FLORIDA STANDARD JURY INSTRUCTIONS CONTRACT AND
BUSINESS CASES
FLORIDA STANDARD JURY INSTRUCTIONS CONTRACT AND
BUSINESS CASES ................................................................................................... 1
SECTION 100 OATHS .......................................................................................... 7
101.1 OATH OF JURORS BEFORE VOIR DIRE .................................................. 7
101.2 OATH OF JUROR AFTER VOIR DIRE ....................................................... 7
101.3 OATH OF A WITNESS ................................................................................. 7
101.4 OATH OF AN INTERPRETER ..................................................................... 7
SECTION 200 PRELIMINARY INSTRUCTIONS ............................................ 9
QUALIFICATIONS INSTRUCTION ....................................................................10
201.1 DESCRIPTION OF THE CASE (PRIOR TO VOIR DIRE) .......................12
201.2 INTRODUCTION OF PARTICIPANTS AND THEIR ROLES ................13
201.3 EXPLANATION OF THE VOIR DIRE PROCESS ....................................19
202.1 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................21
202.2 EXPLANATION OF THE TRIAL PROCEDURE ......................................22
202.3 NOTE-TAKING BY JURORS .....................................................................28
202.4 JUROR QUESTIONS ...................................................................................29
202.5 JURY TO BE GUIDED BY OFFICIAL ENGLISH
TRANSLATION/INTERPRETATION ..................................................................31
SECTION 300 EVIDENCE INSTRUCTIONS ..................................................32
301.1 DEPOSITION TESTIMONY, INTERROGATORIES, STIPULATED
TESTIMONY, STIPULATIONS, AND ADMISSIONS (FROM 1.13(A)) ...........33
301.2 INSTRUCTION WHEN FIRST ITEM OF DOCUMENTARY,
PHOTOGRAPHIC, OR PHYSICAL EVIDENCE IS ADMITTED .......................35
301.3 INSTRUCTION WHEN EVIDENCE IS FIRST PUBLISHED TO
JURORS ...................................................................................................................36
301.4 INSTRUCTION REGARDING VISUAL OR DEMONSTRATIVE
AIDS ........................................................................................................................37
301.5 EVIDENCE ADMITTED FOR A LIMITED PURPOSE ............................38
301.6 JURY TO BE GUIDED BY OFFICIAL ENGLISH
TRANSLATION/INTERPRETATION ..................................................................39
301.7 JURY TO BE GUIDED BY OFFICIAL ENGLISH TRANSCRIPT OF
RECORDING IN FOREIGN LANGUAGE (ACCURACY NOT IN DISPUTE) .41
301.8 JURY TO BE GUIDED BY OFFICIAL ENGLISH
TRANSLATION/INTERPRETATION TRANSCRIPT OF RECORDING IN
FOREIGN LANGUAGE (ACCURACY IN DISPUTE) ........................................42
301.9 DISREGARD STRICKEN MATTER..........................................................43
301.10 INSTRUCTION BEFORE RECESS ..........................................................44
301.11 FAILURE TO MAINTAIN EVIDENCE OR KEEP A RECORD ............45
SECTION 400 SUBSTANTIVE INSTRUCTIONS ..........................................47
416.1 BREACH OF CONTRACT INTRODUCTION ......................................50
416.2 THIRD-PARTY BENEFICIARY .................................................................51
416.3 CONTRACT FORMATION ESSENTIAL FACTUAL ELEMENTS ....52
416.4 BREACH OF CONTRACT ESSENTIAL FACTUAL ELEMENTS ......54
416.5 ORAL OR WRITTEN CONTRACT TERMS ..............................................56
416.6 CONTRACT IMPLIED IN FACT ................................................................58
416.7 CONTRACT IMPLIED IN LAW .................................................................60
416.8 CONTRACT FORMATION OFFER .......................................................62
416.9 CONTRACT FORMATION REVOCATION OF OFFER .....................64
416.10 CONTRACT FORMATION ACCEPTANCE .......................................66
416.11 CONTRACT FORMATION ACCEPTANCE BY SILENCE OR
CONDUCT ..............................................................................................................67
416.12 SUBSTANTIAL PERFORMANCE............................................................69
416.13 MODIFICATION ........................................................................................70
416.14 INTERPRETATION DISPUTED TERM(S) .........................................72
416.15 INTERPRETATION MEANING OF ORDINARY WORDS ...............74
416.16 INTERPRETATION MEANING OF DISPUTED TECHNICAL OR
SPECIAL WORDS ..................................................................................................75
416.17 INTERPRETATION CONSTRUCTION OF CONTRACT AS A
WHOLE ...................................................................................................................76
416.18 INTERPRETATION CONSTRUCTION BY CONDUCT ...................77
416.19 INTERPRETATION REASONABLE TIME ........................................78
416.20 INTERPRETATIONCONSTRUCTION AGAINST DRAFTER ......79
416.21 EXISTENCE OF CONDITIONS PRECEDENT DISPUTED ...................81
416.22 OCCURRENCE OF AGREED CONDITION PRECEDENT ....................83
416.23 ANTICIPATORY BREACH .......................................................................84
416.27 AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE UNDUE INFLUENCE .............................92
416.28 AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE FRAUD ....................................................93
416.29 AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE NEGLIGENT MISREPRESENTATION 95
416.30 AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE WAIVER ..................................................96
416.31 AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE NOVATION .............................................98
416.32 AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS .................99
416.33 AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE EQUITABLE ESTOPPEL .......................100
416.34 [RESERVED FOR FUTURE USE] ..........................................................102
416.35 AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE JUDICIAL ESTOPPEL ...........................103
416.36 AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE RATIFICATION ......................................104
416.37 GOODS SOLD AND DELIVERED .........................................................105
416.38 OPEN ACCOUNT .....................................................................................107
416.39 ACCOUNT STATED ................................................................................109
416.40 MONEY HAD AND RECEIVED .............................................................111
416.41 MISAPPROPRIATION OF TRADE SECRETS ......................................112
416.42 BREACH OF DUTY TO DISCLOSE RESIDENTIAL ...................115
416.43 PIERCING THE CORPORATE VEIL .................................................116
416.44 LEGAL STATUS OF ENTITIES..........................................................118
416.46 PROMISSORY ESTOPPEL ..................................................................119
SECTION 500 DAMAGES ..............................................................................121
504.1 INTRODUCTION TO CONTRACT DAMAGES .....................................122
504.2 BREACH OF CONTRACT DAMAGES ....................................................123
504.3 LOST PROFITS ...........................................................................................125
504.4 DAMAGES FOR COMPLETE DESTRUCTION OF BUSINESS ............127
504.5 OWNER’S DAMAGES FOR BREACH OF CONTRACT TO
CONSTRUCT IMPROVEMENTS ON REAL PROPERTY ...............................128
504.6 OBLIGATION TO PAY MONEY ONLY ..................................................130
504.7 BUYER’S DAMAGES FOR BREACH OF CONTRACT FOR SALE OF
REAL PROPERTY ................................................................................................131
504.8 SELLER’S DAMAGES FOR BREACH OF CONTRACT TO PURCHASE
REAL PROPERTY ................................................................................................134
504.9 MITIGATION OF DAMAGES ...................................................................136
504.10 PRESENT CASH VALUE OF FUTURE DAMAGES ............................138
504.11 NOMINAL DAMAGES ............................................................................139
SECTION 600 SUBSTANTIVE INSTRUCTIONS GENERAL ...............140
601.1 WEIGHING THE EVIDENCE ..................................................................141
601.2 BELIEVABILITY OF WITNESSES ..........................................................142
601.3 JURY TO BE GUIDED BY OFFICIAL ENGLISH
TRANSLATION/INTERPRETATION ................................................................144
601.4 MULTIPLE CLAIMS, NUMEROUS PARTIES, CONSOLIDATED
CASES ...................................................................................................................145
601.5 CONCLUDING INSTRUCTION (BEFORE FINAL ARGUMENT) ........146
SECTION 700 CLOSING INSTRUCTIONS ..................................................147
SECTION 700 CLOSING INSTRUCTIONS ..................................................148
SECTION 800 SUPPLEMENTAL MATTERS ...............................................152
801.1 JUROR QUESTIONS DURING DELIBERATIONS ...............................153
801.2 READ-BACK OF TESTIMONY ................................................................154
801.3 JURY DEADLOCKED ..............................................................................156
801.4 INSTRUCTION UPON DISCHARGE OF JURY ......................................157
APPENDIX A ........................................................................................................158
APPENDIX B INTRODUCTORY GUIDE ..........................................................159
FORM 416.2 MODEL FORM OF VERDICT FOR THIRD-PARTY
BENEFICIARY OF CONTRACT CLAIM ..........................................................160
FORM 416.3 MODEL FORM OF VERDICT FOR FORMATION OF
CONTRACT ..........................................................................................................161
FORM 416.4. MODEL FORM OF VERDICT FOR BREACH OF
CONTRACT ..........................................................................................................163
FORM 416.5 MODEL FORM OF VERDICT FOR ORAL OR WRITTEN
CONTRACT TERMS ............................................................................................165
FORM 416.6 MODEL FORM OF VERDICT FOR CONTRACT IMPLIED IN
FACT ......................................................................................................................166
FORM 416.7 MODEL FORM OF VERDICT FOR CONTRACT IMPLIED IN
LAW .......................................................................................................................168
FORM 416.8 MODEL FORM OF VERDICT FOR CONTRACT
FORMATIONOFFER .......................................................................................170
FORM 416.10 MODEL FORM OF VERDICT FOR CONTRACT
FORMATIONACCEPTANCE..........................................................................172
FORM 416.11 MODEL FORM OF VERDICT FOR CONTRACT FORMATION
ACCEPTANCE BY SILENCE OR CONDUCT .............................................174
FORM 416.12 MODEL FORM OF VERDICT FOR SUBSTANTIAL
PERFORMANCE OF CONTRACT .....................................................................175
FORM 416.13 MODEL FORM OF VERDICT FOR MODIFICATION OF
TERM(S) OF CONTRACT ...................................................................................176
FORM 416.14 MODEL FORM OF VERDICT FOR INTERPRETATION
DISPUTED TERM(S) ...........................................................................................177
FORM 416.15 MODEL FORM OF VERDICT FOR INTERPRETATION
MEANING OF ORDINARY WORDS .................................................................178
FORM 416.16 MODEL FORM OF VERDICT FOR INTERPRETATION
MEANING OF DISPUTED TECHNICAL OR SPECIAL WORDS ...................179
FORM 416.17 MODEL FORM OF VERDICT FOR INTERPRETATION
CONSTRUCTION OF CONTRACT AS A WHOLE ..........................................180
FORM 416.18 MODEL FORM OF VERDICT FOR INTERPRETATION
CONSTRUCTION BY CONDUCT ......................................................................181
FORM 416.19 MODEL FORM OF VERDICT FOR INTERPRETATION OF
CONTRACTREASONABLE TIME .................................................................182
FORM 416.20 MODEL FORM OF VERDICT FOR INTERPRETATION
CONSTRUCTION AGAINST DRAFTER ...........................................................183
FORM 416.21 MODEL FORM OF VERDICT FOR EXISTENCE OF
CONDITIONS PRECEDENT DISPUTED ...........................................................184
FORM 416.22 MODEL FORM OF VERDICT FOR OCCURRENCE OF
AGREED CONDITION PRECEDENT OF CONTRACT CLAIM .....................186
FORM 416.24. MODEL FORM OF VERDICT FOR BREACH OF IMPLIED
COVENANT OF GOOD FAITH AND FAIR DEALING ...................................187
FORM 416.25. MODEL FORM OF VERDICT FOR AFFIRMATIVE
DEFENSEMUTUAL MISTAKE OF FACT .....................................................189
FORM 416.32(A) MODEL FORM OF VERDICT FOR AFFIRMATIVE
DEFENSESTATUTE OF LIMITATIONS .......................................................190
FORM 416.32. (B) MODEL FORM OF VERDICT FOR STATUTE OF
LIMITATIONS DEFENSE IN A BREACH OF CONTRACT CASE .................191
FORM 416.33 MODEL FORM OF VERDICT FOR AFFIRMATIVE
DEFENSEEQUITABLE ESTOPPEL ...............................................................192
FORM 416.35 MODEL FORM OF VERDICT FOR AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
OF CONTRACT CLAIMJUDICIAL ESTOPPEL ...........................................194
FORM 416.36 MODEL FORM OF VERDICT FOR AFFIRMATIVE
DEFENSERATIFICATION ..............................................................................195
FORM 416.37 MODEL FORM OF VERDICT FOR GOODS SOLD AND
DELIVERED .........................................................................................................197
FORM 416.38 MODEL FORM OF VERDICT FOR OPEN ACCOUNT ...........198
FORM 416.39 MODEL FORM OF VERDICT FOR ACCOUNT STATED ......200
FORM 416.42 MODEL FORM OF VERDICT FOR BREACH OF DUTY TO
DISCLOSERESIDENTIAL ..............................................................................202
FORM 416.43 MODEL FORM OF VERDICT FOR PIERCING THE
CORPORATE VEIL IN CONTRACT CLAIM ....................................................204
FORM 416.44 MODEL FORM OF VERDICT FOR LEGAL STATUS OF
ENTITIES IN A CONTRACT CLAIM ................................................................206
FORM 416.46 MODEL FORM OF VERDICT FOR PROMISSORY ESTOPPEL
................................................................................................................................207
SECTION 100 OATHS
101.1 Oath of Jurors Before Voir Dire
101.2 Oath of Jurors After Voir Dire
101.3 Oath of a Witness
101.4 Oath of an Interpreter
101.1 OATH OF JURORS BEFORE VOIR DIRE
Do you solemnly swear or affirm that you will answer truthfully all
questions asked of you as prospective jurors [so help you God]?
101.2 OATH OF JUROR AFTER VOIR DIRE
Do you solemnly swear or affirm that you will well and truly try this
case between the [plaintiff(s)] [petitioner(s)] and [defendant(s)]
[respondent(s)], and a true verdict render according to the law and evidence
[so help you God]?
101.3 OATH OF A WITNESS
Do you solemnly swear or affirm that the evidence you are about to give
will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth [so help you
God]?
101.4 OATH OF AN INTERPRETER
Do you solemnly swear or affirm that you will make a true
interpretation to the witness of all questions or statements made to [him] [her]
in a language which that person understands, and a true interpretation of the
witness’ statements into the English language [so help you God]?
SECTION 200 PRELIMINARY INSTRUCTIONS
Qualifications Instruction
A. During Jury Selection
201.1 Description of the Case
201.2 Introduction of Participants and Their Roles
201.3 Explanation of the Voir Dire Process
B. After Jury Selected and Sworn
202.1 Introduction
202.2 Explanation of the Trial Procedure
202.3 Note-Taking by Jurors
202.4 Juror Questions
202.5 Jury to Be Guided by Official English
Translation/Interpretation
QUALIFICATIONS INSTRUCTION
Many of you have electronic devices such as cell phones, smartphones,
tablets, and laptops. Even though you have not yet been selected as a juror,
there are some strict rules that you must follow about electronic devices.
When you are called to a courtroom, the judge will give you specific
instructions on the use of electronic devices. These rules are so important that
the judge may tell you that you must turn off your cell phone or other
electronic devices completely or that you cannot have your cell phone or
electronic devices in the courtroom. If someone needs to contact you in case of
an emergency, the judge will provide you with a phone number where you can
receive messages.
If the trial judge allows you to keep your cell phones, computers, or
other electronic devices, you cannot use them to take photographs, video
recordings, or audio recordings of the proceedings in the courtroom or your
fellow jurors. You must not use them to search the Internet or to find out
anything related to any cases in the courthouse.
Why is this restriction imposed? This restriction is imposed because
jurors must decide the case without distraction and only on the evidence
presented in the courtroom. I know that, for some of you, these restrictions
affect your normal daily activities and may require a change in the way you
are used to communicating and perhaps even in the way you are used to
learning.
If you investigate, research, or make inquiries on your own, the trial
judge has no way to make sure that the information you obtain is proper for
the case. The parties likewise have no opportunity to dispute or challenge the
accuracy of what you find. Any independent investigation by a juror unfairly
and improperly prevents the parties from having that opportunity our
judicial system promises.
Between now and when you have been discharged from jury duty by the
judge, you must not discuss any information about your jury service with
anyone, including friends, co-workers, and family members. You may tell
those who need to know where you are that you have been called for jury
duty. If you are picked for a jury, you may tell people that you have been
picked for a jury and how long the case may take. However, you must not give
anyone any information about the case itself or the people involved in the
case. You must also warn people not to try to say anything to you or write to
you about your jury service or the case. This includes face-to-face, phone or
computer communications.
I want to stress that you must not use electronic devices or computers to
talk about this case, including tweeting, texting, blogging, e-mailing, posting
information on a website or chat room, or any other means at all. Do not send
or accept any messages, including e-mail and text messages, about your jury
service. You must not disclose your thoughts about your jury service or ask
for advice on how to decide any case.
The judge will tell you when you are released from this instruction.
Remember, these rules are designed to guarantee a fair trial. It is important
that you understand the rules as well as the impact on our system of justice if
you fail to follow them. If it is determined that any one of you has violated
this rule, and conducted any type of independent research or investigation, it
may result in a mistrial. A mistrial would require the case to be tried again at
great expense to the parties and the judicial system. The judge may also
impose a penalty upon any juror who violates this instruction. All of us are
depending on you to follow these rules, so that there will be a fair and lawful
resolution of every case.
NOTE ON USE
This instruction should be given in addition to and at the conclusion of the
instructions normally given to the prospective jurors. The portion of this
instruction dealing with communication with others and outside research may need
to be modified to include other specified means of communication or research as
technology develops.
A. During Jury Selection
201.1 DESCRIPTION OF THE CASE
(PRIOR TO VOIR DIRE)
Welcome. [I] [The clerk] will now administer your oath.
Now that you have been sworn, I’d like to give you an idea about what
we are here to do.
This is a civil trial. A civil trial is different from a criminal case, where a
defendant is charged by the state prosecutor with committing a crime. The
subject of a civil trial is a disagreement between people or companies [or
others, as appropriate], where the claims of one or more of these parties have
been brought to court to be resolved. It is called “a trial of a lawsuit.”
This is a case about (insert brief description of claim(s) and defense(s)
brought to trial in this case).*
The incident involved in this case occurred on (date) at (location). (Add
any other information relevant to voir dire).
The principal witnesses who will testify in this case are (list witnesses).
NOTE ON USE FOR 201.1
*See, for example, 401.2.
201.2 INTRODUCTION OF PARTICIPANTS AND THEIR ROLES
Who are the people here and what do they do?
Judge/Court: I am the Judge. You may hear people occasionally refer to
me as “The Court.” That is the formal name for my role. My job is to
maintain order and decide how to apply the rules of the law to the trial. I will
also explain various rules to you that you will need to know in order to do
your job as the jury. It is my job to remain neutral on the issues of this
lawsuit.
Parties: A party who files a lawsuit is called the Plaintiff. A party that is
sued is called the Defendant.
Attorneys: The attorneys have the job of representing their clients. That
means they speak for their client here at the trial. They have taken oaths as
attorneys to do their best and to follow the rules for their profession.
Plaintiff’s Counsel: The attorney on this side of the courtroom, (introduce
by name), represents (client name) and is the person who filed the lawsuit here
at the courthouse. [His] [Her] job is to present [his] [her] client’s side of things
to you. [He] [She] and [his] [her] client will be referred to most of the time as
“the plaintiff. (Attorney name), will you please introduce who is sitting at the
table with you?
[Plaintiff without Counsel: (Introduce claimant by name), on this side of the
courtroom, is the person who filed the lawsuit at the courthouse. (Claimant) is
not represented by an attorney and will present [his] [her] side of things to
you [himself] [herself].]
Defendant’s Counsel: The attorney on this side of the courtroom,
(introduce by name), represents (client name), the one who has been sued. [His]
[Her] job is to present [his] [her] client’s side of things to you. [He] [She] and
[his] [her] client will usually be referred to here as “the defendant.” (Attorney
name), will you please introduce who is sitting at the table with you?
[Defendant’s Counsel: The attorney on this side of the courtroom,
(introduce by name), represents (client name), the one who has been sued. [His]
[Her] job is to present [his] [her] client’s side of things to you. [He] [She] and
[his] [her] client will usually be referred to here as “the defendant. [His]
[Her] client (defendant uninsured or underinsured motorist carrier) is (claimant’s
name) motor vehicle insurance company and provided [him] [her] [uninsured]
[underinsured] motorist coverage, which may be available to pay some or all
of the damages that may be awarded.]*
*Use the bracketed paragraph above when the case involves an uninsured
or underinsured motorist carrier.
[Defendant without Counsel: (Introduce defendant by name), on this side of
the courtroom, is the one who has been sued. (Defendant) is not represented by
an attorney and will present [his] [her] side of things to you [himself]
[herself].]
Court Clerk: This person sitting in front of me, (name), is the court clerk.
[He] [She] is here to assist me with some of the mechanics of the trial process,
including the numbering and collection of the exhibits that are introduced in
the course of the trial.
Court Reporter: The person sitting at the stenographic machine, (name),
is the court reporter. [His] [Her] job is to keep an accurate legal record of
everything we say and do during this trial.
Bailiff: The person over there, (name), is the bailiff. [His] [Her] job is to
maintain order and security in the courtroom. The bailiff is also my
representative to the jury. Anything you need or any problems that come up
for you during the course of the trial should be brought to [him] [her].
However, the bailiff cannot answer any of your questions about the case. Only
I can do that.
Jury: Last, but not least, is the jury, which we will begin to select in a
few moments from among all of you. The jury’s job will be to decide what the
facts are and what the facts mean. Jurors should be as neutral as possible at
this point and have no fixed opinion about the lawsuit.
In order to have a fair and lawful trial, there are rules that all jurors
must follow. A basic rule is that jurors must decide the case only on the
evidence presented in the courtroom. You must not communicate with
anyone, including friends and family members, about this case, the people and
places involved, or your jury service. You must not disclose your thoughts
about this case or ask for advice on how to decide this case.
I want to stress that this rule means you must not use electronic devices
or computers to communicate about this case, including tweeting, texting,
blogging, e-mailing, posting information on a website or chat room, or any
other means at all. Do not send or accept any messages to or from anyone
about this case or your jury service.
You must not do any research or look up words, names, [maps,] or
anything else that may have anything to do with this case. This includes
reading newspapers, watching television or using a computer, cell phone, the
Internet, any electronic device, or any other means at all, to get information
related to this case or the people and places involved in this case. This applies
whether you are in the courthouse, at home, or anywhere else.
Many of you may have cell phones, tablets, laptops, or other electronic
devices with you here in the courtroom.**
**The trial judge should select one of the following two alternative
instructions explaining the rules governing jurors’ use of electronic devices,
as explained in Note on Use 1.
Alternative A: [All cell phones, computers, tablets, or other types of
electronic devices must be turned off while you are in the courtroom. Turned
off means that the phone or other electronic device is actually off and not in a
silent or vibrating mode. You may use these devices during recesses, but even
then you may not use your cell phone or electronic device to find out any
information about the case or communicate with anyone about the case or the
people involved in the case. Do not take photographs, video recordings, or
audio recordings of the proceedings or of your fellow jurors. After each
recess, please double check to make sure your cell phone or electronic device
is turned off. At the end of the case, while you are deliberating, you must not
communicate with anyone outside the jury room. You cannot have in the jury
room any cell phones, computers, or other electronic devices. If someone
needs to contact you in an emergency, the court can receive messages and
deliver them to you without delay. A contact phone number will be provided
to you.]
Alternative B: [You cannot have any cell phones, tablets, laptops, or
other electronic devices in the courtroom. You may use these devices during
recesses, but even then you may not use your cell phone or electronic device to
find out any information about the case or communicate with anyone about
the case or the people involved in the case. Do not take photographs, video
recordings, or audio recordings of the proceedings or your fellow jurors. At
the end of the case, while you are deliberating, you must not communicate
with anyone outside the jury room. If someone needs to contact you in an
emergency, the court can receive messages and deliver them to you without
delay. A contact phone number will be provided to you.]
What are the reasons for these rules? These rules are imposed because
jurors must decide the case without distraction and only on the evidence
presented in the courtroom. If you investigate, research, or make inquiries on
your own outside of the courtroom, the trial judge has no way to make sure
that the information you obtain is proper for the case. The parties likewise
have no opportunity to dispute or challenge the accuracy of what you find.
That is contrary to our judicial system, which assures every party the right to
ask questions about and challenge the evidence being considered against it
and to present argument with respect to that evidence. Any independent
investigation by a juror unfairly and improperly prevents the parties from
having that opportunity our judicial system promises.
Any juror who violates these restrictions jeopardizes the fairness of
these proceedings, and a mistrial could result that would require the entire
trial process to start over. A mistrial is a tremendous expense and
inconvenience to the parties, the court, and the taxpayers. If you violate these
rules, you may be held in contempt of court, and face sanctions, such as
serving time in jail, paying a fine or both.
All of your communications with courtroom personnel, or me, will be
part of the record of these proceedings. That means those communications
shall either be made in open court with the court reporter present or, if they
are in writing, the writing will be filed with the court clerk. This means, if you
are outside the courtroom, any communication with me must be in writing,
unsigned, and handed directly to the bailiff. Do not share the content of the
writing with anyone, including other jurors. I have instructed the courtroom
personnel that any communications you have with them outside of my
presence must be reported to me, and I will tell the parties [and their
attorneys] about any communication from you that I believe may be of
interest to the parties [and their attorneys].
However, you may communicate directly with courtroom personnel
about matters concerning your comfort and safety, such as [juror parking]
[location of break areas] [how and when to assemble for duty] [dress] [what
personal items can be brought into the courthouse or jury room] [list any
other types of routine ex parte communications permitted].
If you become aware of any violation of these instructions or any other
instruction I give in this case, you must tell me by giving a note to the bailiff.
NOTES ON USE FOR 201.2
1. Florida Rule of Judicial Administration 2.451 directs trial judges to
instruct jurors on the use of cell phones and other electronic devices. During the
trial, the trial judge may remove the jurors’ cell phones or other electronic devices.
The trial judge also has the option to allow the jurors to keep the cell phones and
electronic devices during trial until the jurors begin deliberations. Rule 2.451
prohibits jurors from using the cell phones or electronic devices to find out
information about the case or to communicate with others about the case. The
jurors also cannot use the electronic devices to record, photograph, or videotape
the proceedings. In recognition of the discretion rule 2.451 gives trial judges, this
instruction provides two alternatives: (A) requiring jurors to turn off electronic
devices during court proceedings and removing their cell phones and electronic
devices during deliberations; or (B) removing the cell phones and electronic
devices during all proceedings and deliberations. These instructions may be
modified to fit the practices of a trial judge in a particular courtroom. These
instructions are not intended to limit the discretion of the trial court to control the
proceedings.
2. The portion of this instruction dealing with communication with
others and outside research may be modified to include other specified means of
communication or research as technology develops.
3. Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.431(i)(2) requires the court, by
pretrial order or statement on the record with opportunity for objection, to set forth
the scope of routine, ex parte communications. Rule 1.431(i)(3) mandates an
instruction during voir dire regarding the limitations on jurors’ communications
with the court and courtroom personnel. The court should make sure that
courtroom personnel are also aware of the limitations on their communications
with jurors.
4. The introduction of the uninsured/underinsured motorist carrier is
required because the plaintiffs are entitled to have the jury know that the joined
carrier is the plaintiffs’ uninsured/underinsured carrier. Lamz v. Geico General
Insurance Co., 803 So. 2d 593 (Fla. 2001); Medina v. Peralta, 724 So. 2d 1188
(Fla. 1999).
201.3 EXPLANATION OF THE VOIR DIRE PROCESS
Voir Dire:
The last thing I want to do, before we begin to select the jury, is to
explain to you how the selection process works.
Questions/Challenges: This is the part of the case where the parties and
their lawyers have the opportunity to get to know a little bit about you, in
order to help them come to their own conclusions about your ability to be fair
and impartial, so they can decide who they think should be the jurors in this
case.
How we go about that is as follows: First, I’ll ask some general questions
of you. Then, each of the lawyers will have more specific questions that they
will ask of you. After they have asked all of their questions, I will meet with
them and they will tell me their choices for jurors. Each side can ask that I
exclude a person from serving on a jury if they can give me a reason to believe
that he or she might be unable to be fair and impartial. That is what is called
a challenge for cause. The lawyers also have a certain number of what are
called peremptory challenges, by which they may exclude a person from the
jury without giving a reason. By this process of elimination, the remaining
persons are selected as the jury. It may take more than one conference among
the parties, their attorneys, and me before the final selections are made.
Purpose of Questioning: The questions that you will be asked during this
process are not intended to embarrass you or unnecessarily pry into your
personal affairs, but it is important that the parties and their attorneys know
enough about you to make this important decision. If a question is asked that
you would prefer not to answer in front of the whole courtroom, just let me
know and you can come up here and give your answer just in front of the
attorneys and me. If you have a question of either the attorneys or me, don’t
hesitate to let me know.
Response to Questioning: There are no right or wrong answers to the
questions that will be asked of you. The only thing that I ask is that you
answer the questions as frankly and as honestly and as completely as you can.
