What is the test for a reversal of an instruction in a civil case where the jury found that the original instruction was deficient?

Finally, even if appellants were correct that the instructions were deficient, they do not establish the prejudice necessary for a reversal. Factors commonly used in civil cases to determine prejudice from instructional error include the degree of conflict in the evidence, whether the jury requested a rereading of the instruction or related evidence, the closeness of the verdict, whether counsel's closing arguments were misleading, and the effect of other instructions given. (Mitchell v. Gonzales (1991) 54 Cal.3d 1041, 1054-1056.) Appellants do not substantially address any of these. Moreover, while they make various conclusory statements in their briefs, they do not cite to any evidence that the use by respondents' predecessor was, in fact, different than the use by respondents, or that respondents' use changed in such a legally meaningful manner as to preclude (or restart) the running of the five-year term. They therefore fail to show from the record that, if the instruction had been given as appellants urge, they would have obtained a better outcome in the trial.