UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

Case No. 20-cv-22783-BLOOM/Louis

KATHRYN BIRREN 

and MANDY BIRREN,

Plaintiffs,

vs.

ROYAL CARIBBEAN CRUISES, LTD.,

Defendant.

/

JOINT PROPOSED JURY INSTRUCTIONS

Plaintiffs, KATHRYN BIRREN and MANDY BIRREN (“Birrens”), and Defendant, 

ROYAL CARIBBEAN CRUISES, LTD. (“RCCL”), by and through their respective undersigned 

counsels, hereby jointly file the attached Proposed Jury Instructions and Proposed Verdict Form.1

Respectfully submitted this 14th day of March, 2022,

ARONFELD TRIAL LAWYERS

1 Alhambra Plaza, Penthouse

Coral Gables, Florida 33134

Tel: 305-441-0440

Fax: 305-441-0198

Attorneys for Plaintiffs

By: /s/ Matthias M. Hayashi

Matthias M. Hayashi, Esq.

Florida Bar No.: 115973

mhayashi@aronfeld.com

Spencer Marc Aronfeld, Esq.

Florida Bar No.: 905161

aronfeld@aronfeld.com

Abby Hernandez Ivey, Esq.

Florida Bar No.: 1002774

aivey@aronfeld.com

McALPIN CONROY, P.A.

80 Southwest 8th Street, Suite 2805

Miami, Florida 33130

Telephone: 305-810-5400

Facsimile: 305-810-5401

Attorneys for Defendant

By: /s/ Daniel Marcotte___

Daniel Marcotte, Esq.

Florida Bar Number 52314

dmarcotte@mcalpinconroy.com

amecias@mcalpinconroy.com

gmartinez@mcalpinconroy.com

1 Pursuant to the Court’s Procedures, the Birrens’ proposed instructions not agreed to are italicized 

and Defendant’s proposed instruction not agreed to are in bold. 

Case 1:20-cv-22783-BB Document 142-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/14/2022 Page 1 of 42
2

PROPOSED INSTRUCTION NO. 1

PRELIMINARY INSTRUCTIONS BEFORE TRIAL

Members of the Jury:

Now that you’ve been sworn, I need to explain some basic principles about a civil trial and 

your duty as jurors. These are preliminary instructions. I’ll give you more detailed instructions at 

the end of the trial.

The jury’s duty:

It’s your duty to listen to the evidence, decide what happened, and apply the law to the 

facts. It’s my job to provide you with the law you must apply – and you must follow the law even 

if you disagree with it.

What is evidence:

You must decide the case on only the evidence presented in the courtroom. Evidence comes 

in many forms. It can be testimony about what someone saw, heard, or smelled. It can be an exhibit 

or a photograph. It can be someone’s opinion.

Some evidence may prove a fact indirectly. Let’s say a witness saw wet grass outside and 

people walking into the courthouse carrying wet umbrellas. This may be indirect evidence that it 

rained, even though the witness didn’t personally see it rain. Indirect evidence like this is also 

called “circumstantial evidence” – simply a chain of circumstances that likely proves a fact.

As far as the law is concerned, it makes no difference whether evidence is direct or indirect. 

You may choose to believe or disbelieve either kind. Your job is to give each piece of evidence 

whatever weight you think it deserves.

What is not evidence:

During the trial, you’ll hear certain things that are not evidence and you must not consider 

them.

First, the lawyers’ statements and arguments aren’t evidence. In their opening statements 

and closing arguments, the lawyers will discuss the case. Their remarks may help you follow each 

side’s arguments and presentation of evidence. But the remarks themselves aren’t evidence and 

shouldn’t play a role in your deliberations.

Second, the lawyers’ questions and objections aren’t evidence. Only the witnesses’ answers 

are evidence. Don’t decide that something is true just because a lawyer’s question suggests that it 

is. For example, a lawyer may ask a witness, “You saw Mr. Jones hit his sister, didn’t you?” That 

question is not evidence of what the witness saw or what Mr. Jones did – unless the witness agrees 

with it.

Case 1:20-cv-22783-BB Document 142-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/14/2022 Page 2 of 42
3

There are rules of evidence that control what the court can receive into evidence. When a 

lawyer asks a witness a question or presents an exhibit, the opposing lawyer may object if [he/she] 

thinks the rules of evidence don’t permit it. If I overrule the objection, then the witness may answer 

the question or the court may receive the exhibit. If I sustain the objection, then the witness cannot 

answer the question, and the court cannot receive the exhibit. When I sustain an objection to a 

question, you must ignore the question and not guess what the answer might have been.

Sometimes I may disallow evidence – this is also called “striking” evidence – and order 

you to disregard or ignore it. That means that you must not consider that evidence when you are 

deciding the case.

I may allow some evidence for only a limited purpose. When I instruct you that I have 

admitted an item of evidence for a limited purpose, you must consider it for only that purpose and 

no other.

Credibility of witnesses:

To reach a verdict, you may have to decide which testimony to believe and which testimony 

not to believe. You may believe everything a witness says, part of it, or none of it. When 

considering a witness’s testimony, you may take into account:

- the witness’s opportunity and ability to see, hear, or know the things the witness is 

testifying about;

- the witness’s memory;

- the witness’s manner while testifying;

- any interest the witness has in the outcome of the case;

- any bias or prejudice the witness may have;

- any other evidence that contradicts the witness’s testimony;

- the reasonableness of the witness’s testimony in light of all the evidence; and

- any other factors affecting believability.

At the end of the trial, I’ll give you additional guidelines for determining a witness’s 

credibility.

The Birrens’ description of the case:

This is a maritime personal injury case that involves a malfunctioning elevator. On 

September 7, 2019, the Birrens paying passengers on Defendant’s cruise ship, the Harmony of the 

Seas. The Birrens were attempting to walk out of an elevator when the elevator doors’ sensors 

failed, and the doors abruptly closed with unusually great force on Kathryn Birren, causing her to 

twist, contort, and suffer severe injuries, which resulted in surgery. As a result, Kathryn Birren 

collided with her daughter, Mandy Birren, causing her to suffer severe injuries as well.

RCCL’s Description of the case.

Case 1:20-cv-22783-BB Document 142-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/14/2022 Page 3 of 42
4

This is a maritime personal injury action in which the Plaintiffs, Kathryn Birren and Mandy 

Birren, claim to have sustained injury while passengers aboard RCCL’s vessel, the Harmony of the 

Seas. Plaintiffs alleged that the elevator door malfunctioned which allowed the elevator door to make 

contact with Kathryn Birren, causing her to bump into her daughter Plaintiff Mandy Birren. RCCL 

denies that the elevator door malfunctioned and denies that it had any notice that the elevator door 

represented an unreasonably dangerous condition on the date of the subject incident. RCCL further 

contends that the functioning of the elevator doors was an open and obvious condition of which both 

Plaintiffs had actual knowledge. Plaintiffs had a duty to act reasonably under the circumstances and 

failed to do so which proximately caused their damages, if any. Finally, Plaintiffs’ alleged injuries were 

not the caused or contributed to by the subject incident.