You [will take] [have taken] an oath to answer all questions truthfully and
completely and you must do so. Remaining silent when you have information
you should disclose is a violation of that oath as well. If a juror violates this
oath, it not only may result in having to try the case all over again but also can
result in civil and criminal penalties against a juror personally. So, again, it is
very important that you be as honest and complete with your answers as you
possibly can. If you don’t understand the question, please raise your hand and
ask for an explanation or clarification.
In sum, this is a process to assist the parties and their attorneys to select
a fair and impartial jury. All of the questions they ask you are for this
purpose. If, for any reason, you do not think you can be a fair and impartial
juror, you must tell us.
NOTE ON USE FOR 201.3
The publication of this recommended instruction is not intended to intrude
upon the trial judge’s own style and manner of delivery. It may be useful in
cataloging the subjects to be covered in an introductory instruction.
B. After Jury Selected and Sworn
202.1 INTRODUCTION
Administer oath:
You have now taken an oath to serve as jurors in this trial. Before we
begin, I am going to tell you about the rules of law that apply to this case and
let you know what you can expect as the trial proceeds.
It is my intention to give you [all] [most] of the rules of law but it might
be that I will not know for sure all of the law that will apply in this case until
all of the evidence is presented. However, I can anticipate most of the law and
give it to you at the beginning of the trial so that you will better understand
what to be looking for while the evidence is presented. If I later decide that
different or additional law applies to the case, I will tell you. In any event, at
the end of the evidence I will give you the final instructions on which you must
base your verdict. At that time, you will have a complete written set of the
instructions so you do not have to memorize what I am about to tell you.
(Continue with the Substantive law, Damages, and General instructions
from the applicable sections of this book, followed by the applicable parts of
202.2 through 202.5)
NOTE ON USE FOR 202.1
The committee recommends giving the jury at the beginning of the trial a
complete as possible set of instructions on the Substantive law, Damages, and
General Instructions.
202.2 EXPLANATION OF THE TRIAL PROCEDURE
Now that you have heard the law, I want to let you know what you can
expect as the trial proceeds.
Opening Statements: In a few moments, the attorneys will each have a
chance to make what are called opening statements. In an opening statement,
an attorney is allowed to give you [his] [her] views about what the evidence
will be in the trial and what you are likely to see and hear in the testimony.
Evidentiary Phase: After the attorneys’ opening statements the plaintiffs
will bring their witnesses and evidence to you.
Evidence: Evidence is the information that the law allows you to see or
hear in deciding this case. Evidence includes the testimony of the witnesses,
documents, and anything else that I instruct you to consider.
Witnesses: A witness is a person who takes an oath to tell the truth and
then answers attorneys’ questions for the jury. The answering of attorneys’
questions by witnesses is called “giving testimony.” Testimony means
statements that are made when someone has sworn an oath to tell the truth.
The plaintiff’s lawyer will normally ask a witness the questions first.
That is called direct examination. Then the defense lawyer may ask the same
witness additional questions about whatever the witness has testified to. That
is called cross-examination. Certain documents or other evidence may also be
shown to you during direct or cross-examination. After the plaintiff’s
witnesses have testified, the defendant will have the opportunity to put
witnesses on the stand and go through the same process. Then the plaintiff’s
lawyer gets to do cross-examination. The process is designed to be fair to both
sides.
It is important that you remember that testimony comes from witnesses.
The attorneys do not give testimony and they are not themselves witnesses.
Objections: Sometimes the attorneys will disagree about the rules for
trial procedure when a question is asked of a witness. When that happens, one
of the lawyers may make what is called an “objection.” The rules for a trial
can be complicated, and there are many reasons for attorneys to object. You
should simply wait for me to decide how to proceed. If I say that an objection
is “sustained,” that means the witness may not answer the question. If I say
that the objection is “overruled,” that means the witness may answer the
question.
When there is an objection and I make a decision, you must not assume
from that decision that I have any particular opinion other than that the rules
for conducting a trial are being correctly followed. If I say a question may not
be asked or answered, you must not try to guess what the answer would have
been. That is against the rules, too.
Side Bar Conferences: Sometimes I will need to speak to the attorneys
about legal elements of the case that are not appropriate for the jury to hear.
The attorneys and I will try to have as few of these conferences as possible
while you are giving us your valuable time in the courtroom. But, if we do
have to have such a conference during testimony, we will try to hold the
conference at the side of my desk so that we do not have to take a break and
ask you to leave the courtroom.
Recesses: Breaks in an ongoing trial are usually called “recesses.”
During a recess you still have your duties as a juror and must follow the rules,
even while having coffee, at lunch, or at home.
Instructions Before Closing Arguments: After all the evidence has been
presented to you, I will instruct you in the law that you must follow. It is
important that you remember these instructions to assist you in evaluating the
final attorney presentations, which come next, and, later, during your
deliberations, to help you correctly sort through the evidence to reach your
decision.
Closing Arguments: The attorneys will then have the opportunity to
make their final presentations to you, which are called closing arguments.
Final Instructions: After you have heard the closing arguments, I will
instruct you further in the law as well as explain to you the procedures you
must follow to decide the case.
Deliberations: After you hear the final jury instructions, you will go to
the jury room and discuss and decide the questions I have put on your verdict
form. [You will have a copy of the jury instructions to use during your
discussions.] The discussions you have and the decisions you make are usually
called “jury deliberations.” Your deliberations are absolutely private and
neither I nor anyone else will be with you in the jury room.
Verdict: When you have finished answering the questions, you will give
the verdict form to the bailiff, and we will all return to the courtroom where
your verdict will be read. When that is completed, you will be released from
your assignment as a juror.
What are the rules?
Finally, before we begin the trial, I want to give you just a brief
explanation of rules you must follow as the case proceeds.
Keeping an Open Mind: You must pay close attention to the testimony
and other evidence as it comes into the trial. However, you must avoid
forming any final opinion or telling anyone else your views on the case until
you begin your deliberations. This rule requires you to keep an open mind
until you have heard all of the evidence and is designed to prevent you from
influencing how your fellow jurors think until they have heard all of the
evidence and had an opportunity to form their own opinions. The time and
place for coming to your final opinions and speaking about them with your
fellow jurors is during deliberations in the jury room, after all of the evidence
has been presented, closing arguments have been made, and I have instructed
you on the law. It is important that you hear all of the facts and that you hear
the law and how to apply it before you start deciding anything.
Consider Only the Evidence: It is the things you hear and see in this
courtroom that matter in this trial. The law tells us that a juror can consider
only the testimony and other evidence that all the other jurors have also heard
and seen in the presence of the judge and the lawyers. Doing anything else is
wrong and is against the law. That means that you must not do any work or
investigation of your own about the case. You must not obtain on your own
any information about the case or about anyone involved in the case, from any
source whatsoever. This includes reading newspapers, watching television or
using a computer, cell phone, the Internet, any electronic device, or any other
means at all, to get information related to this case or the people and places
involved in this case. This applies whether you are in the courthouse, at home,
or anywhere else. You must not visit places mentioned in the trial or use the
internet to look at maps or pictures to see any place discussed during trial.
Do not provide any information about this case to anyone, including
friends or family members. Do not let anyone, including the closest family
members, make comments to you or ask questions about the trial. Jurors
must not have discussions of any sort with friends or family members about
the case or the people and places involved. So, do not let even the closest
family members make comments to you or ask questions about the trial. In
this age of electronic communication, I want to stress again that just as you
must not talk about this case face-to-face, you must not talk about this case by
using an electronic device. You must not use phones, tablets, computers or
other electronic devices to communicate. Do not send or accept any messages
related to this case or your jury service. Do not discuss this case or ask for
advice by any means at all, including posting information on an Internet
website, chat room or blog.
No Mid-Trial Discussions: When we are in a recess, do not discuss
anything about the trial or the case with each other or with anyone else. If
attorneys approach you, don’t speak with them. The law says they are to
avoid contact with you. If an attorney will not look at you or speak to you, do
not be offended or form a conclusion about that behavior. The attorney is not
supposed to interact with jurors outside of the courtroom and is only
following the rules. The attorney is not being impolite. If an attorney or
anyone else does try to speak with you or says something about the case in
your presence, please inform the bailiff immediately.
Only the Jury Decides: Only you get to deliberate and answer the verdict
questions at the end of the trial. I will not intrude into your deliberations at
all. I am required to be neutral. You should not assume that I prefer one
decision over another. You should not try to guess what my opinion is about
any part of the case. It would be wrong for you to conclude that anything I say
or do means that I am for one side or another in the trial. Discussing and
deciding the facts is your job alone.
Use of Cell Phones and Electronic Devices in the Courtroom and Jury
Room:*
*The trial judge should select one of the following two alternative
instructions explaining the rules governing jurors’ use of electronic devices,
as explained in Note on Use 3.
Alternative A: [All cell phones or other types of electronic devices must
be turned off while you are in the courtroom. Turned off means that the
phone or other electronic device is actually off and not in a silent or vibrating
mode. You may use these devices during recesses, but even then you may not
use your phone or electronic device to find out any information about the case
or communicate with anyone about the case or the people involved in the case.
Do not take photographs, video recordings or audio recordings of the
proceedings or your fellow jurors. After each recess, please double check to
make sure your device is turned off. At the end of the case, while you are
deliberating, you must not communicate with anyone outside the jury room.
You cannot have in the jury room any cell phones, computers, or other
electronic devices. If there are breaks in the deliberations, I may allow you to
communicate with your family or friends, but do not communicate about the
case or your deliberations. If someone needs to contact you in an emergency,
the court can receive messages and deliver them to you without delay. The
court’s phone number will be provided to you.]
Alternative B: [You cannot have any cell phones, computers, or other
electronic devices in the courtroom. You may use these devices during
recesses, but even then you may not use your phone or electronic device to
find out any information about the case or communicate with anyone about
the case or the people involved in the case. Do not take photographs, video
recordings or audio recordings of the proceedings or your fellow jurors. At
the end of the case, while you are deliberating, you must not communicate
with anyone outside the jury room. If there are breaks in the deliberations, I
may allow you to communicate with your family or friends, but do not
communicate about the case or your deliberations. If someone needs to
contact you in an emergency, the court can receive messages and deliver them
to you without delay. The court’s phone number will be provided to you.]
NOTES ON USE FOR 202.2
1. This instruction is intended for situations in which at the end of the
case the jury is going to be instructed before closing argument. The committee
strongly recommends instructing the jury before closing argument. If, however, the
court is going to instruct the jury after closing argument, this instruction will have
to be amended.
2. The publication of this recommended instruction is not intended to
intrude upon the trial judge’s own style and manner of delivery. It may be useful in
cataloging the subjects to be covered in an introductory instruction.
3. Florida Rule of Judicial Administration 2.451 directs trial judges to
instruct jurors on the use of cell phones and other electronic devices. During the
trial, the trial judge may remove the jurors’ cell phones or other electronic devices.
The trial judge also has the option to allow the jurors to keep the cell phones and
electronic devices during trial until the jurors begin deliberations. Rule 2.451
prohibits jurors from using the cell phones or electronic devices to find out
information about the case or to communicate with others about the case. The
jurors also cannot use the electronic devices to record, photograph, or videotape
the proceedings. In recognition of the discretion rule 2.451 gives trial judges, this
instruction provides two alternatives. The trial judge should give the jurors one of
the following alternative instructions: (A) requiring jurors to turn off electronic
devices during court proceedings and removing their phones and electronic devices
during deliberations; or (B) removing the cell phones and electronic devices during
all proceedings and deliberations. These instructions may be modified to fit the
practices of a trial judge in a particular courtroom. These instructions are not
intended to limit the discretion of the trial court to control the proceedings.
4. The portion of this instruction dealing with communication with
others and outside research may be modified to include other specified means of
communication or research as technology develops.
202.3 NOTE-TAKING BY JURORS
If you would like to take notes during the trial, you may do so. On the
other hand, of course, you are not required to take notes if you do not want to.
That will be left up to you individually.
You will be provided with a note pad and a pen for use if you wish to
take notes. Any notes that you take will be for your personal use. However,
you should not take them with you from the courtroom. During recesses, the
bailiff will take possession of your notes and will return them to you when we
reconvene. After you have completed your deliberations, the bailiff will collect
your notes, which will be immediately destroyed. No one will ever read your
notes.
If you take notes, do not get so involved in note-taking that you become
distracted from the proceedings. Your notes should be used only as aids to
your memory.
Whether or not you take notes, you should rely on your memory of the
evidence and you should not be unduly influenced by the notes of other jurors.
Notes are not entitled to any greater weight than each juror’s memory of the
evidence.
NOTES ON USE FOR 202.3
1. The court should furnish all jurors with the necessary pads and pens
for taking notes. Additionally, it may be desirable for jurors to be furnished with
envelopes to place the notes for additional privacy.
2. Florida Rule of Judicial Administration 2.430(k) provides that at the
conclusion of the trial, the court shall collect and immediately destroy all juror
notes.
3. Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.455 provides that the trial court
may, in its discretion, authorize the use of juror notebooks to contain documents
and exhibits as an aid to the jurors in performing their duties.
4. When it is impractical to take exhibits into the jury room, this
instruction should be modified to describe how the jury will have access to the
exhibits.
202.4 JUROR QUESTIONS
Questions for the court or courtroom personnel:
During the trial, you may have a question about these proceedings. If
so, please write it down and hand it to the bailiff, who will then hand it to me.
I will review your question with the parties [and their attorneys] before
responding.
Questions for witnesses:
You also may have a question you think should be asked of a witness. If
so, there is a way for you to request that I ask the witness a question. After all
the attorneys have completed their questioning of the witness, you should
raise your hand if you have a question. I will then give you sufficient time to
write the question on a piece of paper, fold it, and give it to the bailiff, who
will pass it to me. Do not put your name on the question, show it to anyone or
discuss it with anyone.
It is important to know that if you have a question you believe should be
asked of a witness, you must raise your hand and request that I ask the
witness the question before the witness leaves the witness stand. You will not
have an opportunity to ask the witness a question once the witness leaves the
courtroom. I will then review the question with the attorneys. Under our law,
only certain evidence may be considered by a jury in determining a verdict.
You are bound by the same rules of evidence that control the attorneys’
questions. If I decide that the question may not be asked under our rules of
evidence, I will tell you. Otherwise, I will direct the question to the witness.
The attorneys may then ask follow-up questions if they wish. If there are
additional questions from jurors, we will follow the same procedure again.
By providing this procedure, I do not mean to suggest that you must or
should submit written questions for witnesses. In most cases, the lawyers will
have asked the necessary questions.
NOTES ON USE FOR 202.4
1. Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.431(i)(3) requires an instruction that
jurors’ questions must be submitted in writing to the court, which will review them
with the parties and counsel before responding. Rule 1.431 does not prevent jurors
from asking the bailiff about routine matters affecting comfort and safety. The
committee notes to rule 1.431 recognize that this instruction may need to be
modified to reflect that individual trial judges may have reasonable differences
regarding the type of communications considered routine.
2. Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.452 mandates that jurors be
permitted to submit written questions directed to witnesses or the court.
202.5 JURY TO BE GUIDED BY OFFICIAL ENGLISH
TRANSLATION/INTERPRETATION
[A] [Some] witness[es] may testify in (language to be used) which will be
interpreted in English.
The evidence you are to consider is only that provided through the
official court interpreters. Although some of you may know (language used), it
is important that all jurors consider the same evidence. Therefore, you must
accept the English interpretation. You must disregard any different meaning.
If, however, during the testimony there is a question as to the accuracy
of the English interpretation, you should bring this matter to my attention
immediately by raising your hand. You should not ask your question or make
any comment about the interpretation in the presence of the other jurors, or
otherwise share your question or concern with any of them. I will take steps to
see if your question can be answered and any discrepancy resolved. If,
however, after such efforts a discrepancy remains, I emphasize that you must
rely only upon the official English interpretation as provided by the court
interpreter and disregard any other contrary interpretation.
NOTE ON USE FOR 202.5
When instructing the jury at the beginning of the trial, this instruction should
be used in lieu of 601.3. See United States v. Franco, 136 F.3d 622, 626 (9th Cir.
1998); United States v. Fuentes-Montijo, 68 F.3d 352, 35556 (9th Cir. 1995). For
an example, see Model Instruction No. 1.
SECTION 300 EVIDENCE INSTRUCTIONS
301.1 Deposition Testimony, Interrogatories, Stipulated Testimony,
Stipulations, and Admissions
301.2 Instruction when First Item of Documentary, Photographic, or
Physical Evidence Is Admitted
301.3 Instruction when Evidence Is First Published to Jurors
301.4 Instruction Regarding Visual or Demonstrative Aids
301.5 Evidence Admitted for a Limited Purpose
301.6 Jury to Be Guided by Official English
Translation/Interpretation
301.7 Jury to Be Guided by Official English Transcript of Recording
in Foreign Language (Accuracy Not in Dispute)
301.8 Jury to Be Guided by Official English
Translation/Interpretation Transcript of Recording in
Foreign Language (Accuracy in Dispute)
301.9 Disregard Stricken Matter
301.10 Instruction Before Recess
301.11 Failure to Maintain Evidence or Keep a Record
301.1 DEPOSITION TESTIMONY, INTERROGATORIES,
STIPULATED TESTIMONY, STIPULATIONS,
AND ADMISSIONS (from 1.13(a))
a. Deposition or prior testimony:
Members of the jury, the sworn testimony of (name), given before trial,
will now be presented. You are to consider and weigh this testimony as you
would any other evidence in the case.
b. Interrogatories:
Members of the jury, answers to interrogatories will now be read to
you. Interrogatories are written questions that have been presented before
trial by one party to another. They are answered under oath. You are to
consider and weigh these questions and answers as you would any other
evidence in the case.
c. Stipulated testimony:
Members of the jury, the parties have agreed that if (name of witness)
were called as a witness, [he] [she] would testify (read or describe the
testimony). You are to consider and weigh this testimony as you would any
other evidence in the case.
d. Stipulations:
Members of the jury, the parties have agreed to certain facts. You must
accept these facts as true. (Read the agreed facts).
e. Admissions:
1. Applicable to all parties:
Members of the jury, (identify the party or parties that have admitted the
facts) [has] [have] admitted certain facts. You must accept these facts as true.
(Read the admissions).
2. Applicable to fewer than all parties:
Members of the jury, (identify the party or parties that have admitted the
facts) [has] [have] admitted certain facts. You must accept these facts as true
in deciding the issues between (identify the affected parties), but these facts
should not be used in deciding the issues between (identify the unaffected
parties). (Read the admissions).
NOTE ON USE FOR 301.1
The committee recommends that the appropriate explanation be read
immediately before a deposition, or an interrogatory and answer, stipulated
testimony, a stipulation, or an admission are read in evidence, and that no
instruction on the subject be repeated at the conclusion of the trial.
301.2 INSTRUCTION WHEN FIRST ITEM OF DOCUMENTARY,
PHOTOGRAPHIC, OR PHYSICAL
EVIDENCE IS ADMITTED
The (describe item of evidence) has now been received in evidence.
Witnesses may testify about or refer to this or any other item of evidence
during the remainder of the trial. This and all other items received in evidence
will be available to you for examination during your deliberations at the end
of the trial.
NOTE ON USE FOR 301.2
This instruction should be given when the first item of evidence is received
in evidence. It may be appropriate to repeat this instruction when items received in
evidence are not published to the jury. It may be combined with 301.5 in
appropriate circumstances. It may also be given in conjunction with 301.4 if a
witness has used exhibits which have been admitted in evidence and demonstrative
aids which have not.
301.3 INSTRUCTION WHEN EVIDENCE IS FIRST PUBLISHED TO
JURORS
The (describe item of evidence) has been received in evidence. It is being
shown to you now to help you understand the testimony of this witness and
other witnesses in the case, as well as the evidence as a whole. You may
examine (describe item of evidence) briefly now. It will also be available to you
for examination during your deliberations at the end of the trial.
NOTE ON USE FOR 301.3
This instruction may be given when an item received in evidence is handed
to the jurors. It may be combined with 301.5 in appropriate circumstances.
301.4 INSTRUCTION REGARDING VISUAL
OR DEMONSTRATIVE AIDS
a. Generally:
This witness will be using (identify demonstrative or visual aid(s)) to assist
in explaining or illustrating [his] [her] testimony. The testimony of the witness
is evidence; however, [this] [these] (identify demonstrative or visual aid(s)) [is]
[are] not to be considered as evidence in the case unless received in evidence,
and should not be used as a substitute for evidence. Only items received in
evidence will be available to you for consideration during your deliberations.
b. Specially created visual or demonstrative aids based on disputed
assumptions:
This witness will be using (identify demonstrative aid(s)) to assist in
explaining or illustrating [his] [her] testimony. [This] [These] item[s] [has]
[have] been prepared to assist this witness in explaining [his] [her] testimony.
[It] [They] may be based on assumptions which you are free to accept or
reject. The testimony of the witness is evidence; however, [this] [these]
(identify demonstrative or visual aid(s)) [is] [are] not to be considered as
evidence in the case unless received in evidence, and should not be used as a
substitute for evidence. Only items received in evidence will be available to
you for consideration during your deliberations.
NOTES ON USE FOR 301.4
1. Instruction 301.4a should be given at the time a witness first uses a
demonstrative or visual aid which has not been specially created for use in the
case, such as a skeletal model.
2. Instruction 301.4b is designed for use when a witness intends to use
demonstrative or visual aids which are based on disputed assumptions, such as a
computer-generated model. This instruction should be given at the time the witness
first uses these demonstrative or visual aids. This instruction should be used in
conjunction with 301.3 if a witness uses exhibits during testimony, some of which
are received in evidence, and some of which are not.
301.5 EVIDENCE ADMITTED FOR A LIMITED PURPOSE
The (describe item of evidence) has now been received into evidence. It
has been admitted only [for the purpose of (describe purpose)] [as to (name
party)]. You may consider it only [for that purpose] [as it might affect (name
party)]. You may not consider that evidence [for any other purpose] [as to [any
other party] [(name other party(s)].
301.6 JURY TO BE GUIDED BY OFFICIAL ENGLISH
TRANSLATION/INTERPRETATION
Introduction:
The law requires that the court appoint a qualified interpreter to assist
a witness who does not readily speak or understand the English language in
testifying. The interpreter does not work for either side in this case. [He] [She]
is completely neutral in the matter and is here solely to assist us in
communicating with the witness. [He] [She] will repeat only what is said and
will not add, omit, or summarize anything. The interpreter in this case is
(name of interpreter). The oath will now be administered to the interpreter.
Oath to Interpreter:
Do you solemnly swear or affirm that you will make a true
interpretation to the witness of all questions or statements made to [him] [her]
in a language which that person understands, and interpret the witness’s
statements into the English language, to the best of your abilities [so help you
God]?
Foreign Language Testimony:
You are about to hear testimony of a witness who will be testifying in
(language used). This witness will testify through the official court interpreter.
Although some of you may know (language used), it is important that all jurors
consider the same evidence. Therefore, you must accept the English
translation of the witness’s testimony. You must disregard any different
meaning.
If, however, during the testimony there is a question as to the accuracy
of the English interpretation, you should bring this matter to my attention
immediately by raising your hand. You should not ask your question or make
any comment about the interpretation in the presence of the other jurors, or
otherwise share your question or concern with any of them. I will take steps to
see if your question can be answered and any discrepancy resolved. If,
however, after such efforts a discrepancy remains, I emphasize that you must
rely only upon the official English interpretation as provided by the court
interpreter and disregard any other contrary interpretation.
NOTE ON USE FOR 301.6
This instruction should be given to the jury immediately before the
testimony of a witness who will be testifying through the services of an official
court interpreter. Compare United States v. Franco, 136 F.3d 622, 626 (9th Cir.
1998) (jury properly instructed that it must accept translation of foreign-language
tape-recording when accuracy of translation is not in issue); United States v.
Fuentes-Montijo, 68 F.3d 352, 35556 (9th Cir. 1995).
301.7 JURY TO BE GUIDED BY OFFICIAL ENGLISH
TRANSCRIPT OF RECORDING IN FOREIGN LANGUAGE
(ACCURACY NOT IN DISPUTE)
You are about to listen to a tape recording in (language used). Each of
you has been given a transcript of the recording which has been admitted into
evidence. The transcript is a translation of the foreign language tape
recording.
Although some of you may know (language used), it is important that all
jurors consider the same evidence. Therefore, you must accept the English
translation contained in the transcript and disregard any different meaning.
If, however, during the testimony there is a question as to the accuracy
of the English translation, you should bring this matter to my attention
immediately by raising your hand. You should not ask your question or make
any comment about the translation in the presence of the other jurors, or
otherwise share your question or concern with any of them. I will take steps to
see if your question can be answered and any discrepancy resolved. If,
however, after such efforts a discrepancy remains, I emphasize that you must
rely only upon the official English translation as provided by the court
interpreter and disregard any other contrary translation.
NOTE ON USE FOR 301.7
This instruction is appropriate immediately prior to the jury hearing a tape-
recorded conversation in a foreign language if the accuracy of the translation is not
an issue. See, e.g., United States v. Franco, 136 F.3d 622, 626 (9th Cir. 1998);
United States v. Fuentes-Montijo, 68 F.3d 352, 35556 (9th Cir. 1995).
301.8 JURY TO BE GUIDED BY OFFICIAL ENGLISH
TRANSLATION/INTERPRETATION TRANSCRIPT OF RECORDING
IN FOREIGN LANGUAGE (ACCURACY IN DISPUTE)
You are about to listen to a tape recording in (language used). Each of
you has been given a transcript of the recording. The transcripts were
provided to you by [the plaintiff] [the defendant] so that you could consider
the content of the recordings. The transcript is an English translation of the
foreign language tape recording.
Whether a transcript is an accurate translation, in whole or in part, is
for you to decide. In considering whether a transcript accurately describes the
meaning of a conversation, you should consider the testimony presented to
you regarding how, and by whom, the transcript was made. You may consider
the knowledge, training, and experience of the translator, as well as the nature
of the conversation and the reasonableness of the translation in light of all the
evidence in the case. You should not rely in any way on any knowledge you
may have of the language spoken on the recording; your consideration of the
transcripts should be based on the evidence introduced in the trial.
NOTE ON USE FOR 301.8
This instruction is appropriate immediately prior to the jury hearing a tape-
recorded conversation in a foreign language if the accuracy of the translation is an
issue. See, e.g., United States v. Jordan, 223 F.3d 676, 689 (7th Cir. 2000). See
also Seventh Circuit Federal Criminal Jury Instructions §3.18.
301.9 DISREGARD STRICKEN MATTER
NOTE ON USE FOR 301.9
No standard instruction is provided. The court should give an instruction that
is appropriate to the circumstances. In drafting a curative instruction, the court
must decide on a measured response that will do more good than harm, going no
further than necessary. The language of curative instructions should be carefully
selected so as not to punish a party or attorney.
301.10 INSTRUCTION BEFORE RECESS
We are about to take [our first] [a] recess. Remember that all of the
rules I have given you apply even when you are outside the courtroom, such as
at recess.
Remember the basic rule: Do not talk to anyone, including your fellow
jurors, friends, family or co-workers about anything having to do with this
trial, except to speak to court staff. This means no e-mailing, text messaging,
tweeting, blogging, or any other form of communication. You cannot do any
research about the case or look up any information about the case.
Remember to observe during our recess the other rules I gave you. If you
become aware of any violation of any of these rules at all, notify court
personnel of the violation.
After each recess, please double check to make sure [that your cell
phone or other electronic device is turned off completely] [that you do not
bring your cell phone or other electronic device into the courtroom or jury
room].
NOTES ON USE FOR 301.10
1. This instruction should be given before the first recess. Before later
recesses, the court has the discretion to give an abbreviated version of this
instruction.
2. The publication of this recommended instruction is not intended to
intrude upon the trial judge’s own style and manner of delivery. Instead, this
instruction is intended to remind jurors throughout the proceedings of the
importance of the rules limiting their use of cell phones and other electronic
devices.
301.11 FAILURE TO MAINTAIN EVIDENCE OR KEEP A RECORD
a. Adverse inference.
If you find that:
(Name of party) [lost] [destroyed] [mutilated] [altered] [concealed] or
otherwise caused the (describe evidence) to be unavailable, while it was within
[his] [her] [its] possession, custody, or control; and the (describe evidence)
would have been material in deciding the disputed issues in this case; then you
may, but are not required to, infer that this evidence would have been
unfavorable to (name of party). You may consider this, together with the other
evidence, in determining the issues of the case.
NOTES ON USE FOR 301.11a
1. This instruction is not intended to limit the trial court’s discretion to
impose additional or other sanctions or remedies against a party for either
inadvertent or intentional conduct in the loss, destruction, mutilation, alteration,
concealment, or other disposition of evidence material to a case. See, e.g., Golden
Yachts, Inc. v. Hall, 920 So. 2d 777, 780 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006); Am. Hosp. Mgmt.
Co. of Minnesota v. Hettiger, 904 So. 2d 547 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005); Jost v Lakeland
Reg. Med. Ctr., 844 So. 2d 656 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003); Nationwide Lift Trucks, Inc.
v. Smith, 832 So. 2d 824 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002); Torres v. Matsushita Elec. Corp.,
762 So. 2d 1014 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000); and Sponco Mfg, Inc. v. Alcover, 656 So. 2d
629 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995).
2. The inference addressed in this instruction does not rise to the level of
a presumption. Pub. Health Tr. of Dade Cty. v. Valcin, 507 So. 2d 596 (Fla. 1987),
and Instruction 301.11b.
3. This instruction may require modification in the event a factual
dispute exists as to which party or person is responsible for the loss of any
evidence.
b. Burden shifting presumption.
