Misplaced Pages

#28971

120-426: Currently, in many countries with a democratic system and the rule of law, criminal procedure puts the burden of proof on the prosecution – that is, it is up to the prosecution to prove that the defendant is guilty beyond any reasonable doubt, as opposed to having the defense prove that they are innocent, and any doubt is resolved in favor of the defendant. This provision, known as the presumption of innocence ,

240-572: A brief investigative stop or search by a police officer or any government agent is warranted. This stop or search must be brief; its thoroughness is proportional to, and limited by, the low standard of evidence. A more definite standard of proof (often probable cause ) would be required to justify a more thorough stop/search. In Terry v. Ohio , 392 U.S. 1 (1968), the Supreme Court ruled that reasonable suspicion requires specific, articulable, and individualized suspicion that crime

360-436: A jury and then have a trial by jury or the case may proceed as a bench trial. A bench trial is only heard by the judge if the parties waive a jury trial or if the right to a jury trial is not guaranteed for their particular claim (such as those under equity in the U.S.) or for any lawsuits within their jurisdiction. Usually, lawsuits end in a settlement, with an empirical analysis finding that less than 2% of cases end with

480-413: A voluntary dismissal , so that the settlement agreement is never entered into the court record. The decisions that the jury makes are not put into effect until the judge makes a judgment, which is the approval to have this trial information be filed in public records. In a civil case, the judge is allowed at this time to make changes to the verdict that the jury came up with by either adding on or reducing

600-539: A "civil action." In England and Wales the term "claim" is far more common; the person initiating proceedings is called the claimant . England and Wales began to turn away from traditional common law terminology with the Rules of the Supreme Court (1883), in which the "statement of claim" and "defence" replaced the traditional complaint and answer as the pleadings by which parties placed their case at issue before

720-498: A civil action brought by a plaintiff (a party who claims to have incurred loss as a result of a defendant's actions) who requests a legal remedy or equitable remedy from a court . The defendant is required to respond to the plaintiff's complaint or else risk default judgment . If the plaintiff is successful, judgment is entered in favor of the plaintiff, and the Court may impose the legal and/or equitable remedies available against

840-465: A convicted accused to pay a fine to the Crown as punishment for the crime, and sometimes to pay the legal costs of the prosecution , but does not normally order the convicted accused to pay any compensation to the victim of the crime. The victim must pursue their claim for compensation in a civil, not a criminal, action. In countries using the continental civil law system , such as France and Italy ,

960-409: A copy of the complaint to notify the defendants of the nature of the claims. Once the defendants are served with the summons and complaint, they are subject to a time limit to file an answer stating their defenses to the plaintiff's claims, which includes any challenges to the court's jurisdiction, and any counterclaims they wish to assert against the plaintiff. In a handful of jurisdictions (notably,

1080-528: A court must determine whether to involuntarily hospitalize a mentally ill patient or to issue an Assisted Outpatient Treatment Order. This standard was also codified by the United States Supreme Court in all mental health civil commitment cases. This standard is used in many types of equity cases, including paternity , persons in need of supervision , child custody , the probate of both wills and living wills , petitions to remove

1200-404: A crime will be found". The primary issue was whether Drug Enforcement Administration agents had a reason to execute a search. Courts have traditionally interpreted the idea of "a fair probability" as meaning whether a fair-minded evaluator would have reason to find it more likely than not that a fact (or ultimate fact) is true, which is quantified as a 51% certainty standard (using whole numbers as

1320-525: A criminal action (that is, in most cases, the state) is called the prosecution , but the party bringing a civil action is the plaintiff . In a civil action the other party is known as the defendant . In a criminal case, the private party may be known as the defendant or the accused . A criminal case in the United States against a person named Ms. Sanchez would be entitled United States v. (short for versus , or against) Sanchez if initiated by

SECTION 10

#1732772010029

1440-438: A criminal trial is not necessarily admissible in a civil action about the same matter, just as evidence given in a civil cause is not necessarily admissible on a criminal trial. For example, the victim of a road accident does not directly benefit if the driver who injured him is found guilty of the crime of careless driving. He still has to prove his case in a civil action. In fact he may be able to prove his civil case even when

1560-410: A given description, or the gravity of the consequences flowing from a particular finding are considerations which must affect the answer to the question whether the issue has been proved to the reasonable satisfaction of the tribunal. In such matters “reasonable satisfaction” should not be produced by inexact proofs, indefinite testimony, or indirect inferences. Everyone must feel that, when, for instance,

1680-401: A history of unscrupulous lawyers deliberately reserving such issues in order to ambush each other in the appellate courts (the "invited error" problem). The idea is that it is more efficient to force all parties to fully litigate all relevant issues of fact before the trial court. Thus, a party who does not raise an issue of fact at the trial court level generally cannot raise it on appeal. When

1800-419: A legal dispute, one party has the burden of proof to show that they are correct, while the other party has no such burden and is presumed to be correct. The burden of proof requires a party to produce evidence to establish the truth of facts needed to satisfy all the required legal elements of the dispute. The burden of proof is usually on the person who brings a claim in a dispute. It is often associated with

