(Fla. 11th Cir. Ct. Jul. 14, 2023) (2024)

`

`Paulone Richardson, et al. v. Miami Jewish Health Systems, Inc., et al.
`Case No.: 2022-005573-CA-01
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`WE HEREBY CERTIFY that on July 14, 2023 a true and correct copy of the above and
`
`foregoing document was filed with the Clerk of the above styled Court using the Florida e-Filing
`
`Portal, which will deliver electronic copies of this filing to the designated e-mail addresses for all
`
`counsel of record pursuant to Fla. R. Jud. Admin. 2.516. We also certify that the foregoing
`
`document was served this day on all counsel of record identified on the attached Service List via
`
`electronic mail.
`
`Respectfully Submitted,
`
`ELSER, MOSKOWITZ,
`WILSON,
`EDELMAN & DICKER LLP
`Counsel for Defendant, G4S Secure Solutions
`(USA) Inc.
`100 SE Second Street, Suite 2100
`Miami, Florida 33131
`Telephone: (305) 374-4400
`Facsimile: (305) 579-0261
`
`By: Roberto M. Ureta
`
`
`ROBERTO M. URETA, ESQ.
`Florida Bar No.: 000957
`rob.ureta@wilsonelser.com
`DAKEITHA HAYNES, ESQ.
`Florida Bar No.: 1002429
`dakeitha.haynes@wilsonelser.com
`
`
`
`
`[Space below was intentionally left blank; Service List to follow on next page.]
`
`
`
`
`-2-
`
`WILSON, ELSER, MOSKOWITZ, EDELMAN & DICKER LLP
`100 SOUTHEAST SECOND STREET • SUITE 2100 • MIAMI, FLORIDA 33131
`TELEPHONE (305) 374-4400 • FACSIMILE (305) 579-0261
`
`281095008V.1
`
`

`

`Paulone Richardson, et al. v. Miami Jewish Health Systems, Inc., et al.
`Case No.: 2022-005573-CA-01
`
`
`
`SERVICE LIST
`
`
`Counsel for Plaintiff:
`
`Scott Jay Feder, Esq.
`SCOTT JAY FEDER, P.A.
`4649 Ponce De Leon, Blvd., Suite 402
`Coral Gables, Florida 33146
`Telephone: (305) 669-0060
`Facsimile: (305) 669-4220
`scottj8@aol.com;
`assistantscottjfeder@hotmail.com
`
`
`
`Counsel for Defendant, Miami Jewish
`Health Systems, Inc.:
`
`Michael J. Schwartz, Esq.
`LUKS, SANTANIELLO, PETRILLO
`COHEN & PETERFRIEND
`301 Yamato Road, Suite 4150
`Boca Raton, Florida 33431
`Telephone: (561) 893-9088
`Facsimile: (561) 893-9048
`LUKSBOCA-Pleadings@LS-Law.com;
`mschwartz@insurancedefense.net;
`jmariotti@insurancedefense.net;
`rlabra@insurancedefense.net
`
`
`
`
`
`Co-Counsel for Plaintiff:
`
`Marc R. Ginsberg, Esq.
`MANDINA & GINSBERG, LLP
`Laurel Court - Suite 107
`15500 New Barn Road
`Miami Lakes, Florida 33014
`Telephone: (305) 358-1181
`Facsimile: (305) 231-7900
`marcginsberg@mg-trialattorneys.com
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`-3-
`
`WILSON, ELSER, MOSKOWITZ, EDELMAN & DICKER LLP
`100 SOUTHEAST SECOND STREET • SUITE 2100 • MIAMI, FLORIDA 33131
`TELEPHONE (305) 374-4400 • FACSIMILE (305) 579-0261
`
`281095008V.1
`
`