The court has determined that (name of party) had a duty to [maintain
(describe missing evidence)] [keep a record of (describe subject matter as to
which party had record keeping duty)]. (Name of party) did not [maintain
(describe missing evidence)] [or] [keep a record of (describe subject matter as to
which party had recordkeeping duty)].
Because (name of party) did not [maintain (describe missing evidence)]
[or] [keep a record of (describe subject matter as to which party had a record
keeping duty)], you should find that (name of invoking party) established [his]
[her] (describe applicable claim or defense) unless (name of party) proves
otherwise by the greater weight of the evidence.
NOTES ON USE FOR 301.11b
1. This instruction applies only when the court has determined that there
was a duty to maintain or preserve the missing evidence at issue and the party
invoking the presumption has established to the satisfaction of the court that the
absence of the missing evidence hinders the other party’s ability to establish its
claim or defense. See Pub. Health Tr. of Dade Cty. v. Valcin, 507 So. 2d 596 (Fla.
1987).
2. This instruction may require modification in the event a factual
dispute exists as to which party or person is responsible for the loss of any
evidence.
SECTION 400 SUBSTANTIVE INSTRUCTIONS
416.1 Breach of Contract Introduction
416.2 Third-Party Beneficiary
416.3 Contract Formation Essential Factual Elements
416.4 Breach of Contract Essential Factual Elements
416.5 Oral or Written Contract Terms
416.6 Contract Implied in Fact
416.7 Contract Implied in Law
416.8 Contract Formation Offer
416.9 Contract Formation Revocation of Offer
416.10 Contract Formation Acceptance
416.11 Contract Formation Acceptance by Silence or Conduct
416.12 Substantial Performance
416.13 Modification
416.14 Interpretation Disputed Term(s)
416.15 Interpretation Meaning of Ordinary Words
416.16 Interpretation Meaning of Disputed Technical or
Special Words
416.17 Interpretation Construction of Contract as a Whole
416.18 Interpretation Construction by Conduct
416.19 Interpretation Reasonable Time
416.20 Interpretation Construction Against Drafter
416.21 Existence of Condition Precedent Disputed
416.22 Occurrence of Agreed Condition Precedent
416.23 Anticipatory Breach
416.24 Breach of Implied Covenant of Good Faith and Fair
Dealing
416.25 Affirmative Defense Mutual Mistake of Fact
416.26 Affirmative Defense Unilateral Mistake of Fact
416.27 Affirmative Defense Undue Influence
416.28 Affirmative Defense Fraud
416.29 Affirmative Defense Negligent Misrepresentation
416.30 Affirmative Defense Waiver
416.31 Affirmative Defense Novation
416.32 Affirmative Defense Statute of Limitations
416.33 Affirmative Defense Equitable Estoppel
416.34 [reserved for future use]
416.35 Affirmative Defense Judicial Estoppel
416.36 Affirmative Defense Ratification
416.37 Goods Sold and Delivered
416.38 Open Account
416.39 Account Stated
416.40 Money Had and Received
NOTE ON USE
These substantive instructions should be followed by the applicable sections
from Damages, Substantive Instructions General, and Closing Instructions
(Before Final Argument).
These instructions are numbered 416 (as a series) to not conflict with the
instructions already numbered 401 through 415 by the Florida Supreme Court
Committee on Standard Jury Instructions in Civil Cases.
416.1 BREACH OF CONTRACT INTRODUCTION
(Claimant) claims that [he] [she] [it] and (defendant) entered into a
contract for (insert brief summary of alleged contract).
(Claimant) claims that (defendant) breached this contract by (briefly state
alleged breach), and that the breach resulted in damages to (claimant).
(Defendant) denies (insert denial of any of the above claims). (Defendant)
also claims (insert affirmative defense).
NOTES ON USE FOR 416.1
This instruction is intended to introduce the jury to the issues involved in the
case. It should be read before the instructions on the substantive law.
416.2 THIRD-PARTY BENEFICIARY
(Claimant) is not a party to the contract. However, (claimant) may be
entitled to damages for breach of the contract if [he] [she] [it] proves that
(insert names of the contracting parties) intended that (claimant) benefit from
their contract.
It is not necessary for (claimant) to have been named in the contract. In
deciding what (insert names of the contracting parties) intended, you should
consider the contract as a whole, the circumstances under which it was made,
and the apparent purpose the parties were trying to accomplish.
NOTES ON USE FOR 416.2
See Restatement (Second) of Contracts § 302 (1981):
[A] beneficiary of a promise is an intended beneficiary if recognition of a
right to performance in the beneficiary is appropriate to effectuate the intention of
the parties and ... the circumstances indicate that the promisee intends to give the
beneficiary the benefit of the promised performance.
While the Supreme Court has not commented directly on the applicability of
the Restatement (Second) of Contracts § 302 (1981) (but note Justice Shaws
partial concurrence in Metropolitan Life Insurance Co. v. McCarson, 467 So.2d
277, 280-81 (Fla. 1985)), all five district courts of appeal have cited the
Restatement (Second) of Contracts § 302 (1981). Civix Sunrise, GC, LLC v.
Sunrise Road Maintenance Assn., Inc., 997 So.2d 433 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008);
Technicable Video Systems, Inc. v. Americable of Greater Miami, Ltd., 479 So.2d
810 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985); Cigna Fire Underwriters Ins. Co. v. Leonard, 645 So.2d
28 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994); Warren v. Monahan Beaches Jewelry Center, Inc., 548
So.2d 870 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989); Publix Super Markets, Inc. v. Cheesbro Roofing,
Inc., 502 So.2d 484 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987). See also A.R. Moyer, Inc. v. Graham,
285 So.2d 397, 402 (Fla. 1973), and Carvel v. Godley, 939 So.2d 204, 207-208
(Fla. 4th DCA 2006) (The question of whether a contract was intended for the
benefit of a third person is generally regarded as one of construction of the
contract. The intention of the parties in this respect is determined by the terms of
the contract as a whole, construed in the light of the circumstances under which it
was made and the apparent purpose that the parties are trying to accomplish.).
416.3 CONTRACT FORMATION ESSENTIAL FACTUAL ELEMENTS
(Claimant) claims that the parties entered into a contract. To prove that
a contract was created, (claimant) must prove all of the following:
1. The essential contract terms were clear enough that the parties could
understand what each was required to do;
2. The parties agreed to give each other something of value. [A promise
to do something or not to do something may have value]; and
3. The parties agreed to the essential terms of the contract. When you
examine whether the parties agreed to the essential terms of the
contract, ask yourself if, under the circumstances, a reasonable
person would conclude, from the words and conduct of each party,
that there was an agreement. The making of a contract depends only
on what the parties said or did. You may not consider the parties’
thoughts or unspoken intentions.
Note: If neither offer nor acceptance is contested, then element #3 should
not be given.
If (Claimant) did not prove all of the above, then a contract was not
created.
NOTES ON USE FOR 416.3
This instruction should be given only when the existence of a contract is
contested. If both parties agree that they had a contract, then the instructions
relating to whether a contract was actually formed would not need to be given. At
other times, the parties may be contesting only a limited number of contract
formation issues. Also, some of these issues may be decided by the judge as a
matter of law. Users should omit elements in this instruction that are not contested
so that the jury can focus on the contested issues. Read the bracketed language
only if it is an issue in the case.
SOURCES AND AUTHORITIES FOR 416.3
1. The general rule of contract formation was enunciated by the Florida
Supreme Court in St. Joe Corp. v. McIver, 875 So.2d 375, 381 (Fla. 2004) (An
oral contract . . . is subject to the basic requirements of contract law such as offer,
acceptance, consideration and sufficient specification of essential terms.).
2. The first element of the instruction refers to the definiteness of
essential terms of the contract. The definition of essential term varies widely
according to the nature and complexity of each transaction and is evaluated on a
case-by-case basis. Lanza v. Damian Carpentry, Inc., 6 So.3d 674, 676 (Fla. 1st
DCA 2009). See also Leesburg Community Cancer Center v. Leesburg Regional
Medical Center, 972 So.2d 203, 206 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007) (We start with the basic
premise that no person or entity is bound by a contract absent the essential
elements of offer and acceptance (its agreement to be bound to the contract terms),
supported by consideration.).
3. The second element of the instruction requires giving something of
value. In Florida, to constitute valid consideration there must be either a benefit to
the promisor or a detriment to the promisee. Mangus v. Present, 135 So.2d 417,
418 (Fla. 1961). The detriment necessary for consideration need not be an actual
loss to the promisee, but it is sufficient if the promisee does something that he or
she is not legally bound to do. Id.
4. The final element of this instruction requires an objective test. “[A]n
objective test is used to determine whether a contract is enforceable.” Robbie v.
City of Miami, 469 So.2d 1384, 1385 (Fla. 1985). The intention as expressed
controls rather than the intention in the minds of the parties. “The making of a
contract depends not on the agreement of two minds in one intention, but on the
agreement of two sets of external signs-not on the parties having meant the same
thing but on their having said the same thing.” Gendzier v. Bielecki, 97 So.2d 604,
608 (Fla. 1957).
416.4 BREACH OF CONTRACT ESSENTIAL FACTUAL ELEMENTS
To recover damages from (defendant) for breach of contract, (claimant)
must prove all of the following:
1. (Claimant) and (defendant) entered into a contract;
2. (Claimant) did all, or substantially all, of the essential things
which the contract required [him] [her] [it] to do [or that [he] [she] [it]
was excused from doing those things];
3. [All conditions required by the contract for (defendant’s)
performance had occurred;]
4. [(Defendant) failed to do something essential which the contract
required [him] [her] [it] to do] [(defendant) did something which the contract
prohibited [him] [her] [it] from doing and that prohibition was essential to the
contract]; and
Note: If the allegation is that the defendant breached the contract by doing
something that the contract prohibited, use the second option.
5. (Claimant) was damaged by that failure.
NOTE ON USE FOR 416.4
In many cases, some of the above elements may not be contested. In those
cases, users should delete the elements that are not contested so that the jury can
focus on the contested issues.
SOURCES AND AUTHORITIES FOR 416.4
1. An adequately pled breach of contract action requires three elements:
(1) a valid contract; (2) a material breach; and (3) damages. Friedman v. New York
Life Ins. Co., 985 So. 2d 56, 58 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008). This general rule was
enunciated by various Florida district courts of appeal. See Murciano v. Garcia,
958 So. 2d 423, 423-24 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007); Abbott Laboratories, Inc. v. General
Elec. Capital, 765 So. 2d 737, 740 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000); Mettler, Inc. v. Ellen
Tracy, Inc., 648 So. 2d 253, 255 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994); Knowles v. C.I.T. Corp., 346
So. 2d 1042, 1043 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977).
2. To maintain an action for breach of contract, a claimant must first
establish performance on the claimant’s part of the contractual obligations imposed
by the contract. Marshall Construction, Ltd. v. Coastal Sheet Metal & Roofing,
Inc., 569 So. 2d 845, 848 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990). A claimant is excused from
establishing performance if the defendant anticipatorily repudiated the contract.
Hosp. Mortg. Grp. v. First Prudential Dev. Corp., 411 So. 2d 181, 182-83 (Fla.
1982). Repudiation constituting a prospective breach of contract may be evidenced
by words or voluntary acts but refusal must be distinct, unequivocal and absolute.
Mori v. Matsushita Elec. Corp. of Am., 380 So. 2d 461, 463 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980).
3. “Substantial performance is performance ‘nearly equivalent to what
was bargained for.’” Strategic Resources Grp., Inc. v. Knight-Ridder, Inc., 870 So.
2d 846, 848 (Fla. 3d DCA 2003). “Substantial performance is that performance of
a contract which, while not full performance, is so nearly equivalent to what was
bargained for that it would be unreasonable to deny the promisee the full contract
price subject to the promisor’s right to recover whatever damages may have been
occasioned him by the promisee’s failure to render full performance.” Ocean Ridge
Dev. Corp. v. Quality Plastering, Inc., 247 So. 2d 72, 75 (Fla. 4th DCA 1971).
4. The doctrine of substantial performance applies when the variance
from the contract specifications is inadvertent or unintentional and unimportant so
that the work actually performed is substantially what was called for in the
contract. Lockhart v. Worsham, 508 So. 2d 411, 412 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987). “In the
context of contracts for construction, the doctrine of substantial performance is
applicable only where the contractor has not willfully or materially breached the
terms of his contract or has not intentionally failed to comply with the
specifications.” National Constructors, Inc. v. Ellenberg, 681 So. 2d 791, 793 (Fla.
3d DCA 1996).
5. “There is almost always no such thing as ‘substantial performance’ of
payment between commercial parties when the duty is simply the general one to
pay.” Hufcor/Gulfstream, Inc. v. Homestead Concrete & Drainage, Inc., 831 So.
2d 767, 769 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002).
416.5 ORAL OR WRITTEN CONTRACT TERMS
[Contracts may be written or oral.]
[Contracts may be partly written and partly oral.]
Oral contracts are just as valid as written contracts.
NOTES ON USE FOR 416.5
Give the bracketed alternative that is most applicable to the facts of the case.
If the complete agreement is in writing, this instruction should not be given.
SOURCES AND AUTHORITIES FOR 416.5
1. An “agreement, partly written and partly oral, must be regarded as an
oral contract, the liability arising under which is not founded upon an instrument of
writing.” Johnson v. Harrison Hardware Furniture Co., 160 So. 878, 879 (Fla.
1935).
2. An oral contract is subject to the basic requirements of contract law
such as offer, acceptance, consideration, and sufficient specification of essential
terms. St. Joe Corp. v. McIver, 875 So.2d 375, 381 (Fla. 2004).
3. “The complaint alleged the execution of an oral contract, the
obligation thereby assumed, and a breach. It therefore set forth sufficient facts
which taken as true, would state a cause of action for breach of contract.” Perry v.
Cosgrove, 464 So.2d 664, 667 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985).
4. As long as an essential ingredient is not missing from an agreement,
courts have been reluctant to hold contracts unenforceable on grounds of
uncertainty, especially where one party has benefited from the other’s reliance.
Gulf Solar, Inc. v. Westfall, 447 So.2d 363 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984); Community
Design Corp. v. Antonell, 459 So.2d 343 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984). When the existence
of a contract is clear, the jury may properly determine the exact terms of an oral
contract. Perry v. Cosgrove, 464 So.2d 664, 667 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985).
5. “To state a cause of action for breach of an oral contract, a plaintiff is
required to allege facts that, if taken as true, demonstrate that the parties mutually
assented to ‘a certain and definite proposition’ and left no essential terms open.”
W.R. Townsend Contracting, Inc. v. Jensen Civil Construction, Inc., 728 So.2d 297
(Fla. 1st DCA 1999). See also Carole Korn Interiors, Inc. v. Goudie, 573 So.2d
923 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990) (company which provided interior design services
sufficiently alleged cause of action for breach of oral contract, when company
alleged that: it had entered into oral contract with defendants for interior design
services; company had provided agreed services; defendants breached contract by
refusing to remit payment; and company suffered damages); Rubenstein v.
Primedica Healthcare, Inc., 755 So.2d 746, 748 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000) (“In this
case, appellant sufficiently pled that Primedica, upon acquiring Shapiros’ assets,
which included their oral agreement with appellant, mutually assented to
appellant’s continued employment under the same terms and conditions as with
Shapiro. Further, he alleged that he suffered damages as a result of his
termination.”).
416.6 CONTRACT IMPLIED IN FACT
Contracts can be created by the conduct of the parties, without spoken
or written words. Contracts created by conduct are just as valid as contracts
formed with words.
Conduct will create a contract if the conduct of both parties is
intentional and each knows, or under the circumstances should know, that the
other party will understand the conduct as creating a contract.
In deciding whether a contract was created, you should consider the
conduct and relationship of the parties as well as all of the circumstances.
NOTES ON USE FOR 416.6
Use this instruction where there is no express contract, oral or written,
between the parties, and the jury is being asked to infer the existence of a contract
from the facts and circumstances of the case.
SOURCES AND AUTHORITIES FOR 416.6
1. [A]n implied contract is one in which some or all of the terms are
inferred from the conduct of the parties and the circumstances of the case, though
not expressed in words. 17A AM. JUR. 2d Contracts § 12 (2009).
2. In a contract implied in fact the assent of the parties is derived from
other circumstances, including their course of dealing or usage of trade or course
of performance. Rabon v. Inn of Lake City, Inc., 693 So.2d 1126, 1131 (Fla. 1st
DCA 1997); McMillan v. Shively, 23 So.3d 830, 831 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009).
3. In Commerce Partnership 8098 Limited Partnership v. Equity
Contracting Co., 695 So.2d 383, 387 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997), the Fourth District
held:
A contract implied in fact is one form of an enforceable contract; it is
based on a tacit promise, one that is inferred in whole or in part from the
parties conduct, not solely from their words. 17 AM. JUR. 2d Contracts § 3
(1964); Corbin, CORBIN ON CONTRACTS §§ 1.18-1.20 (Joseph M. Perillo ed.
1993). When an agreement is arrived at by words, oral or written, the
contract is said to be express. 17 AM. JUR. 2d Contracts § 3. A contract
implied in fact is not put into promissory words with sufficient clarity, so a
fact finder must examine and interpret the parties conduct to give definition
to their unspoken agreement. Id.; CORBIN ON CONTRACTS § 562 (1960). It is
to this process of defining an enforceable agreement that Florida courts have
referred when they have indicated that contracts implied in fact rest upon
the assent of the parties. Policastro v. Myers, 420 So.2d 324, 326 (Fla. 4th
DCA 1982); Tipper v. Great Lakes Chemical Co., 281 So.2d 10, 13 (Fla.
1973). The supreme court described the mechanics of this process in Bromer
v. Florida Power & Light Co., 45 So.2d 658, 660 (Fla. 1950):
[A] [c]ourt should determine and give to the alleged implied contract
the effect which the parties, as fair and reasonable men, presumably would
have agreed upon if, having in mind the possibility of the situation which
has arisen, they had contracted expressly thereto.” 12 AM. JUR. 2d 766.
See Mecier v. Broadfoot, 584 So.2d 159, 161 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991).
Common examples of contracts implied in fact are when a person performs
services at anothers request, or where services are rendered by one person for
another without his expressed request, but with his knowledge, and under
circumstances fairly raising the presumption that the parties understood and
intended that compensation was to be paid. Lewis v. Meginniss, 12 So. 19, 21 (Fla.
1892); Tipper, 281 So.2d at 13. In these circumstances, the law implies the promise
to pay a reasonable amount for the services. Lewis, 12 So. at 21; Lamoureux v.
Lamoureux, 59 So.2d 9, 12 (Fla. 1951); A.J. v. State, 677 So.2d 935, 937 (Fla. 4th
DCA 1996); Dean v. Blank, 267 So.2d 670 (Fla. 4th DCA 1972); Solutec Corp. v.
Young & Lawrence Associates, Inc., 243 So.2d 605, 606 (Fla. 4th DCA 1971).
For example, a common form of contract implied in fact is where one party
has performed services at the request of another without discussion of
compensation. These circumstances justify the inference of a promise to pay a
reasonable amount for the service. The enforceability of this obligation turns on the
implied promise, not on whether the defendant has received something of value. A
contract implied in fact can be enforced even where a defendant has received
nothing of value.
416.7 CONTRACT IMPLIED IN LAW
(Claimant) claims that (defendant) owes [him] [her] [it] money for (insert
brief summary of allegations). To establish this claim, (claimant) must prove all
of the following:
1. (Claimant) gave a benefit to (defendant);
2. (Defendant) knew of the benefit;
3. (Defendant) accepted or retained the benefit; and
4. The circumstances are such that (defendant) should, in all fairness,
be required to pay for the benefit.
NOTES ON USE FOR 416.7
1. To describe the cause of action encompassed by a contract implied in
law, Florida courts have synonymously used a number of different terms quasi
contract, unjust enrichment, restitution, constructive contract, and quantum
meruit.” Commerce Partnership 8098 Limited Partnership v. Equity Contracting
Co., 695 So.2d 383, 386 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997) (internal quotations and footnotes
omitted). However, a contract implied in lawis not based upon the finding, by a
process of implication from the facts, of an agreement between the parties. A
contract implied in law is a legal fiction, an obligation created by the law without
regard to the parties expression of assent by their words or conduct. The fiction
was adopted to provide a remedy where one party was unjustly enriched, where
that party received a benefit under circumstances that made it unjust to retain it
without giving compensation.Id. “The elements of a cause of action for a quasi
contract are that: (1) the plaintiff has conferred a benefit on the defendant; (2) the
defendant has knowledge of the benefit; (3) the defendant has accepted or retained
the benefit conferred and (4) the circumstances are such that it would be
inequitable for the defendant to retain the benefit without paying fair value for it.
Because the basis for recovery does not turn on the finding of an enforceable
agreement, there may be recovery under a contract implied in law even where the
parties had no dealings at all with each other.” Id. (internal citations omitted).
2. The committee has drafted this instruction because a claim to establish
a contract implied in law may be a claim in equity for the court to decide or a claim
at law for a jury to decide. See Della Ratta v. Della Ratta, 927 So.2d 1055, 1060
n.2 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006) (“In Florida, all implied contract actions, including unjust
enrichment, were part of the action of assumpsit, which was an action at law under
the common law. Although some Florida courts have described quasi contracts as
being ‘equitable in nature,’ the term has been used in the sense of fairness, to
describe that quality which makes an enrichment unjust, and not as a reference to
the equity side of the court.”) (internal citations omitted).
416.8 CONTRACT FORMATION OFFER
Both an offer and an acceptance are required to create a contract.
(Defendant) contends a contract was not created because there was never any
offer. To establish that an offer was made, (claimant) must prove:
1. (Claimant) communicated to (defendant) that [he] [she] [it] was
willing to enter into a contract with (defendant);
2. The communication[s] contained the essential terms of the offer;
and
3. Based on the communication, (defendant) could have reasonably
concluded that a contract with these terms would result if [he]
[she] [it] accepted the offer.
If (claimant) did not prove all of the above, then no offer was made and
no contract was created.
NOTES ON USE FOR 416.8
Do not give this instruction unless the defendant has testified or offered
other evidence in support of his or her contention. This instruction assumes that the
defendant is alleging that the claimant never made an offer. Change the identities
of the parties in the indented paragraphs if, under the facts of the case, the roles of
the parties are switched (e.g., if defendant was the alleged offeror). If the existence
of an offer is not contested, then this instruction is unnecessary.
SOURCES AND AUTHORITIES FOR 416.8
1. The court in Lee County v. Pierpont, 693 So.2d 994 (Fla. 2d DCA
1997), defined offer as follows: A proposal to do a thing or pay an amount,
usually accompanied by an expected acceptance, counter-offer, return promise or
act. A manifestation of willingness to enter into a bargain, so made as to justify
another person in understanding that his assent to that bargain is invited and will
conclude it. Id. at 996 (citation omitted).
2. The rule that it is possible for parties to make an enforceable contract
binding them to prepare and execute a subsequent agreement is well recognized.
However, if the document or contract that the parties agree to make is to contain
any material term that is not already agreed on, no contract has yet been made; and
the so-called contract to make a contract is not a contract at all. John I. Moss,
Inc. v. Cobbs Co., 198 So.2d 872, 874 (Fla. 3d DCA 1967).
3. In Socarras v. Claughton Hotels, Inc., 374 So.2d 1057, 1060 (Fla. 3d
DCA 1979), the court found that a handwritten note evidences only [the
defendants] willingness to negotiate a contract with potential purchasers who
might be interested in the general terms that he outlined. The note did not
incorporate all of the essential terms necessary to make an enforceable contract for
the sale of the land. It reflected only the state of negotiations at that point,
preliminary negotiations which never ripened into a formal agreement.
416.9 CONTRACT FORMATION REVOCATION OF OFFER
Both an offer and an acceptance are required to create a contract.
(Defendant) contends that the offer was withdrawn before the offer was
accepted. To establish that the offer was not withdrawn, (claimant) must prove
one of the following:
1. (Defendant) did not withdraw the offer; or
2. (Claimant) accepted the offer before (defendant) withdrew it; or
3. (Defendant’s) withdrawal of the offer was never communicated to
(claimant).
If (claimant) did not prove any of the above, then the offer was
withdrawn and no contract was created.
NOTES ON USE FOR 416.9
Do not give this instruction unless the defendant has testified or offered
other evidence to support this contention.
This instruction assumes that the defendant is claiming to have revoked the
offer. Change the identities of the parties in the indented paragraphs if, under the
facts of the case, the roles of the parties are switched (e.g., if the defendant was the
alleged offeree).
SOURCES AND AUTHORITIES FOR 416.9
1. A mere offer not assented to constitutes no contract, for there must
be not only a proposal, but an acceptance thereof. So long as a proposal is not
acceded to, it is binding upon neither party, and it may be retracted. Gibson v.
Courtois, 539 So.2d 459, 460 (Fla. 1989).
2. In the United States, the law is virtually uniform that a revocation
requires communication and that an acceptance prior to a communicated
revocation constitutes a binding contract. Lance v. Martinez-Arango, 251 So.2d
707, 709 (Fla. 3d DCA 1971).
3. Where an offer has not been accepted by the offeree, the offeror may
revoke the offer provided the communication of such revocation is received prior
to acceptance. Kendel v. Pontious, 244 So.2d 543, 544 (Fla. 3d DCA 1971).
416.10 CONTRACT FORMATION ACCEPTANCE
Both an offer and acceptance are required to create a contract.
(Defendant) contends that a contract was not created because the offer was
never accepted. To establish acceptance of the offer, (claimant) must prove
(defendant) communicated [his] [her] [its] agreement to the terms of the offer.
[If (defendant) agreed only to certain conditions, or if [he] [she] [it]
introduced a new term into the bargain, then there was no acceptance.]
NOTES ON USE FOR 416.10
1. Do not give this instruction unless the defendant has testified or
offered other evidence in support of the defendant’s contention.
2. This instruction assumes that the defendant has denied accepting the
claimants offer. Change the identities of the parties in the indented paragraphs if,
under the facts of the case, the roles of the parties are switched (e.g., if defendant
was the alleged offeror).
SOURCES AND AUTHORITIES FOR 416.10
The general rule is that an acceptance is not valid, and thus is ineffective to
form a contract, unless it is communicated to the offeror. Kendel v. Pontious, 261
So.2d 167, 169-70 (Fla. 1972).
416.11 CONTRACT FORMATION ACCEPTANCE BY SILENCE OR
CONDUCT
Ordinarily, if a party does not say or do anything in response to another
party’s offer, then [he] [she] [it] has not accepted the offer. However, if
(claimant) proves that [both [he] [she] [it] and (defendant) understood silence
or inaction to mean that the offer was accepted] [the benefits of the offer were
accepted] [(offeree) had a legal duty to speak from a past relationship between
(claimant) and (defendant), (claimant)’s and (defendant)’s previous dealings, or
(identify other circumstances creating a legal duty to speak)], then there was an
acceptance.
NOTES ON USE FOR 416.11
1. This instruction should be read in conjunction with and immediately
after Instruction 416.10, Contract Formation Acceptance if acceptance by
silence is an issue.
2. Pending further development of the law, the committee takes no
position as to what other circumstances create a legal duty to speak. The
committee does not consider the factors listed to be exclusive and, if the court
determines that the jury may consider other circumstances, the court should
modify this instruction.
SOURCES AND AUTHORITIES FOR 416.11
1. “[A]n offeree who does any act inconsistent with the offeror’s
ownership of offered property is bound in accordance with the offered terms. In
addition, such an exercise of dominion even though not intended as acceptance ...
is a sufficient manifestation of assent ....Stevenson v. Stevenson, 661 So.2d 367,
369 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995) (citing RESTATEMENT (SECOND) OF CONTRACTS § 69(2)
and comment (e), and Scocozzo v. Gen. Development Corp., 191 So.2d 572, 579
(Fla. 1966)).
2. Section 69 of the Restatement (Second) of Contracts states that if an
offeree fails to reply to an offer, his or her silence and inaction operate as an
acceptance in the following cases only:
(1) if an offeree takes the benefit of offered services with
reasonable opportunity to reject them and reason to know that
they were offered with the expectation of compensation;
(2) if the offeror has stated or given the offeree reason to
understand that assent may be manifested by silence or
inaction, and the offeree in remaining silent and inactive intends
to accept the offer; or
(3) if, because of previous dealings or otherwise, it is reasonable
that the offeree should notify the offeror if he or she does not
intend to accept.
3. An offerees silent acceptance of benefits from the offeror constitutes
acceptance. See Hendricks v. Stark, 126 So. 293, 297 (Fla. 1930) (It has been
repeatedly held that a person by the acceptance of benefits, may be estopped from
questioning the validity and effect of a contract; and, where one has an election to
ratify or disaffirm a conveyance, he can either claim under or against it, but he
cannot do both, and, having adopted one course with knowledge of the facts, he
cannot afterwards pursue the other.”).
416.12 SUBSTANTIAL PERFORMANCE
(Defendant) claims that (claimant) did not perform all of the essential
things which the contract required, and therefore (defendant) did not have to
perform [his] [her] [its] obligations under the contract. To defeat this claim,
(claimant) must prove both of the following:
1. (Claimant) performed in good faith; and
2. (Claimant’s) performance was so nearly equivalent to what was
bargained for that it would be unreasonable to deny [him] [her]
[it] the full contract price less an appropriate reduction, if any, for
(claimant’s) failure to fully perform.