1920-405: A lion than a dog. The task for the tribunal then when faced with serious allegations is to recognize that their seriousness generally means they are inherently unlikely, such that to be satisfied that a fact is more likely than not the evidence must be of a good quality. But the standard of proof remains 'the balance of probabilities'. In Australia, two standards of proof are applied at common law:

2040-402: A parent or guardian. The "some credible evidence" standard is used as a legal placeholder to bring some controversy before a trier of fact, and into a legal process. It is on the order of the factual standard of proof needed to achieve a finding of "probable cause" used in ex parte threshold determinations needed before a court will issue a search warrant. It is a lower standard of proof than

2160-407: A party during the trial must be highly and substantially more probable to be true than not and the trier of fact must have a firm belief or conviction in its factuality. In this standard, a greater degree of believability must be met than the common standard of proof in civil actions (i.e. preponderance of the evidence), which only requires that the facts as a threshold be more likely than not to prove

2280-440: A peremptory ruling like a directed verdict) and the burden of persuasion (standard of proof such as preponderance of the evidence). A "burden of persuasion" or "risk of non-persuasion" is an obligation that remains on a single party for the duration of the court proceeding. Once the burden has been entirely discharged to the satisfaction of the trier of fact , the party carrying the burden will succeed in its claim. For example,

2400-436: A person from life support (" right to die " cases), mental hygiene and involuntary hospitalizations, and many similar cases. Clear and convincing evidence is the standard of proof used for immunity from prosecution under Florida's stand-your-ground law . Once raised by the defense, the state must present its evidence in a pre-trial hearing, showing that the statutory prerequisites have not been met, and then request that

2520-519: A police officer to have an unquantified amount of certainty the courts say is well below 51% before briefly detaining a suspect (without consent) to pat them down and attempt to question them. The "beyond reasonable doubt" standard, used by criminal juries in the United States to determine guilt for a crime, also contrasts with probable cause which courts hold requires an unquantified level of proof well above that of probable cause's 51%. Though it

SECTION 20

#1732772010029

2640-442: A prisoner's good conduct time for a disciplinary violation, prison officials need only have "some evidence", i.e., "a modicum of evidence"; however, the sentencing judge is under no obligation to adhere to good/work time constraints, nor are they required to credit time served. "Reasonable indication (also known as reasonable suspicion) is substantially lower than probable cause; factors to consider are those facts and circumstances

2760-416: A prudent investigator would consider, but must include facts or circumstances indicating a past, current, or impending violation; an objective factual basis must be present, a mere 'hunch' is insufficient." The reasonable indication standard is used in interpreting trade law in determining if the United States has been materially injured. Reasonable suspicion is a low standard of proof to determine whether

2880-513: A reasonable person, considering the record as a whole, would accept as sufficient to find that a contested fact is more likely to be true than untrue.” One author highlights the phrase “more likely to be true than untrue” as the critical component of the definition. From 2013 to 2020, the Department of Education required schools to use a preponderance of evidence standard in evaluating sexual assault claims (USA). Clear and convincing evidence

3000-419: A reasonable suspicion. The officer must be prepared to establish that criminal activity was a logical explanation for what they perceived. The requirement serves to prevent officers from stopping individuals based merely on hunches or unfounded suspicions. The purpose of the stop and detention is to investigate to the extent necessary to confirm or dispel the original suspicion. If the initial confrontation with

3120-408: A reply to this counterclaim. The defendant may also file a " third party complaint ", which is the defendant's privilege to join another party or parties in the action with the belief that those parties may be liable for some or all of the plaintiff's claimed damages. An answer from the defendant in response to the claims made against him/her, can also include additional facts or a so-called "excuse" for

3240-407: A share of the ultimate settlement or award. If the case ultimately loses, the litigant does not have to pay any of the money funded back. Legal financing is different from a typical bank loan in that the legal financing company does not look at credit history or employment history. Litigants do not have to repay the cash advance with monthly payments, but do have to fill out an application so that

3360-521: A similar approach is taken in Canada. In the United Kingdom the evidential requirements of the civil standard of proof don't vary with the seriousness of an allegation. The case law that establishes this is Briginshaw v Briginshaw , which is the fifth most cited decision of Australia's High Court. The case has since been incorporated into the uniform evidence law. The Briginshaw principle

3480-518: A term of imprisonment exceeding 12 months are called 'Summary Offences'. Some offences (with a term of imprisonment <10 years) may be heard by a court of summary jurisdiction, a.k.a. Magistrates Court with the consent of all parties; however the court may not impose a sentence greater than 12 months. Juries are required to make findings of guilt 'beyond reasonable doubt' for criminal matters. The Australian constitution does not expressly provide that criminal trials must be 'fair', nor does it set out

3600-415: A trial. It is sometimes said that 95% of cases end in settlement; few jurisdictions report settlements, but empirical analysis suggests that the settlement rate varies by type of lawsuit, with torts settling around 90% of the time and overall civil cases settling 50% of the time; other cases end due to default judgment , lack of a valid claim, and other reasons. At trial, each person presents witnesses and

