PJC Business

DTPA/I NSURANCE C ODE

PJC 102.1

PJC 102.1

Question and Instructions on False, Misleading, or Deceptive Act or Practice (DTPA § 17.46(b))

QUESTION ______ Did Don Davis engage in any false, misleading, or deceptive act or practice that Paul Payne relied on to his detriment and that was a producing cause of damages to Paul Payne ? “Producing cause” means a cause that was a substantial factor in bringing about the damages, if any, and without which the damages would not have occurred. There may be more than one producing cause. “False, misleading, or deceptive act or practice” means any of the following: [Insert appropriate instructions.] Answer “Yes” or “No.” Answer: _______________ COMMENT When to use. PJC 102.1 is a basic question that should be appropriate in most cases brought under section 17.46(b) of the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices– Consumer Protection Act (Tex. Bus. & Com. Code §§ 17.41–.63) (DTPA). See Cruz v. Andrews Restoration, Inc. , 364 S.W.3d 817, 824 n.6 (Tex. 2012) (noting PJC 102.1). Questions for other causes of action based on the DTPA or the Insurance Code may be found at PJC 102.7 (unconscionable action), 102.8 (warranty), 102.14 (Insurance Code), and 102.21 (knowing or intentional conduct). Accompanying instructions. Instructions to accompany PJC 102.1, informing the jury what type of conduct should be considered under the question, are at PJC 102.2–102.6. If more than one instruction is used, each must be separated by the word or , because a finding of any one of the acts or practices defined in the instructions would support recovery under the DTPA. “Producing cause.” Under section 17.50(a) of the DTPA, a “consumer may maintain an action where any of the following constitute a producing cause ” of actual damages. DTPA § 17.50(a) (emphasis added). The definition of “producing cause” is from Ford Motor Co. v. Ledesma , 242 S.W.3d 32, 46 (Tex. 2007) (stating that “[d]efin ing producing cause as being a substantial factor in bringing about an injury, and with out which the injury would not have occurred . . . is the definition that should be given in the jury charge”). “For DTPA violations,” the Texas Supreme Court has repeatedly

139