What Does Burden of Proof Mean in Civil Trials?
In Most Car Crash and Workers Comp Claims, You Must Prove Your Case by a Preponderance of the Evidence or Clear and Convincing Evidence. This Article Explains What That Means.
The phrase “burden of proof” is used often – on television shows, during instant replay challenges in football games, and, of course, in criminal and civil trials.
But how does the law define the burden of proof?
And how does the burden of proof impact your medical malpractice, product liability, Social Security Disability, automobile accident, or workers’ comp case?
This article’s purpose is to explain the burden of proof in civil cases. It describes how convincing you need to be for the jury to allow the damages sought in a personal injury case or the Workers Compensation Commission to award lifetime medical and wage loss benefits. You have the obligation to produce persuasive evidence, no matter how obvious you think your case is or how poorly the insurance company treated you.
Keep reading to learn more.
Call me if you have any questions about your case or want a free consultation with a top-rated personal injury lawyer in Virginia: (804) 251-1620 or (757) 810-5614. My firm has negotiated top-dollar car accident and workers comp settlements, and we are ready to help you.
What is the Burden of Proof?
The burden of proof is the type and amount of evidence it takes to persuade the judge or jury to accept your argument. You lose your case if you fail to satisfy your burden of proof.
The judicial system separates the burden of proof into two concepts: (a) the burden of production and (b) the burden of persuasion.
What is the Burden of Production?
The burden of production refers to a party’s responsibility to present evidence at trial to make a prima facie case.
Prima facie evidence is evidence that is sufficient to prove your case unless refuted by the other party.
Once you establish a prima facie case, the burden of production shifts to the opposing party.
Who Has the Burden of Production in Civil Litigation?
In most civil cases, the person asking for something has the burden of production for each element of the cause of action.
This means the injured person seeking damages or benefits has the burden of production in tort claims based on negligence and workers comp cases. The defendant – usually the insurance company – does not have to produce any evidence, though that’s usually a bad idea.
What Happens if I Fail to Produce Evidence in My Case?
Failing to produce evidence such as medical records, expert witness reports, permanent impairment ratings, accident and injury photos, and witness statements during the discovery process or trial has consequences.
First, the court may dismiss your claim before trial if you do not produce evidence during discovery. For example, the state or federal court may grant the other party’s motion to dismiss or demurrer, and the Workers Compensation Commission may dismiss your claim or refuse to schedule it for hearing until you produce evidence.
Second, the judge may grant the opposing party’s motion for judgment as a matter of law (directed verdict) at trial. A trial judge must direct a verdict if, under the applicable law, there is only one reasonable conclusion as to the judgment. If reasonable minds could differ as to the evidence’s weight, however, the judge should not direct a verdict. Read this article for more information on when a judge can overturn the jury’s verdict.
When Does the Burden of Production Shift to the Defendants in Personal Injury or Workers Comp Cases?
The defendant has the burden of production in some situations.
First, the defendant has the burden of producing evidence to support any affirmative defense raised.
In a civil lawsuit, an affirmative defense is a fact or set of facts that negate the defendant’s liability and bar your claim – even if the defendant acted negligently. Common affirmative defenses include the statute of limitations, willful misconduct (violation of a safety rule), contributory negligence, assumption of risk, accord and satisfaction, collateral estoppel, res judicata, fraud, failure to mitigate damages, promissory estoppel, waiver, and unjust enrichment.
Second, the defendant has the burden of production when the statute provides a legal presumption.
A legal presumption is a procedural rule stating that if a party proves certain facts at a trial or hearing, the judge or jury must also accept an additional fact (“presumed fact”) as proven unless the opposing party presents sufficient evidence to rebut the presumed fact.
For example, police officers and firefighters diagnosed with hypertension, heart disease, lung disease, and some types of cancer are presumed to have developed the condition from work. However, the employer can produce evidence to rebut this presumption.
What is the Burden of Persuasion?
The burden of persuasion is a party’s obligation to introduce evidence that convinces the fact finder (judge, jury, deputy commissioner, etc.) of each element.
The evidence needed depends on the applicable standard of proof.
The standard of proof is the degree of certainty by which you must persuade the fact finder of a factual conclusion. The evidentiary standard specifies how difficult it will be for the party bearing the burden of persuasion to convince the judge or jury of the facts in its favor.
The burden of persuasion does not concern the amount of evidence offered at trial. Instead, it refers to the power and persuasiveness of the evidence presented. For example, your treating physician’s opinion can overcome the opinions of three doctors who reviewed your records but never examined you or examined you only one time as part of a Defense Medical Examination (DME/IME).
Who Has the Burden of Persuasion in Personal Injury and Workers Compensation Cases?
As the accident victim or injured employee, you likely have the burden of persuasion.
The default rule is that plaintiffs have the risk of failing to prove their claims.
The Different Standards of Proof
There are three standards of proof: (1) proof beyond a reasonable doubt (the highest standard), (2) clear and convincing evidence (the intermediate standard), and (3) preponderance of the evidence (more likely than not).
The Preponderance of Evidence Standard
In most civil cases, including personal injury lawsuits and workers comp claims, you must convince the judge or jury that something (liability, damages, etc.) is more likely than not true. This standard of proof is called “preponderance of evidence.” And it is the lowest evidentiary standard, meaning it is the easiest to meet.
Put into numbers, you satisfy the preponderance of evidence standard if the judge or jury believes there is a 50.1 percent probability that you are correct. If the factfinder finds the evidence is equally balanced, then you lose your case if you have the burden of persuasion.
Clear and Convincing Evidence Standard
In some civil cases, you will have to prove your case by clear and convincing evidence. For example, many occupational disease claims require clear and convincing evidence to recover workers comp benefits.
The clear and convincing evidence standard requires more compelling evidence than the preponderance of the evidence standard. It’s also called the “highly probable” standard.
In numbers, you meet the clear and convincing standard if the judge or jury believes there is a 70 to 80 percent probability that you are correct.
Beyond a Reasonable Doubt Standard
The beyond a reasonable doubt standard is the most challenging standard to meet.
It applies only to criminal cases, not civil trials. And the U.S. Supreme Court has explained why:
In a civil suit between two private parties for money damages, for example, we view it as no more serious in general for there to be an erroneous verdict in the defendant’s favor than for there to be an erroneous verdict in the plaintiff’s favor. A preponderance of the evidence standard therefore seems peculiarly appropriate …
In a criminal case, on the other hand, we do not view the social disutility of convicting an innocent man as equivalent to the disutility of acquitting someone who is guilty … In this context, I view the requirement of proof beyond a reasonable doubt in a criminal case as bottomed on a fundamental value determination of our society that it is far worse to convict an innocent man than to let a guilty man go free.
You will never have to prove your injury claim beyond a reasonable doubt.
Get Help Developing and Presenting Evidence in Your Injury or Workers Comp Case
Understanding the burden of proof and the differences between the evidentiary standards (preponderance of the evidence vs. clear and convincing evidence vs. beyond a reasonable doubt) is a start. But it’s not enough to win your auto accident or workers comp case. You must be proactive.
Call me today for help investigating and preparing the evidence in your case: (804) 251-1620 or (757) 810-5614. We have a track record of success. And we’re ready to work for you.
- Will the Dollar Tree Store Closures Affect My Workers’ Compensation? - March 14, 2024
- SSA Proposes a Rule Change to Work History Evaluation - November 1, 2023
- VA Workers Comp Lawyer: We Win Work Injury Claims - May 8, 2017