3720-415: Is a generalized description of how a lawsuit may proceed in a common law jurisdiction: A lawsuit begins when a complaint or petition, known as a pleading, is filed with the court. A complaint should explicitly state that one or more plaintiffs seek(s) damages or equitable relief from one or more stated defendants, and also should state the relevant factual allegations supporting the legal claims brought by

Criminal procedure - Misplaced Pages Continue

3840-463: Is a higher level of burden of persuasion than "preponderance of the evidence", but less than "beyond reasonable doubt". It is employed intra-adjudicatively in administrative court determinations, as well as in civil and certain criminal procedure in the United States. For example, a prisoner seeking habeas corpus relief from capital punishment must prove his factual innocence by clear and convincing evidence. New York State uses this standard when

3960-416: Is a legal basis for the appeal, then one has the right to do so. The prevailing party may appeal, for example, if they wanted a larger award than was granted. The appellate court (which may be structured as an intermediate appellate court) and/or a higher court then affirms the judgment, declines to hear it (which effectively affirms it), reverses—or vacates and remands. This process would then involve sending

4080-558: Is afoot. A mere guess or "hunch" is not enough to constitute reasonable suspicion. An investigatory stop is a seizure under the Fourth Amendment. The state must justify the seizure by showing that the officer conducting the stop had a reasonable articulable suspicion that criminal activity was afoot. The important point is that officers cannot deprive a citizen of liberty unless the officer can point to specific facts and circumstances and inferences therefrom that would amount to

4200-533: Is also possible for one state to apply the law of another in cases where additionally it may not be clear which level (or location) of court actually has jurisdiction over the claim or personal jurisdiction over the defendant, or whether the plaintiff has standing to participate in a lawsuit. About 98 percent of civil cases in the United States federal courts are resolved without a trial. Domestic courts are also often called upon to apply foreign law, or to act upon foreign defendants, over whom they may not even have

4320-417: Is also the standard of proof used in United States administrative law . In at least one case, there is a statutory definition of the standard. While there is no federal definition, such as by definition of the courts or by statute applicable to all cases, The Merit Systems Protection Board’s has codified their definition at 5 CFR 1201.56(c)(2). MSPB defines the standard as “The degree of relevant evidence that

4440-439: Is beyond the scope of this topic, when courts review whether 51% probable cause certainty was a reasonable judgment, the legal inquiry is different for police officers in the field than it would be for grand jurors. In Franks v. Delaware , the U.S. Supreme Court held that probable cause requires that there not be "reckless disregard for the truth" of the facts asserted. Examples of a police officer's truth-certainty standards in

4560-486: Is called appearing pro se . Many courts have a pro se clerk to assist people without lawyers. A pretrial discovery can be defined as "the formal process of exchanging information between the parties about the witnesses and evidence they'll present at trial" and allows for the evidence of the trial to be presented to the parties before the initial trial begins. The early stages of the lawsuit may involve initial disclosures of evidence by each party and discovery , which

4680-437: Is likewise important that the plaintiff select the proper venue with the proper jurisdiction to bring the lawsuit. The clerk of a court signs or stamps the court seal upon a summons or citation, which is then served by the plaintiff upon the defendant, together with a copy of the complaint. This service notifies the defendants that they are being sued and that they are limited in the amount of time to reply. The service provides

4800-542: Is met if the proposition is more likely to be true than not true. Lord Denning , in Miller v. Minister of Pensions , described it simply as "more probable than not". Another high-level way of interpreting that is that the plaintiff’s case (evidence) be 51% likely. A more precise statement is that “the weight [of the evidence, including in calculating such a percentage] is determined not by the amount of evidence, but by its quality.” The author goes on to affirm that preponderance

4920-484: Is more evidence in the vehicle of the crime for which the suspect was arrested. There is still an ongoing debate as to the exact meaning of this phrase. Some courts have said it should be a new standard while others have equated it with the "reasonable suspicion" of the Terry stop. Most courts have agreed it is somewhere less than probable cause. Probable cause is a higher standard of proof than reasonable suspicion, which

Criminal procedure - Misplaced Pages Continue

5040-444: Is nevertheless crucial to the elements of the offense in a first-degree-murder conviction. This brings up the ethical dilemma of whether or not a death sentence should be imposed when the defendant's motives or intentions are the contingent factors in sentencing. However, in some cases such as defamation suits with a public figure as the defamed party, the public figure must prove actual malice. Burden of proof refers most generally to

5160-399: Is no reasonable way that the other party could legally win and therefore there is no sense in continuing with the trial. Motions for summary judgment , for example, can usually be brought before, after, or during the actual presentation of the case. Motions can also be brought after the close of a trial to undo a jury verdict contrary to law or against the weight of the evidence, or to convince

5280-401: Is on the prosecutor for criminal cases , and the defendant is presumed innocent . If the claimant fails to discharge the burden of proof to prove their case, the claim will be dismissed. A "burden of proof" is a party's duty to prove a disputed assertion or charge, and includes the burden of production (providing enough evidence on an issue so that the trier-of-fact decides it rather than in

5400-486: Is regrettably all too common and not at all improbable. Nor are serious allegations made in a vacuum. Consider the famous example of the animal seen in Regent’s Park. If it is seen outside the zoo on a stretch of greensward regularly used for walking dogs, then of course it is more likely to be a dog than a lion. If it is seen in the zoo next to the lions’ enclosure when the door is open, then it may well be more likely to be