3.
NOTES ON USE FOR 416.12
The measure of any reduction referred to in element 2 should be addressed
in the damages instructions.
SOURCES AND AUTHORITIES FOR 416.12
1. There is almost always no such thing as substantial performance’ of
payment between commercial parties when the duty is simply the general one to
pay. Payment is either made in the amount and on the date due, or it is not.”
Enriquillo Export & Import, Inc. v. M.B.R. Indus., Inc., 733 So.2d 1124, 1127 (Fla.
4th DCA 1999).
2. Substantial performance is that performance of a contract which,
while not full performance, is so nearly equivalent to what was bargained for that it
would be unreasonable to deny the promisee the full contract price subject to the
promisors right to recover whatever damages may have been occasioned him by
the promisees failure to render full performance. Ocean Ridge Dev. Corp. v.
Quality Plastering, Inc., 247 So.2d 72, 75 (Fla. 4th DCA 1971).
416.13 MODIFICATION
(Claimant) claims that the original contract was modified, or changed.
(Defendant) denies that the contract was modified. Therefore, (Claimant) must
prove that the parties agreed to the modification.
The parties to a contract may agree to modify its terms. You must
decide whether a reasonable person would conclude from the words and
conduct of (claimant) and (defendant) that they agreed to modify the contract.
You cannot consider the parties’ hidden intentions.
A contract in writing may be modified by a contract in writing, by a
subsequent oral agreement between the parties, or by the parties’ subsequent
conduct [, if the modified agreement has been accepted and acted upon by the
parties in such a manner as would work a fraud on either party to refuse to
enforce it].
SOURCES AND AUTHORITIES FOR 416.13
1. In St. Joe Corporation v. McIver, 875 So.2d 375 (Fla. 2004), our
Supreme Court said:
It is well established that the parties to a contract can discharge or modify
the contract, however made or evidenced, through a subsequent agreement.
Whether the parties have validly modified a contract is usually a question of
fact.
Under Florida law, the parties’ subsequent conduct also can modify the
terms in a contract. We note, however, that a party cannot modify a contract
unilaterally. All the parties whose rights or responsibilities the modification
affects must consent.
Id. at 381-82 (internal citations omitted).
2. The parol evidence rule does not bar the introduction of evidence of a
subsequent oral contract modifying a written agreement. H.I. Resorts, Inc. v.
Touchton, 337 So.2d 854, 856 (Fla. 2d DCA 1976).
3. “A written contract or agreement may be altered or modified by an
oral agreement if the latter has been accepted and acted upon by the parties in such
a manner as would work a fraud on either party to refuse to enforce it . . . An oral
modification under these circumstances is permissible even though there was in the
written contract a provision prohibiting its alteration except in writing.”
Professional Ins. Corp. v. Cahill, 90 So.2d 916, 918 (Fla. 1956).
4. “[T]he actions of the parties may be considered as a means of
determining the interpretation that they themselves have placed upon the contract.”
Lalow v. Codomo, 101 So.2d 390 (Fla. 1958).
5. “A written contract can be modified by subsequent oral agreement
between the parties or by the parties’ course of dealing . . . Whether a written
contract has been modified by subsequent oral agreement or by course of dealing is
a question of fact for the jury.” Kiwanis Club of Little Havana, Inc. v. de Kalafe,
723 So.2d 838, 841 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998).
416.14 INTERPRETATION DISPUTED TERM(S)
(Claimant) and (defendant) dispute the meaning of the following term(s)
contained in their contract: (insert text of term(s)).
(Claimant) claims that the term(s) means: (insert claimant’s interpretation
of the term(s)). (Defendant) claims that the term(s) means: (insert defendant’s
interpretation of the term(s)). (Claimant) must prove that [his] [her] [its]
interpretation of the term(s) is correct.
In deciding what the term(s) of a contract mean, you must decide what
the parties agreed to at the time the contract was created.
In order to determine what the parties agreed to, you should consider
the plain and ordinary meaning of the language used in the contract as well as
the circumstances surrounding the making of the contract. The agreement of
the parties is determined only by what the parties said, wrote, or did. You
may not consider the parties’ thoughts or unspoken intentions.
Note: The following instruction should be given if the court is going to give
additional instructions related to disputed term(s).
[I will now instruct you on other methods that you should use in
resolving the dispute over term(s) in the contract:]
NOTES ON USE FOR 416.14
Read any of Instructions 416.15 through 416.20 (as appropriate) on tools for
interpretation after reading the last bracketed sentence. The instructions on
interpretation are not exhaustive and the court may give any additional instruction
on interpretation applicable to the facts and circumstances of the particular case
provided it is supported by Florida law.
SOURCES AND AUTHORITIES FOR 416.14
1. The interpretation of a contract is normally a matter of law that is
determined by the court. Smith v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 231 So.2d 193,
194 (Fla. 1970); Strama v. Union Fidelity Life Ins. Co., 793 So.2d 1129, 1132 (Fla.
1st DCA 2001). Under certain circumstances, however, such as when the terms of
a contract are ambiguous or susceptible to different interpretations, an issue of fact
is presented which should be submitted to the jury. First Natl Bank of Lake Park
v. Gay, 694 So.2d 784, 788 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997); State Farm Fire & Cas. Co. v.
De Londono, 511 So.2d 604, 605 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987). The initial determination
of whether the contract term is ambiguous is a question of law for the court, and, if
the facts of the case are not in dispute, the court will also be able to resolve the
ambiguity as a matter of law. Strama, 793 So.2d at 1132; Ellenwood v. Southern
United Life Ins. Co., 373 So.2d 392, 394 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979).
2. In Florida, an objective test is used to determine the agreement of the
parties. Fivecoat v. Publix Super Markets, Inc., 928 So.2d 402, 403 (Fla. 1st DCA
2006). The agreement of the parties is ascertained from the language used in the
instrument and the objects to be accomplished ….” Rylander v. Sears Roebuck &
Co., 302 So.2d 478, 479 (Fla. 3d DCA 1974); Jones v. Treasure, 984 So.2d 634,
638 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008). When determining the agreement of the parties, a court
need not consider whether or not the parties reached a subjective meeting of the
minds as to the terms of a contract. Robbie v. City of Miami, 469 So.2d 1384, 1385
(Fla. 1985). The making of a contract depends not on the agreement of two minds
in one intention, but on the agreement of two sets of external signs not on the
parties having meant the same thing but on their having said the same thing. Id.
(quoting Gendzier v. Bielecki, 97 So.2d 604, 608 (Fla. 1957)). Accordingly, the
plain meaning of the language used by the parties controls as the best indication of
the parties agreement. SPP Real Estate (Grand Bay), Inc. v. Joseph J. Portuondo,
P.A., 756 So.2d 182, 184 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000). Thus, the terms in a contract should
be interpreted in accordance with their plain and ordinary meaning. Kel Homes,
LLC v. Burris, 933 So.2d 699, 702 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006).
3. The norms of contractual interpretation may vary in certain areas of
the law. For example, although the existence of an ambiguous contractual term
typically creates an issue of fact as to the intent of the parties which should be
resolved by the jury, this principle of law is not applicable to contracts between
contractors and subcontractors with regard to risk-shifting provisions. Dec
Electric, Inc. v. Raphael Constr. Corp., 558 So.2d 427, 428-29 (Fla. 1990). In
such instances, the intention of the parties may be determined from the written
contract as a matter of law because the nature of the transaction makes it
appropriate for a court to resolve the apparent ambiguity. Id. The reason is that
the relationship between the parties is a common one and usually their intent will
not differ from transaction to transaction, although it may be differently
expressed. Id. at 429. The norms of contractual interpretation also do not apply to
insurance contracts, as ambiguities are always to be construed against the insurer
and in favor of coverage.
416.15 INTERPRETATION MEANING OF ORDINARY WORDS
You should assume that the parties intended the disputed term(s) in
their contract to have their plain and ordinary meaning, unless you decide
that the parties intended the disputed term(s) to have another meaning.
NOTES ON USE FOR 416.15
The phrase “plain and ordinary” is used throughout the charge to describe
the meaning of words. The Committee found no distinction between the phrases
“usual and customary” and “plain and ordinary” as those phrases are used in case
law. The Committee chooses to use the phrase “plain and ordinary” in the
instruction because the phrase is more commonly used.
SOURCES AND AUTHORITIES FOR 416.15
1. This principle is well-established under Florida law. Hamilton Constr.
Co. v. Bd. of Pub. Instruction of Dade Cnty., 65 So.2d 729, 731 (Fla. 1953);
Langley v. Owens, 42 So. 457, 460 (Fla. 1906); Winn-Dixie Stores, Inc. v. 99 Cent
Stuff-Trial Plaza, LLC, 811 So.2d 719, 722 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002); Institutional &
Supermarket Equipment, Inc. v. C&S Refrigeration, Inc., 609 So.2d 66, 68 (Fla.
4th DCA 1992); Bingemann v. Bingemann, 551 So.2d 1228, 1231 (Fla. 1st DCA
1989).
2. Plain and ordinary meaning is often described as the meaning of
words as found in the dictionary. Beans v. Chohonis, 740 So.2d 65, 67 (Fla. 3d
DCA 1999). Also, plain and ordinary meaning is the natural meaning that is most
commonly understood in relation to the subject matter and circumstances of the
case. Sheldon v. Tiernan, 147 So.2d 167, 169 (Fla. 2d DCA 1962).
416.16 INTERPRETATION MEANING OF DISPUTED TECHNICAL
OR SPECIAL WORDS
Disputed term(s) in the contract should be given the meaning used by
people in that trade, business, or technical field unless the parties agree that
the disputed term(s) should have another meaning.
SOURCES AND AUTHORITIES FOR 416.16
1. Contractual terms should be construed in accordance with their plain
and ordinary meaning unless the parties intended the contractual terms to have a
different or special meaning. Madson v. Madson, 636 So.2d 759, 761 (Fla. 2d DCA
1994).
2. Contracts may be written in light of established custom or trade usage
in an industry, and contracts involving such transactions should be interpreted in
light of such custom or trade usage. The responsibility for determining trade usage
is customarily one for the jury. Fred S. Conrad Construction Co. v. Exchange Bank
of St. Augustine, 178 So.2d 217, 221 (Fla. 1st DCA 1965).
3. Extrinsic evidence may be admitted to explain technical terminology
even if the contract is unambiguous. NCP Lake Power, Inc. v. Florida Power
Corp., 781 So.2d 531, 536 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001).
4. Evidence showing the meaning of technical terms is not an exception
to the parol evidence rule because it does not vary or contradict the written
instrument, but merely places the fact finder in the position of the parties when the
contract was made. Southeast Banks Trust Co., N.A. v. Higginbotham Chevrolet-
Oldsmobile, Inc., 445 So.2d 347, 348-49 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984).
416.17 INTERPRETATION CONSTRUCTION OF CONTRACT AS A
WHOLE
In deciding what the disputed term(s) of the contract mean, you should
consider the whole contract, not just isolated parts. You should use each part
to help you interpret the others, so that all the parts make sense when taken
together.
SOURCES AND AUTHORITIES FOR 416.17
1. In reviewing the contract in an attempt to determine its true meaning,
the court must review the entire contract without fragmenting any segment or
portion. J.C. Penney Co., Inc. v. Koff, 345 So.2d 732, 735 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977).
2. Every provision in a contract should be given meaning and effect and
apparent inconsistencies reconciled if possible. Excelsior Ins. Co. v. Pomona Park
Bar & Package Store, 369 So.2d 938, 941 (Fla. 1979); Royal Am. Realty, Inc. v.
Bank of Palm Beach & Trust Company, 215 So.2d 336 (Fla. 4th DCA 1968);
Transport Rental Systems, Inc. v. Hertz Corp., 129 So.2d 454 (Fla. 3d DCA 1961).
3. We rely upon the rule of construction requiring courts to read
provisions of a contract harmoniously in order to give effect to all portions
thereof.City of Homestead v. Johnson, 760 So.2d 80, 84 (Fla. 2000). See also
Sugar Cane Growers Cooperative of Fla., Inc. v. Pinnock, 735 So.2d 530, 535
(Fla. 4th DCA 1999) (holding contracts should be interpreted to give effect to all
provisions); Paddock v. Bay Concrete Indus., Inc., 154 So.2d 313, 315 (Fla. 2d
DCA 1963) (All the various provisions of a contract must be so construed, if it
can reasonably be done, as to give effect to each.).
416.18 INTERPRETATION CONSTRUCTION BY CONDUCT
In deciding what the disputed term(s) of the contract mean, you should
consider how the parties acted before and after the contract was created.
SOURCES AND AUTHORITIES FOR 416.18
In the face of ambiguity on an issue, a jury is free to look at the subsequent
conduct of the parties to determine the parties intent and the contract’s meaning.
See Rafael J. Roca, P.A. v. Lytal, Reiter, Clark, Roca, Fountain & Williams, 856
So.2d 1, 5 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003) (“Where an agreement is ambiguous, the meaning
of the agreement may be ascertained by looking to the interpretation the parties
have given the agreement and the parties conduct throughout their course of
dealings.”); Mayflower Corp. v. Davis, 655 So.2d 1134, 1137 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994)
(“Courts have also looked to the conduct of the parties throughout their course of
dealings to determine their intentions and the meaning of the agreement.”).
416.19 INTERPRETATION REASONABLE TIME
If a contract does not state a specific time within which a party is to
perform a requirement of the contract, then the party must perform the
requirement within a reasonable time. What is a reasonable time depends on
the facts of each case, including the subject matter and purpose of the
contract and the expressed intent of the parties at the time they entered into
the contract.
SOURCES AND AUTHORITIES FOR 416.19
1. Whenever a contract fails to provide a specific time for performance,
the law implies a reasonable time for performance. Patrick v. Kirkland, 43 So.
969, 971 (Fla. 1907); De Cespedes v. Bolanos, 711 So.2d 216, 218 (Fla. 3d DCA
1998); Fleming v. Burbach Radio, Inc., 377 So.2d 723, 724 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980).
2. The decision of what constitutes a reasonable time for performance is
ordinarily a question of fact for the jury or fact-finder. L.P. Sims v. Am. Hardware
Mut. Ins. Co., 429 So.2d 21, 22 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982).
3. The determination of what constitutes a reasonable time for
performance depends on the facts of each case, such as the subject matter of the
contract, the situation of the parties, and the parties agreement when they entered
into the contract. Sound City, Inc. v. Kessler, 316 So.2d 315, 317 (Fla. 1st DCA
1975); Cocoa Props., Inc. v. Commonwealth Land Title Ins. Co., 590 So.2d 989,
991 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991); Sharp v. Machry, 488 So.2d 133, 137 (Fla. 2d DCA
1986).
416.20 INTERPRETATIONCONSTRUCTION AGAINST DRAFTER
You must first attempt to determine the meaning of the ambiguous
term[s] in the contract from the evidence presented and the previous
instructions. If you cannot do so, only then should you consider which party
drafted the disputed term[s] in the contract and then construe the language
against that party.
NOTES ON USE FOR 416.20
1. This instruction endeavors to explain to the jury that this principle
should be secondary to the consideration of other means of interpretation,
principally the consideration of parol evidence that may explain the parties
intent at the time they entered into the contract. See W. Yellow Pine Co. v.
Sinclair, 90 So. 828, 831 (Fla. 1922) (the rule to construe against the drafter
should not be used if other rules of construction reach the intent of the parties);
The School Bd. of Broward Cnty. v. The Great Am. Ins. Co., 807 So. 2d 750
(Fla. 4th DCA 2002) (the rule to construe against the drafter is a secondary
rule of interpretation and should be used as a last resort when all ordinary
interpretive guides have been exhausted); DSL Internet Corp. v. TigerDirect,
Inc., 907 So. 2d 1203, 1205 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005) (the against-the-drafter rule is
a rule of last resort and is inapplicable if there is evidence of the parties
intent). There is a risk that the jury may place too much emphasis on this rule,
to the exclusion of evidence and other approaches; therefore, this instruction
should be given with caution. One district court of appeal has held that express
contractual provisions prohibiting use of this principle must be enforced. See
Agile Assur. Group, Ltd. v. Palmer, 147 So. 3d 1017 (Fla. 2d DCA 2014).
2. If the contract at issue or an applicable statute provides that the
contract will not be construed against the drafter, the Committee would
suggest that this be taken into consideration before this instruction is used,
particularly given the secondary rule of interpretation principle expressed in
the preceding paragraph and established Florida law that every provision in a
contract should be given meaning and effect. See Excelsior Ins. Co. v. Pomona
Park Bar & Package Store, 369 So. 2d 938, 941 (Fla. 1979) (holding that
every provision in a contract should be given meaning); see also section
542.335(1)(h), Florida Statutes (providing an example in the context of not
construing a restrictive covenant against the drafter).
3. The Committee strongly recommends the use of this instruction in
connection with a verdict form that clarifies, by special interrogatory, what the
term or phrase is that the court has declared to be ambiguous. See First Nat’l
Bank of Lake Park v. Gay, 694 So. 2d 784, 789 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997)
(discussing that interrogatory verdict forms should track the same issues and
defenses in the jury instructions).
SOURCES AND AUTHORITIES FOR 416.20
1. The existence of this interpretation principle is well established. “An
ambiguous term in a contract is to be construed against the drafter.” City of
Homestead v. Johnson, 760 So. 2d 80, 84 (Fla. 2000). “Generally, ambiguities are
construed against the drafter of the instrument.” Hurt v. Leatherby Ins. Co., 380
So. 2d 432, 434 (Fla. 1980). “[A] provision in a contract will be construed most
strongly against the party who drafted it ….” Sol Walker & Co. v. Seaboard Coast
Line R.R. Co., 362 So. 2d 45, 49 (Fla. 2d DCA 1978). Where the language of
contract is ambiguous or doubtful, it should be construed against the party who
drew the contract and chose the wording. Vienneau v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co.,
548 So. 2d 856 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989); Am. Agronomics Corp. v. Ross, 309 So. 2d
582 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975). “To the extent any ambiguity exists in the interpretation
of [a] contract, it will be strictly construed against the drafter.” Goodwin v. Blu
Murray Ins. Agency, Inc., 939 So. 2d 1098 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006); Russell v. Gill,
715 So. 2d 1114 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998).
2. If only one party drafted a contract, then the jury should consider that
party to be the drafter in the context of this instruction. However, if more than one
party contributed to drafting a contract, provision, or term, then the jury should
consider the drafter to be the party that actually chose the wording at issue.
Finberg v. Herald Fire Ins. Co., 455 So. 2d 462 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984); Bacon v.
Karr, 139 So. 2d 166 (Fla. 2d DCA 1962). An additional tool the jury can utilize to
determine who is the drafter is they can interpret the language at issue against the
party which benefits from the language. Belen School, Inc. v. Higgins, 462 So. 2d
1151 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984); Watson v. Poe, 203 So. 2d 14 (Fla. 4th DCA 1967).
416.21 EXISTENCE OF CONDITIONS PRECEDENT DISPUTED
(Defendant) claims that the contract with (claimant) provides that [he]
[she] [it] was not required to (insert duty) unless (insert condition precedent).
(Defendant) must prove that the parties agreed to this condition. If
(defendant) proves this, then (claimant) must prove that (insert condition
precedent) [was performed] [occurred] [was waived].
If (claimant) does not prove that (insert condition precedent) [was
performed] [occurred] [was waived], then (defendant) was not required to
(insert duty).
NOTES ON USE FOR 416.21
1. This instruction should be given only where both the existence and the
occurrence of a condition precedent are disputed. If only the occurrence of a
condition precedent is disputed, use Instruction 416.22 Occurrence of Agreed
Condition Precedent.
2. If the issue of waiver arises, the court should define waiver as set forth
in Instruction 416.30 Affirmative Defense Waiver.
SOURCES AND AUTHORITIES FOR 416.21
1. A condition precedent is an act or event, other than a lapse of time,
that must occur before a binding contract will arise. … A condition may be either a
condition precedent to the formation of a contract or a condition precedent to
performance under an existing contract. Mitchell v. DiMare, 936 So.2d 1178,
1180 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006).
2. Provisions of a contract will only be considered conditions precedent
or subsequent where the express wording of the disputed provision conditions
formation of a contract and or performance of the contract on the completion of the
conditions. Gunderson v. Sch. Dist. of Hillsborough Cnty., 937 So.2d 777, 779
(Fla. 1st DCA 2006).
3. In pleading, the performance or occurrence of a condition precedent
may be alleged generally, but a denial of the performance or occurrence of a
condition precedent shall be made specifically and with particularity. Fla.R.Civ.P.
1.120(c). When a claimant alleges generally the occurrence of a condition
precedent, and the defendant fails to deny the occurrence with particularity, then
the defendant has no right to demand proof from the claimant of the occurrence of
such condition. See Cooke v. Ins. Co. of N. Am., 652 So.2d 1154, 1156 (Fla. 2d
DCA 1995); Scarborough Assocs. v. Financial Federal Savings & Loan Assn of
Dade Cnty., 647 So.2d 1001, 1004 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994). However, once the
defendant has made a specific denial of a condition precedent to a contract, the
burden reverts to the claimant to prove the satisfaction of the condition precedent.
Griffin v. Am. Gen. Life & Accident Ins. Co., 752 So.2d 621, 623 n.1 (Fla. 2d DCA
1999).
416.22 OCCURRENCE OF AGREED CONDITION PRECEDENT
The parties agreed in their contract that (defendant) would not have to
(insert duty) unless (insert condition precedent). (Defendant) contends that this
condition did not occur and that [he] [she] [it] did not have to (insert duty). To
overcome this contention, (claimant) must prove that (insert condition
precedent) [was performed] [occurred] [was waived].
If (claimant) does not prove that (insert condition precedent) [was
performed] [occurred] [was waived], then (defendant) was not required to
(insert duty).
NOTES ON USE FOR 416.22
1. If both the existence and the occurrence of a condition precedent are
disputed, use Instruction 416.21 Existence of Conditions Precedent Disputed.
2. If the issue of waiver arises, the court should define waiver as set forth
in Instruction 416.30 Affirmative Defense Waiver.
SOURCES AND AUTHORITIES FOR 416.22
In pleading, the performance or occurrence of a condition precedent may be
alleged generally, but a denial of the performance or occurrence of a condition
precedent shall be made specifically and with particularity. Fla.R.Civ.P. 1.120(c).
When a claimant alleges generally the occurrence of a condition precedent, and the
defendant fails to deny the occurrence with particularity, then the defendant has no
right to demand proof from the claimant of the occurrence of such condition. See
Cooke v. Ins. Co. of N. Am., 652 So.2d 1154, 1156 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995);
Scarborough Assocs. v. Financial Federal Savings & Loan Ass’n of Dade Cnty.,
647 So.2d 1001, 1004 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994). However, once the defendant has made
a specific denial of a condition precedent to a contract, the burden reverts to the
claimant to prove the satisfaction of the condition precedent. Griffin v. Am. Gen.
Life & Accident Ins. Co., 752 So.2d 621, 623 n.1 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999).
416.23 ANTICIPATORY BREACH
(Claimant) claims that (defendant) anticipatorily breached the contract
between the parties.
To establish this claim, (claimant) must prove both of the following:
1. (Defendant) breached the contract by clearly and positively
indicating, by words or conduct, or both, that [he] [she] [it] would
not or could not perform the contract; and
2. (Claimant) was willing and able to perform the contract at the
time (defendant) breached the contract.
SOURCES AND AUTHORITIES FOR 416.23
1. Where performances are to be exchanged under an exchange of
promises, one party’s repudiation of a duty to render performance discharges the
other partys remaining duties to render performance.Hosp. Mortgage Grp. v.
First Prudential Dev. Corp., 411 So.2d 181, 182 (Fla. 1982) (quoting
RESTATEMENT (SECOND) OF CONTRACTS § 253 (1979)).
2. “[R]epudiation may be evidenced by words or voluntary acts but the
refusal must be distinct, unequivocal, and absolute. Mori v. Matsushita Elec.
Corp. of Am., 380 So.2d 461, 463 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980).
3. [T]he non-breaching party is required to plead and prove compliance
with all conditions precedent or the ability to comply if the performance has been
excused by the repudiation.Hosp. Mortgage Grp., 411 So.2d at 183. But see
Custer Med. Ctr. v. United Auto. Ins. Co., 62 So.3d 1086, 1096 (Fla. 2010) (“[A]
defending partys assertion that a plaintiff has failed to satisfy conditions precedent
necessary to trigger contractual duties under an existing agreement is generally
viewed as an affirmative defense, for which the defensive pleader has the burden of
pleading and persuasion.”); Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.120(c) (“In pleading the performance
or occurrence of conditions precedent, it is sufficient to aver generally that all
conditions precedent have been performed or have occurred. A denial of
performance or occurrence shall be made specifically and with particularity.”).
416.24 BREACH OF IMPLIED COVENANT OF
GOOD FAITH AND FAIR DEALING
An implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing exists in all
contracts. (Claimant) contends that (defendant) violated the implied covenant
of good faith and fair dealing in the contract in this case. To establish this
claim, (claimant) must prove all of the following:
1. (Claimant) and (defendant) entered into a contract;
2. (Claimant) did all, or substantially all, of the significant things that
the contract required [him] [her] [it] to do [or that [he] [she] [it] was excused
from having to do those things];
3. All conditions required for (defendant’s) performance had
occurred;
4. (Defendant’s) conduct was not consistent with (parties’) reasonable
expectations under [identify specific provision(s) of the contract]; and
5. (Claimant) was damaged by (defendant’s) conduct.
NOTE ON USE FOR 416.24
The question of whether a particular contract is one in which an implied
covenant of good faith and fair dealing applies is a question for the trial court to
answer in the first instance. This instruction should not be used to rewrite or vary
the express terms of the contract. See case notes.
SOURCES AND AUTHORITIES FOR 416.24
1. The implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing exists in virtually
all contractual relationships. County of Brevard v. Miorelli Engineering, Inc., 703
So. 2d 1049, 105051 (Fla. 1998).
2. The purpose of the implied covenant of good faith is “to protect the
reasonable expectations of the contracting parties.” Ins. Concepts & Design, Inc. v.
Healthplan Services, Inc., 785 So. 2d 1232, 123435 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001). See
also Cox v. CSX Intermodal, Inc., 732 So. 2d 1092, 1097 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999)
(“[T]he implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing is designed to protect the
contracting parties’ reasonable expectations.”).
3. The implied covenant of good faith “is a gap filling default rule”
which comes into play “when a question is not resolved by the terms of the
contract or when one party has the power to make a discretionary decision without
defined standards.” Speedway SuperAmerica, LLC v. Tropic Enterprises, Inc., 966
So. 2d 1, 3 n.2 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007); see also Cox, 732 So. 2d at 1097.
4. “Because the implied covenant is not a stated contractual term, to
operate it attaches to the performance of a specific or express contractual
provision.” Snow v. Ruden, McClosky, Smith, Schuster & Russell, P.A., 896 So. 2d
787, 792 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005).
5. The implied covenant of good faith cannot override an express
contractual provision. Snow, 896 So. 2d at 79192; see also Ins. Concepts, 785 So.
2d at 1234.
6. “The implied obligation of good faith cannot be used to vary the terms
of an express contract.” City of Riviera Beach v. John’s Towing, 691 So. 2d 519,
521 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997); see also Ins. Concepts, 785 So. 2d at 123435
(“Allowing a claim for breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair
dealing ‘where no enforceable executory contractual obligation’ remains would
add an obligation to the contract that was not negotiated by the parties.”) (citations
omitted).
7. Good faith means honesty, in fact, in the conduct of contractual
relations. Burger King Corp. v. C.R. Weaver, 169 F.3d 1310, 1315 (11th Cir. 1999)
(citing Harrison Land Dev. Inc. v. R & H Holding Co., 518 So. 2d 353, 355 (Fla.
4th DCA 1987))
416.25 AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSEMUTUAL MISTAKE OF FACT
(Defendant) claims that [he] [she] [it] should be able to set aside the
contract because the parties were mistaken about (insert description of
mistake). To establish this defense, (defendant) must prove the following:
1. The parties were mistaken about (insert description of mistake);
and
2. (Defendant) did not bear the risk of mistake. (Defendant) bears the
risk of a mistake when
[the parties’ agreement assigned the risk to [him] [her] [it]]*
[or]
[[he] [she] [it] was aware, at the time the contract was made, that [he]
[she] [it] had only limited knowledge about the facts relating to the mistake
but decided to proceed with the contract].**
* The court should give the first option only if the court finds that the
contract is ambiguous regarding whether the contract assigns the risk to the
defendant.
**The court should give the second option only if there is evidence that, at
the time the contract was made, the defendant had only limited knowledge with
respect to the facts relating to the mistake but treated the limited knowledge as
sufficient.
NOTES ON USE FOR 416.25
1. The court should not give this instruction if it determines that the
alleged mistake was not material.
2. The court should not give this instruction if it finds that the
contract unambiguously assigns the risk to the defendant or if the court assigns
the risk of mistake to the defendant on the ground that it is reasonable under
the circumstances to do so.
SOURCES AND AUTHORITIES FOR 416.25
1. “A party may avoid a contract by proving mutual mistake
regarding a basic assumption underlying the contract. However, to prevail on
this basis the party must also show he did not bear the risk of mistake. Leff v.
Ecker, 972 So. 2d 965, 966 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007) (citation omitted).
