What is the legal test for abuse of abuse of authority when a jury asks a jury a question about the law in a civil case?

In criminal cases, Penal Code "[s]ection 1138 imposes upon the court a duty to provide the jury with information the jury desires on points of law." (People v. Smithey (1999) 20 Cal.4th 936, 985.) "The court has a primary duty to help the jury understand the legal principles it is asked to apply. [Citation.] This does not mean the court must always elaborate on the standard instructions. Where the original instructions are themselves full and complete, the court has discretion . . . to determine what additional explanations are sufficient to satisfy the jury's request for information. [Citation.] . . . [Citation.] . . . It should decide as to each jury question whether further explanation is desirable, or whether it should merely reiterate the instructions already given." (People v. Beardslee (1991) 53 Cal.3d 68, 97.)

The trial court's duty is similar in civil cases. Where the jury seeks further guidance during its deliberations by asking questions, it is "'incumbent on the trial court to give instructions on all the vital issues in the case so that the jury w[ill] have a full and complete understanding of the law applicable to the facts.' [Citation.] 'The responsibility for adequate instruction becomes particularly acute when the jury asks specific guidance.'" (Bartosh v. Banning (1967) 251 Cal.App.2d 378, 387.) We review a trial court's response to a jury question for abuse of discretion. (People v. Waidla (2000) 22 Cal.4th 690, 745-746; see People v. Smithey, supra, 20 Cal.4th at p. 985.)