`

`IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 11TH
`JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
`IN AND FOR
`MIAMI-DADE, FLORIDA
`
`CASE NO.: 2022-005573-CA-01
`
`
`Division: CA23
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`PAULONE RICHARDSON and THECEL
`RICHARDSON,
`
`
`
`vs.
`
`MIAMI JEWISH HEALTH SYSTEMS,
`INC. and G4S SECURE SOLUTIONS
`(USA) INC.,
`
`Defendants.
`
`___________________________________/
`
`Plaintiffs,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`DEFENDANT, G4S SECURE SOLUTIONS (USA) INC.’S
`PROPOSED JURY INSTRUCTIONS
`
`
`
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`Case No.: 2022-005573-CA-01
`Page 1
`
`JURY INSTRUCTIONS
`
`DESCRIPTION OF THE CASE
`(Prior to Voir Dire)
`
`Welcome. I will now administer your oath.
`
`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]?
`
`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, 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 lawsuit arises out of an incident that occurred on February 13, 2021 at Miami Jewish
`
`Health Systems, Inc. with its principal office in Miami Dade County, Florida.
`
`Plaintiffs PAULONE RICHARDSON and THECEL RICHARDSON, claim that on
`
`February 13, 2021 Defendant, MIAMI JEWISH HEALTH SYSTEMS, INC., that as the owner
`
`and manager of the property as improved, had a non-delegable duty to provide reasonable and
`
`responsive security services under the circ*mstances and which duty MJHS had assumed.
`
`Plaintiffs further claim that MJHS fell below the requisite standard of care in this regard in that its
`
`selected security service failed to property monitor the facilities, failed to property assist and failed
`
`to act upon the concerns reported by THECEL RICHARDSON.
`
`Plaintiffs PAULONE RICHARDSON and THECEL RICHARDSON, claim that on
`
`February 13, 2021 Defendant, G4S Secure Solutions (USA), Inc., had a duty to provide a
`
`
`
`

`

`
`reasonably safe environment for PAULONE RICHARDSON at MJHS and that G4S Secure
`
`Case No.: 2022-005573-CA-01
`Page 2
`
`Solutions (USA), Inc. breached that duty.
`
`Defendants, MJHS and G4S Secure Solutions (USA), Inc., deny that they had the duties
`
`alleged by the Plaintiffs and further that any breach of duties was a legal cause of loss, injury or
`
`damage to PAULONE RICHARDSON or that Plaintiff sustained a permanent injury within a
`
`reasonable degree of medical probability.
`
`The principal witnesses who will testify in this case are:
`
`1. Paulone Richardson
`
`2. Thecel Richardson
`
`3. Paul Elie Richardson
`
`4. Barthelemy Richardson
`
`5. Louis Cordero Emt (Badge #1924)
`
`6. Jacob Sauls, EMT-Paramedic (Badge #1883) City of Miami Fire Rescue
`
`7. Daniel Comenas, OIC (Badge #116) City of Miami Fire Rescue
`
`8. Jackson Memorial Hospital Medical Personnel
`
`
`a.
`b.
`c.
`d.
`e.
`f.
`g.
`h.
`i.
`j.
`k.
`l.
`m.
`n.
`o.
`
`Jose Romano - Attending
`John Clenkl - ER
`Aaron Winn - Radiology
`Rita Bhatia - Neuro-Radiology
`Gaurav Saigal - Radiology
`Carlos Millan - Plainitff Attending
`Erika Marulanda-Londono - Attending Neurology
`Nathan McKenty - Physical Medicine
`Victor Lu - Neurological Surgery
`Francesco Vendrame - Endocrinology
`Rafael Caputi - Fellow Endocrinology
`Christopher Mallow - Admitting
`Liza Doamradzki - Pulmonary & Critical
`Seung Kang – Attending
`Rosario Colombo – Cardiology
`
`
`
`

`

`
`
`Case No.: 2022-005573-CA-01
`Page 3
`
`Adriana Albuena - Rehabilitation Medicine
`
`p.
`
`North Shore Medical Center (Miami) Medical Personnel
`
`9.
`
`a. Emin Hodzic - Attending
`b. Susan Baker - Lab Medical Director
`c. Modinat Balogun - Primary
`d. Terri Ann Noe -Radiology
`e. Donald Puller - Neuro-Radiology
`f. Sonal Mehta - Vascular and Interventional Neurology
`g. Rehan A. Naqui - Internal Medicine
`h. Leidy Sangil Rivero, RN
`i. Jill A. Figueroa, APRN
`j. Daniel E. Frank - Diagnostic Radiology
`k. Megan K. Martinez, PA - General Internal Medicine
`l. Bashar Mohsen - Neurology
`m. Jonathan Gomez - Neurology n. Rafael Abreu -
`o. Robin Moore - ER
`p. Grace Mckelvey - ED Triage
`q. Mark Goldberg - Neuro diagnostics
`r. Fernando G. Mendez, Jr. - Radiology
`s. Nathalie Vachon, APRN
`t. Geovannie Marcano-Centeno - ER
`u. Neredia Rodriguez, RN
`v. Jean-Marc Dominique, RPh
`w. Margareth Joseph Tech - ER
`x. Barbara Martin, RN
`y. Patrick Dioro, RN
`z. Amy Jarvis
`Andres Rivero - Infectious Disease
`aa.
`Julian Medina - Radiology
`bb.
`Javier Marquez, APRN
`cc.
`dd. Amin Abolfazli –Neurology
`
`UM Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center Medical Personnel
`
`
`
`10.
`
`
`a.
`b.
`c.
`d.
`e.
`
`Gerald A. Soff, MD Hematology Oncology
`Eduardo Novoa Cianelli, APRN
`Lisbet Garcia
`Rosa Salgado, RN
`Crystal Yan, MD
`
`11. Michael Jean-Baptiste, PT
`
`12.
`
`Linda Xie, MD Brain Center
`
`
`
`

