Cited by

d 729, 741 (Minn. 2005) (explaining that the eggshell-plaintiff doctrine “makes the defendant responsible for all damages that the defendant legally caused even if the plaintiff was more susceptible to injury because of a preexisting condition or injury”) .

(“[A] defendant should be responsible for the harm that the defendant caused even if the harm is more severe because the plaintiff is more susceptible to injury—the eggshell 11 plaintiff doctrine.” (emphasis added)).

Because the jury instruction guide “is only a guide,” n.1 (Minn. 2005), we focus on Christy itself.

This testimony supports a reasonable inference of intent to terrorize because it shows that Niesen used violence by pulling the victim by her 3 We note that, although the jury-instruction guides are not binding law, n.1 (Minn. 2005), this instruction is consistent with the statute and “does not contravene existing case law,”

We note that while the jury-instruction guides are not binding law, n.1 (Minn. 2005), this instruction is consistent with the statute and “does not contravene existing case law,”

See Minnesota Practice —Jury Instruction Guides , supra, at iii-v; Rowe v. Munye , n.1 (Minn. 2005).

(explaining that a party asking for damages has the burden to prove those damages).

“[A] court errs if it gives a jury instruction that materially misstates the law.”

n.1 (Minn. 2005) (noting that JIGS are a guide, not an exclusive source of substantive law).

(“We recognize that it is conceivable that a person could have both an injury that involves aggravation of a preexisting injury and an injury that was more severe because the plaintiff was more susceptible to injury.”); Waits, d at 578 (“[W]e can envision situations where the principles

(citing Hilligoss v. Cargill, Inc., ).

Co., -86 (Minn.App.2006) ( aff'd, ).