2. “A party bears the risk of a mistake when (a) the risk is allocated
to him by agreement of the parties or (b) he is aware, at the time the contract is
made, that he has only limited knowledge with respect to the facts to which the
mistake relates but treats his limited knowledge as sufficient, or (c) the risk is
allocated to him by the court on the ground that it is reasonable in the
circumstances to do so. Rawson v. UMLIC VP, L.L.C., 933 So. 2d 1206, 1210
(Fla. 1st DCA 2006) (quoting Restatement (Second) of Contracts § 154
(1979)).
416.26 AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE UNILATERAL MISTAKE OF FACT
RESERVED
NOTES ON USE FOR 416.26
1. .The Committee does not find there is sufficient clarity in the law at
this time that warrants a standard instruction on the affirmative defense of
unilateral mistake to a breach of contract action. In Maryland Casualty Co. v.
Krasnek, 174 So. 2d 541, 542 (Fla. 1965), the Florida Supreme Court recognized
unilateral mistake as an equitable defense to a breach of contract action. In that
case, the Court indicated that the defense applies if: (1) the mistake did not result
from an inexcusable lack of due care in the circumstances; and (2) the non-
mistaken party’s position had not been so changed in reliance on the contract that it
would be unconscionable to order rescission. Id. at 543.
2. Florida’s district courts of appeal have interpreted the Krasnek test for
unilateral mistake in different ways. For example, in Rachid v. Perez, 26 So. 3d 70,
72 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010), the Third District Court of Appeal articulated the elements
of the defense as a four-part test as follows:
(1) the mistake was induced by the party seeking to benefit from the
mistake, (2) there is no negligence or want of due care on the part of the
party seeking a return to the status quo, (3) denial of release from the
agreement would be inequitable, and (4) the position of the opposing party
has not so changed that granting the relief would be unjust.
3. By contrast, in Garvin v. Tidwell, 126 So. 3d 1224, 1228 (Fla. 4th
DCA 2012), the Fourth District Court of Appeal articulated the elements of the
defense as follows:
a trial court may rescind an agreement based on unilateral mistake if “(1) the
mistake did not result from an inexcusable lack of due care, and (2)
defendant’s position did not so change in reliance that it would be
unconscionable to set aside the agreement.” [Quoting Stamato v. Stamato,
818 So. 2d 662, 664 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002).] Additionally, we will look at
whether the unilateral mistake goes to the “very substance of the
agreement.” [Quoting Rock Springs Land Co. v. West, 281 So. 2d 555, 556
(Fla. 4th DCA 1973); Langbein v. Comerford, 215 So. 2d 630, 631 (Fla. 4th
DCA 1968).]
4. Finally, in Orkin Exterminating Co. v. Palm Beach Hotel
Condominium Association, Inc., 454 So. 2d 697 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984), a different
panel of the Fourth District quoted with approval the test for unilateral mistake set
forth in the Restatement (Second) of Contracts, secs. 153, 154 (1979). See also
DePrince v. Starboard Cruise Services, Inc., 163 So. 3d 586 (Fla. 3d DCA 2015)
(collecting cases and discussing the various formulations of the test for the
unilateral mistake defense).
5. Based on the foregoing, and pending further development in the law,
the Committee offers no standard instruction on the unilateral mistake defense.
416.27 AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE UNDUE INFLUENCE
(Defendant) claims that [he] [she] [it] should be able to set aside the
contract because (claimant) unfairly pressured [him] [her] [it] into agreeing to
the contract. To establish this defense, (defendant) must prove both of the
following:
1. (Claimant) used [a relationship of trust and confidence] [or]
[(defendant)’s weakness of mind] [or] [(defendant)’s needs or
distress] to control, persuade, or pressure (defendant) into
agreeing to the contract; and
2. (Defendant) would not otherwise have voluntarily agreed to the
contract.
SOURCES AND AUTHORITIES FOR 416.27
1. “Undue influence must amount to over-persuasion, duress, force,
coercion, or artful or fraudulent contrivances to such a degree that there is a
destruction of free agency and willpower.” Jordan v. Noll, 423 So.2d 368, 370
(Fla. 1st DCA 1982).
2. “[M]ere weakness of mind, unaccompanied by any other inequitable
incident, if the person has sufficient intelligence to understand the nature of the
transaction and is left to act upon his own free will, is not a sufficient ground to set
aside an agreement.” Donnelly v. Mann, 68 So.2d 584, 586 (Fla. 1953) (citations
omitted).
3. “To constitute ‘undue influence’ the mind . . . must be so controlled or
affected by persuasion or pressure, artful or fraudulent contrivances, or by the
insidious influences of persons in close confidential relations with him, that he is
not left to act intelligently, understandingly, and voluntarily, but . . . subject to the
will or purposes of another.” Peacock v. Du Bois, 105 So. 321, 322 (Fla. 1925)
(citation omitted).
416.28 AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE FRAUD
To establish the defense of fraud, (defendant) must prove all of the
following:
1. (Claimant) represented that (insert alleged fraudulent statement) and
that representation was material to the transaction;
2. (Claimant) knew that the representation was false;
3. (Claimant) made the representation to persuade (defendant) to agree
to the contract;
4. (Defendant) relied on the representation; and
5. (Defendant) would not have agreed to the contract if [he] [she] [it]
had known that the representation was false.
On this defense, (Defendant) may rely on a false statement, even though
its falsity could have been discovered if (defendant) had made an investigation.
However, (defendant) may not rely on a false statement if [he] [she] [it] knew it
was false or its falsity was obvious to [him] [her] [it]. In making this
determination, you should consider the totality of the circumstances
surrounding the type of information transmitted, the nature of the
communication between the parties, and the relative positions of the parties.
SOURCES AND AUTHORITIES FOR 416.28
1. Fraud must be pled as an affirmative defense or it is waived. Cocoves
v. Campbell, 819 So.2d 910, 912 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002); Peninsular Fla. Dist.
Council of Assemblies of God v. Pan Am. Inv. & Dev. Corp., 450 So.2d 1231, 1232
(Fla. 4th DCA 1984); Ash Chem., Inc. v. Dept of Envtl. Regulation, 706 So.2d
362, 363 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998).
2. In order to raise an affirmative defense of fraud, the “pertinent facts
and circumstances constituting fraud must be pled with specificity, and all the
essential elements of fraudulent conduct must be stated.” Zikofsky v. Robby Vapor
Systems, Inc., 846 So.2d 684, 684 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003) (citation omitted).
3. The party seeking to use the defense of fraud must specifically
identify misrepresentations or omissions of fact. Cocoves v. Campbell, 819 So.2d
910, 912-13 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002).
4. Fraud must be pled with particularity. Cocoves v. Campbell, 819
So.2d 910, 913 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002); Thompson v. Bank of New York, 862 So.2d
768 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003).
5. Mere statements of opinion are insufficient to constitute the defense of
fraud. Thompson v. Bank of New York, 862 So.2d 768, 769 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003);
Carefree Vills. Inc. v. Keating Props., Inc., 489 So.2d 99, 102 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986).
6. The elements of fraudulent misrepresentation are: “(1) a false
statement concerning a material fact; (2) the representor’s knowledge that the
representation is false; (3) an intention that the representation induce another to act
on it; and (4) consequent injury by the party acting in reliance on the
representation.Butler v. Yusem, 44 So.3d 102, 105 (Fla. 2010).
7. Justifiable reliance is not a necessary element of fraudulent
misrepresentation.” Butler v. Yusem, 44 So.3d 102, 105 (Fla. 2010).
416.29 AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE NEGLIGENT
MISREPRESENTATION
The committee recognizes that some authority exists suggesting that
negligent misrepresentation can be asserted as an affirmative defense to a breach of
contract claim. See Rocky Creek Retirement Properties, Inc. v. The Estate of
Virginia B. Fox, 19 So.3d 1105, 1110 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009). However, the law
supporting this defense has not been sufficiently developed to enable the
committee to propose an instruction on this defense. Pending further development
in the law, the committee takes no position on this issue.
416.30 AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE WAIVER
(Defendant) claims that [he] [she] [it] did not have to (insert description of
performance) because (claimant) gave up [his] [her] [its] right to have
(defendant) perform [this] [these] obligation[s]. This is called a “waiver.
To establish this defense, (defendant) must prove all of the following:
1. (Claimant’s) right to have (defendant) (insert description of
performance) actually existed;
2. (Claimant) knew or should have known [he] [she] [it] had the right
to have (defendant) (insert description of performance); and
3. (Claimant) freely and intentionally gave up [his] [her] [its] right to
have (defendant) (insert description of performance).
A waiver may be oral or written or may arise from conduct which
shows that (claimant) gave up that right.
If (defendant) proves that (claimant) gave up [his] [her] [its] right
to have (defendant) (insert description of performance), then (defendant)
was not required to perform [this] [these] obligation[s].
SOURCES AND AUTHORITIES FOR 416.30
1. “Waiver” is the voluntary and intentional relinquishment of a known
right. Raymond James Fin. Servs., Inc. v. Saldukas, 896 So.2d 707, 711 (Fla.
2005); Bueno v. Workman, 20 So.3d 993, 998 (Fla. 4th DCA 2009); Winans v.
Weber, 979 So.2d 269, 274 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007).
2. The elements necessary to establish waiver are: the existence of a
right, privilege, or advantage; the actual or constructive knowledge thereof; and an
intention to relinquish that right, privilege, or advantage. Bueno v. Workman, 20
So.3d 993, 998 (Fla. 4th DCA 2009); Winans v. Weber, 979 So.2d 269, 274 (Fla.
2d DCA 2007).
3. There can be no waiver if the party against whom the waiver is
invoked did not know all of the material facts, or was misled about the material
facts. Winans v. Weber, 979 So.2d 269, 274 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007); L.R. v. Dep’t of
Children & Families, 822 So.2d 527, 530 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002).
4. Proof of the elements of waiver may be express or implied from
conduct or acts that lead a party to believe a right has been waived. Raymond
James Fin. Servs., Inc. v. Saldukas, 896 So.2d 707, 711 (Fla. 2005); LeNeve v. Via
S. Fla., L.L.C., 908 So.2d 530, 535 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005).
416.31 AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE NOVATION
To establish the defense of novation, (defendant) must prove that all
parties agreed, by words or conduct, to cancel the original contract and to
substitute a new contract in its place.
NOTES ON USE FOR 416.31
If necessary, Instruction 416.3 (Contract Formation Essential Factual
Elements) should be read in whole or in part at this point to address the issue of
formation of the new contract.
416.32 AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS
On the defense of statute of limitations, the issue for you to decide is
whether (claimant) filed [his] [her] [its] claim (describe claim as to which statute
of limitations defense has been raised) within the time set by law.
To establish this defense, (defendant) must prove that any breach of
contract, if one in fact occurred, occurred before (insert date four or five years
before date of filing suit).
NOTES ON USE FOR 416.32
The delayed discovery doctrine has not been applied to breach of contract
actions in Florida. See Medical Jet, S.A. v. Signature Flight SupportPalm Beach,
Inc., 941 So.2d 576, 578 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006) ((“The supreme court rejected an
expansion of the delayed discovery doctrine in Davis v. Monahan, 832 So.2d 708
(Fla.2002).”).
SOURCES AND AUTHORITIES FOR 416.32
1. Section 95.11(2)(b), Florida Statutes (2011), provides that “[a] legal
or equitable action on a contract, obligation or liability founded on a written
instrument [other than for the recovery of real property], except for an action to
enforce a claim against a payment bond, which shall be governed by the applicable
provisions of ss. 255.05(1) and 713.23(1)(e)” shall be commenced within five
years. (emphasis added).
2. Section 95.11(3)(k), Florida Statutes (2011), provides that “[a] legal
or equitable action on a contract, obligation or liability not founded on a written
instrument [other than for the recovery of real property], including an action for the
sale and delivery of goods, wares, and merchandise, and on store accounts” shall
be commenced within four years. (emphasis added).
3. In a breach of contract action, “it is well-established that a statute of
limitations runs from the time of the breach, BDI Const. Co. v. Hartford Fire Ins.
Co., 995 So.2d 576, 578 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008), not from the time when
consequential damages result or become ascertained, Medical Jet, S.A. v.
Signature Flight SupportPalm Beach, Inc., 941 So.2d 576, 578 (Fla. 4th DCA
2006).
416.33 AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE EQUITABLE ESTOPPEL
(Defendant) has raised the defense of equitable estoppel. To establish
this defense, (defendant) must prove all of the following:
1. [(Claimant) took action by (describe material action)]
[(Claimant) spoke about (describe material fact)]
[(Claimant) concealed or was silent about (describe material fact) at
a time when [he] [she] [it] knew of [that fact] [those facts]];
2. (Defendant) relied in good faith upon (claimant’s) [action] [words]
[inaction] [silence]; and
3. (Defendant’s) reliance on (claimant’s) [action] [words] [inaction]
[silence] caused (defendant) to change [his] [her] [its] position for
the worse.
NOTES ON USE FOR 416.33
The court should not give this instruction if it determines that the alleged
action, words, inaction, or silence was not material.
SOURCES AND AUTHORITIES FOR 416.33
1. The elements of equitable estoppel are (1) a representation as to a
material fact that is contrary to a later-asserted position, (2) reliance on that
representation, and (3) a change in position detrimental to the party claiming
estoppel, caused by the representation and reliance thereon.” State v. Harris, 881
So.2d 1079, 1084 (Fla. 2004).
2. [I]n order to work an estoppel, silence must be under such
circumstances that there are both a specific opportunity and a real apparent duty to
speak.” Thomas v. Dickinson, 30 So.2d 382, 384 (Fla. 1947).
3. The representation upon which an estoppel may be predicated may
consist of words, conduct, or, if there is a duty to speak, silence. Lloyds
Underwriters at London v. Keystone Equipment Finance Corp., 25 So.3d 89, 93
(Fla. 4th DCA 2009) (citations omitted).
4. The conduct . . . such as to create an estoppel . . . necessary to a
waiver consists of willful or negligent words and admissions, or conduct, acts and
acquiescence causing another to believe in a certain state of things by which such
other person is or may be induced to act to his prejudice. The acts or conduct need
not be positive, but can consist of failure to act or, more particularly, failure to
speak when under some duty to speak. Richards v. Dodge, 150 So.2d 477, 481
(Fla. 2d DCA 1963) (internal citations omitted).
416.34 [RESERVED FOR FUTURE USE]
416.35 AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE JUDICIAL ESTOPPEL
The committee has not drafted an instruction for the affirmative defense of
judicial estoppel because judicial estoppel is an equitable doctrine which a court is
to determine. See Blumberg v. USAA Cas. Ins. Co., 790 So.2d 1061, 1066 (Fla.
2001) (“Judicial estoppel is an equitable doctrine that is used to prevent litigants
from taking totally inconsistent positions in separate judicial, including quasi-
judicial, proceedings. (citation omitted).
416.36 AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE RATIFICATION
(Defendant) has raised the defense of ratification. To establish this
defense, (defendant) must prove all of the following:
1. (Defendant) performed [an act] [a transaction] which breached the
contract;
2. (Claimant) knew of the [act] [transaction];
3. (Claimant) knew that [he] [she] [it] could reject the contract
because of the [act] [transaction]; and
4. (Claimant) [accepted the [act] [transaction]] [expressed [his] [her]
[its] intention to accept the [act] [transaction]].
SOURCES AND AUTHORITIES FOR 416.36
1. An agreement is deemed ratified where the principal has full
knowledge of all material facts and circumstances relating to the unauthorized act
or transaction at the time of the ratification. An affirmative showing of the
principals intent to ratify the act in question is required. Frankenmuth Mut. Ins.
Co. v. Magaha, 769 So.2d 1012, 1022 (Fla. 2000) (citations omitted).
2. [W]here a party seeking rescission has discovered grounds for
rescinding an agreement and either remains silent when he should speak or in any
manner recognizes the contract as binding upon him, ratifies or accepts the benefits
thereof, he will be held to have waived his right to rescind. AVVA-BC, LLC v.
Amiel, 25 So.3d 7, 11 (Fla. 3d DCA 2009) (citation and internal quotations
omitted).
416.37 GOODS SOLD AND DELIVERED
(Claimant) claims that (defendant) owes [him] [her] [it] money for goods
which (claimant) sold and delivered to (defendant). To establish this claim,
(claimant) must prove all of the following:
1. (Claimant) sold and delivered goods to (defendant);
2. (Defendant) failed to pay for such goods; and
3. [The price agreed upon for] [The reasonable value of] the goods
which (claimant) sold and delivered to (defendant).
If the greater weight of the evidence does not support (claimant’s) claim
on these issues, then your verdict should be for (defendant). However, if the
greater weight of the evidence supports (claimant’s) claims on these issues,
then your verdict should be for (claimant) in the total amount of [his] [her]
[its] damages.
SOURCES AND AUTHORITIES FOR 416.37
1. “[T]he plaintiff was bound to prove the sale and delivery and the price
agreed upon for the [goods], or their value. The sale could be proved by the
delivery, from which the sale is presumed or implied.” Chase & Co. v. Miller, 88
So. 312, 314 (Fla. 1921).
2. “[T]he plaintiff failed to prove that it delivered certain [goods] to
defendant’s [place of business] and as such, no prima facie case for goods sold and
delivered was established.” Bosem v. A.R.A. Corp., 350 So. 2d 526, 527 (Fla. 3d
DCA 1977).
3. “[A] claim on an open account requires proof of a sales contract
between the creditor and debtor, and proof that the amount claimed by the creditor
represents either the agreed upon sales price or the reasonable value of the goods
actually delivered. . . . [I]t is clear that a claimant also must prove delivery of
goods and show either an agreement upon sales price or that amounts claimed
represent the reasonable value of the goods actually delivered.” Alderman Interior
Sys., Inc. v. First National-Heller Factors, Inc., 376 So. 2d 22, 24 (Fla. 2d DCA
1979).
4. Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.935 (Form) (“Defendant owes plaintiff $(amount)
that is due with interest since (date), for the following goods sold and delivered by
plaintiff to defendant between (date) and (date): (list goods and prices).”).
5. Fla. Sm. Cl. R. Form 7.331 (“There is now due, owing, and unpaid
from defendant to plaintiff $(amount) with interest since (date), for the following
goods sold and delivered by plaintiff to defendant between (date) and (date): (list
goods and prices and any credits).”).
416.38 OPEN ACCOUNT
(Claimant) claims that (defendant) owes [him] [her] [it] money on an
open account. An open account is an unsettled debt arising from [items of
work and labor] [goods sold and delivered] where the parties have had [a
transaction] [transactions] between them and expected to conduct further
transactions. To establish this claim, (claimant) must prove all of the
following:
1. (Claimant) and (defendant) had [a transaction] [transactions]
between them;
2. An account existed between (claimant) and (defendant) in which
the parties had a series of charges, payments, adjustments;
3. (Claimant) prepared an itemized statement of the account; and
4. (Defendant) owes money on the account.
If the greater weight of the evidence does not support (claimant’s) claim
on these issues, then your verdict should be for (defendant). However, if the
greater weight of the evidence supports (claimant’s) claim on these issues,
[then your verdict should be for (claimant) in the total amount of [his] [her]
[its] damages] [then you shall consider the [defense] [defenses] raised by
(defendant)].
SOURCES AND AUTHORITIES FOR 416.38
1. “[A]n open account is an unsettled debt arising from items of work
and labor, with the expectation of further transactions subject to future settlements
and adjustment. In order to state a valid claim on an open account, the claimant
must attach an itemized copy of the account.” Farley v. Chase Bank, U.S.A., N.A.,
37 So.3d 936, 937 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010) (citations and quotations omitted).
2. “An account opened is an unsettled debt arising from items of work
and labor, with the expectation of further transactions subject to future settlements
and adjustment.” S. Motor Co. of Dade Cnty. v. Accountable Const. Co., 707 So.2d
909, 912 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998).
3. “An action to recover on an open account is essentially an action to
collect on a debt created by a series of credit transactions. One party to the account
agrees to sell goods or services on credit and the other assumes the obligation to
make payment. These duties do not change merely because the parties have
decided to engage in a course of trade on a cash basis.” Hawkins v. Barnes, 661
So.2d 1271, 1273 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995) (citations omitted).
4. “An open account is one which is based upon a connected series of
transactions, and which has no break or interruption …. [A]n open account has
been defined as an unsettled debt arising from items of work and labor, goods sold
and delivered with the expectation of further transactions subject to further
settlement. Money advanced may form the basis of an open account.” Central Ins.
Underwriters, Inc. v. National Ins. Fin. Co., 599 So.2d 1371, 1373 (Fla. 3d DCA
1992) (citations and quotations omitted).
5. “An ‘open account’ is ... defined as an unsettled debt arising from
items of work and labor, goods sold and delivered, with the expectation of further
transactions subject to future settlement and adjustment.” Robert W. Gottfried, Inc.
v. Cole, 454 So.2d 695, 696 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984).
6. Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.932 (Form) (“A copy of the account showing items,
time of accrual of each, and amount of each must be attached” to the Complaint).
7. But see Evans v. Delro Industries, Inc., 509 So.2d 1262, 1263 (Fla. 1st
DCA 1987) (purportedly an action for “open account,” but requiring proof of sales
contract, proof of sales price or reasonable value of goods delivered, and proof of
actual delivery) (citing Chase & Co. v. Miller, 88 So. 312 (Fla. 1921) (an action
involving common counts for goods bargained and sold and goods sold and
delivered), and Alderman Interior Systems, Inc. v. First National-Heller Factors,
Inc., 376 So.2d 22 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979) (same)).
416.39 ACCOUNT STATED
(Claimant) claims that (defendant) owes [him] [her] [it] money on an
account stated. An account stated involves a transaction or series of
transactions for which a specific amount of money is due. To establish this
claim, (claimant) must prove all of the following:
1. (Claimant) and (defendant) had [a transaction] [transactions]
between them;
2. [(Claimant) and (defendant) agreed upon the balance due] [or]
[(Claimant) rendered a statement to (defendant) and (defendant)
failed to object within a reasonable time to a statement of [his]
[her] [its] account];
3. (Defendant) expressly or implicitly promised to pay (claimant) [this
balance] [the amount set forth in the statement]; and
4. (Defendant) has not paid (claimant) [any] [all] of the amount owed
under the account.
If the greater weight of the evidence does not support (claimant’s) claim
on these issues, then your verdict should be for (defendant). However, if the
greater weight of the evidence supports (claimant’s) claim on these issues,
[then your verdict should be for (claimant) in the total amount of [his] [her]
[its] damages] [then you shall consider the [defense] [defenses] raised by
(defendant)].
SOURCES AND AUTHORITIES FOR 416.39
1. There must be an agreement between the parties that a certain balance
is correct and due and an express or implicit promise to pay this balance. Merrill-
Stevens Dry Dock Co. v. Corniche Exp., 400 So.2d 1286, 1286 (Fla. 3d DCA
1981).
2. The action for an account stated is an action for a sum certain, and
where there is no such agreement between the parties, the plaintiff may not recover
upon a theory of account stated. Merrill-Stevens Dry Dock Co. v. Corniche Exp.,
400 So.2d 1286, 1286-87 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981); FDIC v. Brodie, 602 So. 2d 1358,
1361 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992); Carpenter Contractors of Am., Inc. v. Fastener Corp. of
Am., Inc., 611 So.2d 564, 565 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992).
3. An account statement is not absolutely conclusive upon the parties as
the presumption of the account’s accuracy and correctness may be overcome by
proof of fraud, mistake, or error. Farley v. Chase Bank, U.S.A., N.A., 37 So.3d
936, 937 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010).
4. An agreement to a resulting balance may be established by the failure
to object to the account statement. Myrick v. St. Catherine Laboure Manor, Inc.,
529 So.2d 369, 371 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988).
5. An objection to an account must be made within a reasonable time.
Robert C. Malt & Co. v. Kelly Tractor Co., 518 So.2d 991, 992 (Fla. 4th DCA
1988).
6. Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.933 (Form) (“A copy of the account showing items,
time of accrual of each, and amount of each must be attached” to the Complaint).
416.40 MONEY HAD AND RECEIVED
(Claimant) claims that (defendant) has received money which [he] [she]
[it] ought to refund to (claimant). To establish this claim, (claimant) must
prove all of the following:
1. (Defendant) received (claimant’s) money;
2. (Defendant) received the money as the result of (insert brief
summary of basis of claim); and
3. The circumstances are such that (defendant) should, in all fairness,
be required to return the money to (claimant).
SOURCES AND AUTHORITIES FOR 416.40
1. The common law action for money had and received derives from the
common law action of assumpsit. The action is used to recover money which a
defendant erroneously receives in circumstances where it would be unjust for the
defendant to retain the money. While this is a legal action, it draws “upon the
equitable principle that no one ought to be unjustly enriched at the expense of
another.” Sharp v. Bowling, 511 So.2d 363, 364-65 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987).
2. A claim for money had and received may be based upon a wide
variety of grounds including: (1) upon consideration which has failed, Deco
Purchasing & Distributing Co. v. Panzirer, 450 So.2d 1274, 1275 (Fla. 5th DCA
1984); (2) for money paid by mistake, First State Bank of Fort Meade v.
Singletary, 169 So. 407 (Fla. 1936); (3) for money obtained through imposition,
extortion, or coercion, Cullen v. Seaboard Air Line R. Co., 58 So. 182, 184 (Fla.
1912); or (4) where defendant had taken undue advantage of claimant’s situation,
Moss v. Condict, 16 So.2d 921, 922 (Fla. 1944). The foregoing list is not exclusive,
and a claim for money had and received may be based upon any set of facts “which
show that an injustice would occur if money were not refunded.” Moore Handley,
Inc. v. Major Realty Corp., 340 So.2d 1238, 1239 (Fla. 4th DCA 1976).
416.41 MISAPPROPRIATION OF TRADE SECRETS
(Claimant) claims that [he] [she] [it] had a trade secret and that (defendant)
misappropriated that trade secret.
To prove that (claimant) had a trade secret, [he] [she] [it] must prove that:
1. (Claimant) had (insert description of information) that:
a. derived actual or potential independent economic
value from not being generally known to other
persons who could obtain value from its disclosure or
use; and
b. was not readily ascertainable by proper means by
other persons.
2. (Claimant) took reasonable steps, under the circumstances,
to maintain the secrecy of (insert description of information).
If you find that (claimant) proved that [he] [she] [it] had a trade secret,
then (claimant) must further establish that the trade secret was
misappropriated by proving that: Select one or more of the following:
a. Acquisition Theory, § 688.002(2)(a) [(Defendant)
acquired (claimant’s) trade secret and (defendant)
knew or had reason to know the trade secret was
acquired through improper means, such as [theft]
[bribery] [misrepresentation] [breach of a duty to
maintain secrecy] [inducing a breach of duty to
maintain secrecy] [espionage through electronic or
other means].]
b. Disclosure Theory, § 688.002(2)(b)(1) [(Defendant)
disclosed or used (claimant’s) trade secret without
[his] [her] [its] [express] [implied] consent and
(defendant) used improper means to acquire
knowledge of the trade secret, such as [theft] [bribery]
[misrepresentation] [breach of a duty to maintain
secrecy] [inducing a breach of duty to maintain
secrecy] [espionage through electronic or other
means].]
c. Disclosure Theory, § 688.002(2)(b)(2)(a) [(Defendant)
disclosed or used (claimant’s) trade secret without
[his] [her] [its] [express] [implied] consent at a time
when (defendant) knew or had reason to know that
[his] [her] [its] knowledge of (claimant’s) trade secret
came from or through a person who had used
improper means to acquire that trade secret, such as
[theft] [bribery] [misrepresentation] [breach of a duty
to maintain secrecy] [inducing a breach of duty to
maintain secrecy] [espionage through electronic or
other means].]
d. Disclosure Theory, § 688.002(2)(b)(2)(b) [(Defendant)
disclosed or used (claimant’s) trade secret without
(claimant’s) [express] [implied] consent at a time when
(defendant) knew or had reason to know that [he] [she]
[it]acquired the trade secret under circumstances
where [he] [she] [it] had a duty to maintain its secrecy
or limit its use.]
e. Disclosure Theory, § 688.002(2)(b)(2)(c) [(Defendant)
disclosed or used (claimant’s) trade secret without
[his] [her] [its] [express] [implied] consent at a time
when (defendant) knew or had reason to know that
(defendant’s) knowledge of (claimant’s) trade secret
was acquired from or through a person who owed a
duty to (claimant) to maintain its secrecy or limit its
use.]
f. Accident or Mistake Theory, § 688.002(2)(b)(3)
[(Defendant) disclosed or used (claimant’s) trade secret
without [his] [her] [its] [express] [implied] consent,
and before a material change in (defendant’s) position,
[he] [she] [it] knew or had reason to know that the
information was a trade secret and that knowledge of
the trade secret had been acquired by accident or
mistake.]
NOTE ON USE FOR 416.41
1. For the liability elements of misappropriation of trade secrets see
§688.002, Florida Statutes.
416.42 BREACH OF DUTY TO DISCLOSE RESIDENTIAL
To [recover damages from] [be entitled to rescind the transaction with]
(defendant) for nondisclosure in connection with the purchase of residential
real property, (claimant) must prove all of the following:
1. There was a condition in the property that:
a. Materially and adversely affected the value of the
property; and
b. Was not readily observable and was not otherwise
known to (claimant).
2. (Defendant) knew of the condition and did not disclose it to
(claimant).
