Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ared-2_18-cv-00085/USCOURTS-ared-2_18-cv-00085-5/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 110
Nature of Suit: Insurance
Cause of Action: 28:1441 Petition for Removal- Insurance Contract

---

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS 

DELTA DIVISION 

LASHANDA CAL VIN PLAINTIFF 

v. No. 2:18-cv-85-DPM 

SHELTER MUTUAL INSURANCE 

COMPANY 

ORDER 

DEFENDANT 

The Court is attaching revised draft final jury instructions, in 

response to Calvin's objections, NQ 51. The voir dire, preliminary 

instructions, and verdict form, NQ 43-1, 43-2 & 43-4, are locked in 

without objection. Here are the Court's rulings about the final 

instructions. The second proximate cause paragraph stands for now; 

there may be proof on multiple causes. We'll see. The Court added an 

edited version of the requested model instruction about aggravation of 

pre-existing conditions. The present value instruction stands; expert 

testimony is not required. J.E. Merit Constructors, Inc. v. Cooper, 

345 Ark 136, 150, 44 S.W.3d 336, 347 (2001). 

So Ordered. 

// D.P. Marshall Jr. 

United States District Judge 

Case 2:18-cv-00085-DPM Document 52 Filed 02/07/20 Page 1 of 15
Court’s Revised Draft Final Instructions 2:18-cv-85-DPM

7 February 2020 – 1 – Calvin v. Shelter Mutual

(3) FINAL INSTRUCTIONS

Case 2:18-cv-00085-DPM Document 52 Filed 02/07/20 Page 2 of 15
Court’s Revised Draft Final Instructions 2:18-cv-85-DPM

7 February 2020 – 2 – Calvin v. Shelter Mutual

1.

Follow all the Court’s instructions. Written and spoken 

instructions are equally important. And it doesn’t make any 

difference when I gave an instruction. Follow them all. 

2.

Your job is to decide what happened. Don’t take anything I 

said or did as a suggestion about what your decision should be.

You’re the judges of the facts, not me.

3.

Don’t decide the case based on sympathy, prejudice, or 

emotion. Decide based on the evidence, the law, and your common 

sense. Decide this case as a dispute between persons of equal 

worth. All persons, including a corporation such as Shelter, are 

equal under the law.

Case 2:18-cv-00085-DPM Document 52 Filed 02/07/20 Page 3 of 15
Court’s Revised Draft Final Instructions 2:18-cv-85-DPM

7 February 2020 – 3 – Calvin v. Shelter Mutual

4.

The evidence is the witnesses’ testimony, the exhibits, any 

facts agreed by the parties, and any facts I’ve told you that you 

must accept as true. Anything the lawyers said (such as questions, 

statements, arguments, and objections) is not evidence. If I told 

you to disregard something, ignore it. If you saw or heard 

something about this case outside the courtroom, ignore that, too.

If I told you some evidence must be used only for a limited 

purpose, do so.

5.

Be careful evaluating each witness’s credibility. Use your life 

experience, and your common sense, in deciding what testimony 

you believe.

Case 2:18-cv-00085-DPM Document 52 Filed 02/07/20 Page 4 of 15
Court’s Revised Draft Final Instructions 2:18-cv-85-DPM

7 February 2020 – 4 – Calvin v. Shelter Mutual

6.

An expert is a person who has special knowledge, skill, 

experience, training, or education on a subject. An expert may give 

his or her opinion on issues in controversy. You may consider the 

expert’s opinion in light of his or her qualifications, credibility, the 

reasons given for the opinion, and the basis of the opinion. You 

are not bound to accept an expert’s opinion. You should give it 

whatever weight you think it should have. As with any witness, 

you can believe some, all, or none of what an expert says. You may 

disregard any expert opinion if you find it to be unreasonable.

Case 2:18-cv-00085-DPM Document 52 Filed 02/07/20 Page 5 of 15
Court’s Revised Draft Final Instructions 2:18-cv-85-DPM

7 February 2020 – 5 – Calvin v. Shelter Mutual

7.

