6.12 RELIANCE ON ADVICE OF COUNSEL

• Category: Federal - Jury Instructions - 7th Circuit - Criminal
• State: Multi-State
• Control #: US-JURY-7THCIR-6-12-CR
• Format: Word

Description

Official Pattern Jury Instructions adopted by Federal 7th Circuit Court. All converted to Word format. Please see the official site for addional information. www.ca7.uscourts.gov/pattern-jury-instructions/pattern-jury.htm 6.12 Reliance on Advice of Counsel is a legal doctrine that allows for a defense against negligence when a party has relied in good faith upon the advice of a qualified professional. This doctrine is used in both civil and criminal cases to provide a defense when a defendant argues that they relied on a professional’s advice when making a decision. It is often used when a defendant is accused of breaching a duty of care, failing to meet a standard of care, or engaging in wrongful conduct. There are two types of 6.12 Reliance on Advice of Counsel: actual reliance and apparent reliance. Actual reliance occurs when a party can show that they asked for, received, and followed the advice of a qualified professional. Apparent reliance occurs when a defendant can demonstrate that their actions demonstrate that they reasonably believed they were following the advice of a qualified professional.

6.12 Reliance on Advice of Counsel is a legal doctrine that allows for a defense against negligence when a party has relied in good faith upon the advice of a qualified professional. This doctrine is used in both civil and criminal cases to provide a defense when a defendant argues that they relied on a professional’s advice when making a decision. It is often used when a defendant is accused of breaching a duty of care, failing to meet a standard of care, or engaging in wrongful conduct. There are two types of 6.12 Reliance on Advice of Counsel: actual reliance and apparent reliance. Actual reliance occurs when a party can show that they asked for, received, and followed the advice of a qualified professional. Apparent reliance occurs when a defendant can demonstrate that their actions demonstrate that they reasonably believed they were following the advice of a qualified professional.