5520-549: Is required, for example, in the 46 countries that are members of the Council of Europe , under Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights , and it is included in other human rights documents. However, in practice, it operates somewhat differently in different countries. Such basic rights also include the right for the defendant to know what offence he or she has been arrested for or is being charged with, and

5640-418: Is solely circumstantial, i.e. , when conviction is based entirely on circumstantial evidence , certain jurisdictions specifically require the prosecution's burden of proof to be such that the facts proved must exclude to a moral certainty every reasonable hypothesis or inference other than guilt. The main reason that this high level of proof is demanded in criminal trials is that such proceedings can result in

5760-403: Is that no other logical explanation can be derived from the facts except that the defendant committed the crime, thereby overcoming the presumption that a person is innocent unless and until proven guilty. If the trier of fact has no doubt as to the defendant's guilt, or if their only doubts are unreasonable doubts, then the prosecutor has proved the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt and

5880-404: Is the structured exchange of evidence and statements between the parties. Discovery is meant to eliminate surprises, clarify what the lawsuit is about, and also to make the parties decide if they should settle or drop frivolous claims or defenses. At this point, the parties may also engage in pretrial motions to exclude or include particular legal or factual issues before trial. There is also

6000-482: Is used in the United States to determine whether a search, or an arrest, is unreasonable. It is also used by grand juries to determine whether to issue an indictment . In the civil context, this standard is often used where plaintiffs are seeking a prejudgement remedy . In the criminal context, the U.S. Supreme Court in United States v. Sokolow , 490 U.S. 1 (1989), determined that probable cause requires "a fair probability that contraband or evidence of

6120-401: Is “merely enough to tip the scales” towards one party; however, that tilt need only be so slight as the weight of a “feather.” Until 1970, it was also the standard used in juvenile court in the United States . Compared to the criminal standard of “proof beyond a reasonable doubt,” the preponderance of the evidence standard is “a somewhat easier standard to meet.” Preponderance of the evidence

SECTION 50

#1732772010029

6240-569: The Child Support Standards Act , and in child custody determinations between parties having equal legal rights respecting a child. It is also the standard of proof by which the defendant must prove affirmative defenses or mitigating circumstances in civil or criminal court in the United States. In civil courts, aggravating circumstances also only have to be proven by a preponderance of the evidence, as opposed to beyond reasonable doubt (as in criminal court). The standard

6360-469: The U.S. state of New York ) a lawsuit begins when one or more plaintiffs properly serve a summons and complaint upon the defendants. In such jurisdictions, nothing must be filed with the court until a dispute develops requiring actual judicial intervention. If the defendant chooses to file an answer within the time permitted, the answer must address each of the plaintiffs' allegations. The defendant has three choices to make, which include either admitting to

6480-438: The evidential burden , or burden of production, or duty of producing (or going forward with evidence) which is an obligation that may shift between parties over the course of the hearing or trial. The evidential burden is the burden to adduce sufficient evidence to properly raise an issue at court. There is no burden of proof with regard to motive or animus in criminal cases in the United States. The intent surrounding an offense

6600-417: The plaintiff in a civil action is required to prove his case "on the balance of probabilities". "Beyond reasonable doubt" is not defined for the jury which decides the verdict, but it has been said by appeal courts that proving guilt beyond reasonable doubt requires the prosecution to exclude any reasonable hypothesis consistent with innocence: Plomp v. R . In a civil case , however, the court simply weighs

6720-410: The presumption of innocence in a criminal case places a legal burden upon the prosecution to prove all elements of the offense (generally beyond a reasonable doubt), and to disprove all the defenses except for affirmative defenses in which the proof of non-existence of all affirmative defense(s) is not constitutionally required of the prosecution. The burden of persuasion should not be confused with

6840-422: The "Briginshaw test does not create any third standard of proof between the civil and the criminal." Civil action A lawsuit is a proceeding by one or more parties (the plaintiff or claimant) against one or more parties (the defendant ) in a civil court of law . The archaic term " suit in law " is found in only a small number of laws still in effect today. The term "lawsuit" is used with respect to

6960-415: The "preponderance of the evidence" standard. The standard does not require the fact-finder to weigh conflicting evidence, and merely requires the investigator or prosecutor to present the bare minimum of material credible evidence to support the allegations against the subject, or in support of the allegation; see Valmonte v. Bane, 18 F.3d 992 (2nd Cir. 1994). In some Federal Appellate Circuit Courts, such as

7080-453: The Latin maxim semper necessitas probandi incumbit ei qui agit , a translation of which is: "the necessity of proof always lies with the person who lays charges." In civil suits, for example, the plaintiff bears the burden of proof that the defendant's action or inaction caused injury to the plaintiff, and the defendant bears the burden of proving an affirmative defense . The burden of proof

7200-488: The Second Circuit, the "some credible evidence" standard has been found constitutionally insufficient to protect liberty interests of the parties in controversy at CPS hearings. Preponderance of the evidence (American English), also known as balance of probabilities (British English), is the standard required in civil cases, including family court determinations solely involving money, such as child support under

