WI · jury_instructions
Wis JI-Civil 950
Reasonable Diligence in Discovery of Injury (Statute of Limitations)
Question asks whether (plaintiff) knew, or should (he) (she) with the exercise
of reasonable diligence have known, on or before (date on which statute of limitations would
have run) that was a cause of (damage) (injury) to.
To answer this question "yes," you must be satisfied that, prior to (date), (plaintiff)
knew or with the exercise of reasonable diligence should have known the following:
First, that (he) (she) (suffered damages) (was injured).
Second, that (his) (her) (damages) (injuries) were probably caused by (defendant)’s
conduct.
"Reasonable diligence" means the diligence the great majority of persons would use in
the same or similar circumstances to discover the cause of the (damages) (injuries).
History
Wis JI-Civil 950 (2016). ©2016, Regents, Univ. of Wis. Prepared by the Wisconsin Civil Jury Instructions Committee of the Wisconsin Judicial Conference with the University of Wisconsin Law School; posted by the Wisconsin State Law Library with the University's permission.
Provenance
- Source
- wilawlibrary.gov
- Retrieved
- 2026-09-24
- Edition
- 2026-09-24
- Content hash
2b47a032a31f6283afbd6d0b80bc6a8da55c42873d51d5d1ee6e0261e85894e1
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.