NOTES ON USE FOR 416.42
1. Johnson v. Davis, 480 So. 2d 625 (Fla. 1985), held that “where the
seller of a home knows of facts materially affecting the value of the property which
are not readily observable and are not known to the buyer, the seller is under a duty
to disclose them to the buyer. This duty is equally applicable to all forms of real
property, new and used.”
2. As crafted by the supreme court [in Johnson v. Davis], the
materiality of a fact is to be determined objectively by focusing on the relationship
between the undisclosed fact and the value of the property.” Billian v. Mobil Corp.,
710 So. 2d 984, 987 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998).
3. The committee takes no position on the precise parameters of the
“readily observable” standard as that is generally a question of fact for the jury to
determine. Compare Nelson v. Wiggs, 699 So. 2d 258 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997); M/I
Schottenstein Homes, Inc. v. Azam, 813 So. 2d 91 (Fla. 2002); Newbern v.
Mansbach, 777 So. 2d 1044 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001).
416.43 PIERCING THE CORPORATE VEIL
A (form of business entity) is a legal entity separate from its owner(s). An
owner can be an/a [individual] [(form of business entity)]. The owner(s) are not
liable for the acts of the (form of business entity) unless there is a piercing of
the corporate veil. In this case, (claimant) seeks to “pierce the corporate veil”
between (form of business entity) and (owner) so as to impose obligations upon
(owner) that otherwise would be owing, if at all, solely from (form of business
entity).
In order to pierce the corporate veil and hold (owner) liable for
obligations of (form of business entity), (claimant) must show that:
1. (Owner) dominated and controlled (form of business entity)
such that:
a. (form of business entity)’s separate identity was not
sufficiently maintained, and
b. (form of business entity) lacked an existence
independent from (owner); and
2. The corporate form of (business entity) was [formed] [used]
for a fraudulent or improper purpose; and
3. (Claimant) was harmed by the fraudulent or improper
[formation] [use] of the corporate form of (business entity).
NOTES ON USE FOR 416.43
1. The context of each case dictates what terms should be inserted into
the bracketed spaces. Sometimes, plaintiffs or other claimants sue both the
business entity and the individual who are the subjects of the veil piercing claim,
so the form instruction identifies the defendants as “(form of business entity)” and
“owner,” but this may not be appropriate in all cases. There may also be more than
one entity or individual in any particular case.
2. “The mere fact that one or two individuals own and control the stock
structure of a corporation does not lead inevitably to the conclusion that the
corporate entity is a fraud or that it is necessarily the alter ego of its stockholders to
the extent that the debts of the corporation should be imposed upon them
personally.” Dania Jai-Alai Palace, Inc. v. Sykes, 450 So. 2d 1114, 1120 (Fla.
1984).
3. Although this doctrine arose in the corporate context, case law
appears to apply this doctrine to other business entities such as limited liability
companies. See, e.g., Houri v. Boaziz, 196 So. 3d 383 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016)
(discussing piercing the veil of limited liability companies).
SOURCES AND AUTHORITIES FOR 416.43
Dania Jai-Alai Palace, Inc. v. Sykes, 450 So. 2d 1114, 1120 (Fla. 1984)
(citing Advertects v. Sawyer Industries, Inc., 84 So. 2d 21, 23, 24 (Fla. 1955)), is
the seminal case on this topic; Beltran v. Miraglia, 125 So. 3d 855 (Fla. 4th DCA
2013) (causality of harm arose from improper conduct of the defendant); Gasparini
v. Pordomingo, 972 So. 2d 1053 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008) (only one or few owners
would not permit piercing of corporate veil even if it were the alter ego of the
shareholder); Steinhardt v. Banks, 511 So. 2d 336 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987) (illegal
purpose, fraud, or evading existing obligations).
416.44 LEGAL STATUS OF ENTITIES
[Claimant] [Defendant] is a (type of business entity). A (type of business
entity) is a person under the law. All persons, whether (type of business entity)
or individuals, are entitled to equal treatment under the law.
A (type of business entity) can act only through its [agent(s)]
[employee(s)] [officer(s)] [director(s)] [manager(s)] [member(s)] [partner(s)].
NOTES ON USE FOR 416.44
1. Not every entity (e.g., sole proprietorships and general partnerships)
may constitute a legal person, and the court should only give this instruction when
the entity is recognized under the law as a separate legal person. A government
organization may be a separate legal person under the law and, as determined by
the court, may be deemed a business entity within the meaning of this instruction.
2. The list of individuals through which an entity can act is not
exhaustive. Additionally, individuals may act in more than one capacity on behalf
of an entity, and an entity may act through more than one individual. The court
should tailor this instruction as the circumstances of the case require when the
entity is recognized under the law as a legal person.
3. In an appropriate situation, it may be necessary for the court to
instruct the jury whether the agent, employee, officer, director, manager, member,
or partner of the entity is testifying on behalf of himself/herself, the entity, or both.
416.46 PROMISSORY ESTOPPEL
A party who has not entered a contract to do something, but who has
promised to do something, sometimes has a legal obligation to fulfill the
promise, but only when specific conditions are met. This is sometimes called
“promissory estoppel.” To recover damages from (defendant) for promissory
estoppel, (claimant) must prove all of the following:
1. (Defendant) promised to [describe subject matter of alleged
promise];
2. (Defendant) should have expected the promise to change
(claimant)’s behavior;
3. In reliance on (defendant)’s promise, (claimant) changed
[his] [her] [its] behavior; and
4. Injustice can be avoided only if the promise is enforced.
To “change behavior” means to do something of significance that the
person otherwise would not have done, or to refrain from doing something of
significance that the person otherwise would have done.
A claim of this kind must be proved by clear and convincing evidence,
not just by the greater weight of the evidence. Your verdict will be for
(claimant) on this claim only if you find by clear and convincing evidence each
of the elements that I just described to you.
NOTES ON USE FOR 416.46
1. The definition of the clear and convincing evidence standard is set
forth in Standard Jury InstructionCivil 405.4.
2. No Florida court has directly decided the issue of whether the court or
a jury should decide the issues related to a promissory estoppel claim; however,
there are several Florida appellate decisions that have indicated that it is
appropriate to submit such a claim to a jury. See, e.g., Sunshine Bottling Co. v.
Tropicana Prods. Inc., 757 So. 2d 1231, 1232 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000) (concluding
that trial court erred in entering a judgment notwithstanding the verdict and
reversing and remanding for reinstatement of the jury’s award on the promissory
estoppel claim); W.R. Townsend Contracting, Inc. v. Jensen Civil Constr., Inc., 728
So. 2d 297, 306 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999) (reversing order dismissing promissory
estoppel claim and remanding with instructions for a jury trial).
SOURCES AND AUTHORITIES FOR 416.46
1. The Florida Supreme Court recognized the existence of an affirmative
cause of action for promissory estoppel in W.R. Grace & Co. v. Geodata Servs.,
Inc., 547 So. 2d 919 (Fla. 1989). The Court held that the doctrine applies “where
the promise is definite, of a substantial nature, and established by clear and
convincing evidence.” Id. at 920. The Court further stated that “[t]he basic
elements of promissory estoppel are set forth in Restatement (Second) of Contracts
sec. 90 (1979),” and quoted the following from the Restatement: “A promise which
the promisor should reasonably expect to induce action or forbearance on the part
of the promise or a third person and which does induce such action or forbearance
is binding if injustice can be avoided only by enforcement of the promise.” Id. at
924. But see, State, Dep’t of Health and Rehabilitative Servs. v. Law Offices of
Donald W. Belveal, 663 So. 2d 650, 652 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995) (“The law of this
state recognizes that the theory of promissory estoppel applies to the sovereign
only under exceptional circumstances.”).
2. In Doe v. Univision Television Grp., Inc., 717 So. 2d 63, 65 (Fla. 3d
DCA 1998), the court held that “the doctrine of promissory estoppel comes into
play where the requisites of contract are not met, yet the promise should be
enforced to avoid injustice.”
3. A cause of action for promissory estoppel is not available where the
claim would be barred by the statute of frauds. Coral Reef Drive Land Dev., LLC v.
Duke Realty Ltd. P’ship, 45 So. 3d 897, 906 n. 8 (Cope, J., dissenting), citing
Tannenbaum v. Biscayne Osteopathic Hosp., Inc., 190 So. 2d 777, 779 (Fla. 1966).
SECTION 500 DAMAGES
504.1 Introduction to Contract Damages
504.2 Breach of Contract Damages
504.3 Lost Profits
504.4 Damages for Complete Destruction to Business
504.5 Owner’s Damages for Breach of Contract to Construct Improvements
to Real Property
504.6 Obligation to Pay Money Only
504.7 Buyer’s Damages for Breach of Contract for Sale of Real Property
504.8 Seller’s Damages for Breach of Contract to Purchase Real Property
504.9 Mitigation of Damages
504.10 Present Cash Value of Future Damages
504.11 Nominal Damages
NOTE ON USE
These instructions are numbered 504 to not conflict with the instructions
already numbered 501 through 503 by the Florida Supreme Court Committee on
Standard Jury Instructions in Civil Cases.
504.1 INTRODUCTION TO CONTRACT DAMAGES
If you find for (defendant), you will not consider the matter of damages.
But, if you find for (claimant), you should award (claimant) an amount of money
that the greater weight of the evidence shows will fairly and adequately
compensate (claimant) for [his] [her] [its] damages. You shall consider the
following type(s) of damages:
504.2 BREACH OF CONTRACT DAMAGES
a. Compensatory damages:
Compensatory damages is that amount of money which will put
(claimant) in as good a position as [he] [she] [it] would have been if (defendant)
had not breached the contract and which naturally result from the breach.
SOURCES AND AUTHORITIES FOR 504.2a
1. Capitol Environmental Svcs., Inc. v. Earth Tech, Inc., 25 So.3d 593,
596 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009) (“It is well-settled that the injured party in a breach of
contract action is entitled to recover monetary damages that will put it in the same
position it would have been had the other party not breached the contract.”).
2. Sharick v. Se. University of the Health Sciences, Inc., 780 So.2d 136,
139 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000) (“Damages recoverable by a party injured by a breach of
contract are those which would naturally result from the breach and can reasonably
be said to have been contemplated by the parties at the time the contract was
made.”).
b. Special damages:
Special damages is that amount of money which will compensate
(claimant) for those damages which do not normally result from the breach of
contract. To recover special damages, (claimant) must prove that when the
parties made the contract, (defendant) knew or reasonably should have known
of the special circumstances leading to such damages.
SOURCES AND AUTHORITIES FOR 504.2b
1. Land Title of Central Fla., LLC v. Jimenez, 946 So.2d 90, 93 (Fla. 5th
DCA 2006) (“Special damages are those that do not necessarily result from the
wrong or breach of contract complained of, or which the law does not imply as a
result of that injury, even though they might naturally and proximately result from
the injury. More succinctly, special damages are damages that do not follow by
implication of law merely upon proof of the breach.”) (citations omitted).
2. Hardwick Properties, Inc. v. Newbern, 711 So.2d 35, 40 (Fla. 1st
DCA 1998) (“[S]pecial damages are not likely to occur in the usual course of
events, but may reasonably be supposed to have been in contemplation of the
parties at the time they made the contract. Special damages consist of items of loss
which are peculiar to the party against whom the breach was committed and would
not be expected to occur regularly to others in similar circumstances.”) (citation
and internal quotations omitted).
3. Hardwick, 711 So.2d at 40 (“Similarly, consequential damages do not
arise within the scope of the immediate buyer-seller transaction, but rather stem
from losses incurred by the non-breaching party in its dealings, often with third
parties, which were a proximate result of the breach, and which were reasonably
foreseeable by the breaching party at the time of contracting.”) (citation and
internal quotations omitted).
4. Lanzalotti v. Cohen, 113 So.2d 727, 731 (Fla. 3d DCA 1959)
(“Recovery may include special damages which are reasonably and necessarily
incurred as a proximate result of the failure of the lessor or sublessor to perform his
contract to make a lease or sublease, and such as should reasonably have been
contemplated by the parties.”).
5. Fla. E. Coast Railway Co. v. Peters, 83 So. 559, 563 (Fla. 1919) (“If
the owner of the goods would charge the carrier with any special damages, he must
have communicated to the carrier all the facts and circumstances of the case which
do not ordinarily attend the carriage or the particular character and value of the
property carried, for otherwise such peculiar circumstances cannot be
contemplated by the carrier.”) (citation omitted).
504.3 LOST PROFITS
To be entitled to recover lost profits, (claimant) must prove both of the
following:
1. (Defendant’s) actions caused (claimant) to lose profits; and
2. (Claimant) can establish the amount of [his] [her] [its] lost profits
with reasonable certainty.
For (claimant) to establish the amount of [his] [her] [its] lost profits with
reasonable certainty, [he] [she] [it] must prove that a reasonable person would
be satisfied that the amount of lost profits which [he] [she] [it] may be entitled
to recover is not simply the result of speculation or guessing. Instead,
(claimant) must prove that there is some standard by which the amount of lost
profits may be established. (Claimant) does not have to be able to prove that
the amount of lost profits can be calculated with mathematical precision as
long as [he] [she] [it] has shown there is a reasonable basis for determining the
amount of the loss.
[Even though (claimant’s) business is not established or does not have a
“track record,” [he] [she] [it] still may be able to establish the amount of lost
profits which [he] [she] [it] may be entitled to recover if [he] [she] [it] proves
that there is some standard by which the amount of lost profits may be
established.]
NOTE ON USE FOR 504.3
Provide the bracketed language if the claimant’s business is not established
or does not have a “track record.”
SOURCES AND AUTHORITIES FOR 504.3
1. River Bridge Corp. v. Am. Somax Ventures ex rel. Am. Home Dev.
Corp., 18 So.3d 648, 650 (Fla. 4th DCA 2009) (“When a party seeks lost future
profits based upon a breach of contract or other wrong, the party must prove that
the lost profits were a direct result of the defendant’s actions and that the amount
of the lost profits can be established with reasonable certainty.”) (citation and
internal quotations omitted).
2. Levitt-ANSCA Towne Park P’ship v. Smith & Co., 873 So.2d 392, 396
(Fla. 4th DCA 2004) (“Lost profits must be proven with a reasonable degree of
certainty before they are recoverable. The mind of a prudent impartial person
should be satisfied that the damages are not the result of speculation or
conjecture.”) (citation and internal quotations omitted).
3. Marshall Auto Painting & Collision, Inc. v. Westco Eng’g, Inc., 2003
WL 25668018 *7 (M.D. Fla. 2003) (“[T]he Florida Supreme Court has stated that
a business can recover lost prospective profits [if] … there is some standard by
which the amount of the damages may be adequately determined… . The requisite
… allowance [for lost profits] is some standard, such as regular market values, or
other established data, by reference to which the amount may be satisfactorily
established.”) (citations and internal quotation marks omitted).
4. W.W. Gay Mechanical Contractor, Inc. v. Wharfside Two, Ltd., 545
So.2d 1348, 1351 (Fla. 1989) (“A business can recover lost prospective profits
regardless of whether it is established or has any ‘track record.’ The party must
prove that 1) the defendant’s action caused the damage and 2) there is some
standard by which the amount of damages may be adequately determined.”).
504.4 DAMAGES FOR COMPLETE DESTRUCTION OF BUSINESS
If (claimant) proved that (defendant) completely destroyed (claimant’s)
business, then you must award (claimant) damages based upon the market
value of (claimant’s) business on the date (claimant’s) business was destroyed.
NOTE ON USE FOR 504.4
The court should give this instruction when the claimant seeks damages for
the complete destruction of a business. If a business has not been completely
destroyed, then damages based upon the market value of the business are not
appropriate, and the court should not give this instruction. Instead, the court
should give instruction 504.3 regarding lost profits.
SOURCES AND AUTHORITIES FOR 504.4
1. “If a business is completely destroyed, the proper total measure of
damages is the market value of the business on the date of the loss. If the business
is not completely destroyed, then it may recover lost profits. A business may not
recover both lost profits and the market value of the business.” Montage Grp., Ltd.
v. Athle-Tech Computer Systems, Inc., 889 So.2d 180, 193 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004)
(citations omitted).
2. “Market value,” as used in this instruction, is not meant to suggest a
particular approach to determining market value. See, e.g., Fidelity Warranty
Servs., Inc. v. Firstate Ins. Holdings, Inc., 74 So.3d 506, 514 n.5 (Fla. 4th DCA
2011) (discussing various approaches).
3. “Courts in other jurisdictions have generally rejected the notion that
‘fair value’ is synonymous with ‘fair market value.’” Boettcher v. IMC Mortg. Co.,
871 So.2d 1047, 1052 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004). “The rationale underlying this
language is the recognition that the events that trigger the valuation process may
either disrupt or preclude the market for the shares, if in fact such a market ever
existed as in the case of a closely held corporation.” Id. (citation omitted).
504.5 OWNER’S DAMAGES FOR BREACH OF CONTRACT TO
CONSTRUCT IMPROVEMENTS ON REAL PROPERTY
The amount of damages recoverable for breach of a contract to
construct improvements on real property is:
a. In cases where the defendant does not contend that the damages
claimed by the claimant constitute unreasonable economic waste:
The reasonable cost to (claimant) of completing the work in accordance
with the contract
less the balance due under the contract.
b. In cases where the defendant contends that the damages claimed by
the claimant constitute unreasonable economic waste:
If construction and completion in accordance with the contract would
not involve unreasonable economic waste, the reasonable cost to (claimant) of
completing the work in accordance with the contract
less the balance due
under the contract;
or
If construction and completion in accordance with the contract would
involve unreasonable economic waste, the difference between the fair market
value of (claimant’s) real property as improved and its fair market value if
(defendant) had constructed the improvements in accordance with the
contract, measured at the time of the breach.
SOURCES AND AUTHORITIES FOR 504.5
1. In Grossman Holdings Ltd. v. Hourihan, 414 So.2d 1037, 1039 (Fla.
1982), the Florida Supreme Court adopted Section 346 of the Restatement (First)
of Contracts (1932), which provides, in relevant part:
For a breach by one who has contracted to construct a specified product, the
other party can get judgment for compensatory damages for all unavoidable
harm that the builder had reason to foresee when the contract was made, less
such part of the contract price as has not been paid and is not still payable,
determined as follows:
(a) For defective or unfinished construction he can get judgment for
either
(i) the reasonable cost of construction and completion in
accordance with the contract, if this is possible and does not
involve unreasonable economic waste; or
(ii) the difference between the value that the product contracted for
would have had and the value of the performance that has been
received by the plaintiff, if construction and completion in
accordance with the contract would involve unreasonable
economic waste.
2. Heine v. Parent Construction, Inc., 4 So.3d 790, 792 (Fla. 4th DCA
2009) (“The [Florida] [S]upreme [C]ourt ... adopted section 346(1)(a) of the
Restatement (First) of Contracts (1932), as the law for the measure of damages in a
claim for breach of a construction contract.”).
3. Centex-Rooney Construction Co. v. Martin Cnty., 706 So.2d 20, 27
(Fla. 4th DCA 1997) (“In a case involving the breach of a construction contract, a
recognized measure of damages is the reasonable cost of performing construction
and repairs in conformance with the original contract’s requirements.”).
504.6 OBLIGATION TO PAY MONEY ONLY
To recover damages for the breach of a contract to pay money,
(claimant) must prove the amount due under the contract.
SOURCE AND AUTHORITY FOR 504.6
See Murciano v. Garcia, 958 So.2d 423, 423 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007) (“[T]o
prevail on a breach of contract action, [a plaintiff] must prove (1) a valid contract;
(2) a material breach; and (3) damages.”).
504.7 BUYER’S DAMAGES FOR BREACH OF CONTRACT FOR SALE
OF REAL PROPERTY
To recover damages for the breach of a contract to sell real property,
(claimant) must prove that [he] [she] [it] was ready, willing, and able to
perform the contract.
If (claimant) proves that [he] [she] [it] was ready, willing, and able to
perform the contract, then (claimant) may recover:
1. The amount of any payment made by (claimant) toward the
purchase price; and
2. The amount of any reasonable expenses for examining title.
If (claimant) also proves that (defendant) acted in bad faith in breaching
the contract or that (defendant) sold the property to a third party after
entering into the contract, then (claimant) also may recover the difference
between the fair market value of the property on the date of the breach and
the contract price.
NOTE ON USE FOR 504.7
The court should give this instruction when a buyer is seeking damages as a
remedy for the breach of a contract for the sale of real property. This instruction
does not apply to claims for specific performance. See Castigliano v. O’Connor,
911 So.2d 145, 148 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005) (a decree of specific performance is an
equitable remedy); 381651 Alberta, Ltd. v. 279298 Alberta, Ltd., 675 So.2d 1385,
1387 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996) (the right to a jury trial applies only to legal and not
equitable causes of action).
SOURCES AND AUTHORITIES FOR 504.7
1. In Gassner v. Lockett, 101 So.2d 33, 34 (Fla. 1958), the Florida
Supreme Court, quoting Key v. Alexander, 108 So. 883, 885 (Fla. 1926), stated
(emphasis and internal quotations omitted):
The law is well settled that in an action brought by the vendee against
the vendor upon a valid contract for the sale of land when the vendor has
breached such contract, the general rule as to the measure of damages is that
the vendee is entitled to such purchase money as he paid, together with
interest and expenses of investigating title. This rule, however, does not
apply where there is want of good faith in the vendor, which may be shown
by any acts inconsistent with the utmost good faith. In such cases, or in cases
where the vendor had no title but acting on the supposition that he might
acquire title, he is liable for the value of the land at the time of the breach
with interest from that date … .
The reason for the rule seems to be that where a vendor acts in good
faith he should not be liable for more than the actual loss which might be
suffered by the vendee. On the other hand, there is no reason why the vendor
should be allowed to benefit from such mistake even though it was made in
good faith. Every rule of logic and justice would seem to indicate that where
a vendor is unable to perform a prior contract for the sale of lands because of
a subsequent sale of the same land, he should be held, to the extent of any
profit in the subsequent sale, to be a trustee for the prior vendee and
accountable to such vendee for any profit.
2. Hollywood Mall, Inc. v. Capozzi, 545 So.2d 918, 921 (Fla. 4th DCA
1989) (“To obtain damages for anticipatory breach of contract, the purchaser must
also show that he was ready, willing, and able to perform the contract.”) (citing
Hosp. Mortg. Grp. v. First Prudential Dev. Corp., 411 So.2d 181 (Fla. 1982)).
3. Coppola Enterprises, Inc. v. Alfone, 531 So.2d 334, 335-36 (Fla.
1988) (“A seller will not be permitted to profit from his breach of a contract with a
buyer, even absent proof of fraud or bad faith, when the breach is followed by a
sale of the land to a subsequent purchaser.”).
4. Port Largo Club, Inc. v. Warren, 476 So.2d 1330, 1333 (Fla. 3d DCA
1985) (“Where bad faith exists a purchaser may obtain, as a portion of his full
compensatory damages, loss of bargain damages, i.e., the difference between the
contract price and the value of the property on the closing date.”).
5. Wolofsky v. Behrman, 454 So.2d 614, 615 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984)
(“Florida has long since aligned itself with the English rule announced in Flureau
v. Thornhill, 2 W.Bl. 1078, 96 Eng.Rep. 635, to the effect that, except where a
vendor has acted in bad faith, his liability for breach of a land sale contract is
limited to the amount of the deposit paid by the purchaser, with interest and
reimbursement for expenses in investigating title to the property. However, absent
good faith, he is liable for full compensatory damages, including the loss of his
bargain, which is the difference between the value of the property and the contract
price.”).
6. Bosso v. Neuner, 426 So.2d 1209, 1212 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983)
(“However, where bad faith exists the purchaser may obtain loss of bargain
damages which is the difference in value between the price the purchaser had
agreed to pay and the value of the property on the contracted date for closing.”).
7. Horton v. O’Rourke, 321 So.2d 612, 613 (Fla. 2d DCA 1975) (“[I]n
the absence of bad faith the damages recoverable for breach by the vendor of an
executory contract to convey title to real estate are the purchase money paid by the
purchaser together with interest and expenses of investigating title.”).
504.8 SELLER’S DAMAGES FOR BREACH OF CONTRACT TO
PURCHASE REAL PROPERTY
To recover damages for the breach of a contract to buy real property,
(claimant) must prove that [he] [she] [it] performed, or had the ability to
perform, all of [his] [her] [its] obligations necessary for closing.
If (claimant) proves that [he] [she] [it] performed, or had the ability to
perform, all of [his] [her] [its] obligations necessary for closing, then (claimant)
may recover:
1. The difference between the contract sales price and the fair
market value of the property on the date of the breach, less any
amount which (defendant) previously paid; and
2. Any damages which the parties contemplated when the parties
made the contract and which normally result from the breach of
contract.
NOTES ON USE FOR 504.8
1. The court should give this instruction when a seller is seeking
damages as a remedy for the breach of a contract for the purchase of real property.
This instruction does not apply to claims for specific performance. See Castigliano
v. O’Connor, 911 So.2d 145, 148 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005) (a decree of specific
performance is an equitable remedy); 381651 Alberta, Ltd. v. 279298 Alberta, Ltd.,
675 So.2d 1385, 1387 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996) (the right to a jury trial applies only to
legal and not equitable causes of action).
2. The court should give this instruction where the contract does not
contain a liquidated damages provision or where the liquidated damages provision
has been determined to be unenforceable.
SOURCES AND AUTHORITIES FOR 504.8
1. Pembroke v. Caudill, 37 So.2d 538, 541 (Fla. 1948) (receded from on
other grounds by Hutchison v. Tompkins, 259 So.2d 129, 130 (Fla. 1972)) (“[T]he
measure of the sellers’ damage ordinarily being in such cases [where the buyer
breaches the contract] the difference between the agreed purchase price and the
actual value of the property at the time of the breach of the contract of purchase,
less the amount paid.”).
2. Buschman v. Clark, 583 So.2d 799, 800 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991) (“[T]he
measure of damages for breach of a real estate sales contract is the difference
between the contract sales price and the fair market value of the property on the
date of the breach. All additional damages must be alleged and proved to have
been contemplated by the parties and must be a natural and proximate result of the
breach.”).
3. When the seller elects to sue for breach of contract, “the measure of
damages is the difference between the price the buyer agreed to pay for the
property and the fair market value of the property on the date of the breach.” Frank
Silvestri, Inc. v. Hilltop Developers, Inc., 418 So.2d 1201, 1203 (Fla. 5th DCA
1982). “If a seller has suffered additional damage, he must allege and prove that
those damages were contemplated by the parties and were a natural and proximate
result of the breach.” Id. at 1203 n.1.
4. Cohen v. Champlain Towers N. Assocs., 452 So.2d 989, 991 (Fla. 3d
DCA 1984) (seller must show ability to perform all conditions precedent to recover
damages) (citing Hosp. Mortg. Grp. v. First Prudential Dev. Corp., 411 So.2d 181
(Fla. 1982)).
5. Redmond v. Prosper, Inc., 364 So.2d 812, 813 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978)
(proper measure of damages for breach of real estate contract is “the excess of the
contract sales price over the market value as of the time of the breach, less the
amount previously paid”).
6. Popwell v. Abel, 226 So.2d 418, 422 (Fla. 4th DCA 1969) (“In the
ordinary case where a purchaser of land breaches his contract to buy, the difference
between the value of the land on the date of breach as compared with the date of
sale would restore the vendor, but the vendor may still allege and prove as proper
elements of damage all those damages contemplated by the parties which are a
natural and proximate result of the breach.”).
504.9 MITIGATION OF DAMAGES
If (defendant) breached the contract and the breach caused damages,
(claimant) is not entitled to recover for those damages which (defendant) proves
(claimant) could have avoided with reasonable efforts or expenditures. You
should consider the reasonableness of (claimant’s) efforts in light of the
circumstances facing [him] [her] [it] at the time, including [his] [her] [its]
ability to make the efforts or expenditures without undue [risk] [burden] [or]
[humiliation].
If (claimant) made reasonable efforts to avoid the damages caused by the
breach, then your award should include reasonable amounts that [he] [she]
[it] spent for this purpose.
NOTE ON USE FOR 504.9
This instruction is intended primarily for use in exclusive contract cases
when the defense of mitigation of damages has been asserted, as non-exclusive
contracts are generally considered an exception to the doctrine of avoidable
consequences. See Graphic Assocs., Inc. v. Riviana Rest. Corp., 461 So.2d 1011,
1014 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984); Calimari and Perillo, THE LAW OF CONTRACTS § 14-16.
This instruction does not use the somewhat inaccurate term “duty to mitigate”
damages because “[t]here is no actual ‘duty to mitigate,’ because the injured party
is not compelled to undertake any ameliorative efforts.” Sys. Components Corp. v.
Fla. Dep’t of Transp., 14 So.3d 967, 982 (Fla. 2009).
SOURCES AND AUTHORITIES FOR 504.9
1. Sys. Components Corp. v. Fla. Dep’t of Transp., 14 So.3d 967, 982
(Fla. 2009) (“The doctrine of avoidable consequences … commonly applies in
contract and tort actions. … The doctrine does not permit damage reduction based
on what ‘could have been avoided’ through Herculean efforts. Rather, the injured
party is only accountable for those hypothetical ameliorative actions that could
have been accomplished through ‘ordinary and reasonable care’ without requiring
undue effort or expense.”) (internal citations omitted).