7320-404: The United States Supreme Court arguably defined a new standard, that of "reasonable to believe". This standard applies only to vehicle searches after the suspect has been placed under arrest. The Court overruled New York v. Belton (1981) and concluded that police officers are allowed to go back and search a vehicle incident to a suspect's arrest only where it is "reasonable to believe" that there

SECTION 60

#1732772010029

7440-412: The ability of one to make an under-oath statement during the pretrial, also known as a deposition. The deposition can be used in the trial or just in the pretrial, but this allows for both parties to be aware of the arguments or claims that are going to be made by the other party in the trial. It is notable that the depositions can be written or oral. At the close of discovery, the parties may either pick

7560-482: The ability of one to present claims or defenses at any subsequent trial, or even lead to the dismissal of the lawsuit altogether. Though the majority of lawsuits are settled before ever reaching trial, they can still be very complicated to litigate. This is particularly true in federal systems, where a federal court may be applying state law (e.g. the Erie doctrine , for example in the United States ), or vice versa. It

7680-486: The ability to enforce a judgment if the defendant's assets are theoretically outside their reach. Lawsuits can become additionally complicated as more parties become involved (see joinder ). Within a "single" lawsuit, there can be any number of claims and defenses (all based on numerous laws) between any number of plaintiffs or defendants. Each of these participants can bring any number of cross-claims and counterclaims against each other, and even bring additional parties into

7800-414: The allegation, denying it, or pleading a lack of sufficient information to admit or deny the allegation. Some jurisdictions, like California and Florida, still authorize general denials of each and every allegation in the complaint. At the time the defendant files an answer, the defendant also raises all "affirmative" defenses. The defendant may also assert counterclaims for damages or equitable relief against

7920-425: The approximate meaning of some kind of legal proceeding, but an action terminated when a judgment was rendered, while a suit also included the execution of the judgment. Particularly in the United States, plaintiffs and defendants who lack financial resources for litigation or other attorney's fees may be able to obtain legal financing . Legal financing companies can provide a cash advance to litigants in return for

8040-423: The attorneys representing them are called litigators. The term litigation may also refer to the conducting of criminal actions (see criminal procedure ). The word "lawsuit" derives from the combination of law and suit. Suit derives from the old French "suite, sieute" meaning to pursue or follow. This term was derived from the Latin "secutus", the past participle of "sequi" meaning to attend or follow. Similarly,

8160-419: The balance of probabilities had led to a departure from the common law principles of just two standards. Baroness Hale said: 70. ... Neither the seriousness of the allegation nor the seriousness of the consequences should make any difference to the standard of proof to be applied in determining the facts. The inherent probabilities are simply something to be taken into account, where relevant, in deciding where

8280-484: The case of Kirk constrains the way that State courts may operate during criminal trials per the Kable Doctrine . In Australia, the civil standard is termed the 'balance of probabilities'. In Australia, the 'balance of probabilities' involves considerations that the evidence required to establish a fact at the civil standard will vary with the seriousness of what is being alleged. Although it has been noted

8400-513: The claimant, policyholder, or applicant files a lawsuit with the courts to seek review of that decision, and from that point forward participates in the lawsuit as a plaintiff. In other words, the terms "claimant" and "plaintiff" carry substantially different connotations of formality in American English, in that only the latter risks an award of costs in favor of an adversary in a lawsuit. In medieval times, both "action" and "suit" had

8520-669: The codified text of the Ku Klux Klan Act . The fusion of common law and equity in England in the Judicature Acts of 1873 and 1875 led to the collapse of that distinction, so it became possible to speak of a "lawsuit." In the United States , the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (1938) abolished the distinction between actions at law and suits in equity in federal practice, in favor of a single form referred to as

8640-421: The costs of litigation and attorneys' fees, and for this reason, many litigants turn to reputable legal financing companies to apply for a cash advance to help pay for bills. Defendants, civil rights organizations, public interest organizations, and government public officials can all set up an account to pay for litigation costs and legal expenses. These legal defense funds can have large membership counts where

8760-421: The court deny a motion for declaration of immunity. The judge must then decide from clear and convincing evidence whether to grant immunity. This is a lower burden than "beyond a reasonable doubt", the threshold a prosecutor must meet at any proceeding criminal trial, but higher than the "probable cause" threshold generally required for indictment . Clear and convincing proof means that the evidence presented by

8880-473: The criminal standard and the civil standard. It is possible for other standards of proof to be applied where required by law. The criminal standard in Australia is, 'beyond reasonable doubt'. An offence against a Commonwealth law, with a term of imprisonment in excess of 12 months is an 'indictable offence'; and is constitutionally required to be tried before jury of 12 people. Offences that do not carry

9000-560: The decision of the House of Lords in Re B (A Child) [2008] UKHL 35 there had been some confusion – even at the Court of Appeal – as to whether there was some intermediate standard, described as the 'heightened standard'. The House of Lords found that there was not. As the above description of the American system shows, anxiety by judges about making decisions on very serious matters on the basis of

