Decisions on jury instructions are within the trial court’s discretion, and the Montana Supreme Court will only reverse the decision if the trial court has abused its discretion. Cechovic v. Hardin & Assocs., 273 Mont. 104, 116, 902 P.2d 520, 527 (1995). When reviewing a trial court’s decision on jury instructions, we consider the “instructions in their entirety and in connection with other instructions given and the evidence introduced at trial.” Story v. City of Bozeman, 259 Mont. 207, 222, 856 P.2d 202, 211 (1993) (overruled on other grounds). See also Busta v. Columbus Hosp, 276 Mont. 342, 359–60, 916 P.2d 122, 132 (1996).
Although a trial court has broad discretion, the principle that “jury instructions must fully and fairly instruct the jury regarding the applicable law” limits its discretion. Goles v. Neumann, 2011 MT 11, ¶ 9, 359 Mont. 132, 247 P.3d 1089.
A trial court’s refusal to give an offered instruction only constitutes reversible error when “such refusal affects the substantial rights of the party proposing the instruction, thereby prejudicing him.” Busta, 276 Mont. 359–60, 916 P. 2d 133. The party assigning error must show prejudice. Tarlton v. Kaufman, 2008 MT 462, ¶ 19, 348 Mont. 178, 199 P.3d 263. If “the jury instructions in their entirety state the applicable law of the case,” we will not find prejudice. Peterson v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co., 2010 MT 187, ¶ 22, 357 Mont. 293, 239 P.3d 904.
If the “subject matter of the instruction is not applicable to the pleadings and facts, or not supported by the evidence introduced at trial, or the subject matter is adequately covered by other instructions submitted to the jury,” a failure to give the offered instruction will not constitute prejudice. Busta, 276 Mont. 359–60, 916 P. 2d 133.