Burden of proof:

The Birrens have the burden of proving their case by what the law calls “the greater weight

of the evidence/preponderance of the evidence.” That means The Birrens must prove that, in light 

of all the evidence, what they claim is more likely true than not. So, if you could put the evidence 

favoring the Birrens and the evidence favoring RCCL on opposite sides of balancing scales, the 

Birrens needs to make the scales tip to his side. If the Birrens fail to meet this burden, you must 

find in favor of RCCL.

To decide whether any fact has been proved by the greater weight of the 

evidence/preponderance of the evidence, you may – unless I instruct you otherwise – consider 

the testimony of all witnesses, regardless of who called them, and all exhibits that the court 

allowed, regardless of who produced them. After considering all the evidence, if you decide a 

claim or fact is more likely true than not, then the claim or fact has been proved by the greater 

weight of the evidence/preponderance of the evidence.

On certain issues, called “affirmative defenses,” RCCL has the burden of proving the 

elements of a defense by the greater weight of the evidence/preponderance of the evidence. I’ll 

instruct you on the facts RCCL must prove for any affirmative defense. After considering all the 

evidence, if you decide that RCCL has successfully proven that the required facts are more likely 

true than not, the affirmative defense is proved.

Conduct of the jury:

While serving on the jury, you may not talk with anyone about anything related to the case. 

You may tell people that you’re a juror and give them information about when you must be in 

court. But you must not discuss anything about the case itself with anyone.

You shouldn’t even talk about the case with each other until you begin your deliberations. 

You want to make sure you’ve heard everything – all the evidence, the lawyers’ closing arguments, 

and my instructions on the law – before you begin deliberating. You should keep an open mind 

until the end of the trial. Premature discussions may lead to a premature decision.

Case 1:20-cv-22783-BB Document 142-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/14/2022 Page 4 of 42
5

You must not provide any information about the case to anyone by any means whatsoever, 

and that includes posting information about the case, or what you are doing in the case, on any 

device or Internet site, including blogs, chat rooms, social websites, or any other means.

In this age of technology, I want to emphasize that in addition to not talking face-to-face 

with anyone about the case, you must not communicate with anyone about the case by any other 

means. This includes e-mails, text messages, and the Internet, including social-networking 

websites such as Facebook, TikTok, and Twitter. You may not use any similar technology of social 

media, even if I have not specifically mentioned it here.

You also should not Google or search online or offline for any information about the case, 

the parties, or the law. Don’t read or listen to the news about this case, visit any places related to 

this case, or research any fact, issue, or law related to this case. The law forbids the jurors to talk 

with anyone else about the case and forbids anyone else to talk to the jurors about it. It’s very 

important that you understand why these rules exist and why they’re so important. You must base 

your decision only on the testimony and other evidence presented in the courtroom. It is not fair 

to the parties if you base your decision in any way on information you acquire outside the 

courtroom. For example, the law often uses words and phrases in special ways, so it’s important 

that any definitions you hear come only from me and not from any other source. Only you jurors 

can decide a verdict in this case. The law sees only you as fair, and only you have promised to be 

fair – no one else is so qualified.

Taking notes:

If you wish, you may take notes to help you remember what the witnesses said. If you do 

take notes, please don’t share them with anyone until you go to the jury room to decide the case. 

Don’t let note-taking distract you from carefully listening to and observing the witnesses. When 

you leave the courtroom, you should leave your notes hidden from view in the jury room.

Whether or not you take notes, you should rely on your own memory of the testimony. 

Your notes are there only to help your memory. They’re not entitled to greater 

weight/preponderance of the evidence than your memory or impression about the testimony.

Course of the trial:

Let’s walk through the trial. First, each side may make an opening statement, but they don’t 

have to. Remember, an opening statement isn’t evidence, and it’s not supposed to be 

argumentative; it’s just an outline of what that party intends to prove.

Next, the Birrens will present his witnesses and ask them questions. After the Birrens

questions the witness, RCCL may ask the witness questions – this is called “cross-examining” the 

witness. Then RCCL will present its witnesses, and the Birrens may cross-examine them. You 

should base your decision on all the evidence, regardless of which party presented it.

After all the evidence is in, the parties’ lawyers will present their closing arguments to 

summarize and interpret the evidence for you, and then I’ll give you instructions on the law.

Case 1:20-cv-22783-BB Document 142-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/14/2022 Page 5 of 42
6

You’ll then go to the jury room to deliberate.

Authority: Eleventh Circuit Civil Pattern Jury Instruction 1.1.

GRANTED ____________ MODIFIED ____________

DENIED ____________ WITHDRAWN ____________

Case 1:20-cv-22783-BB Document 142-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/14/2022 Page 6 of 42
7

PROPOSED INSTRUCTION NO. 2

JURY QUESTIONS

During this trial, you may submit questions to a witness after the lawyers have finished 

their own questioning. Here is how the procedure works: After each witness has testified, and the 

lawyers have asked all of their questions, I’ll ask if any of you have questions. If you have a 

question, write it down and give it to the court staff.

You may submit a question for a witness only to clarify an answer or to help you understand 

the evidence. Our experience with juror questions indicates that jurors rarely have more than a few 

questions for any one witness, and there may be no questions at all for some witnesses.

If you submit a question, the court staff will give it to me and I’ll share your questions with 

the lawyers in the case. If the rules of evidence allow your question, one of the lawyers or I will 

read your question to the witness. I may modify the form or phrasing of a question so that it’s 

allowed under the evidence rules. Sometimes, I may not allow the questions to be read to the 

witness, either because the law does not allow it or because another witness is in a better position 

to answer the question. If I can’t allow the witness to answer a question, you must not draw any 

conclusions from that fact or speculate on what the answer might have been.

Here are several important things to keep in mind about your questions for the witnesses:

• First, you must submit all questions in writing. Please don’t ask any questions aloud.

• Second, the court can’t re-call witnesses to the stand for additional juror questions. If 

you have a question for a particular witness, you must submit it when I ask.

• Finally, because you should remain neutral and open-minded throughout the trial, you 

should phrase your questions in a way that doesn’t express an opinion about the case 

or a witness. You must keep an open mind until you’ve heard all the evidence, the 

closing arguments, and my final instructions on the law.

Authority: Eleventh Circuit Civil Pattern Jury Instruction 1.4.

GRANTED _______________ MODIFIED _______________

DENIED _______________ WITHDRAWN _______________

Case 1:20-cv-22783-BB Document 142-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/14/2022 Page 7 of 42
8

PROPOSED INSTRUCTION NO. 3

STIPULATIONS

Sometimes the parties have agreed that certain facts are true. This agreement is called a 

stipulation. You must treat these facts as proved for this case.