The party with the burden of proof must prove the facts 

asserted by a preponderance of the evidence. That means the party 

must prove that something is more likely true than not true. I will 

tell you whether Calvin or Shelter has the burden of proof on 

particular issues. If Calvin has the burden of proof on a fact, and 

the evidence is equally balanced, then Calvin has not carried her

burden. If Shelter has the burden of proof on a fact, and the 

evidence is equally balanced, then Shelter has not carried its 

burden. Neither Calvin nor Shelter must prove anything beyond 

a reasonable doubt. That’s the standard for a criminal case, not a 

civil case like this one.

Case 2:18-cv-00085-DPM Document 52 Filed 02/07/20 Page 6 of 15
Court’s Revised Draft Final Instructions 2:18-cv-85-DPM

7 February 2020 – 6 – Calvin v. Shelter Mutual

8.

Here are some rules of law about negligence.

First, “negligence” means the failure to do something which a 

reasonably careful person would do, or the doing of something 

which a reasonably careful person would not do, under 

circumstances similar to those shown by the evidence in this case.

To be negligence, an act must be one from which a reasonably 

careful person would foresee such an appreciable risk of harm to 

others as to cause him not to do the act, or to do it in a more careful 

manner.

Second, a failure to exercise ordinary care is negligence.

“Ordinary care” means the care a reasonably careful person would 

use under circumstances similar to those shown by the evidence in 

this case. It is for you to decide how a reasonably careful person 

would act under those circumstances.

Third, it was duty of the driver who rear-ended Calvin to use 

ordinary care for the driver’s own safety and the safety of others.

Case 2:18-cv-00085-DPM Document 52 Filed 02/07/20 Page 7 of 15
Court’s Revised Draft Final Instructions 2:18-cv-85-DPM

7 February 2020 – 7 – Calvin v. Shelter Mutual

Every person using ordinary care has a right to assume, until the 

contrary is or reasonably should be apparent, that every other 

person will use ordinary care. To act on that assumption is not 

negligence.

Fourth, the fact that an accident occurred is not, by itself, 

evidence of negligence on the part of anyone.

Fifth, when two vehicles are traveling in the same direction, 

the vehicle in front has the superior right to the use of the highway, 

and the driver behind must use ordinary care to operate his vehicle 

in recognition of this superior right. This does not relieve the 

driver of the forward vehicle of the duty to use ordinary care and 

to obey the rules of the road.

Sixth, drivers of motor vehicles have certain duties. A driver 

must keep his vehicle under control. The control required is that 

which a reasonably careful driver would maintain under 

circumstances similar to those shown by the evidence in this case. 

A driver of a motor vehicle must also drive at a speed no greater 

Case 2:18-cv-00085-DPM Document 52 Filed 02/07/20 Page 8 of 15
Court’s Revised Draft Final Instructions 2:18-cv-85-DPM

7 February 2020 – 8 – Calvin v. Shelter Mutual

than is reasonable and prudent under the circumstances, having 

due regard for any actual or potential hazards. A failure to meet 

the standard of conduct required by either of these two rules of the 

road is negligence. 

9.

Calvin claims that the hit-and-run driver was negligent in 

operating his car. Calvin has the burden of proving three things:

First, she sustained damages;

Second, the hit-and-run driver was negligent; and

Third, the hit-and-run driver’s negligence was a proximate 

cause of Calvin’s damages.

Case 2:18-cv-00085-DPM Document 52 Filed 02/07/20 Page 9 of 15
Court’s Revised Draft Final Instructions 2:18-cv-85-DPM

7 February 2020 – 9 – Calvin v. Shelter Mutual

10.

“Proximate cause” is a term of law. Here is a definition.

“Proximate cause” means a cause which, in a natural and 

continuous sequence, produces damage and without the cause the 

damage would not have occurred.

This does not mean that the law recognizes only one 

proximate cause of damage. To the contrary, if two or more causes 

work together to produce damage, then you may find that each of 

them was a proximate cause.

Case 2:18-cv-00085-DPM Document 52 Filed 02/07/20 Page 10 of 15
Court’s Revised Draft Final Instructions 2:18-cv-85-DPM

7 February 2020 – 10 – Calvin v. Shelter Mutual

11.

