18.01 [1991 Revision] Verdict Directing-Agency in Issue-Modification Required

Instruction No 1 18.01 [1991 Revision] Verdict Directing--Agency in Issue--Modification Required Servant Not Joined Where defendant master or principal is being sued and he has denied agency of the alleged servant or agent, paragraph First in the verdict directing instruction shall be in the following form: First, the driver Jones [was an employee of Ajax and] was operating the (defendant's) motor vehicle within the scope and course of his [employment by] [agency for] (defendant's name) [at the time of the collision]. The remaining paragraphs of the verdict directing instruction will then be renumbered. The name of the servant or some other identification will be substituted for the word "defendant" in the remainder of the instruction. Thus if Verdict Directing Instruction 17.01 were to include the issue of agency it would read as follows: Your verdict must be for plaintiff if you believe: First, the driver Jones [was an employee of Ajax and] was operating the Ajax Company motor vehicle within the scope and course of his employment by Ajax [at the time of the collision], and Second, Jones violated the traffic signal, and Third, Jones was thereby negligent, and Fourth, as a direct result of such negligence plaintiff sustained damage. Both Master and Servant Joined Where the master and servant are both joined as parties and agency is in issue, the verdict directing instruction against the servant will be a typical verdict directing instruction such as MAI 17.01. Since the verdict directing instruction contains those elements relevant to the liability of the servant, the only remaining issue relating to the master will be the agency issue. Under these circumstances it is not necessary to repeat the elements relating to the servant's negligence in the verdict directing instruction against the master. Thus, the verdict directing instruction against the master would read as follows: In your verdict you must find defendant Ajax responsible for any negligence of defendant Jones if you believe driver Jones was operating the Ajax Company motor vehicle within the scope and course of his employment by Ajax. In preparing the verdict form where the master's liability is submitted only on the servant's conduct, the servant is also joined, and agency is in issue, MAI 36.01 should be modified by adding the following: Note: Complete the following paragraph by writing the word(s) required by your verdict. On the claim of plaintiff for personal injury against defendant (name of master), we, the undersigned jurors, ("do" or "do not") find (name of master) responsible for ("do" or "do not") any negligence of (name of servant).