Jury Charge

The jury charge is the set of questions, definitions, and instructions submitted to the jury in a Texas civil case. The charge frames what the jury decides, and a harmful charge error can require a new trial. Texas favors broad-form submission, single questions encompassing all theories of liability supported by the evidence, but the Casteel doctrine restricts broad-form submission where the question commingles valid and invalid theories.

Broad-form submission

Rule 277 directs trial courts to submit "broad-form questions" whenever feasible. The classic broad-form negligence question: "Did the negligence, if any, of [defendant] proximately cause the occurrence in question?", a single question encompassing duty, breach, causation, and (if relevant) multiple theories.

The Casteel doctrine

Crown Life Insurance Co. v. Casteel, 22 S.W.3d 378 (Tex. 2000), is the principal limitation on broad-form submission. Casteel held that broad-form submission is reversible error where the question commingles valid and invalid theories of liability, the jury's affirmative answer cannot be parsed to determine which theory it relied on, and remand is required. Application of Casteel: (1) where multiple theories are submitted broad-form and one theory is unsupported by evidence, and (2) where one theory is invalid as a matter of law. Casteel error is preserved by specific objection at the charge conference, identifying the invalid theory.

Definitions and instructions

The charge includes not only questions but also definitions and instructions. Definitions explain key legal terms (e.g., "negligence means failure to use ordinary care"); instructions explain how to answer (e.g., "Do not consider sympathy or prejudice"). Definitions and instructions must be supported by the pleadings, evidence, and law; the court may not comment directly on the weight of the evidence, although an incidental comment that is properly part of an instruction or definition is not objectionable (Rule 277). Texas Pattern Jury Charges provide standard definitions and instructions for many common causes of action.

The charge conference

The charge conference, the formal proceeding at which the trial court determines what to include in the charge, is the critical moment for preserving charge issues for appeal. Each party submits proposed questions, definitions, and instructions; the trial court rules on inclusions and exclusions; objections must be specific and on the record. Failure to object specifically waives the issue (Rule 274). For an omitted definition or instruction, or an omitted question the complaining party relies on, Rule 278 also requires a written request in substantially correct wording. The charge conference follows the close of evidence, and the court must read the charge to the jury before argument begins (Rule 275).

Damages submission

Damages submission frequently uses granulated rather than broad-form questions, separating each element of damages (medical expenses, lost wages, pain and suffering, etc.). Separating the elements lets an appellate court tell whether an award rests on an element with no evidentiary support. In Harris County v. Smith, 96 S.W.3d 230 (Tex. 2002), the court held it harmful error, over a timely objection, to submit a broad-form damages question that included such an element. Mental anguish, future damages, and exemplary damages typically receive separate questions.

Common charge errors

Recurring sources of charge error: (1) commingling theories, broad-form questions that include unsupported or invalid theories; (2) missing element, failure to include a necessary element of the cause of action; (3) improper definition, definitions that misstate the law or unfairly slant interpretation; (4) commenting on the evidence, instructions that imply judicial opinion on disputed facts; (5) missing instruction, failure to include a required limiting instruction; (6) burden allocation, placing the burden of proof on the wrong party.