Las Vegas Personal Injury Lawyer

Burden of Proof

When a case is brought to trial or court, the defendant typically has what is called the "benefit of assumption". In popular language, this is referred to as the concept of being "innocent until proven guilty". The plaintiff, on the other hand, has the "burden of proof", in that they have the obligation to prove using evidence that their position is the correct one and they are deserving of the damages they are claiming.

In criminal cases, a defendant must be shown to be guilty "beyond a reasonable doubt". This standard is extremely exacting, as the consequences tend to reach far beyond monetary concerns. The burden of proof in these cases is said to be extremely high.

However, in civil cases, the standards are much lower. In civil cases, most plaintiffs will not have access to the types of resources that the state commands when bringing a case against a criminal defendant. Very rarely does a plaintiff have the ability to conduct investigations of the caliber that we see in shows such as "CSI".

As such, the burden of proof is much lower in civil cases. The plaintiff is only required to prove that their position is more likely to be true than the defendant's. As opposed to the criminal burden of proof where the defendant must be 100% likely to be guilty in order to be convicted, a civil defendant only requires a "preponderance of evidence", that is, he must be more than 50% likely to be guilty.

This article is not intended to serve as, or as a replacement for, legal advice. If you have been injured and are unsure as to whether or not you can prove your case, contact the Las Vegas personal injury lawyers of Palmer & Associates at 702-888-2222.