Arizona’s civil jury instructions are the Revised Arizona Jury Instructions (Civil), known as RAJI (Civil), a set of model instructions the State Bar maintains for use in civil trials. They cover everything from burden of proof to damages calculations, and Arizona Rule of Civil Procedure 51 governs how lawyers propose them, how judges rule on them, and how a party preserves an instructional error for appeal.
What RAJI Is and Whether Judges Have to Follow It
The Civil Jury Instructions Committee of the State Bar of Arizona drafts and updates RAJI (Civil), and the State Bar’s Board of Governors handles publication. The committee’s job is to keep the instructions aligned with current Arizona statutes and appellate decisions.
The instructions are persuasive, not mandatory. The Arizona Supreme Court once reviewed and approved RAJI before publication, but later stopped issuing that advance approval outside of appellate cases. The Board of Governors then renamed the set from “Recommended” to “Revised” and added a disclaimer that the Supreme Court has not approved the instructions.1State Bar of Arizona. Revised Arizona Jury Instructions (Criminal) 6th Edition Courts and attorneys are expected to confirm in each case, using original and current authority, that the instructions given are correct.
The most current version is the RAJI (Civil) 8th Edition, published in October 2025. Earlier editions, including the 7th Edition from 2020, are still available through the State Bar and through commercial publishers such as LexisNexis.2State Bar of Arizona. Revised Arizona Jury Instructions Civil – Preliminary Instructions
How the Instructions Are Organized
RAJI (Civil) is divided into topical sections that track the phases of a civil trial and the major areas of civil law. The first two sections handle the procedural framework: Preliminary Instructions, given right after the jury is sworn, and Standard Instructions, which cover foundational concepts like evaluating evidence, burden of proof, and witness credibility.3State Bar of Arizona. Revised Arizona Jury Instructions (Civil) 8th – Standard Instructions
The remaining sections address specific types of civil claims. In a personal injury case, for example, the case-specific instructions come from the Fault, Negligence, Medical Negligence, or Product Liability sections, while the damages instructions come from the Personal Injury Damages section.4State Bar of Arizona. Revised Arizona Jury Instructions Civil – Personal Injury Damages Other sections cover Contract Instructions, Intentional Torts, and Employment Law, among others.
What Preliminary Instructions Cover
Rule 51(b)(2) requires the court to instruct the jury on several topics immediately after the jury is sworn. These preliminary instructions set the ground rules before any evidence comes in and must include:5New York Codes, Rules and Regulations. Arizona Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 51 – Jury Instructions; Objections; Preserving a Claim of Error
- Juror duties and conduct, including deciding facts on the evidence and avoiding sympathy or speculation
- The order of proceedings
- The procedure for jurors to submit written questions
- Whether and how jurors may take notes
- What counts as evidence and the difference between direct and circumstantial evidence
- A preview of the legal claims and defenses
- The substantive law the jury will apply
- What jurors should do if problems arise during trial
The RAJI Preliminary Instructions expand on each of these with model language, including an admonition against outside research and internet searches and guidance on media coverage.2State Bar of Arizona. Revised Arizona Jury Instructions Civil – Preliminary Instructions
Proposing Instructions Under Rule 51
Rule 51(a) controls how a party requests an instruction. Written requests may be filed before trial, or with the court’s permission during trial. After the evidence closes, a party can still request instructions on issues that could not reasonably have been anticipated by the pretrial deadline, or ask leave to file late requests on any issue.5New York Codes, Rules and Regulations. Arizona Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 51 – Jury Instructions; Objections; Preserving a Claim of Error
In practice, the court’s scheduling order sets the specific deadline for proposed instructions. Many judges require the parties to meet in advance and submit a joint set of agreed instructions, with separate submissions for the ones they dispute. Rule 51 itself does not require each proposed instruction to include a RAJI number or a citation, but that is standard practice in Arizona courts and most judges expect it. Identifying an instruction by its RAJI designation, when one exists, helps the court quickly gauge whether it states the law correctly.