9120-417: The defendant (for example, the statutory defense to drunk in charge that there was no likelihood of the accused driving while still over the alcohol limit ). However, where the law does not stipulate a reverse burden of proof, the defendant need only raise the issue and it is then for the prosecution to negate the defence to the criminal standard in the usual way (for example, that of self-defence ). Prior to

9240-532: The defendant (respondent). A variety of court orders may be issued in connection with or as part of the judgment to enforce a right , award damages or restitution, or impose a temporary or permanent injunction to prevent an act or compel an act. A declaratory judgment may be issued to prevent future legal disputes . A lawsuit may involve resolution of disputes involving issues of private law between individuals, business entities or non-profit organizations . A lawsuit may also involve issues of public law in

9360-421: The defendant should be pronounced guilty. The term connotes that evidence establishes a particular point to a moral certainty which precludes the existence of any reasonable alternatives. It does not mean that no doubt exists as to the accused's guilt, but only that no reasonable doubt is possible from the evidence presented. Further to this notion of moral certainty, where the trier of fact relies on proof that

9480-582: The deprivation of a defendant's liberty or even in their death. These outcomes are far more severe than in civil trials, in which monetary damages are the common remedy. Another noncriminal instance in which proof beyond a reasonable doubt is applied is LPS conservatorship . In the three jurisdictions of the UK (Northern Ireland; England and Wales ; and Scotland) there are only two standards of proof in trials. There are others which are defined in statutes, such as those relating to police powers. The criminal standard

9600-413: The doctrine of res judicata from relitigating any of the issues, even under different legal theories. Judgments are typically a monetary award. If the defendant fails to pay, the court has various powers to seize any of the defendant's assets located within its jurisdiction, such as: If all assets are located elsewhere, the plaintiff must file another suit in the appropriate court to seek enforcement of

9720-481: The driver is found not guilty in the criminal trial. If the accused has given evidence on his trial he may be cross-examined on those statements in a subsequent civil action regardless of the criminal verdict. Once the plaintiff has shown that the defendant is liable, the main argument in a civil court is about the amount of money , or damages , which the defendant should pay to the plaintiff. Proponents of either system tend to consider that their system defends best

9840-415: The elements of a fair trial, but it may by implication protect other attributes. The High Court has moved toward, but not yet, entrenched procedural fairness as a constitutional right. If it did so, this would have the potential to constitutionalise the 'beyond reasonable doubt' standard in criminal proceedings. State offences are not subject to the constitution's section 80 requirement for a jury. However,

9960-459: The evidence and decides what is most probable. Criminal and civil procedure are different. Although some systems, including the English , allow a private citizen to bring a criminal prosecution against another citizen , criminal actions are nearly always started by the state . Civil actions , on the other hand, are usually started by individuals . In Anglo-American law, the party bringing

10080-414: The evidence collected is recorded. After this occurs, the judge or jury renders their decision. Generally speaking, the plaintiff has the burden of proof in making his claims, however, the defendant may have the burden of proof on other issues, such as affirmative defenses . The attorneys are held responsible in devising a trial strategy that ensures they meet the necessary elements of their case or (when

10200-421: The evidence, or lack of evidence, in a case, then the level of proof has not been met. Proof beyond a reasonable doubt, therefore, is proof of such a convincing character that one would be willing to rely and act upon it without hesitation in the most important of one's own affairs. However, it does not mean an absolute certainty. The standard that must be met by the prosecution's evidence in a criminal prosecution

10320-521: The federal government; if brought by a state, the case would typically be called State v. Sanchez or People v. Sanchez. In the United Kingdom, the criminal case would be styled R. (short for Rex or Regina, that is, the King or Queen ) v. Sanchez. In both the United States and the United Kingdom, a civil action between Ms. Sanchez and a Mr. Smith would be Sanchez v. Smith if started by Sanchez and Smith v. Sanchez if begun by Smith. Evidence given at

10440-417: The field and their practical consequences are offered below: Some credible evidence is one of the least demanding standards of proof. This proof standard is often used in administrative law settings and in some states to initiate Child Protective Services (CPS) proceedings. This proof standard is used where short-term intervention is needed urgently, such as when a child is arguably in immediate danger from

10560-537: The highest standard used as the burden of proof in Anglo-American jurisprudence and typically only applies in juvenile delinquency proceedings, criminal proceedings, and when considering aggravating circumstances in criminal proceedings. It has been described, in negative terms, as a proof having been met if there is no plausible reason to believe otherwise. If there is a real doubt, based upon reason and common sense after careful and impartial consideration of all

10680-419: The increment of measurement). Some courts and scholars have suggested probable cause could, in some circumstances, allow for a fact to be established as true to a standard of less than 51%, but as of August 2019, the United States Supreme Court has never ruled that the quantification of probable cause is anything less than 51%. Probable cause can be contrasted with "reasonable articulable suspicion" which requires

10800-603: The internet. For example, in the case of William J. Ralph Jr. v. Lind-Waldock & Company (September 1999), one would assume that Ralph lost the case when in fact, upon review of the evidence, it was found that Ralph was correct in his assertion that improper activity took place on the part of Lind-Waldock, and Ralph settled with Lind-Waldock. Cases such as this illustrate the need for more comprehensive information than mere internet searches when researching legal decisions. While online searches are appropriate for many legal situations, they are not appropriate for all. The following