The following are a list of stipulations that the parties have agreed to:

a. For purposes of this litigation only, at the time of the incident, the Harmony of the 

Seas was owned and operated by Defendant.

b. At the time of the incident, the Birrens were passengers aboard the Harmony of the 

Seas.

c. The incident in this case happened on September 7, 2019.

Authority: Eleventh Circuit Pattern Jury Instruction - Trial Instructions 2.1

GRANTED _______________ MODIFIED _______________

DENIED _______________ WITHDRAWN _______________

Case 1:20-cv-22783-BB Document 142-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/14/2022 Page 8 of 42
9

PROPOSED INSTRUCTION NO. 4

USE OF DEPOSITIONS

A deposition is a witness’s sworn testimony that is taken before the trial. During a 

deposition, the witness is under oath and swears to tell the truth, and the lawyers for each party 

may ask questions. A court reporter is present and records the questions and answers.

The deposition of [name of witness], taken on [date], [is about to be/has been] presented to 

you [by a video/by reading the transcript]. Deposition testimony is entitled to the same 

consideration as live testimony, and you must judge it in the same way as if the witness was 

testifying in court.

Do not place any significance on the behavior or tone of voice of any person reading the 

questions or answers.

Authority: Eleventh Circuit Pattern Jury Instruction - Trial Instructions 2.2

GRANTED _______________ MODIFIED _______________

DENIED _______________ WITHDRAWN _______________

Case 1:20-cv-22783-BB Document 142-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/14/2022 Page 9 of 42
10

PROPOSED INSTRUCTION NO. 5

USE OF INTERROGATORIES

[You’ll now hear/You’ve heard] answers that [name of party] gave in response to written 

questions the other side submitted. The questions are called “interrogatories.” Before the trial, 

[name of party] gave the answers in writing while under oath.

You must consider [name of party]’s answers to as though [name of party] gave the answers 

on the witness stand.

Authority: Eleventh Circuit Pattern Jury Instruction - Trial Instructions 2.6

GRANTED _______________ MODIFIED _______________

DENIED _______________ WITHDRAWN _______________

Case 1:20-cv-22783-BB Document 142-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/14/2022 Page 10 of 42
11

PROPOSED INSTRUCTION NO. 6

INTRODUCTION BEFORE DELIBERATION

COURT’S INSTRUCTIONS TO THE JURY

Members of the jury: 

It’s my duty to instruct you on the rules of law that you must use in deciding this case. 

When I have finished, you will go to the jury room and begin your discussions, sometimes 

called deliberations.

Authority: Eleventh Circuit Pattern Jury Instruction - Trial Instructions 3.1

GRANTED _______________ MODIFIED _______________

DENIED _______________ WITHDRAWN _______________

Case 1:20-cv-22783-BB Document 142-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/14/2022 Page 11 of 42
12

PROPOSED INSTRUCTION NO 7. The Duty to Follow Instructions – Corporate Party 

Involved

Your decision must be based only on the evidence presented here. You must not be 

influenced in any way by either sympathy for or prejudice against anyone.

You must follow the law as I explain it – even if you do not agree with the law – and you 

must follow all of my instructions as a whole. You must not single out or disregard any of the 

instructions on the law.

The fact that a corporation is involved as a party must not affect your decision in any way. 

A corporation and all other persons stand equal before the law and must be dealt with as equals 

in a court of justice. When a corporation is involved, of course, it may act only through people as 

its employees; and, in general, a corporation is responsible under the law for the acts and 

statements of its employees that are made within the scope of their duties as employees of the 

company.

Authority: Eleventh Circuit Standard Jury Instruction– 3.2.2. 

GRANTED _______________

DENIED _______________

MODIFIED_______________

Case 1:20-cv-22783-BB Document 142-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/14/2022 Page 12 of 42
13

PROPOSED INSTRUCTION NO. 8

CONSIDERATION OF DIRECT AND CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE.

ARGUMENT OF COUNSEL; AND COMMENTS BY THE COURT

As I said before, you must consider only the evidence that I have admitted in the case. 

Evidence includes the testimony of witnesses and the exhibits admitted. But anything the lawyers 

say is not evidence and isn’t binding on you.

You shouldn’t assume from anything I’ve said that I have any opinion about any factual 

issue in this case. Except for my instructions to you on the law, you should disregard anything I 

may have said during the trial in arriving at your own decision about the facts.

Your own recollection and interpretation of the evidence is what matters.

In considering the evidence you may use reasoning and common sense to make deductions 

and reach conclusions. You shouldn’t be concerned about whether the evidence is direct or 

circumstantial.

“Direct evidence” is the testimony of a person who asserts that he or she has actual 

knowledge of a fact, such as an eyewitness.

“Circumstantial evidence” is proof of a chain of facts and circumstances that tend to prove 

or disprove a fact. There’s no legal difference in the weight you may give to either direct or 

circumstantial evidence.

Authority: Eleventh Circuit Pattern Jury Instruction - Trial Instructions 3.3

GRANTED _______________ MODIFIED _______________

DENIED _______________ WITHDRAWN _______________

Case 1:20-cv-22783-BB Document 142-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/14/2022 Page 13 of 42
14

PROPOSED INSTRUCTION NO. 9

CREDIBILITY OF WITNESSES

When I say you must consider all the evidence, I don’t mean that you must accept all the 

evidence as true or accurate. You should decide whether you believe what each witness had to say, 

and how important that testimony was. In making that decision you may believe or disbelieve any 

witness, in whole or in part. The number of witnesses testifying concerning a particular point 

doesn’t necessarily matter.

To decide whether you believe any witness I suggest that you ask yourself a few questions:

• Did the witness impress you as one who was telling the truth? 

• Did the witness have any particular reason not to tell the truth?

• Did the witness have a personal interest in the outcome of the case? 

• Did the witness seem to have a good memory? 

• Did the witness have the opportunity and ability to accurately observe the things he or he 

testified about? 

• Did the witness appear to understand the questions clearly and answer them directly? 

• Did the witness’s testimony differ from other testimony or other evidence? 

Authority: Eleventh Circuit Pattern Jury Instruction - Trial Instructions 3.4

GRANTED _______________ MODIFIED _______________

DENIED _______________ WITHDRAWN _______________

Case 1:20-cv-22783-BB Document 142-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/14/2022 Page 14 of 42
15

PROPOSED INSTRUCTION NO. 10

IMPEACHMENT OF WITNESSES BECAUSE OF INCONSISTENT STATEMENTS

You should also ask yourself whether there was evidence that a witness testified falsely 

about an important fact. And ask whether there was evidence that at some other time a witness 

said or did something, or didn’t say or do something, that was different from the testimony the 

witness gave during this trial.

But keep in mind that a simple mistake doesn’t mean a witness wasn’t telling the truth as 

he or she remembers it. People naturally tend to forget some things or remember them inaccurately. 

