Skip to main content
DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

Quigley v. Winter, 598 F.3d 938 (2010)

Citation
Quigley v. Winter, 598 F.3d 938 (2010)
Parent Document
Quigley v. Winter, 598 F.3d 938 (2010)
Effective Date
2010-03-16

Other Sections in This Document (232)

Full Text

701 chars
“‘Plain error is a stringently limited standard of review,’ especially in the civil
context, and must result in a miscarriage of justice in order to compel reversal.” Id.
at 771 (quoting Rush v. Smith, 56 F.3d 918, 925 (8th Cir. 1995) (en banc)). Jury
instructions must fairly and adequately state the law, but “we will not find error in
instructions simply because they are technically imperfect or are not a model of
clarity.” Hastings v. Boston Mut. Life Ins. Co., 975 F.2d 506, 510 (8th Cir. 1992)
(citation omitted). Having reviewed the jury instructions in their entirety, we
conclude Winter has not shown there was plain error in either the form or content of
the instructions and verdict form.