Before instructing the jury and before final arguments, the court must tell the parties which instructions it intends to give and how it has ruled on any disputed requests.5New York Codes, Rules and Regulations. Arizona Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 51 – Jury Instructions; Objections; Preserving a Claim of Error That advance notice lets attorneys tailor closing arguments to the instructions the jury will actually receive and raise objections before the final charge.
When No RAJI Instruction Fits
RAJI does not address every legal theory or factual scenario. When no standard instruction covers the issue, attorneys draft custom language. The guiding principle is that non-RAJI instructions should be added only to the extent needed, and they must be verified against original, current authority.1State Bar of Arizona. Revised Arizona Jury Instructions (Criminal) 6th Edition Custom instructions that stray from settled law or slip in argumentative language are the ones most likely to draw objections and create appellate issues.
The Instruction Conference
The judge usually holds a conference with the attorneys, outside the jury’s presence, to work through each proposed instruction. The court may give an instruction as proposed, refuse it, or modify it, and must indicate any modifications on the record. The court also must make a record of its rulings on all instruction requests.5New York Codes, Rules and Regulations. Arizona Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 51 – Jury Instructions; Objections; Preserving a Claim of Error Come to the conference with alternative language ready in case the court rejects the first version.
What Jurors Receive in Writing
Rule 51(b)(1) requires each juror to receive a written copy of both the preliminary and final instructions before they are read aloud and before deliberations begin. The rule also directs that instructions be “as readily understandable as possible by individuals unfamiliar with the legal system.”5New York Codes, Rules and Regulations. Arizona Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 51 – Jury Instructions; Objections; Preserving a Claim of Error That is not just aspirational. Instructions loaded with jargon or tangled syntax can draw objections precisely because the rule demands accessibility.
Objecting to Instructions and Preserving Error
A bad instruction on the record is worthless if the objection is not made correctly. Rule 51(c) requires any objection to an instruction, or to the court’s failure to give an instruction, to be made on the record. The objection must distinctly state what is being challenged and the specific legal grounds.5New York Codes, Rules and Regulations. Arizona Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 51 – Jury Instructions; Objections; Preserving a Claim of Error A vague “we object to instruction number twelve” preserves nothing.
The objection is timely if made during the window the court provides under Rule 51(b)(3)(C), when parties are given the chance to object on the record, outside the jury’s hearing, before instructions and arguments. If a party was not told of an instruction or ruling before that window, the party may object promptly after learning about it.5New York Codes, Rules and Regulations. Arizona Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 51 – Jury Instructions; Objections; Preserving a Claim of Error
Under Rule 51(d)(1), a party may assign error on appeal in two situations. The first is when an instruction that was actually given contained an error and the party properly objected. The second is when the court failed to give a requested instruction, and the party both properly requested it and properly objected to the refusal. If the court made a definitive ruling on the record rejecting the request, that ruling satisfies the objection requirement.5New York Codes, Rules and Regulations. Arizona Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 51 – Jury Instructions; Objections; Preserving a Claim of Error
Fundamental Error When No Objection Was Made
Failing to object does not always kill an issue on appeal. Rule 51(d)(2) allows a court to consider “fundamental error as allowed by law, even if the error was not preserved.”5New York Codes, Rules and Regulations. Arizona Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 51 – Jury Instructions; Objections; Preserving a Claim of Error This is a narrow exception. Arizona courts apply it only when the instructional error goes to the foundation of the case and effectively deprives a party of a fair trial. Appellate courts invoke it sparingly, and treating it as a strategy is a losing bet. The safer course is a clear, specific, on-the-record objection at trial.
Practical Points for Trial Attorneys
Instructions shape outcomes more than many attorneys appreciate until they lose a trial over one. A few points worth keeping in mind:
- Start drafting early. The scheduling order sets the deadline, and drafting instructions forces you to pin down the legal elements you have to prove.
- Use RAJI as the default. Judges are more comfortable giving instructions they recognize; modify only when the case requires it.
- Cite your authority on every proposed instruction, even though Rule 51 does not strictly require it. An instruction without a citation invites skepticism.
- Object with precision. Name the instruction, identify the specific legal error, and explain what the instruction should say instead.
- Get a definitive ruling on the record. A definitive rejection preserves the issue without a separate formal objection, but if the ruling is ambiguous, object anyway.