So, if a witness misstated something, you must decide whether it was because of an innocent lapse 

in memory or an intentional deception. The significance of your decision may depend on whether 

the misstatement is about an important fact or about an unimportant detail.

Authority: Eleventh Circuit Pattern Jury Instruction - Trial Instructions 3.5.1

GRANTED _______________ MODIFIED _______________

DENIED _______________ WITHDRAWN _______________

Case 1:20-cv-22783-BB Document 142-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/14/2022 Page 15 of 42
16

PROPOSED INSTRUCTION NO. 11

EXPERT WITNESS

During this trial, you have heard testimony from certain treating and expert witnesses for 

the parties:

• Jeffrey Hanson, who’s expertise includes elevator safety

• Alex Alonso, MD, who’s expertise includes radiology

• Nicholas Suite, MD, who’s expertise includes neurology

• Kamal Patel, MD, who’s expertise includes pain management

• Elizabeth Trinidad, MD, who’s expertise includes neurosurgery

• Ying Lu, Ph.D, who’s expertise includes biomechanics

• J.S. Held, who’s expertise includes biomechanics/accident reconstruction

• Jonathan Gottlieb, MD, who’s expertise includes orthopedics

• Joseph Fernandez, MD, who’s expertise includes orthopedics

• Richard Rauck, MD, who’s expertise includes pain management

• Tray Edmonds, who’s expertise includes elevator safety

When scientific, technical or other specialized knowledge might be helpful, a person who 

has special training or experience in that field is allowed to state an opinion about the matter.

But that doesn’t mean you must accept the witness’s opinion. As with any other witness’s 

testimony, you must decide for yourself whether to rely upon the opinion.

Expert Witness – When Expert Fees Represent a Significant Portion of the Witness’s Income 

When scientific, technical or other specialized knowledge might be helpful, a person who has 

special training or experience in that field is allowed to state an opinion about the matter. But that 

doesn’t mean you must accept the witness’s opinion. As with any other witness’s testimony, you 

must decide for yourself whether to rely upon the opinion. When a witness is being paid for 

reviewing and testifying concerning the evidence, you may consider the possibility of bias and 

should view with caution the testimony of such witness where court testimony is given with 

regularity and represents a significant portion of the witness’s income

Authority: Eleventh Circuit Civil Pattern Jury Instruction 3.6.1.and 3.6.2

GRANTED _______________ MODIFIED _______________

DENIED _______________ WITHDRAWN _______________

Case 1:20-cv-22783-BB Document 142-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/14/2022 Page 16 of 42
17

PROPOSED INSTRUCTION NO. 12

NEGLIGENCE GENERAL INSTRUCTION

In this case, the Birrens claim that RCCL was negligent and that such negligence was a 

legal cause of damage sustained by them.

Specifically, the Birrens claim that RCCL, was negligent in failing to use reasonable care 

under the circumstances.

On the other hand, RCCL contends that it did exercise reasonable care and that the Birrens

failed to use reasonable care for their own safety. 

To succeed on a claim for negligence, the Birrens must prove each of the following facts 

by the greater weight of the evidence/preponderance of the evidence:

First: that RCCL was “negligent” and

Second: that such negligence was a “legal cause” of the injury or damage sustained by the 

Birrens.

In the verdict form that I’ll explain in a moment, you’ll be asked to answer questions about 

these factual issues.

“Negligence” means the failure to use reasonable care. Reasonable care is the degree of 

care that a reasonably careful person would use under similar circumstances. Negligence can mean 

doing something that a reasonably careful person wouldn’t do under like circumstances, or failing 

to do something that a reasonably careful person would do under like circumstances.

Negligence is a “legal cause” of damage if it directly and in natural and continuous 

sequence produces, or contributes substantially to producing such damage, so it can reasonably be 

said that, but for the negligence, the loss, injury or damage would not have occurred. 

Negligence may be a legal cause of damage even though it operates in combination with 

the act of another, some natural cause, or some other cause if such other cause occurs at the same 

time as the negligence and if the negligence contributes substantially to producing such damage.

If the greater weight of the evidence/preponderance of the evidence doesn’t support the 

Birrens’ claim for negligence, then your verdict should be for RCCL. But if the greater weight of 

the evidence/preponderance of the evidence supports the Birrens’ claims, you must next consider 

the defenses raised by RCCL.

No Duty to Warn of Open and Obvious Dangers

A ship operator does not have a duty to warn passengers of dangers which are open and 

obvious to passengers. An open and obvious danger is one that is apparent to or one that can be 

perceived by an objective, reasonable person through the ordinary use of his or her senses. 

Case 1:20-cv-22783-BB Document 142-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/14/2022 Page 17 of 42
18

Whether a danger is open and obvious is decided based on an objective standard, that is 

what “a reasonably prudent person through the exercise of common sense and the original use of 

his [or her] senses” would observe. A condition can be open and obvious regardless of whether 

the Plaintiff, herself, perceived the condition so long as the condition would be apparent to a 

reasonable person under the same circumstances. The vessel operator is entitled to expect a ship 

passenger to take necessary precautions for her own safety, including perceiving obvious 

conditions through the ordinary use of her senses. 

Authority: Keefe v. Bahama Cruise Lines, Inc. , 867 F. 2d 1318, 1320 (11th Cir. 1989); Luby v. 

Carnival Cruise Lines, Inc. , 633 F. Supp. 40, 42 (S. D. Fla. 1986), aff’d 808 F. 2d 60 (11th Cir. 

1986); Aponte v. Royal Caribbean Cruise Lines Ltd., 739 Fed. Appx. 531 (11th Cir. 2018); Picar v. Blue 

Horizon, 1993 AMC 1642 (N. D. Cal. 1991). 

GRANTED _______________

DENIED _______________

MODIFIED_______________

Legal Cause

a. Legal cause generally:

Negligence is a legal cause of loss, injury, or damage, if it directly and in natural and 

continuous sequence produces or contributes substantially to producing such loss, injury, or 

damage, so that it can reasonably be said that, but for the negligence, the loss, injury, or damage 

would not have occurred.

b. Concurring cause:

In order to be regarded as a legal cause of loss, injury, or damage, negligence need not be 

the only cause. Negligence may be a legal cause of loss, injury, or damage even though it operates 

in combination with the act of another, some natural cause, or some other cause if the negligence 

contributes substantially to producing such loss, injury, or damage. 

c. Intervening cause:

Case 1:20-cv-22783-BB Document 142-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/14/2022 Page 18 of 42
19

Negligence may also be a legal cause of loss, injury, or damage even though it operates in 

combination with the act of another, some natural cause, or some other cause occurring after the 

negligence occurs if such other cause was itself reasonably foreseeable and the negligence 

contributes substantially to producing such loss, injury, or damage or the resulting loss, injury, or 

damage was a reasonably foreseeable consequence of the negligence and the negligence 

contributes substantially to producing it.

Authority: Florida Standard Jury Instruction (2021) – 401.12. 