2. Graphic Associates, Inc. v. Riviana Rest. Corp., 461 So.2d 1011, 1014
(Fla. 4th DCA 1984) (“The doctrine of avoidable consequences, commonly
referred to as a duty to mitigate damages, prevents a party from recovering those
damages inflicted by a wrongdoer which the injured party ‘could have avoided
without undue risk, burden, or humiliation.’”) (citation omitted).
3. RESTATEMENT (SECOND) OF CONTRACTS § 350 (1981) (“(1) Except as
stated in Subsection (2), damages are not recoverable for loss that the injured party
could have avoided without undue risk, burden or humiliation. (2) The injured
party is not precluded from recovery by the rule stated in Subsection (1) to the
extent that he has made reasonable but unsuccessful efforts to avoid loss.”).
504.10 PRESENT CASH VALUE OF FUTURE DAMAGES
Any amount of damages which you award for future damages should be
reduced to its present money value and only the present money value of these
future damages should be included in your verdict.
The present money value of future damages is the sum of money needed
now which, together with what that sum will earn in the future, will
compensate(claimant) for these damages as they are actually experienced in
future years.
SOURCES AND AUTHORITIES FOR 504.10
1. Designing a standard instruction for reduction of damages to present
value is complicated by the fact that there are several different methods used by
economists and courts to arrive at a present-value determination. See, e.g., Delta
Air Lines, Inc. v. Ageloff, 552 So.2d 1089 (Fla. 1989), and Renuart Lumber Yards
v. Levine, 49 So.2d 97 (Fla. 1950) (using approach similar to calculation of cost of
annuity); Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp. v. Pfeifer, 462 U.S. 523 (1983), and Loftin
v. Wilson, 67 So.2d 185 (Fla. 1953) (lost stream of income approach); Beaulieu v.
Elliott, 434 P.2d 665 (Alaska 1967) (total offset method); Culver v. Slater Boat
Co., 688 F.2d 280 (5th Cir. 1982), and Seaboard Coast Line R.R. v. Garrison, 336
So.2d 423 (Fla. 2d DCA 1976) (discussing real interest rate discount method and
inflation/market rate discount methods); and Bould v. Touchette, 349 So.2d 1181
(Fla. 1977) (even without evidence, juries may consider effects of inflation).
2. Until the Supreme Court or the legislature adopts one approach to the
exclusion of other methods of calculating present money value, the committee
assumes that the present value of future damages is a finding to be made by the
jury on the evidence; or, if the parties offer no evidence to control that finding, that
the jury properly resorts to its own common knowledge as guided by this
instruction and by argument. See Seaboard Coast Line R.R. v. Burdi, 427 So.2d
1048 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983).
504.11 NOMINAL DAMAGES
If you decide that (defendant) breached the contract but also that (claimant)
did not prove any loss or damage, you may still award (claimant) nominal
damages such as one dollar.
SOURCES AND AUTHORITIES FOR 504.11
1. AMC/Jeep of Vero Beach, Inc. v. Funston, 403 So.2d 602, 605 (Fla.
4th DCA 1981) (“While there is a legal remedy for every legal wrong and, thus, a
cause of action exists for every breach of contract, an aggrieved party who has
suffered no damage is only entitled to a judgment for nominal damages.”).
2. Dep’t of Transp. v. Weisenfeld, 617 So.2d 1071, 1086 (Fla. 5th DCA
1993) (“Whenever the intentional invasion of a legal right occurs the law infers
some damage to the party whose rights were violated and if no evidence is adduced
as to any particular specific loss or damage, the law ‘rights’ or remedies the wrong
by awarding nominal damages, usually in the amount of $1.00.”).
SECTION 600 SUBSTANTIVE INSTRUCTIONS GENERAL
601.1 Weighing the Evidence
601.2 Believability of Witnesses
601.3 Jury to Be Guided by Official English
Translation/Interpretation
601.4 Multiple Claims, Numerous Parties, Consolidated Cases
601.5 Concluding Instruction (Before Final Argument)
601.1 WEIGHING THE EVIDENCE
In deciding this case, it is your duty as jurors [to decide the issues, and
only those issues, that I submit for your determination] [to answer certain
questions I ask you to answer on a special form, called a verdict form]. You
must come to an agreement about [your verdict] [what your answers will be.
Your agreed-upon answers to my questions are called your jury verdict].
The evidence in this case consists of the sworn testimony of the
witnesses, all exhibits received in evidence [and] all facts that were admitted
or agreed to by the parties [, and any fact of which the court has taken judicial
notice (explain as necessary)].
In reaching your verdict, you must think about and weigh the testimony
and any documents, photographs, or other material that has been received in
evidence. You may also consider any facts that were admitted or agreed to by
the lawyers. Your job is to determine what the facts are. You may use reason
and common sense to reach conclusions. You may draw reasonable inferences
from the evidence. But you should not guess about things that were not
covered here. And, you must always apply the law as I have explained it to
you.
601.2 BELIEVABILITY OF WITNESSES
a. General considerations:
Let me speak briefly about witnesses. In evaluating the believability of
any witness and the weight you will give the testimony of any witness, you may
properly consider the demeanor of the witness while testifying; the frankness
or lack of frankness of the witness; the intelligence of the witness; any interest
the witness may have in the outcome of the case; the means and opportunity
the witness had to know the facts about which the witness testified; the ability
of the witness to remember the matters about which the witness testified; and
the reasonableness of the testimony of the witness, considered in the light of
all the evidence in the case and in the light of your own experience and
common sense.
b. Expert witnesses:
[You have heard opinion testimony [on certain technical subjects] from
[a person] [persons] referred to as [an] expert witness[es].] [Some of the
testimony before you was in the form of opinions about certain technical
subjects.]
You may accept such opinion testimony, reject it, or give it the weight
you think it deserves, considering the knowledge, skill, experience, training, or
education of the witness, the reasons given by the witness for the opinion
expressed, and all the other evidence in the case.
c. Witness talked to lawyer:
[It is entirely proper for a lawyer to talk to a witness about what
testimony the witness would give if called to the courtroom. The witness
should not be discredited just because the witness talked with a lawyer about
[his] [her] testimony.]
NOTES ON USE FOR 601.2
1. Expert witness. See F.S. 90.702 (1985), and Shaw v. Puleo, 159 So. 2d
641 (Fla. 1964). The court will select one or the other introductory sentence in
keeping with the court’s practice and preference in announcing before the jury, or
acceding to counsel’s characterization, that a tendered witness is an “expert.”
2. Common knowledge and everyday experience. Except to the extent
indicated in instruction 601.2, the committee recommends that the jury not be
instructed that the jurors may bring to bear their “common knowledge and
everyday experience.”
3. Failure to produce witness. The committee recommends that no
instruction be given. While it may be permissible in some circumstances to instruct
the jury regarding inferences arising from a party’s failure to produce a witness
(compare Weeks v. Atlantic Coast Line Railroad Co., 132 So. 2d 315 (Fla. 1st
DCA 1961), with Georgia Southern & Florida Railway Co. v. Perry, 326 F.2d 921
(5th Cir. 1964)), the committee believes that generally such inferences are more
properly referred to in counsel’s argument.
4. Witness talked to lawyer. This may be given if requested as either a
substantive or a curative instruction whenever there is testimony that a witness
spoke to or met with an attorney for one of the parties. This instruction is not
meant to prohibit or limit argument by counsel of the general considerations set
forth in 601.2a.
601.3 JURY TO BE GUIDED BY OFFICIAL ENGLISH
TRANSLATION/INTERPRETATION
[A] [Some] witness[es] have testified in (language used) which was
interpreted into English.
The evidence you are to consider is only that provided through the
official court interpreters. Although some of you may know (language used), it
is important that all jurors consider the same evidence. Therefore, you must
base your decision on the evidence presented in the English interpretation.
You must disregard any different meaning.
If, during the testimony there was a question as to the accuracy of the
English interpretation and steps were taken to resolve any discrepancies and
despite these efforts a discrepancy remains, I emphasize that you must rely
only upon the official English interpretation as provided by the court
interpreter and disregard any other contrary interpretation.
NOTES ON USE FOR 601.3
1. See United States v. Franco, 136 F.3d 622, 626 (9th Cir. 1998);
United States v. Rrapi, 175 F.3d 742, 748 (9th Cir. 1999); United States v.
Fuentes-Montijo, 68 F.3d 352, 35556 (9th Cir. 1995).
2. When instructing the jury at the beginning of the case, use instruction
202.5 instead of this instruction. See Model Instruction No. 1.
601.4 MULTIPLE CLAIMS, NUMEROUS PARTIES, CONSOLIDATED
CASES
In your deliberations, you will consider and decide [several] [(state the
number)] distinct claims. (Identify claims to be considered.) Although these
claims have been tried together, each is separate from the other[s], and each
party is entitled to have you separately consider each claim as it affects that
party. Therefore, in your deliberations, you should consider the evidence as it
relates to each claim separately, as you would had each claim been tried
before you separately.
NOTE ON USE FOR 601.4
This instruction is applicable to two or more consolidated actions as well as
to two or more claims in the same action by or against different persons or by or
against the same person in different capacities. The committee recommends that
this instruction not be given to distinguish between a primary claim and a
derivative claim (e.g., that of the injured party and that of his or her spouse) or
between a claim against a party primarily liable and a claim against a party liable
only vicariously (e.g., claims against a party actively negligent and against his
employer) or claims under F.S. 768.0415.
601.5 CONCLUDING INSTRUCTION (BEFORE FINAL ARGUMENT)
That is the law you must follow in deciding this case. The attorneys for
the parties will now present their final arguments. When they are through, I
will have a few final instructions about your deliberations.
NOTE ON USE FOR 601.5
Instruction 601.5 is for use when instructing the jury before final argument.
If the court’s instruction is to be given after final argument, skip to instruction 700
and omit the bracketed sentence in the first paragraph.
SECTION 700 CLOSING INSTRUCTIONS
700 Closing Instructions
SECTION 700 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 a blog, twitter, e-mail, text message, or any other means. Do not contact
anyone to assist you, such as a family accountant, doctor, or lawyer. These
communications rules apply until I discharge you at the end of the case.
If you become aware of any violation of these instructions or any other
instruction I have given in this case, you must tell me by giving a note to the
bailiff.
Any notes you have taken during the trial may be taken to the jury
room for use during your discussions. 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
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 your notes, which
will be immediately destroyed. 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 go to the jury room, the first thing you should do is choose a
presiding juror to act as a foreperson during your deliberations. The
foreperson should see to it that your discussions are orderly and that everyone
has a fair chance to be heard.
It is your duty to talk with one another in the jury room and to consider
the views of all the jurors. Each of you must decide the case for yourself, but
only after you have considered the evidence with the other members of the
jury. Feel free to change your mind if you are convinced that your position
should be different. You should all try to agree. But do not give up your
honest beliefs just because the others think differently. Keep an open mind so
that you and your fellow jurors can easily share ideas about the case.
[I will give you a verdict form with questions you must answer. 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. You must
consider each question separately. Please answer the questions in the order
they appear. After you answer a question, the form tells you what to do next. I
will now read the form to you: (read form of verdict)]
[You will be given (state number) forms of verdict, which I shall now
read to you: (read form of verdict(s))]
[If you find for (claimant(s)), your verdict will be in the following form:
(read form of verdict)]
[If you find for (defendant(s)), your verdict will be in the following form:
(read form of verdict)]
Your verdict[s] must be unanimous, that is, your verdict must be agreed
to by each of you. When you have [agreed on your verdict[s]] [finished filling
out the form[s]], your foreperson must write the date and sign it at the bottom
and return the verdict[s] to the bailiff.
If any of you need to communicate with me for any reason, write me a
note and give it to the bailiff. In your note, do not disclose any vote or split or
the reason for the communication.
You may now retire to decide your verdict[s].
NOTES ON USE FOR 700
1. When final instructions are read to the jury before the attorney’s
closing arguments, this instruction should not be given at that time. It should be
given following closing arguments, just before the jury retires to deliberate. If,
however, the entire instruction is given after final arguments, omit the bracketed
sentence in the first paragraph.
2. Florida Rule of Judicial Administration 2.451 governs jurors’ use of
electronic devices. Rule 2.451(b)(1) requires the trial court to remove cell phones
and other electronic devices from jurors during their deliberations. This instruction
may need to be modified to reflect the practices of a particular trial court when
removing jurors’ cell phones. The portion of this instruction dealing with
communication with others and outside research may need to be modified to
include other specific means of communication or research as technology
develops.
3. Florida Rule of Judicial Administration 2.430(k) provides that at the
conclusion of the trial, the court shall collect and immediately destroy all juror
notes.
4. Quotient verdict. The committee recommends that no instruction
generally be given to admonish the jury against returning a “quotient verdict.”
5. When it is impracticable to take all of the evidence into the jury room,
this instruction should be modified accordingly.
SECTION 800 SUPPLEMENTAL MATTERS
801.1 Juror Questions During Deliberations
801.2 Read-Back of Testimony
801.3 Jury Deadlocked
801.4 Instructions upon Discharge of Jury
801.1 JUROR QUESTIONS DURING DELIBERATIONS
Members of the jury, I have discussed your [note] [question] with the
attorneys. You have [asked the following question] [made the following
request]:
(read juror’s note):
If I have not read your [note] [question] correctly, please raise your
hand.
(clarify question as needed):
1. The answer is:
(respond to question):
OR
2. I am not able to [answer] [respond to] this [question]
[request] because it [calls for information that is not in
evidence] [is not proper to be considered in this case] [(other
reason why question or request is improper)]. Your decision
must be based only on the evidence presented in the trial
and the law that I have given you. [If you have any other
specific questions, please send another note, and I will see if
I can answer it.] [(other appropriate response)].
NOTES ON USE FOR 801.1
1. The procedure contained in 801.1 assumes that a juror question or
request will be in writing. Oral questions from jurors are discouraged.
2. In responding to a juror’s question or request, the court should answer
as specifically as possible. To avoid inadvertent error, it is a good practice to
prepare a written answer with the assistance of the attorneys and then read this
answer to the jury.
3. All written questions and answers should be preserved and placed in
the court file.
801.2 READ-BACK OF TESTIMONY
a. Read-back granted as requested:
Members of the jury, you have asked that the following testimony be
read back to you: (describe testimony)
The court reporter will now read the testimony, which you have
requested.
OR
b. Read-back deferred:
Members of the jury, I have discussed with the attorneys your request
to have certain testimony read back to you. It will take approximately (amount
of time) to have the court reporter prepare and read back the requested
testimony.
I now direct you to return to the jury room and discuss your request
further. If you are not able to resolve your question about the requested
testimony by relying on your collective memory, then you should write down a
more specific description of the part of the witness(es)’ testimony which you
want to hear again. Make your request for reading back testimony as specific
as possible.
c. Read-back denied:
Members of the jury, you have asked that the following testimony be
read back to you: (describe testimony)
I am not able to grant your request because (give reason(s) for denying
request).
NOTES ON USE FOR 801.2
1. In civil cases, the decision to allow read-back of testimony lies within
the sound discretion of the trial court. Broward County School Bd. v. Ruiz, 493 So.
2d 474, 479480 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986). However, the trial court must not tell jurors
that they are prohibited from requesting a read-back of testimony. Johnson v. State,
53 So. 3d 1003 (Fla. 2010).
2. Any read-back of testimony must take place in open court. Transcripts
or tapes of testimony must not be sent back to the jury room.
801.3 JURY DEADLOCKED
Members of the jury, we understand you are having difficulty reaching
a verdict. This case is important to the parties, and we appreciate your efforts.
But I am going to ask you to go back to try again to reach a verdict if you
reasonably can.
Please carefully consider the views of all the jurors, including those you
disagree with. Keep an open mind and feel free to change your view if you
conclude it is wrong.
You should not, however, give up your own conscientiously held views
simply to end the case or avoid further discussion. Each of you must decide
the case for yourself and not merely go along with the conclusions of other
jurors.
If you cannot agree on what a witness said, you may ask that the court
reporter read back to you a portion of any witness’s testimony. To avoid
delay, your request should be as specific as possible.
You may now return to the jury room for further deliberations.
NOTES ON USE FOR 801.3
1. This instruction should not be given unless the jury indicates it is
deadlocked. Moore v. State, 635 So. 2d 998 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994); Armstrong v.
State, 364 So. 2d 1238 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978).
2. This instruction should be given only once. If after having received
this instruction, the jury announces again that it is deadlocked, the jury cannot be
sent back for further deliberations. Tomlinson v. State, 584 So. 2d 43 (Fla. 4th
DCA 1991).
801.4 INSTRUCTION UPON DISCHARGE OF JURY
Ladies and gentlemen, on behalf of the parties, lawyers and the people
of the State of Florida, I wish to thank you for your time and consideration of
this case.
I also wish to advise you of some very special privileges enjoyed by
jurors.
No juror can be required to talk about the discussions that occurred in
the jury room, except by court order. For many centuries, our society has
relied upon juries for consideration of difficult cases. We have recognized for
hundreds of years that a jury’s deliberations, discussions and votes should
remain their private affair as long as they wish it. Therefore, the law gives you
a unique privilege not to speak about the jury’s work.
The lawyers and their representatives are not permitted to initiate any
communication with you about the trial. However, you may speak to the
lawyers or anyone else about the trial. You also have the right to refuse to
speak with anyone. A request may come from those who are simply curious,
or from those who might seek to find fault with you. It will be up to you to
decide whether to preserve your privacy as a juror.
(In discharging the jury, the court should advise them of their further
responsibilities, if any.)
NOTE ON USE FOR 801.4
After this instruction, the jury should be discharged and no further
discussion should be had between the judge and the jurors, or between the
attorneys and jurors, except in accordance with applicable law. See Fla.R.Civ.P.
1.431(h); Rule Reg. Fla. Bar 4-3.5(d)(4).
APPENDIX A
How to Write and Use Jury Instruction in Civil Cases
By Ralph Artigliere and William Michael Artigliere
Available with the hardbound edition of Florida Standard Jury Instructions
in Civil Cases through LexisNexis:
http://www.lexisnexis.com/store/catalog/booktemplate/productdetail.jsp?pag
eName=relatedProducts&skuId=SKU13275&catId=366&prodId=13275
APPENDIX B INTRODUCTORY GUIDE
The following Model Verdict forms are included as examples of how issues
can be submitted to the jury. They may be changed on a case-by-case basis
depending on the rulings and facts in a particular case. The Committee takes no
position whether a special verdict form or a general verdict form is appropriate in
any given case and that decision is left to the presiding court.
Historically, a general verdict form was considered appropriate. However,
with the advent of special verdicts and bifurcation of issues, it is now common for
cases to be submitted to the jury with a special verdict form. The committee has
therefore drafted the following special verdict forms. None of the following are
complete verdicts and in cases involving multiple affirmative defenses, more than
one of these forms or a general verdict form may be used.
FORM 416.2 MODEL FORM OF VERDICT FOR
THIRD-PARTY BENEFICIARY OF CONTRACT CLAIM
VERDICT
Did (claimant) prove that (contracting parties) intended that (claimant)
benefit from their contract?
YES .......... NO ..........
If your answer is NO, then your verdict is for (defendant) on this claim. If
your answer is YES, you should proceed further as follows:
[Insert further instructions regarding proceeding to additional questions, as
appropriate.]
NOTE ON USE FOR FORM 416.2
1. This model verdict form should be used in conjunction with Standard
Jury InstructionContract and Business 416.2 (Third-Party Beneficiary).
FORM 416.3 MODEL FORM OF VERDICT FOR
FORMATION OF CONTRACT
VERDICT
1. Did (claimant) prove that the essential contract terms were clear
enough so that the parties could understand what each party was required to
do?
YES .......... NO ..........
If your answer to question 1 is NO, your verdict is for (defendant) on this
claim, and you should not proceed further except to date and sign this verdict
form and return it to the courtroom. If your answer to question 1 is YES, please
answer question 2.
2. Did (claimant) prove that (claimant) and (defendant) agreed to give
each other something of value? [A promise to do something or not to do
something may have value].
YES .......... NO ..........
If your answer to question 2 is NO, your verdict is for (defendant) on this
claim, and you should not proceed further except to date and sign this verdict
form and return it to the courtroom. If your answer to question 2 is YES, please
answer question 3.
3. Did (claimant) prove that (claimant) and (defendant) agreed to the
essential terms of the contract?
YES .......... NO ..........
If your answer to question 3 is NO, your verdict is for (defendant) on this
claim, and you should not proceed further except to date and sign this verdict
form and return it to the courtroom. If your answer to question 3 is YES, your
verdict is for (claimant) on this claim, and you should not proceed further except
to date and sign this verdict form and return it to the courtroom.
[Insert further instructions regarding proceeding to additional questions, as
appropriate.]
NOTES ON USE FOR FORM 416.3
1. This model verdict form should be used in conjunction with Standard
Jury InstructionContract and Business 416.3 (Contract FormationEssential
Factual Elements).
2. This form should be given only when the existence of a contract is
contested. If both parties agree that they had a contract, then the form relating to
whether a contract was formed would not need to be given. Users should omit
elements in this form that are not contested so that the jury can focus on contested
issues. Include the bracketed language only if it is an issue in the case.
FORM 416.4. MODEL FORM OF VERDICT FOR BREACH OF
CONTRACT
VERDICT
1.a. Did (claimant) do all, or substantially all, of the essential things
which the contract required [him] [her] [it] to do?
YES .......... NO ..........
If your answer to 1.a. is NO, then answer 1.b. If your answer to 1.a.
is YES, then skip question 1.b. and answer question 2.
1.b. Was (claimant) excused from having to do all, or substantially
all, of the essential things which the contract required [him] [her] [it] to
do?
YES .......... NO ..........
If your answers to questions 1.a and 1.b. are NO, your verdict is for
defendant on this claim, and you should not proceed further except to date
and sign this verdict form and return it to the courtroom. If you answered
YES to either part of question 1, please answer question [2][3].
[2. Did all of the conditions that were required for (defendants)
performance occur?
YES .......... NO ..........
If your answer to question 2 is NO, your verdict is for defendant on
this claim, and you should not proceed further except to date and sign this
verdict form and return it to the courtroom. If your answer to question 2
is YES, please answer [either part of] question 3.] Judge may require the
jury to answer either part of question 3, or both.
3. Did (defendant) fail to do something essential which the contract
required [him] [her] [it] to do?
YES .......... NO ..........
Did (defendant) do something that the contract prohibited
[him] [her] [it] from doing and that prohibition was
essential to the contract?
YES .......... NO ..........
If your answer[s] to question 3 [is] [are both] NO, your verdict is for
defendant, and you should not proceed further except to date and sign this
verdict form and return it to the courtroom. If you answered YES to [either
part of] question 3, please answer question 4.
4. Was (claimant) damaged by that [failure] [prohibited conduct]?
YES .......... NO ..........
If your answer to question 4 is NO, your verdict is for defendant on this
claim, and you should not proceed further except to date and sign this verdict
form and return it to the courtroom. If your answer to question 4 is YES,
please answer question 5.
5. What are (claimant’s) damages as a result of the [failure]
[prohibited conduct]?
Total: ______________
[Insert further instructions regarding proceeding to additional questions, as
appropriate.]
NOTES ON USE FOR FORM 416.4
1. This model verdict form should be used in conjunction with Standard
Jury InstructionContract and Business 416.4 (Breach of ContractEssential
Factual Elements).
2. Question 2 should only be used if the court finds the issue of
condition precedent has been adequately raised.
FORM 416.5 MODEL FORM OF VERDICT FOR ORAL OR
WRITTEN CONTRACT TERMS
NOTE ON USE FOR FORM 416.5
1. The Committee does not believe a verdict form is necessary for
Standard Jury InstructionContract and Business 416.5 (InterpretationDisputed
Term(s)).
FORM 416.6 MODEL FORM OF VERDICT FOR CONTRACT
IMPLIED IN FACT
VERDICT
1. Was (claimant’s) conduct intentional and did (claimant) know or
should (claimant) have known that (defendant) understood (claimant’s) conduct
created a contract?
YES .......... NO ..........
If your answer to question 1 is NO, [then go to question 3 if there is an
assertion of a prior relationship] [your verdict is for (defendant) on this claim,
and you should not proceed further on this claim and you should proceed to
[Form (number)] [Question (number)]]. If your answer to question 1 is YES,
please answer question 2.
2. Was (defendant’s) conduct intentional and did (defendant) know or
should (defendant) have known that (claimant) understood (defendant’s) conduct
created a contract?
YES .......... NO ..........
If your answer to question 2 is NO, [then go to question 3 if there is an
assertion of a prior relationship] [your verdict is for (defendant) on this claim,
and you should not proceed further on this claim and you should proceed to
[Form (number)] [Question (number)]]. If your answer to question 2 is YES, your
verdict is for (claimant) on this claim, and you should not proceed further except
to date and sign this verdict form and return it to the courtroom.
[3. Did the prior relationship between the parties, combined with all the
circumstances in this case, create a contract?
YES .......... NO ..........
If your answer to question 3 is NO, your verdict is for (defendant) on this
claim, and you should not proceed further on this claim and you should proceed
to [Form (number)] [Question (number)]. If your answer to question 3 is YES,
your verdict is for (claimant) on this claim, and you should not proceed further
except to date and sign this verdict form and return it to the courtroom.]
[Insert further instructions regarding proceeding to additional questions, as
appropriate.]
NOTES ON USE FOR FORM 416.6
1. This model verdict form should be used in conjunction with Standard
Jury InstructionContract and Business 416.6 (Contract Implied in Fact).
2. Use this form where there is no express contract, oral, or written,
between the parties, and the jury is being asked to infer the existence of a contract
from the facts and circumstances of the case.
3. In deciding whether a contract was created, the conduct and relationship
of the parties as well as all the circumstances should be considered.
4. Do not use question 3 unless there is evidence of a course of dealing,
usage of trade, or course of performance between the parties.
FORM 416.7 MODEL FORM OF VERDICT FOR
CONTRACT IMPLIED IN LAW
VERDICT
1. Did (claimant) prove that (claimant) gave a benefit to (defendant)?
YES .......... NO ..........
If your answer to question 1 is NO, your verdict is for (defendant) on this
claim, and you should not proceed further except to date and sign this verdict
form and return it to the courtroom. If your answer to question 1 is YES, please
answer question 2.
2. Did (claimant) prove that (defendant) knew of the benefit?
YES .......... NO ..........
If your answer to question 2 is NO, your verdict is for (defendant) on this
claim, and you should not proceed further except to date and sign this verdict
form and return it to the courtroom. If your answer to question 2 is YES, please
answer question 3.
3. Did (claimant) prove that (defendant) accepted or retained the
benefit?
YES .......... NO ..........
If your answer to question 3 is NO, your verdict is for (defendant) on this
claim, and you should not proceed further except to date and sign this verdict
form and return it to the courtroom. If your answer to question 3 is YES, please
answer question 4.
4. Did (claimant) prove that the circumstances are such that
(defendant) should, in all fairness, be required to pay for the benefit?
YES .......... NO ..........
If your answer to question 4 is NO, your verdict is for (defendant) on this
claim, and you should not proceed further except to date and sign this verdict
form and return it to the courtroom. If your answer to question 4 is YES, your
verdict is for (claimant) on this claim, and you should not proceed further except
to date and sign this verdict form and return it to the courtroom.
[Insert further instructions regarding proceeding to additional questions, as
appropriate.]
NOTE ON USE FOR FORM 416.7
1. This model verdict form should be used in conjunction with Standard
Jury InstructionContract and Business 416.7 (Contract Implied in Law).
FORM 416.8 MODEL FORM OF VERDICT FOR
CONTRACT FORMATIONOFFER
VERDICT
1. Did (claimant) prove that (claimant) communicated to (defendant)
that (claimant) was willing to enter into a contract with (defendant)?
YES .......... NO ..........
If your answer to question 1 is NO, your verdict is for (defendant) on this
claim, and you should not proceed further except to date and sign this verdict
form and return it to the courtroom. If your answer to question 1 is YES, please
answer question 2.
2. Did (claimant) prove that the communication[s] between (claimant)
and (defendant) contained the essential terms of the offer?
YES .......... NO ..........
If your answer to question 2 is NO, your verdict is for (defendant) on this
claim, and you should not proceed further except to date and sign this verdict
form and return it to the courtroom. If your answer to question 2 is YES, please
answer question 3.
3. Did (claimant) prove that based on the communication[s],
(defendant) could have reasonably concluded that a contract with these terms
would result if (defendant) accepted the offer?
YES .......... NO ..........
If your answer to question 3 is NO, your verdict is for (defendant) on this
claim, and you should not proceed further except to date and sign this verdict
form and return it to the courtroom. If your answer to question 3 is YES, your
verdict is for (claimant) on this claim, and you should not proceed further except
to date and sign this verdict form and return it to the courtroom.
[Insert further instructions regarding proceeding to additional questions, as
appropriate.]
NOTES ON USE FOR FORM 416.8
1. This model verdict form should be used in conjunction with Standard
Jury InstructionContract and Business 416.8 (Contract FormationOffer).
2. Do not give the verdict form unless the defendant has testified or
offered other evidence in support of his or her contention. This verdict form assumes
that the defendant is alleging that the claimant never made an offer. Change the
identities of the parties in the indented paragraphs if, under the facts of the case, the
roles of the parties are switched (e.g., if defendant was the alleged offeror). If the
existence of an offer is not contested, then this verdict form is unnecessary.
