Home Table of Contents

WPI 34.04 Mortality Table—Limitation on Use

6 WAPRAC WPI 34.04Washington Practice Series TMWashington Pattern Jury Instructions--Civil

6 Wash. Prac., Wash. Pattern Jury Instr. Civ. WPI 34.04 (7th ed.)
Washington Practice Series TM
Washington Pattern Jury Instructions--Civil
April 2022 Update
Washington State Supreme Court Committee on Jury Instructions
Part IV. Damages
Chapter 34. Damages—Future—Mortality Tables
WPI 34.04 Mortality Table—Limitation on Use
According to mortality tables, the average expectancy of life of a aged years is years. This one factor is not controlling, but should be considered in connection with all the other evidence bearing on the same question, such as that pertaining to the health, habits, and activity of the person whose life expectancy is in question.
NOTE ON USE
The current mortality table for use in the State of Washington is included herein as Appendix B. Before the instruction is given to the jury, fill in the first blank with the word “man,” “woman,” “male,” or “female.” Fill in the second blank with the person's age and the third blank with the life expectancy from the table. Age should be computed as of the nearest birthday. For a death case, use the life expectancy at time of death. For an injury case, use the life expectancy at the time of trial since the issue is future expectancy.
The Washington Insurance Commissioner's Office should be contacted for the most recent mortality table (www.insurance.wa.gov.)
COMMENT
The giving of this instruction is proper when there is evidence of either permanent injury, future loss of earnings, or future pain and suffering. Lofgren v. W. Wash. Corp. of Seventh Day Adventists, 65 Wn.2d 144, 147, 396 P.2d 139 (1964) (although a life expectancy instruction should have been given, refusal to give the instruction was not error because the plaintiff's attorney included the substance of the instruction in the closing argument to the jury); Ramirez v. Dimond, 70 Wn.App. 729, 732–34, 855 P.2d 338 (1993) (mortality table instruction was not improper, when viewed in context of other instructions, given the instruction simply provided additional information to gauge amount of plaintiff's damages).
The opinion in Bradshaw v. City of Seattle, 43 Wn.2d 766, 784, 264 P.2d 265, 42 A.L.R.2d 800 (1953), abrogated on other grounds, Wuthrich v. King County, 185 Wn.2d 19, 25–26, 366 P.3d 926 (2016), suggests that the life expectancy figure to be used in the jury instruction should be taken from the table published by the State Insurance Commissioner pursuant to statute.
[Current as of April 2021.]
End of Document