GRANTED _______________

DENIED _______________

MODIFIED_______________

RCCL claims that the Birrens were also negligent, and that the Birrens’ negligence was a 

legal cause of their own injuries or damages. This is a defensive claim, which requires RCCL to 

prove these two facts by the greater weight of the evidence/preponderance of the evidence:

First, you must find that the Birrens were also negligent.

And second, you must find that the negligence was a legal cause of the Birrens’ own 

injuries or damages.

In the verdict form that I’ll explain in a moment, you’ll be asked to answer questions about 

these factual issues.

The law requires you to compare any negligence you find on the part of both parties 

because, in this case, RCCL claims that the Birrens’ negligence contributed to the Birrens’ injuries. 

If you find in RCCL’s favor on this defense, by finding that the Birrens were also negligent, that 

will not prevent the Birrens from recovering. But it will reduce the Birrens’ recovery amount by 

the degree of their negligence. This is a legal concept called “comparative negligence.”

For example, if you find that the Birrens were 50% responsible for their own injury, then 

you must reduce their recovery amount by that percentage. By using the number 50% as an 

example, I do not mean to suggest that the Birrens were negligent, or if they were negligent, to 

what degree. That is a decision entrusted to you and it’s up to you to determine the percentage, if 

any, of the Birrens’ negligence. If you find that the Plaintiffs were negligent, you might find them 

1% or 99% responsible. 

Case 1:20-cv-22783-BB Document 142-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/14/2022 Page 19 of 42
20

However, it is important that you understand that the Birrens are responsible only for any 

comparative fault RCCL proves as to them. If you find fault based on the actions of any other 

person or entity other than RCCL, this cannot be the basis for finding the Birrens comparatively 

at fault.

If the evidence proves negligence on the part of RCCL was a legal cause of the Birrens’ 

injury or damage, you must then consider the issue of the Birrens’ damages.

You should assess the monetary amount that the greater weight of the 

evidence/preponderance of the evidence justifies as full and reasonable compensation for all of 

the Birrens’ damages – no more, no less. You must not impose or increase these compensatory

damages to punish or penalize RCCL. And you must not base these compensatory damages on 

speculation or guesswork because the Birrens can recover only their actual damages.

But the law does not restrict compensatory damages only to actual loss of time or money. 

Compensatory damages cover both the mental and physical aspects of injury – tangible and 

intangible. It is not value you’re trying to determine, but an amount that fairly compensates The 

Birrens for emotional pain and mental anguish. No evidence of these things has been, or need be, 

introduced. And there’s no exact standard to apply, but any such award should be fair and just in 

light of the evidence.

If you find that damages have been proved by the greater weight of the 

evidence/preponderance of the evidence, you should consider the following elements of damage:

- medical and hospital expenses incurred in the past [and likely to be incurred in the 

future]; and

- physical and emotional pain and anguish; and

- Permanent injury, disability, disfigurement, impairment, inconvenience, and loss of 

capacity for the enjoyment of life experienced in the past and in the future; and

- Lost wages in the past and in the future.

Authority: U.S. Eleventh Circuit Pattern Jury Instructions –Instruction 8.1 (modified to adapt to 

passenger claim).

GRANTED _______________ MODIFIED _______________

DENIED _______________ WITHDRAWN _______________

A cruise line is not an insurer of its passenger’s safety. That is, a cruise line does not 

become liable to a passenger merely because an incident occurs. To determine whether the 

cruise line was negligent, the benchmark against which its behavior must be measured is the 

duty to use reasonable care under the circumstances. Likewise, the law requires the cruise 

ship passenger like Kathryn and Mandy Birren to also exercise reasonable care for his own 

safety.

Case 1:20-cv-22783-BB Document 142-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/14/2022 Page 20 of 42
21

GRANTED _______________ MODIFIED _______________

DENIED _______________ WITHDRAWN _______________

Case 1:20-cv-22783-BB Document 142-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/14/2022 Page 21 of 42
22

PROPOSED JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 13

DUTY-STANDARD OF CARE

A shipowner has a duty to exercise reasonable care under the circumstances. Where the 

allegation is that a shipowner failed to take measures to make the property safe, this is a standard 

which requires, as a prerequisite to imposing liability for this failure, that it had actual or 

constructive notice of the risk creating condition.

Authority: Kermarec v. Compagnie Generale Transatlantique, 358 U.S. 625, 632 (1959); 

Wilkinson v. Carnival Cruise Lines, Inc., 920 F.2d 1560, 1564 & n. 10 (11th Cir.1991); Everett v. 

Carnival Cruise Lines, Inc., 912 F.2d 1355, 1358 (11th Cir.1990); Keefe v. Bahama's Cruise 

Lines, Inc., 867 F.2d 1318, 1320 (11th Cir.1989); Odom v. Kroger Texas, L.P., No. 3:13-CV-0579-

D, 2014 WL 585329, at *3 (N.D. Tex. Feb. 14, 2014); see Owens v. Publix Supermarkets, Inc., 802 

So. 2d 315, 320 n. 4 (Fla. 2001) (quoting Mabrey v. Carnival Cruise Lines, Inc., 438 So.2d 937, 

938 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983)); see also Berbridge v. Sam's E., Inc., No. 16-CV-62681, 2017 WL 

3593968, at *3 (S.D. Fla. Aug. 21, 2017).

GRANTED _______________ MODIFIED _______________

DENIED _______________ WITHDRAWN _______________

Case 1:20-cv-22783-BB Document 142-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/14/2022 Page 22 of 42
23

PROPOSED JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 14

NEGLIGENCE – NOTICE UNDER GENERAL MARITIME LAW

To recover for injuries sustained from his incident, the Birrens must prove either that RCCL

1) had actual notice, meaning it knew of the risk creating condition of which the Birrens complain; 

or 2) that RCCL had constructive notice of the risk creating condition, meaning it should have 

known of the risk creating condition of which the Birrens complain. 

Actual notice is notice given directly to, or received personally by, a party.

Constructive notice may be shown if (a) the dangerous condition existed for such a length 

of time that, in the exercise of reasonable care, Defendant should have known of the dangerous 

condition, (b) if the condition occurred with regularity and was therefore foreseeable, (c) if 

there were prior substantially similar complaints or incidents, or (d) if there is evidence that 

allows the inference that the cruise ship operator had knowledge that the condition could be 

dangerous.

Authority: Carroll v. Carnival Corp., 955 F.3d 1260 (11th Cir. 2020); Frasca v. NCL (Bahamas), 

Ltd., 654 F. App'x 949, 954 (11th Cir. 2016); Sorrels v. NCL (Bahamas) Ltd., 796 F.3d 1275 (11th 

Cir. 2015); Everett v. Carnival Cruise Lines, 912 F.2d 1355, 1359 (11th Cir. 1990); Keefe v. 

Bahama Cruise Line, 867 F.2d 1318, 1322 (11th Cir. 1989); Marine Turbo Eng'g, Ltd. v. 

