AMI 2201 Measure of Damages—General Instruction
Ark. Model Jury Instr., Civil AMI 2201
Arkansas Model Jury Instructions-Civil
December 2023 Update
Chapter 22. Damages
AMI 2201 Measure of Damages—General Instruction
[If you decide for on the question of liability (against any party (he)(she) is suing)] [If an interrogatory requires you to assess the damages of ], you must then fix the amount of money which will reasonably and fairly compensate [him][her] for any of the following (number) elements of damage sustained [which you find were proximately caused by the (negligence)(or)(fault) of (or )]:
[Here insert the elements.]
[First:]
[Second:]
[Third:]
[etc.:]
Whether any of these (number) elements of damage has been proved by the evidence is for you to determine.
NOTE ON USE
Insert in the spaces marked “Number” the total number of appropriate clauses selected from AMI 2202 through 2210 and AMI 2223 through 2229. However, AMI 2203 is not a separate element but must be combined with the appropriate clause selected from AMI 2202.
This instruction cannot be given in the form shown on this page. It must be completed by selecting the appropriate elements of damage from AMI 2202 through 2210 and AMI 2223 through 2229. The selections should reflect the relevant items of damage and should be inserted between the two paragraphs of this instruction.
If more than one party is entitled to present an instruction on damages, this instruction with proper elements inserted should be repeated for each. If only one element of damage is involved, make appropriate modifications.
When the case is submitted on interrogatories that cover the question of proximate cause—such as under AMI 307 and 307A (fault allocation) or as suggested in Chapter 36, Illustrative Sets of Instructions, Part II—the final bracketed clause in the first paragraph referring to proximate cause should be omitted.
If a claim involves property damage only, use AMI 2222.
Do not use this instruction when AMI 2211, 2212, 2213, 2216 or 2217 is appropriate.
COMMENT
The law in Arkansas is unsettled as to whether purely economic losses are recoverable in a negligence action. In Bayer CropScience v. Schafer, 2011 Ark. 518, at 15–16, the court held that it was unnecessary to resolve the question, but it affirmed the award of economic loss damages because the plaintiff rice farmers also suffered some damages to their lands, crops, and equipment, although they did not seek compensation for that harm.
Damages for economic loss may be recoverable under strict products liability in the absence of any personal injury or any damage to property other than the product, provided that the defective product is unreasonably dangerous such that it poses an actual danger to persons or property. See Berkeley Pump Co. v. Reed-Joseph Land Co., 279 Ark. 384, 390–91, 653 S.W.2d 128, 131 (1987) and Comment to AMI 1008 (citing cases).
© 2023 Arkansas Supreme Court Committee on Jury Instructions-Civil
| End of Document |