`

`Case No.: 2022-005573-CA-01
`Page 4
`
`
`13.
`
`14.
`
`15.
`
`16.
`
`17.
`
`18.
`
`19.
`
`20.
`
`Lauren Tracey Shapiro, MD, MPH
`
`Heliodoro Ruiz, MD
`
`Trecia McFarlane, MD
`
`Dr. Corbett c/o Michael J. Schwartz
`
`Ronald B. Tolchin, D.O. c/o Michael J. Schwartz
`
`Geoffrey A. Negin, M.D. c/o Michael J. Schwartz
`
`Owen Samuels, MD c/o Michael J. Schwartz
`
`Bruce Jacobs, PhD c/o Michael J. Schwartz
`
`
`
`

`

`
`
`INTRODUCTION OF PARTICIPANTS AND THEIR ROLES
`
`Judge/Court: I am the Judge. You may hear people occasionally refer to me as "The Court."
`
`Case No.: 2022-005573-CA-01
`Page 5
`
`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 is, they speak
`
`for their clients here at the trial. They have taken oaths as attorneys to do their best and to follow
`
`the rules of their profession.
`
`Plaintiffs' Counsel: The attorneys on this side of the courtroom, Scott Jay Feder and Marc
`
`Gins-berg represent Paulone and Thecel Richardson who are the persons who filed the lawsuit
`
`here at the courthouse. Their job is to present their clients’ side of things to you. They and their
`
`clients will be referred to most of the time as “the plaintiffs” or “Ms. Richardson or Mr.
`
`Richardson”. Mr. Feder, will you please introduce who is sitting at the table with you?
`
`Defense Counsel: The attorneys on this side of the courtroom, Michael J. Schwartz
`
`represents MIAMI JEWISH HEALTH SYSTEMS, INC., the Defendant in this case. Michael J.
`
`Schwartz present his client's side of things to you. Collectively, Michael J. Schwartz and his client
`
`will be referred to as "the Defendant" or "Miami Jewish Health Systems, Inc."
`
`Defense Counsel: The attorneys on this side of the courtroom, Rob Ureta and Dakeitha
`
`Haynes, represent G4S Secure Solutions (USA) Inc., the one who has been sued. Their job is to
`
`present their client’s side of things to you. They and their client will usually be referred to as “the
`
`
`
`

`

`
`
`Case No.: 2022-005573-CA-01
`Page 6
`
`defendant” or “G4S Secure Solutions (USA) Inc.” Mr. Ureta, will you please introduce who is
`
`sitting at the table with you?
`
`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
`
`
`
`

`

`
`
`Case No.: 2022-005573-CA-01
`Page 7
`
`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. 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.
`
`
`
`

`

`
`
`Case No.: 2022-005573-CA-01
`Page 8
`
`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
`
`
`
`

`

`
`
`Case No.: 2022-005573-CA-01
`Page 9
`
`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,
`
`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.
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`
`
`Case No.: 2022-005573-CA-01
`Page 10
`
`EXPLANATION OF THE VOIR DIRE PROCESS
`
`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.
`
`
`
`

`

`
`
`Case No.: 2022-005573-CA-01
`Page 11
`
`Response to Questioning: There are no right or wrong answers to the questions that we
`
`will asked. The only thing that I ask is that you answer the questions as frankly, 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. It is very important that you be as honest and complete with your answers as
`
`you possibly can. If you do not understand the question, please raise your hand and ask for an
`
`explanation or clarification.
`
`In the process of selecting the jury, some of the lawyers' questions are to help them
`
`anticipate if your beliefs, experiences, or attitudes might make it difficult for you to apply the
`
`rules of law. Jurors take an oath to follow the law. Upon counsel completion in selecting the
`
`jury, you will be sworn in. I will instruct the jury on the rules they must follow in deciding this
`
`case. It is important for you to remember that it will not be the jury's job to decide what the law
`
`ought to be. Rather, the jury is to determine what the facts are, then apply the law to those facts,
`
`using the court's instructions on the rules of law to apply - which will be fully given to the jury
`
`at the appropriate time.
`
`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 the Court and counsel.
`
`
`
`