Turbocharger Servs. Worldwide, LLC, No. 11-60621-CIV, 2011 WL 13217397, at *2 (S.D. Fla. 

July 18, 2011) (quoting Black’s Law Dictionary 1164 (9th ed. 2009)).

GRANTED _______________ MODIFIED _______________

DENIED _______________ WITHDRAWN _______________

Case 1:20-cv-22783-BB Document 142-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/14/2022 Page 23 of 42
24

PROPOSED INSTRUCTION NO. 15

NO NOTICE REQUIRED FOR VICARIOUS LIABILITY

However, the Birrens do not need to prove notice for any affirmative acts of 

negligence by one of the Defendant’ employees or agents. This means that Defendant is 

responsible for any negligence of the individuals involved in the maintenance, inspection, or 

safety of the subject elevator in which the Birrens’ incident occurred.

Authority: Florida Pattern Jury Instruction, Civil, 401.13 (modified due to previous general 

negligence instruction already having been given); Yusko v. NCL (Bahamas), Ltd., 4 F.4th 1164 

(11th Cir. 2021) (“In short, we hold that a passenger need not establish that a shipowner had 

actual or constructive notice of a risk-creating condition to hold a shipowner liable for the 

negligent acts of its employees.”).

GRANTED _______________ MODIFIED _______________

DENIED _______________ WITHDRAWN_______________

Case 1:20-cv-22783-BB Document 142-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/14/2022 Page 24 of 42
25

PROPOSED JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 16

NEGLIGENCE UNDER GENERAL MARITIME LAW – DUTY TO WARN

RCCL had a duty to warn of dangers of which it knew, or reasonably should have known.

However, RCCL had no duty to warn the Birrens of any dangers that were, or should have been, 

apparent and obvious to them by the ordinary use of their senses.

Authority: Joseph v. Carnival Corp., No. 11-20221-CIV, 2011 WL 3022555, at *2 (S.D. Fla. July 

22, 2011) (citing Carlisle v. Ulysses Line Ltd., S.A., 475 So.2d 248, 251 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985)); as 

for the open and obvious instruction, see Smith v. Royal Caribbean Cruises, Ltd., 620 F. App'x 

727 (11th Cir. 2015); Frasca v. NCL (Bahamas), Ltd., 654 F. App'x 949, 952 (11th Cir. 2016); 

Corby v. Kloster Cruise Limited, 1990 U.S. Dist. Lexis 13675 (October 5, 1990); Luby v. Carnival 

Cruise Lines, 633 F. Supp. 40 (S.D. Fla. 1986); Harnesk v. Carnival Cruise Lines, Inc., 1992 AMC 

1472, 1477 (S.D. Fla. 1991).

GRANTED _______________ MODIFIED _______________

DENIED _______________ WITHDRAWN _______________

Case 1:20-cv-22783-BB Document 142-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/14/2022 Page 25 of 42
26

PROPOSED INSTRUCTION NO. 17

PLAINTIFFS’ CLAIM— THE GREATER WEIGHT OF THE EVIDENCE

In this case it is the responsibility of the Birrens to prove every essential part of their claim 

by “the greater weight of the evidence.” This is sometimes called the “burden of proof” or the 

“burden of persuasion.”

“The greater weight of the evidence” simply means an amount of evidence that is enough 

to persuade you that the Birrens’ claim is more likely true than not true.

If the proof fails to establish any essential part of a claim or contention by the greater weight 

of the evidence, you should find against the Birrens.

When more than one claim is involved, you should consider each claim separately.

In deciding whether any fact has been proved by the greater weight of the evidence, you 

may consider the testimony of all of the witnesses, regardless of who may have called them, and 

all of the exhibits received in evidence, regardless of who may have produced them.

If the proof fails to establish any essential part of the Birrens’ claims by the greater weight 

of the evidence, you should find for RCCL as to that claim.

Authority: Eleventh Circuit Pattern Jury Instruction - Trial Instructions 3.7.1

GRANTED _______________ MODIFIED _______________

DENIED _______________ WITHDRAWN _______________

Case 1:20-cv-22783-BB Document 142-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/14/2022 Page 26 of 42
27

PROPOSED INSTRUCTION NO. 18

MORTALITY TABLES

In determining how long the Birrens will live, you may consider their life expectancy. 

The mortality tables received in evidence may be considered in determining how long they

are expected to live. Mortality tables are not binding on you but may be considered together 

with other evidence in the case bearing on their health, age and physical condition, in 

determining the probable length of their life.

Authority: Florida Pattern Jury Instruction, Civil, 502.6a (modified for non-survival/wrongful 

death case).

GRANTED _______________ MODIFIED _______________

DENIED _______________ WITHDRAWN _______________

Case 1:20-cv-22783-BB Document 142-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/14/2022 Page 27 of 42
28

PROPOSED INSTRUCTION NO. 19

REDUCTION OF DAMAGES TO PRESENT VALUE

Any amount of damages which you allow for future medical expenses should be reduced to 

its present money value and only the present money value of these future economic damages 

should be included in your verdict.

The present money value of future economic damages is the sum of money needed now 

which, together with what that sum will earn in the future, will compensate the Birrens for these 

losses as they are actually experienced in future years.

Authority: Florida Standard Jury Instructions, Reduction of Damages to Present Value, 501.7

GRANTED _______________ MODIFIED _______________

DENIED _______________ WITHDRAWN _______________

Case 1:20-cv-22783-BB Document 142-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/14/2022 Page 28 of 42
29

PROPOSED INSTRUCTION NO. 20

VIOLATION OF COMPANY POLICY IS EVIDENCE OF NEGLIGENCE

The Birrens have alleged that RCCL has violated its own internal policies and 

procedures. The violation of a party’s internal policies and procedures can be evidence of its 

negligence. However, compliance or noncompliance with internal policies and procedures is 

not conclusive evidence of negligence.

Authority: Beam v. Carnival Corp., Case No. 1:15-cv-22103-DPG, (E.C.F. 182 at p. 11) (S.D. 

Fla., Jan. 12, 2017); Pustka v. Printpack Inc., 168 F. App'x 583, 584 (5th Cir. 2006); 50 State 

Security Service, Inc. v. Giangrandi, 132 So.3d 1128 (Fla. 3d DCA 2013); Marks v. Mandel, 477 

So.2d 1036, 1038-39 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985).

GRANTED _______________ MODIFIED _______________

DENIED _______________ WITHDRAWN _______________

Case 1:20-cv-22783-BB Document 142-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/14/2022 Page 29 of 42
30

PROPOSED INSTRUCTION NO. 21

NEGLIGENCE PER SE

International codes, industry standards, best practices, and other guidelines and 

recommendations require cruise lines to make their elevators safe for the use of their 

passengers.

Violation of these codes is negligence. If you find that RCCL violated these codes, then 

RCCL was negligent. You should then decide whether such negligence was a legal cause of 

the Birrens’ damages.

