Contract disputes, property issues and a host of other claims may lead to litigation in civil court. Civil court judges and juries can determine contract disputes, award people money damages, and even enforce the terms of an agreement. The ability to take an issue to civil court ensures that individuals and businesses who are in circumstances which threaten unacceptable losses have a forum in which they can seek enforcement of their personal and property rights under the law.
Those contemplating a civil action often do not know what their legal rights and duties are and may feel unsure about the strength of the argument they want to make. The fact that the laws which apply to any given conflict vary greatly depending on the facts and circumstances of the case adds to the complexity of developing the legal foundation for filing a civil action. Sometimes those facts and circumstances raise both criminal and civil law isses. How a criminal prosecutor might decide on whether to bring criminal charges against a suspect may or may not have a bearing on whether a civil claimant will have a strong enough case against that same suspect to win in civil court. What many people in such a situation may not understand is that the burden of proof and standards of evidence in civil court are different than those in criminal court.
The civil courts require less “certainty” than the criminal courts
Evidentiary standards in criminal court are high to protect people from unjust or overzealous prosecution. Under our Constitution, a citizen’s personal liberty is deemed to be a sacred right. Generally speaking, prosecutors need to present evidence at trial which proves to a reasonable jury beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant committed a crime. That is a high standard of proof, and it is difficult to achieve.
Thankfully, the standard of proof which applies to civil plaintiffs requires less certainty. As long as the plaintiff can show through witness testimony, documents or scientific evidence that their position is proved by the preponderance of the evidence, then their case will be proved, and they will prevail. In plain English, the preponderance of the evidence means that the plaintiff’s evidence is more likely true than the defense’s evidence.
In civil trials, when giving jury instructions, the presiding judge will often refer to the image of Lady Justice who holds a scale in one hand, and explains that if the plaintiff has tipped the scales even slightly in their favor, they have met their burden of proof, and the plaintiff is entitled to a verdict. The evidence used to prove a plaintiff’s case can be comprised of a wide range of information, including documents, images, video clips, recorded communications, digital information and witness testimony. The type of evidence required depends on the nature of the dispute and the type of relief sought by the plaintiff.
When considering whether an individual or business has the legal basis for bringing a civil action against another, discussing the matter with a skilled legal team will help determine how strong their legal position is, and what the likelihood of success is if they decide to take the matter to trial. Cases in which the available evidence is most compelling, and the available witnesses are the most credible, are the ones which have the strongest chance to obtain the relief the plaintiff seeks from a judge or jury. Matching that quality of evidence to the applicable law underlying the plaintiff’s case, and presenting it effectively to a judge or jury in court is where experienced civil trial counsel can make the difference between success and defeat.