`

`
`
`INTRODUCTION
`
`Members of the jury, you have now heard and received all of the evidence in this case. I am
`
`Case No.: 2022-005573-CA-01
`Page 12
`
`now going to tell you about the rules of law that you must use in reaching your verdict. You will
`
`recall at the beginning of the case I told you that if, at the end of the case I decided that different
`
`law applies, I would tell you so. These instructions are (slightly) different from what I gave you at
`
`the beginning and it is these rules of law that you must now follow. When I finish telling you about
`
`the rules of law, the attorneys will present their final arguments and you will then retire to decide
`
`your verdict.
`
`401.2 SUMMARY OF CLAIMS
`
`The claims in this case are as follows:
`
`Plaintiffs, PAULONE RICHARDSON AND THECEL RICHARDSON, claim that on
`
`February 13, 2021 that MJHS and G4S Secure Solutions (USA) Inc. were negligent in failing to
`
`use reasonable measures that caused delay in locating Mrs. Richardson, resulting in her not getting
`
`timely medical care which could have prevented her injuries. The Plaintiff must prove her claims
`
`by the greater weight of the evidence.
`
`MJHS denies that claim and claim that Paulone Richardson herself was negligent which
`
`caused her harm.
`
`G4S Secure Solutions (USA) Inc. denies that claim and claims that Paulone Richardson
`
`and Thecal Richardson were themselves negligent which caused Paulone Richardson harm.
`
`The parties must prove their claim by the greater weight of the evidence. Paulone
`
`Richardson must prove her claim by the greater weight of the evidence. G4S Solutions (USA) Inc.
`
`and MJHS must prove their claim by the greater weight of the evidence.
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`
`
`GREATER WEIGHT OF THE EVIDENCE
`
`"Greater weight of the evidence" means the more persuasive and convincing force an
`
`Case No.: 2022-005573-CA-01
`Page 13
`
`effect of the entire evidence in the case.
`
`Negligence is a legal cause of loss, injury, or damage if it directly and in natural and
`
`continuous sequence produces or contributes substantially to producing such loss, injury, or
`
`damage, so that it can reasonably be said that, but for the negligence, the loss, injury, or damage
`
`would not have occurred.
`
`The issues you must decide on Paulone Richardson's claims against Miami Jewish
`
`Health Systems is whether Miami Jewish Health Systems negligently failed to maintain its
`
`premises in a reasonably safe condition by failing to correct a dangerous condition about
`
`which Miami Jewish Health Systems either knew or should have known by the use of
`
`reasonable care and, if so, whether that negligence was a legal cause of loss, injury or
`
`damage to Paulone Richardson. 401.20a
`
`The issues you must decide on Paulone Richardson's claims against G4S Secure
`
`Solutions (USA) Inc. is whether G4S Secure Solutions (USA) Inc. was negligent in
`
`providing reasonable security services and, if so, whether that negligence was a legal cause
`
`of loss, injury or damage to Paulone Richardson.
`
`If the greater weight of the evidence does not support Paulone Richardson's claims against
`
`Miami Jewish Health Systems, then your verdict should be for Miami Jewish Health Systems.
`
`
`
`

`

`
`
`Case No.: 2022-005573-CA-01
`Page 14
`
`If the greater weight of the evidence does not support Paulone Richardson's claims against
`
`G4S Secure Solutions (USA) Inc., then your verdict should be for G4S Secure Solutions (USA)
`
`Inc.
`
`If your verdict is for both Miami Jewish Health Systems and G4S Secure Solutions
`
`(USA) Inc you will not consider the matter of damages. However, if the greater weight of
`
`the evidence supports any of Paulone Richardson's claims against Miami Jewish Health
`
`Systems and/or G4S Secure Solutions (USA) Inc. then you should consider the defense
`
`raised.
`
`On the defense, the issue for you to decide is whether Thecel Richardson and nonparty
`
`Jackson Memorial Hospital was negligent and if so, whether that negligence was a contributing
`
`legal cause of loss, injury or damage to Paulone Richardson.
`
`If the greater weight of the evidence does not support this defense, then you shall not
`
`apportion any negligence to Thecel Richardson and/or Jackson Memorial Hospital.
`
`If the greater weight of the evidence does support Paulone's Richardson's claim against both
`
`Miami Jewish Health Systems and/or G4S Secure Solutions (USA) Inc. and the greater weight of
`
`the evidence does not support the defense, then you should decide and write on the verdict form
`
`what percentage of the total negligence of the parties to this action you apportion to each of them.
`
`If, however, the greater weight of the evidence supports Paulone Richardson's claim
`
`against one or both of the defendants and the greater weight of the evidence does support
`
`
`
`