10920-399: The issue for which they are asserted. This standard is also known as "clear, convincing, and satisfactory evidence"; "clear, cognizant, and convincing evidence", and is applied in cases or situations involving an equitable remedy or where a presumptive civil liberty interest exists. For example, this is the standard or quantum of evidence use to probate a last will and testament . This is

11040-581: The issue is on which of two dates an admitted occurrence took place, a satisfactory conclusion may be reached on materials of a kind that would not satisfy any sound and prudent judgment if the question was whether some act had been done involving grave moral delinquency The Briginshaw principle is sometimes incorrectly referred to as the Briginshaw standard of proof, in Qantas Airways Limited v. Gama Justices French and Jacobson stated

11160-416: The judge to change the decision or grant a new trial. Also, at any time during this process from the filing of the complaint to the final judgment, the plaintiff may withdraw the complaint and end the whole matter, or the defendant may agree to a settlement. If the case settles, the parties might choose to enter into a stipulated judgment with the settlement agreement attached, or the plaintiff may simply file

11280-416: The lawsuit back to the lower trial court to address an unresolved issue, or possibly request for a whole new trial. Some lawsuits go up and down the appeals ladder repeatedly before final resolution. The appeal is a review for errors rather than a new trial, so the appellate court will defer to the discretion of the original trial court if an error is not clear. The initial step in making an appeal consists of

11400-408: The lawsuit is finally resolved, or the allotted time to appeal has expired, the matter is res judicata , meaning the plaintiff may not bring another action based on the same claim again. In addition, other parties who later attempt to re-litigate a matter already ruled on in a previous lawsuit will be estopped from doing so. When a final judgment is entered, the plaintiff is usually barred under

11520-467: The legal financing company can review the merits of the case. Legal financing can be a practical means for litigants to obtain financing while they wait for a monetary settlement or an award in their personal injury , workers' compensation , or civil rights lawsuit. Often, plaintiffs who were injured or forced to leave their jobs still have mortgages , rent, medical expenses, or other bills to pay. Other times, litigants may simply need money to pay for

11640-405: The lower court. There were no errors made, the case would then end, but if the decision was reversed, the appellate court would then send the case back down to the lower court level. There, a new trial will be held and new information taken into account. Some jurisdictions, notably the United States, but prevalent in many other countries, prevent parties from relitigating the facts on appeal, due to

11760-498: The members contribute to the fund. Unlike legal financing from legal financing companies, legal defense funds provide a separate account for litigation rather than a one-time cash advancement, nevertheless, both are used for purposes of financing litigation and legal costs. There was a study conducted in the Supreme Court Economic Review that shows why litigation financing can be practical and beneficial to

11880-406: The motion be filed within the time period specified in the summons for an answer. If all of the above motions are denied by the trial court, and the defendant loses on all appeals from such denials (if that option is available), and finally the defendant must file an answer. Usually the pleadings are drafted by a lawyer , but in many courts persons can file papers and represent themselves, which

12000-434: The obligation of a party to prove its allegations at trial. In a civil case, the plaintiff sets forth its allegations in a complaint, petition or other pleading. The defendant is then required to file a responsive pleading denying some or all of the allegations and setting forth any affirmative facts in defense . Each party has the burden of proof of its allegations. Per Superintendent v. Hill (1985), in order to take away

12120-399: The opposing party has the burden of proof) to ensure the opponent will not be able to meet his or her burden. There are numerous motions that either party can file throughout the lawsuit to terminate it "prematurely"—before submission to the judge or jury for final consideration. These motions attempt to persuade the judge, through legal argument and sometimes accompanying evidence, that there

12240-572: The other court's previous judgment. This can be a difficult task when crossing from a court in one state or nation to another, however, courts tend to grant each other respect when there is not a clear legal rule to the contrary. A defendant who has no assets in any jurisdiction is said to be " judgment-proof ." The term is generally a colloquialism to describe an impecunious defendant. Indigent judgment-proof defendants are no longer imprisoned; debtor's prisons have been outlawed by statute, constitutional amendment, or international human rights treaties in

12360-455: The person stopped dispels suspicion of criminal activity the officer must end the detention and allow the person to go about their business. If the investigation confirms the officer's initial suspicion or reveals evidence that would justify continued detention the officer may require the person detained to remain at the scene until further investigation is complete, and may give rise to the level of probable cause. In Arizona v. Gant (2009),

12480-410: The petitioner filing a notice of appeal and then sending in a brief, a written document stating reason for appeal, to the court. Decisions of the court can be made immediately after just reading the written brief, or there can also be oral arguments made by both parties involved in the appeal. The appellate court then makes the decision about what errors were made when the law was looked at more closely in

12600-451: The plaintiff. For example, in the case of "compulsory counterclaims," the defendant must assert some form of counterclaim or risk having the counterclaim barred in any subsequent proceeding. In the case of making a counterclaim, the defendant is making a motion directed towards the plaintiff claiming that he/she was injured in some way or would like to sue the plaintiff. The plaintiff in this example would then receive some amount of time to make