FORM 416.10 MODEL FORM OF VERDICT FOR
CONTRACT FORMATIONACCEPTANCE
VERDICT
1. Did (claimant) prove that (defendant) communicated [his] [her]
[its] agreement to the terms of the offer?
YES .......... NO ..........
If your answer to question 1 is NO, your verdict is for (defendant) on this
claim, and you should not proceed further except to date and sign this verdict
form and return it to the courtroom. If your answer to question 1 is YES, please
[go to question 2 if there is evidence of an agreement to only certain terms] [go
to question 3 if there is evidence of introduction of a new term into the bargain].
[2. Did (defendant) prove that (defendant) agreed only to certain terms
of the offer?
YES .......... NO ..........
If your answer to question 2 is YES, your verdict is for (defendant) on this
claim, and you should not proceed further on this defense and you should
proceed to [Form (number)] [Question (number)]. If your answer to question 2
is NO, please answer question 3.]
[3. Did (defendant) prove that (defendant) introduced a new term into
the bargain?
YES .......... NO ..........
If your answer to question 3 is YES, your verdict is for (defendant) on this
claim, and you should not proceed further on this claim and you should proceed
to [Form (number)] [Question (number)]. If your answer to question 3 is NO,
your verdict is for (claimant) on this claim, and you should not proceed further
on this claim and you should proceed to [Form (number)] [Question (number)].]
[Insert further instructions regarding proceeding to additional questions, as
appropriate.]
NOTES ON USE FOR FORM 416.10
1. This model verdict form should be used in conjunction with Standard
Jury InstructionContract and Business 416.10 (Contract Formation
Acceptance).
2. Do not give this form unless the defendant has testified or offered other
evidence in support of the defendant’s contention.
3. This form assumes that the defendant has denied accepting the
claimant’s offer. Change the identities of the parties in the indented paragraph, if
under the facts of the case, the roles of the parties are switched.
FORM 416.11 MODEL FORM OF VERDICT FOR CONTRACT
FORMATION ACCEPTANCE BY SILENCE OR CONDUCT
VERDICT
Did (claimant) prove that
Choose appropriate option(s):
1.a. (Claimant) and (defendant) understood (defendant’s) silence or
inaction to mean that the offer was accepted?
[And] [or]
1.b. (Defendant) accepted the benefits of the offer?
[And] [or]
1.c. (Defendant) had a legal duty to speak from (claimant’s) and
(defendant’s) [past relationship] [previous dealings] [or] [(identify other
circumstances)]?
YES .......... NO ..........
If your answer to [this] [any of these] question(s) is YES, your verdict is
for (claimant) on this claim, and you should not proceed further except to date
and sign this verdict form and return it to the courtroom. If your answer to
[this] [all of these] question(s) is NO, your verdict is for (defendant) on this claim,
and you should not proceed further on this claim and you should proceed to
[Form (number)] [Question (number)].
[Insert further instructions regarding proceeding to additional questions, as
appropriate.]
NOTES ON USE FOR FORM 416.11
1. This model verdict form should be used in conjunction with Standard
Jury InstructionContract and Business 416.11 (Contract FormationAcceptance
by Silence or Conduct).
2. Pending further development of the law, the Committee takes no
position as to what “other circumstances” create a legal duty to speak.
FORM 416.12 MODEL FORM OF VERDICT FOR SUBSTANTIAL
PERFORMANCE OF CONTRACT
VERDICT
1. Did (claimant) prove that (claimant) performed in good faith?
YES .......... NO ..........
If your answer to question 1 is NO, your verdict is for (defendant) on this
claim, and you should not proceed further except to date and sign this verdict
form and return it to the courtroom. If your answer to question 1 is YES,
please answer question 2.
2. Was (claimant’s) performance so nearly equivalent to what was
bargained for that it would be unreasonable to deny (claimant) the full
contract price less an appropriate reduction, if any, for (claimant’s) failure to
fully perform?
YES .......... NO ..........
If your answer to question 2 is NO, your verdict is for (defendant) on this
claim, and you should not proceed further except to date and sign this verdict
form and return it to the courtroom. If your answer to question 2 is YES, your
verdict is for (claimant) on this claim, and you should not proceed further
except to date and sign this verdict form and return it to the courtroom.
[Insert further instructions regarding proceeding to additional questions, as
appropriate.]
NOTES ON USE FOR FORM 416.12
1. This model verdict form should be used in conjunction with Standard
Jury InstructionContract and Business 416.12 (Substantial Performance).
2. The measure of any reduction referred to in question 2 should be
addressed in the damages form.
FORM 416.13 MODEL FORM OF VERDICT FOR MODIFICATION OF
TERM(S) OF CONTRACT
VERDICT
1. Did (claimant) prove that (claimant) and (defendant) agree to a
modification of the contract?
YES .......... NO ..........
If your answer to question 1 is NO, your verdict is for (defendant) on this
claim, and you should not proceed further except to date and sign this verdict
form and return it to the courtroom. If your answer to question 1 is YES, your
verdict is for (claimant) on this claim, and you should not proceed further
except to date and sign this verdict form and return it to the courtroom.
NOTES ON USE FOR FORM 416.13
1. This model verdict form should be used in conjunction with Standard
Jury InstructionContract and Business 416.13 (Modification).
2. The parties to a contract may agree to modify its terms. It must be
decided whether a reasonable person would conclude from the words and conduct
of (claimant) and (defendant) that they agreed to modify the contract. The parties’
hidden intentions cannot be considered.
A contract in writing may be modified by a contract in writing, by a subsequent
oral agreement between the parties, or by the parties’ subsequent conduct [, if the
modified agreement has been accepted and acted upon by the parties in such a
manner as would work a fraud on either party to refuse to enforce it].
FORM 416.14 MODEL FORM OF VERDICT FOR
INTERPRETATIONDISPUTED TERM(S)
NOTES ON USE FOR FORM 416.14
The Committee does not believe a verdict form is necessary for Standard
Jury InstructionContract and Business 416.14 (InterpretationDisputed
Term(s)).
FORM 416.15 MODEL FORM OF VERDICT FOR INTERPRETATION
MEANING OF ORDINARY WORDS
NOTES ON USE FOR FORM 416.15
The Committee does not believe a verdict form is necessary for Standard
Jury InstructionContract and Business 416.15 (InterpretationMeaning of
Ordinary Words).
FORM 416.16 MODEL FORM OF VERDICT FOR INTERPRETATION
MEANING OF DISPUTED TECHNICAL OR SPECIAL WORDS
NOTES ON USE FOR FORM 416.16
The Committee does not believe a verdict form is necessary for Standard
Jury InstructionContract and Business 416.16 (InterpretationMeaning of
Disputed Technical or Special Words).
FORM 416.17 MODEL FORM OF VERDICT FOR INTERPRETATION
CONSTRUCTION OF CONTRACT AS A WHOLE
NOTES ON USE FOR FORM 416.17
The Committee does not believe a verdict form is necessary for Standard
Jury InstructionContract and Business 416.17 (InterpretationConstruction of
Contract as a Whole).
FORM 416.18 MODEL FORM OF VERDICT FOR INTERPRETATION
CONSTRUCTION BY CONDUCT
NOTES ON USE FOR FORM 416.18
The Committee does not believe a verdict form is necessary for Standard
Jury InstructionContract and Business 416.18 (InterpretationConstruction by
Conduct).
FORM 416.19 MODEL FORM OF VERDICT FOR INTERPRETATION OF
CONTRACTREASONABLE TIME
VERDICT
1. Did (claimant) prove that (claimant) performed (the requirement)
within a reasonable amount of time?
YES .......... NO ..........
If your answer to question 1 is NO, your verdict is for (defendant) on this
claim, and you should not proceed further except to date and sign this verdict
form and return it to the courtroom. If your answer to question 1 is YES, your
verdict is for (claimant) on this claim, and you should not proceed further
except to date and sign this verdict form and return it to the courtroom.
[Insert further instructions regarding proceeding to additional questions, as
appropriate.]
NOTES ON USE FOR FORM 416.19
This model verdict form should be used in conjunction with Standard Jury
InstructionContract and Business 416.19 (InterpretationReasonable Time).
FORM 416.20 MODEL FORM OF VERDICT FOR INTERPRETATION
CONSTRUCTION AGAINST DRAFTER
NOTES ON USE
The Committee does not believe a verdict form is necessary for Standard
Jury InstructionContract and Business 416.20 (InterpretationConstruction
Against Drafter).
FORM 416.21 MODEL FORM OF VERDICT FOR EXISTENCE OF
CONDITIONS PRECEDENT DISPUTED
VERDICT
1. Did (defendant) prove that the contract between (claimant) and
(defendant) provided that (defendant) was not required to (insert duty) unless
(insert condition precedent)?
YES .......... NO ..........
If your answer to question 1 is NO, your verdict is for (claimant) on this
claim, and you should not proceed further except to date and sign this verdict
form and return it to the courtroom. If your answer to question 1 is YES,
please answer question 2.
2. Did (claimant) prove that (insert condition precedent) [was
performed] [occurred] [was waived]?
YES .......... NO ..........
If your answer to question 2 is YES, your verdict is for (claimant) on this
claim, and you should not proceed further except to date and sign this verdict
form and return it to the courtroom. If your answer to question 2 is NO, your
verdict is for (defendant) on this claim, and you should not proceed further
except to date and sign this verdict form and return it to the courtroom.
[Insert further instructions regarding proceeding to additional questions, as
appropriate.]
NOTES ON USE FOR FORM 416.21
1. This model verdict form should be used in conjunction with Standard
Jury InstructionContract and Business 416.21 (Existence of Condition Precedent
Disputed).
2. This verdict form should be given only where both the existence and
the occurrence of a condition precedent are disputed. If only the occurrence of a
condition precedent is disputed, use Form 416.22 (Occurrence of Agreed
Condition Precedent).
3. If the issue of waiver arises, waiver should be defined as set forth in
Instruction 416.30 (Affirmative DefenseWaiver).
FORM 416.22 MODEL FORM OF VERDICT FOR OCCURRENCE OF
AGREED CONDITION PRECEDENT OF CONTRACT CLAIM
VERDICT
1. Did (claimant) prove that (insert condition precedent) [was
performed] [occurred] [was waived]?
YES .......... NO ..........
If your answer to question 1 is NO, your verdict is for (defendant), on
this claim, and you should not proceed further except to date and sign this
verdict form and return it to the courtroom. If your answer to question 1 is
YES, your verdict is for (claimant) on this claim, and you should not proceed
further except to date and sign this verdict form and return it to the
courtroom.
[Insert further instructions regarding proceeding to additional questions, as
appropriate.]
NOTES ON USE FOR FORM 416.22
1. This model verdict form should be used in conjunction with Standard
Jury InstructionContract and Business 416.22 (Occurrence of Agreed Condition
Precedent).
2. If both the existence and the occurrence of a condition precedent are
disputed, use Form 416.21 (Existence of Conditions Precedent Disputed).
3. If the issue of waiver arises, the court should define waiver as set forth
in Instruction 416.30 (Affirmative DefenseWaiver).
FORM 416.24. MODEL FORM OF VERDICT FOR BREACH OF IMPLIED
COVENANT OF GOOD FAITH AND FAIR DEALING
VERDICT
1. Did (defendant’s) actions [or omissions] unfairly interfere with
(claimant’s) receipt of the contract’s benefits?
YES .......... NO ..........
If your answer to question 1 is NO, your verdict is for defendant on this
claim, and you should not proceed further except to date and sign this verdict
form and return it to the courtroom. If your answer to question 1 is YES,
please answer question 2.
2. Did (defendant’s) conduct not comport with (claimant’s)
reasonable contractual expectations under [a] specific part[s] of the contract?
YES .......... NO ..........
If your answer to question 2 is NO, your verdict is for defendant on this
claim, and you should not proceed further except to date and sign this verdict
form and return it to the courtroom. If your answer to question 2 is YES,
please answer question 3.
3. Was (claimant) damaged by (defendant’s) conduct on this claim?
YES .......... NO ..........
If your answer to question 3 is NO, your verdict is for defendant on this
claim, and you should not proceed further except to date and sign this verdict
form and return it to the courtroom. If your answer to question 3 is YES, then
your verdict is in favor of claimant.
YES .......... NO ..........
[Insert further instructions regarding proceeding to additional questions, as
appropriate.]
NOTES ON USE FOR FORM 416.24
1. This model verdict form should be used in conjunction with Standard
Jury InstructionContract and Business 416.24 (Breach of Implied Covenant of
Good Faith and Fair Dealing).
2. This form should be used in conjunction with other forms, such as
contract formation and breach, as needed to include all of the required elements of
the cause of action.
FORM 416.25. MODEL FORM OF VERDICT FOR AFFIRMATIVE
DEFENSEMUTUAL MISTAKE OF FACT
VERDICT
1. Were [both] [all] parties mistaken about (insert description of
mistake)?
YES .......... NO ..........
If your answer to question 1 is NO, you should not proceed further
except to date and sign this verdict form and return it to the courtroom. If
your answer to question 1 is YES, please answer question 2.
2. Did (defendant) bear the risk of mistake?
YES .......... NO ..........
If your answer to question 2 is NO, your verdict on this issue is for
defendant, and you should not proceed further except to date and sign this
verdict form and return it to the courtroom. If your answer to question 2 is
YES, your verdict is for claimant.
[Insert further instructions regarding proceeding to additional questions, as
appropriate.]
NOTES ON USE FOR FORM 416.25
1. This model verdict form should be used in conjunction with Standard
Jury InstructionContract and Business 416.25 (Affirmative DefenseMutual
Mistake of Fact).
2. If circumstances warrant, then specific interrogatories may be
submitted to the jury to determine whether the agreement assigned the risk to
the defendant or defendant had only limited knowledge about the facts relating
to the mistake but decided to proceed with the contract.
FORM 416.32(a) MODEL FORM OF VERDICT FOR AFFIRMATIVE
DEFENSESTATUTE OF LIMITATIONS
VERDICT
If a breach of contract occurred, did (defendant) prove that such breach
occurred before (insert date four or five years before date of filing suit)?
YES .......... NO ..........
If your answer to question 1 is NO, then verdict is for (claimant) on this
defense, and you should not proceed further except to date and sign this
verdict form and return it to the courtroom. If your answer to question 1 is
YES, your verdict is for (defendant) on this defense, and you should not
proceed further except to date and sign this verdict form and return it to the
courtroom.
[Insert further instructions regarding proceeding to additional questions, as
appropriate.]
NOTE ON USE FOR FORM 416.32(a)
1. This model verdict form should be used in conjunction with Standard
Jury InstructionContract and Business 416.32 (Affirmative DefenseStatute of
Limitations).
FORM 416.32. (b) MODEL FORM OF VERDICT FOR STATUTE OF
LIMITATIONS DEFENSE IN A BREACH OF CONTRACT CASE
VERDICT
1. Did (defendant’s) breach of the contract at issue occur before
.....(insert date).....?
YES .......... NO ..........
[INSERT FURTHER INSTRUCTIONS REGARDING PROCEEDING TO
ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS, AS APPROPRIATE.]
NOTES ON USE FOR FORM 416.32(B)
1. This model verdict form should be used in conjunction with Standard
Jury InstructionContract and Business 416.32 (Affirmative DefenseStatutes of
Limitations).
2. The court determines the elements of a breach of contract and the
jury determines the date the last element accrued.
3. The court may modify this form in cases in which the statute of
repose is in question.
4. The court may modify this form in cases in which there are
multiple or continuing breaches of contract.
FORM 416.33 MODEL FORM OF VERDICT FOR AFFIRMATIVE
DEFENSEEQUITABLE ESTOPPEL
VERDICT
1. Did (defendant) prove that (claimant) [acted by (describe material
action)] [spoke about (describe material fact)] [concealed or was silent about
(describe material fact) at a time when (claimant) knew of (that fact) (those
facts)]?
YES .......... NO ..........
If your answer to question 1 is NO, then your verdict is for (claimant) on
this defense, and you should not proceed further except to date and sign this
verdict form and return it to the courtroom. If your answer to question 1 is
YES, please answer question 2.
2. Did (defendant) prove that (defendant) relied in good faith upon
(claimant’s) [action] [words] [inaction] [silence]?
YES .......... NO ..........
If your answer to question 2 is NO, then your verdict is for (claimant) on
this defense, and you should not proceed further except to date and sign this
verdict form and return it to the courtroom. If your answer to question 2 is
YES, please answer question 3.
3. Did (defendant) prove that (defendant’s) reliance on (claimant’s)
[action] [words] [inaction] [silence] caused (defendant) to change (defendant’s)
position for the worse?
YES .......... NO ..........
If your answer to question 3 is NO, then your verdict is for (claimant)
on this defense, and you should not proceed further except to date and sign
this verdict form and return it to the courtroom. If your answer to question
3 is YES, then your verdict is for (defendant) on this defense, and you
should not proceed further except to date and sign this verdict form and
return it to the courtroom.
[Insert further instructions regarding proceeding to additional questions, as
appropriate.]
NOTE ON USE FOR FORM 416.33
1. This model verdict form should be used in conjunction with Standard
Jury InstructionContract and Business 416.33 (Affirmative DefenseEquitable
Estoppel).
FORM 416.35 MODEL FORM OF VERDICT FOR AFFIRMATIVE
DEFENSE OF CONTRACT CLAIMJUDICIAL ESTOPPEL
NOTES ON USE FOR FORM 416.35
The committee has not drafted an instruction for the affirmative defense of
judicial estoppel because judicial estoppel is an equitable doctrine which a court is
to determine. Therefore, the Committee does not believe a verdict form is
necessary for Standard Jury InstructionContract and Business 416.35
(Affirmative DefenseJudicial Estoppel).
FORM 416.36 MODEL FORM OF VERDICT FOR
AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSERATIFICATION
VERDICT
If your answer to [Form (number)] [Question (number)] is NO, then you
should proceed no further on this [Verdict Form (on this defense)]; if your
answer to [Form (number)] [Question (number)] is YES, please answer
question 1.
1. Did (defendant) prove that (claimant) knew of the [act]
[transaction]?
YES .......... NO ..........
If your answer to question 1 is NO, then your verdict is for (claimant) on
this defense, and you should not proceed further on this defense and you
should proceed to [Form (number)] [Question (number)]. If your answer to
question 1 is YES, please answer question 2.
2. Did (defendant) prove that (claimant) knew that (claimant) could
reject the contract because of the [act] [transaction]?
YES .......... NO ..........
If your answer to question 2 is NO, then your verdict is for (claimant) on
this defense, and you should not proceed further on this defense and you
should proceed to [Form (number)] [Question (number)]. If your answer to
question 2 is YES, please answer question 3.
3. Did (defendant) prove that (claimant) [accepted the [act]
[transaction]] [expressed [his] [her] [its] intention to accept the [act]
[transaction]]?
YES .......... NO ..........
If your answer to question 3 is NO, then your verdict is for (claimant) on
this defense, and you should not proceed further on this defense and you
should proceed to [Form (number)] [Question (number)]. If your answer to
question 3 is YES, your verdict is for (defendant) on this defense, and you
should not proceed further except to date and sign this verdict form and
return it to the courtroom.
[Insert further instructions regarding proceeding to additional questions, as
appropriate.]
NOTE ON USE FOR FORM 416.36
1. This model verdict form should be used in conjunction with Standard
Jury InstructionContract and Business 416.36 (Affirmative Defense
Ratification).
FORM 416.37 MODEL FORM OF VERDICT FOR GOODS SOLD AND
DELIVERED
VERDICT
1. Did (claimant) sell and deliver goods to (defendant)?
YES .......... NO ..........
If your answer to question 1 is NO, your verdict is for (defendant) on this
claim, and you should not proceed further except to date and sign this verdict
form and return it to the courtroom. If your answer to question 1 is YES,
please answer question 2.
2. Did (defendant) fail to pay the [price agreed upon for] [reasonable
value of] the goods which (claimant) sold and delivered to (defendant)?
YES .......... NO ..........
If your answer to question 2 is NO, your verdict is for (defendant) on this
claim, and you should not proceed further except to date and sign this verdict
form and return it to the courtroom. If your answer to question 2 is YES, your
verdict is for (claimant) on this claim, and you should not proceed further
except to date and sign this verdict form and return it to the courtroom.
[Insert further instructions regarding proceeding to additional questions, as
appropriate.]
NOTES ON USE FORM 416.37
This model verdict form should be used in conjunction with Standard Jury
InstructionContract and Business 416.37 (Goods Sold and Delivered).
FORM 416.38 MODEL FORM OF VERDICT FOR OPEN ACCOUNT
VERDICT
1. Did (claimant) prove that (claimant) and (defendant) had [a
transaction] [transaction(s)] between them?
YES .......... NO ..........
If your answer to question 1 is NO, your verdict is for (defendant) on this
claim, and you should not proceed further except to date and sign this verdict
form and return it to the courtroom. If your answer to question 1 is YES,
please answer question 2.
2. Did (claimant) prove that an account existed between (claimant)
and (defendant) in which the parties had a series of charges, payments, or
adjustments?
YES .......... NO ..........
If your answer to question 2 is NO, your verdict is for (defendant) on this
claim, and you should not proceed further except to date and sign this verdict
form and return it to the courtroom. If your answer to question 2 is YES,
please answer question 3.
3. Did (claimant) prove that (claimant) prepared an itemized
statement of the account?
YES .......... NO ..........
If your answer to question 3 is NO, your verdict is for (defendant) on this
claim, and you should not proceed further except to date and sign this verdict
form and return it to the courtroom. If your answer to question 3 is YES,
please answer question 4.
4. Did (claimant) prove that (defendant) owes money on the account?
YES .......... NO ..........
If your answer to question 4 is NO, your verdict is for (defendant) on this
claim, and you should not proceed further except to date and sign this verdict
form and return it to the courtroom. If your answer to question 4 is YES, your
verdict is for (claimant) on this claim, and you should not proceed further
except to date and sign this verdict form and return it to the courtroom.
[Insert further instructions regarding proceeding to additional questions, as
appropriate.]
NOTES ON USE FOR FORM 416.38
1. This model verdict form should be used in conjunction with Standard
Jury InstructionContract and Business 416.38 (Open Account).
FORM 416.39 MODEL FORM OF VERDICT FOR ACCOUNT STATED
VERDICT
1. Did (claimant) prove that (claimant) and (defendant) had a
transaction(s) between them?
YES .......... NO ..........
If your answer to question 1 is NO, your verdict is for (defendant) on this
claim, and you should not proceed further except to date and sign this verdict
form and return it to the courtroom. If your answer to question 1 is YES,
please answer question 2.
2. a. Did (claimant) prove that (claimant) and (defendant) agreed upon
the balance due?
YES .......... NO ..........
If your answer to 2.a. is NO, please answer question 2.b. If your answer
to question 2.a. or b. is YES, please answer question 3.
2. b. Did (claimant) prove that (claimant) rendered a statement to
(defendant) and (defendant) failed to object within a reasonable time to a
statement of (defendant’s) account?
YES .......... NO ..........
If your answer to 2.b. is NO, your verdict is for (defendant) on this claim,
and you should not proceed further except to date and sign this verdict form
and return it to the courtroom. If your answer to question 2.b. is YES, please
answer question 3.
3. Did (defendant) expressly or implicitly promise to pay (claimant)
[the balance] [amount set forth in the statement]?
YES .......... NO ..........
If your answer to question 3 is NO, your verdict is for (defendant) on this
claim, and you should not proceed further except to date and sign this verdict
form and return it to the courtroom. If your answer to question 3 is YES,
please answer question 4.
4. Has (defendant) not paid (claimant) [any] [all] of the amount owed
under the account?
YES .......... NO ..........
If your answer to question 4 is NO, your verdict is for (defendant) on this
claim, and you should not proceed further except to date and sign this verdict
form and return it to the courtroom. If your answer to question 4 is YES, your
verdict is for (claimant) on this claim, and you should not proceed further
except to date and sign this verdict form and return it to the courtroom.
[Insert further instructions regarding proceeding to additional questions, as
appropriate.]
NOTES ON USE FOR FORM 416.39
This model verdict form should be used in conjunction with Standard Jury
InstructionContract and Business 416.39 (Account Stated).
FORM 416.42 MODEL FORM OF VERDICT FOR
BREACH OF DUTY TO DISCLOSERESIDENTIAL
VERDICT
1. Did (claimant) prove that there was a condition in the property
that materially and adversely affected the value of the property?
YES .......... NO ..........
If your answer to question 1 is NO, your verdict is for (defendant) on this
claim, and you should not proceed further except to date and sign this verdict
form and return it to the courtroom. If your answer to question 1 is YES,
please answer question 2.
2. Did (claimant) prove that the condition in the property that
materially and adversely affected the value of the property was not readily
observable and was not otherwise known to (claimant)?
YES .......... NO ..........
If your answer to question 2 is NO, your verdict is for (defendant) on this
claim, and you should not proceed further except to date and sign this verdict
form and return it to the courtroom. If your answer to question 2 is YES,
please answer question 3.
3. Did (claimant) prove that (defendant) knew of the condition and
did not disclose it to (claimant)?
If your answer to question 3 is NO, your verdict is for (defendant) on this
claim, and you should not proceed further except to date and sign this verdict
form and return it to the courtroom. If your answer to question 3 is YES, your
verdict is for (claimant) on this claim, and you should not proceed further
except to date and sign this verdict form and return it to the courtroom.
[Insert further instructions regarding proceeding to additional questions, as
appropriate.]
NOTES ON USE FOR FORM 416.42
This model verdict form should be used in conjunction with Standard Jury
InstructionContract and Business 416.42 (Breach of Duty to Disclose
Residential).
FORM 416.43 MODEL FORM OF VERDICT FOR PIERCING THE
CORPORATE VEIL IN CONTRACT CLAIM
VERDICT
1. Did (claimant) prove that (defendant) dominated and controlled
(form of business entity) such that (form of business entity)’s separate identity
was not sufficiently maintained?
YES .......... NO ..........
If your answer to question 1 is NO, your verdict is for (defendant) on this
claim, and you should not proceed further except to date and sign this verdict
form and return it to the courtroom. If your answer to question 1 is YES,
please answer question 2.
2. Did (claimant) prove that (defendant) dominated and controlled
(form of business entity) such that (form of business entity) lacked an existence
independent from (defendant)?
YES .......... NO ..........
If your answer to question 2 is NO, your verdict is for (defendant) on this
claim, and you should not proceed further except to date and sign this verdict
form and return it to the courtroom. If your answer to question 2 is YES,
please answer question 3.
3. Did (claimant) prove that the corporate form of (business entity)
was [formed] [used] for a fraudulent or improper purpose?
YES .......... NO ..........
If your answer to question 3 is NO, your verdict is for (defendant) on this
claim, and you should not proceed further except to date and sign this verdict
form and return it to the courtroom. If your answer to question 3 is YES,
please answer question 4.
4. Did (claimant) prove that the fraudulent or improper [formation]
[use] of the (business entity’s) corporate form harmed (claimant)?
YES .......... NO ..........
If your answer to question 4 is NO, your verdict is for (defendant) on this
claim, and you should not proceed further except to date and sign this verdict
form and return it to the courtroom. If your answer to question 3 is YES, your
verdict is for (claimant) on this claim, and you should not proceed further
except to date and sign this verdict form and return it to the courtroom.
[Insert further instructions regarding proceeding to additional questions, as
appropriate.]
NOTES ON USE FOR FORM 41.43
This model verdict form should be used in conjunction with Standard Jury
InstructionContract and Business 416.43 (Piercing the Corporate Veil).
FORM 416.44 MODEL FORM OF VERDICT FOR LEGAL STATUS OF
ENTITIES IN A CONTRACT CLAIM
NOTES ON USE
The Committee does not believe a verdict form is necessary for Standard
Jury InstructionContract and Business 416.44 (Legal Status of Entities).
FORM 416.46 MODEL FORM OF VERDICT FOR
PROMISSORY ESTOPPEL
VERDICT
1. Did (claimant) prove that (defendant) promised to (subject matter of
alleged promise)?
YES .......... NO ..........
If your answer to question 1 is NO, your verdict is for (defendant) on this
claim, and you should not proceed further except to date and sign this verdict
form and return it to the courtroom. If your answer to question 1 is YES,
please answer question 2.
2. Did (claimant) prove that (defendant) should have expected the
promise to alter (claimant’s) behavior?
YES .......... NO ..........
If your answer to question 2 is NO, your verdict is for (defendant) on this
claim, and you should not proceed further except to date and sign this verdict
form and return it to the courtroom. If your answer to question 2 is YES,
please answer question 3.
3. Did (claimant) prove that (claimant) changed (claimant’s) behavior
by relying on (defendant’s) promise?
YES .......... NO ..........
If your answer to question 3 is NO, your verdict is for (defendant) on this
claim, and you should not proceed further except to date and sign this verdict
form and return it to the courtroom. If your answer to question 3 is YES,
please answer question 4.
4. Did (claimant) prove that injustice can be avoided only if the
promise is enforced?
YES .......... NO ..........
If your answer to question 4 is NO, your verdict is for (defendant) on this
claim, and you should not proceed further except to date and sign this verdict
form and return it to the courtroom. If your answer to question 4 is YES, your
verdict is for (claimant) on this claim, and you should not proceed further
except to date and sign this verdict form and return it to the courtroom.
[Insert further instructions regarding proceeding to additional questions, as
appropriate.]
NOTES ON USE FOR FORM 416.46
This model verdict form should be used in conjunction with Standard Jury
InstructionContract and Business 416.46 (Promissory Estoppel).