Authority: Florida Standard Jury Instruction, 401.8 (modified to fit this case).

GRANTED _______________ MODIFIED _______________

DENIED _______________ WITHDRAWN _______________

Case 1:20-cv-22783-BB Document 142-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/14/2022 Page 30 of 42
31

PROPOSED INSTRUCTION NO. 22

VIOLATION OF STATUTE, ORDINANCE, REGULATION, CODE, OR GUIDELINE 

AS EVIDENCE OF NEGLIGENCE

(In the Alternative to Proposed Jury Instruction No. 21)

International codes, industry standards, best practices, and other guidelines and 

recommendations require cruise lines to make their elevators safe for the use of their 

passengers.

Violation of these codes is evidence of negligence. It is not, however, conclusive 

evidence of negligence. If you find that RCCL violated these codes, you may consider that 

fact, together with the other facts and circumstances, in deciding whether RCCL was 

negligent.

Authority: Florida Standard Jury Instruction, 401.9 (modified to fit this case).

GRANTED _______________ MODIFIED _______________

DENIED _______________ WITHDRAWN _______________

Case 1:20-cv-22783-BB Document 142-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/14/2022 Page 31 of 42
32

PROPOSED INSTRUCTION NO. 23

OTHER CONTRIBUTING CAUSES OF DAMAGES

If you find that RCCL caused a bodily injury, and that the injury resulted in an 

aggravation of an existing disease or physical defect, you should attempt to decide what 

portion of the Birrens’ condition resulted from the aggravation. If you can make that 

determination, then you should award only those damages resulting from the aggravation. 

However, if you cannot make that determination, or if it cannot be said that the condition 

would have existed apart from the injury, then you should award damages for the entire 

condition suffered by the Birrens.

Authority: Florida Pattern Jury Instruction, Civil, 501.5(a).

GRANTED _______________ MODIFIED _______________

DENIED _______________ WITHDRAWN _______________

Case 1:20-cv-22783-BB Document 142-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/14/2022 Page 32 of 42
33

PROPOSED INSTRUCTION NO. 24

APPROVAL OF A NEGLIGENT DESIGN

“‘[L]iability based on negligent design requires [the Birrens] to produce evidence that 

[RCCL] ‘actually created, participated in OR APPROVED’ the alleged improper design.” 

Authority: Hoover v. NCL (Bahamas) Ltd., 491 F. Supp. 3d 1254, 1257 (S.D. Fla. 2020); Groves 

v. Royal Caribbean Cruises, Ltd., 463 Fed. App'x 837, 837 (11th Cir. 2012).

GRANTED _______________ MODIFIED _______________

DENIED _______________ WITHDRAWN _______________

Case 1:20-cv-22783-BB Document 142-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/14/2022 Page 33 of 42
34

PROPOSED INSTRUCTION NO. 25

REASONABLE AND NECESSARY MEDICAL EXPENSES

“[T]he ultimate determination -- the reasonable value of medical services received by [the 

Birrens] in [this] case – [is for you to decide], upon [your] consideration of all relevant evidence, 

notably including the amount billed, the amount paid, and any expert testimony and other relevant 

evidence the parties may offer.”

Authority: Higgs v. Costa Crociere S.P.A. Co., 969 F.3d 1295, 1313-14 (11th Cir. 2020).

GRANTED _______________ MODIFIED _______________

DENIED _______________ WITHDRAWN _______________

Case 1:20-cv-22783-BB Document 142-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/14/2022 Page 34 of 42
35

PROPOSED INSTRUCTION NO. 26

DUTY TO DELIBERATE ONLY WHEN THE PLAINTIFFS CLAIMS DAMAGES

Of course, the fact that I have given you instructions concerning the issue of the Birrens’ 

damages should not be interpreted in any way as an indication that I believe that the Birrens should, 

or should not, prevail in this case.

Your verdict must be unanimous – in other words, you must all agree. Your deliberations 

are secret, and you’ll never have to explain your verdict to anyone.

Each of you must decide the case for yourself, but only after fully considering the evidence 

with the other jurors. So you must discuss the case with one another and try to reach an agreement. 

While you’re discussing the case, don’t hesitate to reexamine your own opinion and change your 

mind if you become convinced that you were wrong. But don’t give up your honest beliefs just 

because others think differently or because you simply want to get the case over with.

Remember that, in a very real way, you’re judges – judges of the facts. Your only interest 

is to seek the truth from the evidence in the case.

Authority: Eleventh Circuit Pattern Jury Instructions, Civil Cases, § 3.8.1.

GRANTED _______________ MODIFIED _______________

DENIED _______________ WITHDRAWN _______________

Case 1:20-cv-22783-BB Document 142-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/14/2022 Page 35 of 42
36

PROPOSED JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 27

ELECTION OF FOREPERSON EXPLANATION OF VERDICT FORM

When you get to the jury room, choose one of your members to act as foreperson. The 

foreperson will direct your deliberations and speak for you in court.

A verdict form has been prepared for your convenience.

[Explain verdict]

Take the verdict form with you to the jury room. When you’ve all agreed on the verdict, 

your foreperson must fill in the form, sign it and date it. Then you’ll return it to the courtroom.

If you wish to communicate with me at any time, please write down your message or 

question and give it to the court security officer. The court security officer will bring it to me and 

I’ll respond as promptly as possible – either in writing or by talking to you in the courtroom. Please 

understand that I may have to talk to the lawyers and the parties before I respond to your question 

or message, so you should be patient as you await my response. But I caution you not to tell me 

how many jurors have voted one way or the other at that time. That type of information should 

remain in the jury room and not be shared with anyone, including me, in your note or question.

Authority: Eleventh Circuit Civil Pattern Jury Instruction 3.9.

GRANTED _______________ MODIFIED _______________

DENIED _______________ WITHDRAWN _______________

Case 1:20-cv-22783-BB Document 142-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/14/2022 Page 36 of 42
37

PROPOSED JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 28

INTERIM STATEMENTS

At times during the trial, the lawyers will address you. You'll soon hear the lawyers' 

opening statements, and at the trial's conclusion you'll hear their closing arguments. Sometimes 

the lawyers may choose to make short statements to you, either to preview upcoming evidence or 

to summarize and highlight evidence they just presented. These statements and arguments are the 

lawyers' views of the evidence or of what they anticipate the evidence will be. They are not 

evidence themselves. 

Authority: Eleventh Circuit Civil Pattern Jury Instruction 1.5.

GRANTED _______________ MODIFIED _______________

DENIED _______________ WITHDRAWN _______________

Case 1:20-cv-22783-BB Document 142-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/14/2022 Page 37 of 42
38

PROPOSED JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 29

JUDICIAL NOTICE

The rules of evidence allow me to accept facts that no one can reasonably dispute. The law 

calls this “judicial notice.” I've accepted [state the fact that the court has judicially noticed] as 

proved even though no one introduced evidence to prove it. You must accept it as true for this 

case. 