You may need to assess Calvin’s alleged damages. If you 

reach that issue, you must decide the amount of money that will 

reasonably and fairly compensate her. In determining that 

amount, consider any of the following elements of damage that

you find were proximately caused by any negligence of the 

hit-and-run driver:

• The nature, extent, and duration of any injury;

• The reasonable expense of any necessary medical care, 

treatment, and services received;

• The reasonable expense of any necessary medical care, 

treatment, and services in the future;

• Any pain and suffering and mental anguish due to injuries 

sustained in the occurrence that Calvin experienced in the 

past and is reasonably certain to experience in the future;

• Any visible results of any injury;

Case 2:18-cv-00085-DPM Document 52 Filed 02/07/20 Page 11 of 15
Court’s Revised Draft Final Instructions 2:18-cv-85-DPM

7 February 2020 – 11 – Calvin v. Shelter Mutual

• Any lost earnings, and any earnings reasonably certain to 

be lost in the future; and

• Any lost earning capacity.

Whether any of these elements of damage has been proved by a 

preponderance of the evidence is for you to determine.

In fixing the amount of damages, consider that an injured 

person must use ordinary care to determine whether medical 

treatment is needed, to obtain medical treatment, and to follow the 

instructions of her physician. Any damages resulting from a 

failure to use that ordinary care cannot be recovered.

Consider the full extent of any injury sustained, even if you 

find that the degree of injury proximately resulted from the 

aggravation of a condition that already existed and that 

predisposed Calvin to injury to a greater extent than another 

person. But you may not award her damages she would have 

suffered if the accident had not occurred.

Case 2:18-cv-00085-DPM Document 52 Filed 02/07/20 Page 12 of 15
Court’s Revised Draft Final Instructions 2:18-cv-85-DPM

7 February 2020 – 12 – Calvin v. Shelter Mutual

12.

If you find that Calvin is entitled to damages arising in the 

future because of injuries, then you must decide the present value

of those damages.

If these damages are continuing but not permanent, consider 

how long they will continue. If they are permanent, consider how 

long Calvin is likely to live.

I have used the term “present value.” This simply means that 

you must take into account the fact that money recovered today 

will earn interest, if invested, until the time in the future when 

these losses will actually occur. Therefore, you must reduce any 

award of future damages to compensate for the reasonable earning 

power of money.

Case 2:18-cv-00085-DPM Document 52 Filed 02/07/20 Page 13 of 15
Court’s Revised Draft Final Instructions 2:18-cv-85-DPM

7 February 2020 – 13 – Calvin v. Shelter Mutual

13.

Here are some general rules for your deliberations. 

First, choose a foreperson. She or he will preside over your 

deliberations, sign your verdict, and speak for you here in Court. 

Second, talk through the case in detail. Consider all the 

evidence. Discuss it fully with your fellow jurors. And listen 

attentively to others’ views. 

Third, make your own conscientious decision. Don’t be afraid 

to change your mind if you’re persuaded by the discussion. But 

don’t make a decision simply because others think it is right. And 

don’t agree just to get it done. 

Fourth, try hard to reach agreement. Your verdict must be 

unanimous. 

Fifth, if you need to communicate with me during your 

deliberations, send me a note through the court security officer. 

One or more jurors must sign the note. But, do not tell me—or 

anyone—how your votes stand numerically. 

Case 2:18-cv-00085-DPM Document 52 Filed 02/07/20 Page 14 of 15
Court’s Revised Draft Final Instructions 2:18-cv-85-DPM

7 February 2020 – 14 – Calvin v. Shelter Mutual

Sixth, your verdict will be your answers to questions. I’ll read 

the verdict form to you now. 

Seventh, from this point forward, other than a note to the 

Court, do not communicate with any person other than your fellow 

jurors about the merits of the case.

OATH

Court security officer, do you solemnly swear or affirm to 

keep this jury together in the jury room, not to permit any person 

to speak to or communicate with them about this case, nor to do so 

yourself unless by order of the Court or to ask whether they have 

agreed on a verdict, and return them into the courtroom when they 

have so agreed, or when otherwise ordered by the Court?

Case 2:18-cv-00085-DPM Document 52 Filed 02/07/20 Page 15 of 15