Home Table of Contents

WPI 110.31.01 Special Verdict Form—Product Liability—Assumption of Risk—Contributory Negligence...

6 WAPRAC WPI 110.31.01Washington Practice Series TMWashington Pattern Jury Instructions--Civil

6 Wash. Prac., Wash. Pattern Jury Instr. Civ. WPI 110.31.01 (7th ed.)

Washington Practice Series TM

Washington Pattern Jury Instructions--Civil

April 2022 Update

Washington State Supreme Court Committee on Jury Instructions

Part IX. Particularized Standards of Conduct

Chapter 110. Product Liability

WPI 110.31.01 Special Verdict Form—Product Liability—Assumption of Risk—Contributory Negligence—No Empty Chairs

(Insert caption. See WPI 110.30.01.)

We, the jury, answer the questions submitted by the court as follows:

[QUESTION 1:	Did the defendant supply a product that was not reasonably safe [in construction at the time the product left the defendant's control] [because it did not conform to the manufacturer's express warranty] [as designed] [because adequate warnings or instructions were not provided with the product]?]

[QUESTION 1:	Was the defendant negligent in that the product was not reasonably safe because adequate warnings or instructions were not provided after the product was manufactured?]
	ANSWER: (Write “yes” or “no”)

(DIRECTION: If you answered “no” to Question 1, sign this verdict form. If you answered “yes” to Question 1, answer Question 2.)

QUESTION 2:	Was the unsafe condition of the product a proximate cause of injury or damage to the plaintiff?
	ANSWER: (Write “yes” or “no”)

(DIRECTION: If you answered “no” to Question 2, sign this verdict form. If you answered “yes” to Question 2, answer Question 3.)

QUESTION 3:

What do you find to be the plaintiff's amount of damages? (Do not consider the issue[s] of [assumption of risk] [or] [contributory negligence], if any, in your findings.)

ANSWER:
	[(a) Past Economic Damages	$ ]
	[(b) Future Economic Damages	$ ]
	[(c) Noneconomic Damages	$ ]

(DIRECTION: If you answered Question 3 with any amount of money, answer Question 4. If you find no damages, sign this verdict form.)

QUESTION 4:	[Did the plaintiff assume the risk of injury or damage from the product] [or] [was the plaintiff also negligent]?
	ANSWER: (Write “yes” or “no”)

(DIRECTION: If you answered “no” to Question 4, sign this verdict form. If you an swered “yes” to Question 4, answer Question 5.)

QUESTION 5:	Was the plaintiff's [assumption of risk] [or] [negligence] a proximate cause of the [injury] [damage] to the plaintiff?
	ANSWER: (Write “yes” or “no”)

(DIRECTION: If you answered “no” to Question 5, sign this verdict form. If you answered “yes” to Question 5, answer Question 6.)

QUESTION 6:

Assume that 100% represents the total combined fault that proximately caused the plaintiff's [injury] [damage]. What percent of this 100% is attributable to the [unsafe condition of the defendant's product] [defendant's negligence], and what percentage of this 100% is attributable to the plaintiff's [assumption of risk] [and] [negligence]? Your total must equal 100%.

ANSWER:	Percentage
To defendant's [product] [negligence]:	%
To plaintiff (name):	%
TOTAL:	100%

(DIRECTION: Sign and return this verdict.)

DATE: , 20
	Presiding Juror

NOTE ON USE

This special verdict form is for use in product liability actions against a manufacturer if assumption of risk or contributory negligence is in issue and there are no other entities that have been identified as possibly being at fault for the plaintiff's damages.

Use bracketed material as applicable. Question 1 is set out in alternative form. The first option applies a strict liability standard. This option should be used if the product is claimed to be not reasonably safe in construction (WPI 110.01), not reasonably safe because it did not conform to the manufacturer's express warranty (WPI 110.01.01), not reasonably safe in design (WPI 110.02), or not reasonably safe because adequate warnings were not provided with the product (WPI 110.03). The second option applies a negligence standard. The second option should only be used if it is claimed that the manufacturer was negligent in that the product was not reasonably safe because adequate warnings were not provided after the product was manufactured (WPI 110.03.01).

If there is a jury issue whether the defendant was a manufacturer as defined in RCW 7.72.010, insert the following as the first question in the verdict form.

QUESTION 1: Was the defendant a manufacturer?
ANSWER: (Write “yes” or “no”)
(DIRECTION: If you answered “no” to Question 1, sign this verdict form. If you answered “yes” to Question 1, answer Question 2.)

Use WPI 1.11 (Concluding Instruction—For Special Verdict Form) and WPI 30.02.01 (Measure of Economic and Noneconomic Damages—Personal Injury—Contributory Negligence) with this verdict form. If assumption of risk is at issue, WPI 30.02.01 should be modified to refer to assumption of risk.

If defenses are claimed under WPI 110.05 (Government Contract Specifications—Defense) or WPI 110.08 (Useful Safe Life), a question will need to be added to the verdict form covering these defenses.

For a personal injury case involving married co-plaintiffs, the verdict form and damage instruction should take into account the community property issues discussed in Brown v. Brown, 100 Wn.2d 729, 675 P.2d 1207 (1984). See the Comment to WPI 30.01.01 (Measure of Economic and Noneconomic Damages—Personal Injury—No Contributory Negligence).

COMMENT

RCW 4.22.005, RCW 4.22.015, and RCW 4.56.250.

For a discussion of RCW 4.22.005 and RCW 4.22.015, see the Comment accompanying WPI 110.10 (Assumption of Risk—Contributory Negligence). For a discussion of the damages recoverable in product liability actions, see the Comment to WPI 110.30.01 (Special Verdict Form—Product Liability—No Affirmative Defenses—No Empty Chairs).

[Current as of December 2020.]

End of Document