reduce the risk of injury to

the public.