`

`
`
`Case No.: 2022-005573-CA-01
`Page 15
`
`the defense, then you should decide and write on the verdict form what percentage of the
`
`total negligence of all parties to this action you apportion to each of them.
`
`If the greater weight of the evidence supports Paulone Richardson's claim against one
`
`or both defendant, you should determine and write on the verdict form, in dollars, the total
`
`amount of money that the greater weight of the evidence shows will fairly and adequately
`
`compensate Paulone Richardson for the following elements of damage including damage
`
`that she is reasonably certain to incur in the future:
`
`The reasonable expense of hospitalization and medical care and treatment necessarily
`
`or reasonably obtained by Paulone Richardson in the past, or to be so obtained in the future.
`
`Any bodily injury sustained by Paulone Richardson and any resulting pain and
`
`suffering, disability or physical impairment, disfigurement, mental anguish, inconvenience,
`
`or loss of capacity for the enjoyment of life experienced in the past, or to be experienced in
`
`the future. There is no exact standard for measuring such damage. The amount should be
`
`fair and just in the light of the evidence.
`
`You may consider her life expectancy. The mortality tables received in evidence may
`
`be considered in determining how long Paulone Richardson may be expected to live.
`
`Mortality tables are not binding on you but may be considered together with other evidence
`
`in the case bearing on Paulone Richardson health, age and physical condition, before and
`
`after the injury, in determining the probable length of her life. (501.6)
`
`
`
`

`

`
`
`Case No.: 2022-005573-CA-01
`Page 16
`
`Any amount of damages that you allow for future medical expenses should be
`
`reduced to its present money value and only the present money value of these future
`
`economic damages should be included in your verdict.
`
`The present money value of future economic damages is the sum of money needed now,
`
`which, together with what that sum will earn in the future, will compensate Paulone Richardson
`
`for these losses as they are actually experienced in future years.
`
`You should also determine, and write on the verdict form, in dollars, an amount of
`
`money which the greater weight of the evidence shows will fairly and adequately
`
`compensate Thecel Richardson for any loss by reason of his wife's injury and her services,
`
`comfort, society and attentions in the past and in the future caused by the incident in
`
`question.
`
`In deciding this case, it is your duty as jurors to decide the issues, and only those
`
`issues, that I submit for your determination and to answer certain questions I ask you to
`
`answer on a special form, called a verdict form. You must come to an agreement about
`
`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 [an d] all facts that were admitted or agreed to by the parties.
`
`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
`
`
`
`

`

`
`
`Case No.: 2022-005573-CA-01
`Page 17
`
`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. Nevertheless, you should not guess about
`
`things that were not covered here. Moreover, you must always apply the law as I have
`
`explained it to you. (601.2)
`
`
`
`

`

`
`
`LEGAL CAUSE
`
`Case No.: 2022-005573-CA-01
`Page 18
`
`The accident is a legal cause of loss, injury, or damage if it directly and in natural and
`
`continuous sequence produces or contributes substantially to producing such loss, injury, or
`
`damage, so that it can reasonably be said that, but for the negligence, the loss, injury, or damage
`
`would not have occurred.
`
`In order to be regarded as a legal cause of loss, injury, or damage negligence need not be
`
`the only cause. Negligence may be a legal cause of loss, injury, or damage even though it operates
`
`in combination with some other natural cause, if the negligence contributes substantially to
`
`producing such loss, injury, or damage.
`
`
`
`

`

`
`
`Case No.: 2022-005573-CA-01
`Page 19
`
`BELIEVABILITY OF WITNESSES
`
`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.
`
`You have heard opinion testimony on certain technical subjects from persons referred to as
`
`expert witnesses. 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.
`
`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 or her testimony.
`
`
`
`

`

`
`
`Case No.: 2022-005573-CA-01
`Page 20
`
`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.
`
`
`
`

`

`
`
`Case No.: 2022-005573-CA-01
`Page 21
`
`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