Authority: Eleventh Circuit Civil Pattern Jury Instruction 2.5

GRANTED _______________ MODIFIED _______________

DENIED _______________ WITHDRAWN _______________

Case 1:20-cv-22783-BB Document 142-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/14/2022 Page 38 of 42
39

PROPOSED JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 30

Civil Allen Charge

Members of the jury: 

I'm going to ask you to continue your deliberations to reach a verdict. Please consider 

the following comments. 

This is an important case. The trial has been expensive in terms of time, effort, 

money, and emotional strain to both the Birrens and RCCL. If you fail to agree on a verdict, 

the case remains open and may have to be tried again. A second trial would be costly to both 

sides, and there's no reason to believe either side can try it again better or more exhaustively 

than they have tried it before you. 

Any future jury would be selected in the same manner and from the same source as 

you. There's no reason to believe that the case could ever be submitted to a jury of people 

more conscientious, more impartial, or more competent to decide it—or that either side could 

produce more or clearer evidence.

It's your duty to consult with one another and to deliberate with a view to reaching 

an agreement—if you can do it without violating your individual judgment. You must not 

give up your honest beliefs about the evidence's weight or effect solely because of other 

jurors' opinions or just to return a verdict. You must each decide the case for yourself—but 

only after you consider the evidence with your fellow jurors. 

You shouldn't hesitate to reexamine your own views and change your opinion if you 

become convinced it's wrong. To bring your minds to a unanimous result, you must openly 

and frankly examine the questions submitted to you with proper regard for the opinions of 

others and with a willingness to reexamine your own views.

If a substantial majority of you is for a verdict for one party, each of you who holds a 

different position ought to consider whether your position is reasonable. It may not be 

reasonable since it makes so little impression on the minds of your fellow jurors—who bear 

the same responsibility, serve under the same oath, and have heard the same evidence. 

You may conduct your deliberations as you choose, but I suggest that you now 

carefully reexamine and reconsider all the evidence in light of the court's instructions on the 

law. You may take all the time that you need. 

I remind you that in your deliberations, you are to consider the court's instructions 

as a whole. You shouldn't single out any part of any instructions, including this one, and 

ignore others. 

You may now return to the jury room and continue your deliberations. 

Case 1:20-cv-22783-BB Document 142-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/14/2022 Page 39 of 42
40

Authority: Eleventh Circuit Civil Pattern Jury Instruction 2.8

GRANTED _______________ MODIFIED _______________

DENIED _______________ WITHDRAWN _______________

PROPOSED CLOSING INSTRUCTIONS

Members of the jury, you have now heard all the evidence, my instructions on the law that 

you must apply in reaching your verdict, and the closing arguments of the attorneys. You will 

shortly retire to the jury room to decide this case. Before you do so, I have a few last instructions 

for you. 

During deliberations, jurors must communicate about the case only with one another and 

only when all jurors are present in the jury room. You will have in the jury room all of the evidence 

that was received during the trial. In reaching your decision, do not do any research on your own 

or as a group. Do not use dictionaries, the Internet, or any other reference materials. Do not 

investigate the case or conduct any experiments. Do not visit or view the scene of any event 

involved in this case or look at maps or pictures on the Internet. If you happen to pass by the scene, 

do not stop or investigate. All jurors must see or hear the same evidence at the same time. Do not 

read, listen to, or watch any news accounts of this trial. 

You are not to communicate with any person outside the jury about this case. Until you 

have reached a verdict, you must not talk about this case in person or through the telephone, 

writing, or electronic communication, such as blog, twitter, email, text message or any other 

means. Do not contact anyone to assist you, such a family accountant, doctor, or lawyer. These 

communication rules apply until I discharge you at the end of the case. 

If you become aware of any violation these instructions or any other instruction I have 

given you in this case, you must tell me by giving a note to the bailiff. 

Case 1:20-cv-22783-BB Document 142-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/14/2022 Page 40 of 42
41

Any notes you have taken during the trial may be taken to the jury room for use during 

your discussion. Your notes are simply an aid to your own memory, and neither your notes nor 

those of any other juror are binding or conclusive. Your notes are not a substitute for your own 

memory or that of the other jurors. Instead, your verdict must result from the collective memory 

and judgment of all jurors based on the evidence and testimony presented during the trial. 

At the conclusion of the trial, the bailiff will collect all of your notes and immediately 

destroy them. No one will ever read your notes. 

In reaching your verdict, do not let bias, sympathy, prejudice, public opinion, or any other 

sentiment for or against any party to influence your decision. Your verdict must be based on the 

evidence that has been received and the law on which I have instructed you. 

Reaching a verdict is exclusively your job. I cannot participate in that decision in any way 

and you should not guess what I think your verdict should be from something I may have said or 

done. You should not think that I prefer one verdict over another. Therefore, in reaching your 

verdict, you should not consider anything that I have said or done, except for my specific 

instructions to you. 

Pay careful attention to all the instructions that I gave you, for that is the law that you must 

follow. You will have a copy of my instructions with you when you go to the jury room to deliberate. 

All the instructions are important, and you must consider all of them together. There are no other 

laws that apply to this case, and even if you do not agree with these laws, you must use them in 

reaching your decision in this case. 

When you get to the jury room, the first thing you should do is choose one of your members 

to act as foreperson. The foreperson will direct your deliberations and speak for you in court. The 

Case 1:20-cv-22783-BB Document 142-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/14/2022 Page 41 of 42
42

foreperson should see to it that your discussions are orderly and that everyone has a fair chance 

to be heard.

A verdict form has been prepared for your convenience.

I have already instructed you on the law that you are to use in answering these questions. 

You must follow my instructions and the form carefully. The verdict form asks you to answer 

several yes or no questions and then contains instructions depending on your response. Please 

answer the questions in the order they appear and follow the instructions on the verdict form to 

get to a verdict.

Take the verdict form with you to the jury room. When you’ve all agreed on the verdict, 

your foreperson must fill in the form, sign it and date it. Then you’ll return it to the courtroom.

If you wish to communicate with me at any time, please write down your message or 

question and give it to the court security officer. The court security officer will bring it to me and 

I’ll respond as promptly as possible – either in writing or by talking to you in the courtroom. 

Please understand that I may have to talk to the lawyers and the parties before I respond to your 

question or message, so you should be patient as you await my response. But I caution you not to 

tell me how many jurors have voted one way or the other at that time. That type of information 

should remain in the jury room and not be shared with anyone, including me, in your note or 

question.

You may now retire to decide your verdict. 

Authority: Eleventh Circuit Standard Jury Instruction (2020) – 3.9 (modified); Florida Standard 

Jury Instruction (2021) N. 700 (modified). 

GRANTED _______________

DENIED _______________

MODIFIED_______________

Case 1:20-cv-22783-BB Document 142-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 03/14/2022 Page 42 of 42