Members of the jury: There is evidence to show in
this case that the plaintiff, Barbara Scott, prior to March
22, 1958, had several accidents resulting in injuries to and
about her body, and that she was afflicted with a chronic
illness to certain of her female organs. If you find that
such pre-existing condition was latent or dormant before the
accident on March 22, 1958, but was brought into activity as
a direct result of injuries received by her at the time of
this collision, thereby resulting in pain and suffering which
were not due to natural progress of such disease or
condition, then you should include damages for such pain,
suffering and disability, but only to the extent that the
same was solely produced by the collision as a natural result
thereof.
In considering the question of damages or
compensation to be assessed by you in answer to these
questions, you are instructed that the duty devolves upon the
person claiming damages to convince your minds by the greater
weight of the credible evidence and to a reasonable certainty
that he or she has sustained damages in the respects inquired
about. You can only allow such damages as have been proved
to you to a reasonable certainty.
You cannot allow speculative damages based upon
mere guess or conjecture. In making your assessment of
damages, you will in each instance be fair and just and
nothing should be added by way of punishment or because of
sympathy or resentment, nor should anything be deducted by
reason of doubt of the other parties' liability.
You are required to answer the damage questions
regardless of how the other questions are answered in the
verdict. The burden of proof on questions No. 1, No. 2, No.
3, No. 4, No. 5, No. 6 and No. 16 is on the plaintiff. The
burden of proof on questions No. 7, No. 8, No. 9 No. 10, No.
11, No. 12, No. 13 and No. 14 is on the defendant.
By burden of proof is meant the duty resting upon
the party having the affirmative of an issue to satisfy or
convince the minds of ten or more of you jurors by a
preponderance of the questionable evidence of the truth of
his or her contentions, and by a preponderance of the
evidence is meant the evidence which possesses the greater
weight or convincing power.
I charge you further, members of the jury, that the
convincing power of the evidence is not necessarily
determined by the number of witnesses. It may be that the
testimony given by one witness has greater convincing power
than that given by certain witnesses contradicting or tending
to contradict that given by one, although when all the
circumstances are equal, the greater number of witnesses
would carry the greater convincing power.
Now, members of the jury. You are the sole and
responsible judges of the weight and credit to be given to
the testimony of each and every witness whose testimony has
been received on this trial. In considering the credibility
of any of the witnesses, you have a right to consider his or
her interest in the result of this trial. The temptation
that may exist under the circumstances to testify falsely,
and everything appearing in the case bearing upon his or her
credibility, and you are to give to such testimony such
weight as you think it is entitled to, no more and no less.