12720-400: The plaintiffs. As the initial pleading, a complaint is the most important step in a civil case because a complaint sets the factual and legal foundation for the entirety of a case. While complaints and other pleadings may ordinarily be amended by a motion with the court, the complaint sets the framework for the entire case and the claims that will be asserted throughout the entire lawsuit. It

12840-400: The plead. Filing an answer "joins the cause" and moves the case into the pre-trial phase. Instead of filing an answer within the time specified in the summons, the defendant can choose to dispute the validity of the complaint by filing a demurrer (in the handful of jurisdictions where that is still allowed) or one or more "pre-answer motions," such as a motion to dismiss. It is important that

12960-421: The punishment. In criminal cases the situation is a little different, because in this case the judge does not have the authority to change the jury decision. After a final decision has been made, either party or both may appeal from the judgment if they believe there had been a procedural error made by the trial court. It is not necessarily an automatic appeal after every judgment has been made, however, if there

13080-427: The right to appear before a judicial official within a certain time of being arrested. Many jurisdictions also allow the defendant the right to legal counsel and provide any defendant who cannot afford their own lawyer with a lawyer paid for at the public expense. Countries using the common law tend to make a clear distinction between civil and criminal procedures. For example, an English criminal court may force

13200-491: The rights of the innocent. There is a tendency in common law countries to believe that civil law / inquisitorial systems do not have the so-called " presumption of innocence ", and do not provide the defence with adequate rights. Conversely, there is a tendency in countries with an inquisitorial system to believe that accusatorial proceedings unduly favour rich defendants who can afford large legal teams, and therefore disfavour poorer defendants. Legal burden of proof In

13320-485: The same jurisdiction. It is important for litigants to be aware of all relevant procedural rules (or to hire competent counsel who can either comply with such rules on their behalf or explain the rules to them), because the litigants ultimately dictate the timing and progression of the lawsuit. Litigants are responsible for obtaining the desired result and the timing of reaching this result. Failure to comply with procedural rules may result in serious limitations that can affect

13440-411: The sense that the state is treated as if it were a private party in a civil case, either as a plaintiff with a civil cause of action to enforce certain laws or as a defendant in actions contesting the legality of the state's laws or seeking monetary damages for injuries caused by agents of the state. Conducting a civil action is called litigation. The plaintiffs and defendants are called litigants and

13560-451: The suit on either side after it progresses. In reality, however, courts typically have some power to sever claims and parties into separate actions if it is more efficient to do so. A court can do this if there is not a sufficient overlap of factual issues between the various associates, separating the issues into different lawsuits. The official ruling of a lawsuit can be somewhat misleading because post-ruling outcomes are often not listed on

13680-400: The trial court. American terminology is slightly different, in that the term "claim" refers only to a particular count or cause of action alleged in a complaint. Similarly, "defense" refers to only one or more affirmative defenses alleged in an answer. Americans also use "claim" to describe an extrajudicial demand filed with an insurer or administrative agency. If the claim is denied, then

13800-423: The truth lies. 72. ... there is no logical or necessary connection between seriousness and probability. Some seriously harmful behaviour, such as murder, is sufficiently rare to be inherently improbable in most circumstances. Even then there are circumstances, such as a body with its throat cut and no weapon to hand, where it is not at all improbable. Other seriously harmful behaviour, such as alcohol or drug abuse,

13920-422: The vast majority of common law jurisdictions. Scholars in law, economics and management have studied why firms involved in a dispute choose between private dispute resolution—such as negotiation, mediation, and arbitration—and litigation. During the 18th and 19th centuries, it was common for lawyers to speak of bringing an "action" at law and a "suit" in equity . An example of that distinction survives today in

14040-406: The victim of a crime (known as the "injured party") may be awarded damages by a criminal court judge . The standards of proof are higher in a criminal action than in a civil one since the loser risks not only financial penalties but also being sent to prison (or, in some countries, execution). In English law , the prosecution must prove the guilt of a criminal "beyond reasonable doubt", while

14160-545: The word "sue", derives from the old French "suir, sivre" meaning to pursue or follow after. This was also derived from the Latin word "sequi". Rules of criminal or civil procedure govern the conduct of a lawsuit in the common law adversarial system of dispute resolution. Procedural rules arise from statutory law , case law , and constitutional provisions (especially the right to due process ). The details of each kind of legal procedure differ greatly from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, and often from court to court even within

14280-417: Was articulated by Dixon in that case in these terms: ...it is enough that the affirmative of an allegation is made out to the reasonable satisfaction of the tribunal. But reasonable satisfaction is not a state of mind that is attained or established independently of the nature and consequence of the fact or facts to be proved. The seriousness of an allegation made, the inherent unlikelihood of an occurrence of

14400-557: Was formerly described as "beyond reasonable doubt". That standard remains , and the words commonly used , though the Judicial Studies Board guidance is that juries might be assisted by being told that to convict they must be persuaded "so that you are sure". The civil standard is 'the balance of probabilities', often referred to in judgments as "more likely than not". The civil standard is also used in criminal trials in relation to those defenses which must be proven by

#28971