Kenneth Vercammen is a Middlesex County Trial Attorney who has published 130 articles in national and New Jersey publications on Criminal Law, Probate, Estate and litigation topics.

He was awarded the NJ State State Bar Municipal Court Practitioner of the Year.

He lectures and handles criminal cases, Municipal Court, DWI, traffic and other litigation matters.

To schedule a confidential consultation, call us or New clients email us evenings and weekends via contact box www.njlaws.com.

Kenneth Vercammen & Associates, P.C,

2053 Woodbridge Avenue,

Edison, NJ 08817,

(732) 572-0500

Thursday, December 28, 2017

Civil Model Jury Charge 5.30L EFFECT OF INTOXICATION ON DUTY OWING (By Automobile Driver)

5.30L Effect of Intoxication on Duty Owing (By Automobile Driver) (Approved before 1983)

http://www.judiciary.state.nj.us/civil/civindx.html
The driver of a vehicle is required to exercise the care which a reasonably prudent and sober person could exercise under the same or similar circumstances. The fact that a driver of a vehicle has been drinking and gives the appearance of being under the influence of alcohol does not in itself necessarily constitute negligence. However, it is proper evidence to be considered and weighed by you, along with all of the other evidence in the case, in determining whether negligence has been established.
If a person, although intoxicated, drives his/her vehicle in a proper manner and as a reasonably prudent and sober man would, he/she cannot be held liable for damage inflicted by his/her vehicle merely because he/she was intoxicated at the time. On the other hand, voluntary intoxication does not excuse his/her failure to exercise that degree of care, in the conduct and management of his/her vehicle, which would be exercised by a reasonably prudent and sober driver under the same or similar circumstances. If he/she does not exercise that degree of care, he/she is negligent, whether the failure to do so is caused by intoxication or not.

NOTE TO JUDGE
This charge may be modified to apply to other situations where the sobriety of a party is an issue.
Cases:
Roether v. Pearson, 36 N.JSuper. 465 (App. Div. 1955); Petrone v. Margolis, 20 N.JSuper. 180 (App. Div. 1952); Tabor v. OGrady, 61 N.J.Super. 446 (App. Div. 1960).