
	Where results make sense

Topic: Standard of proof

Related Topics

Beyond a reasonable doubt

Burden of proof

Clear and convincing evidence

Presumption of innocence

Newark Liberty International

University of London

In the News (Tue 15 Dec 09)

Northern Trust

Marvin Harrison

Peter Chernin

Gary Locke

Match Play

Penelope Cruz

Mickey Rourke

AR Rahman

Danny Boyle

Hugh Jackman

	Burden of proof - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
		The standard of proof is the level of proof required in a legal action to convince the court that a given proposition is true.
		This is a lesser requirement than "proof beyond a reasonable doubt" which requires that the trier of fact be all but certain of the truth of the matter asserted, but a stricter requirement than proof by "preponderance of the evidence," which merely requires that the matter asserted seem more likely true than not.
		In jurisprudence, the burden of proof is the concept of holding one party to a dispute or one side of a debate responsible for producing a prima facie case.
	en.wikipedia.org /wiki/Standard_of_proof (1338 words)

	Burden of Proof
		The burden of proof is the obligation on a party to establish the facts in issue in a case to the required degree of certainty (the standard of proof) in order to prove their case.
		The criminal standard of proof on the prosecution is proof beyond all reasonable doubt, which means proof to a high degree of probability but not proof beyond a shadow of a doubt.
		The criminal standard of proof on a defendant is the same as the civil standard, i.e., proof on the balance of probabilities.
	www.forensicmed.co.uk /burden_of_proof.htm (536 words)

	FindLaw for Legal Professionals - Case Law, Federal and State Resources, Forms, and Code
		Standards of proof, like other "procedural due process rules[,] are shaped by the risk of error inherent in the truth-finding process as applied to the generality of cases, not the rare exceptions." Mathews v.
		Because the standard of proof affects the comparative frequency of these two types of erroneous outcomes, the choice of the standard to be applied in a particular kind of litigation should, in a rational world, reflect an assessment of the comparative social disutility of each." 397 U.S., at 370 -371.
		When the standard of proof is understood as reflecting such an assessment, an examination of the interests at stake in a particular case becomes essential to determining the propriety of the specified standard of proof.
	caselaw.findlaw.com /scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=455&invol=745 (14613 words)

	Docket No. 96229, In re D.T. (Il. S. Ct.)
		The GAL and the State, however, argue that the appropriate standard of proof is "sound discretion." Under this standard, as explained by the State, a trial judge's decision to terminate parental rights would not rest on a quantitative measure of the evidence.
		In any given proceeding, the minimum standard of proof the due process clause permits reflects the weight of the private and public interests affected, as well as a societal judgment about how the risk of error should be allocated between the parties.
		Use of a clear and convincing standard of proof at the best-interests hearing would likely not impose an increased fiscal burden on the state, since the higher evidentiary burden is already required at the unfitness hearing.
	www.state.il.us /court/Opinions/SupremeCourt/2004/October/Opinions/Html/96229.htm (6676 words)

	In re Walford (M)
		Moreover, the lack of legislative history dictating a particular standard may be an indication--not of Congress's intent to require a lower, uniform standard of proof as suggested by the Court in Grogan--but rather of Congress's intent to retain the standard of proof applicable to the substantive nonbankruptcy causes of action.
		Garner, [citations omitted], that the standard of proof for the dischargeability exceptions in 11 U.S.C. § 523(a) is the ordinary preponderance of the evidence standard.
		With respect to the standard under § 523(a)(6), the Seventh Circuit appears to agree that the standard of proof is the preponderance of the evidence standard.
	www.wiw.uscourts.gov /bankruptcy/Decisions_rdm/dec104.htm (5872 words)

	FindLaw for Legal Professionals - Case Law, Federal and State Resources, Forms, and Code
		A "clear and convincing" standard of proof is required by the Fourteenth Amendment in a civil proceeding brought under state law to commit an individual involuntarily for an indefinite period to a state mental hospital.
		This unique standard of proof, not prescribed or defined in the Constitution, is regarded as a critical part of the "moral force of the criminal law," In re Winship, 397 U.S., at 364, and we should hesitate to apply it too broadly or casually in noncriminal cases.
		Having concluded that the preponderance standard falls short of meeting the demands of due process and that the reasonable-doubt standard is not required, we turn to a middle level of burden of proof that strikes a fair balance between the rights of the individual and the legitimate concerns of the state.
	caselaw.lp.findlaw.com /cgi-bin/getcase.pl?navby=case&court=us&vol=441&invol=418#427 (4511 words)

	In re KELTON MOTORS, INC., Debtor. Gleb GLINKA, Trustee of the Estate of Kelton Motors, Plaintiff, v. BANK OF VERMONT, ... (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-10-20)
		It is the standard we use as the trier of fact to determine whether the evidence in a trial rises to a level sufficient to establish that an alleged claim is true.
		In civil cases, as a general rule, the standard burden or measure of proof imposed on the plaintiff is "preponderance of the evidence." McCormick on Evidence, Burdens of Proof and Presumptions, § 340 (3d Ed.1989).
		This standard is not so strict as to require the moving party to establish a fact to the "satisfaction of the jury," or to present evidence sufficient to "convince their minds" of any particular fact.
	www.vtb.uscourts.gov /opinions/published/130br170.html (5630 words)

	Croker Sack: Programs -- get your programs! (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-10-20)
		Standard of proof (preponderance vs. clear and convincing) is discussed at pages 35 – 36 of the petitioners’ trial brief.
		Using preponderance of the evidence as the standard of proof doesn’t cause an unjustified or unreasonable disruption of the elections process.
		Until the legislature enacts laws which establish a higher standard of proof for election contests, the ordinary standard of proof for civil actions ought to be applied – namely, preponderance of the evidence.
	crokersack.blogspot.com /2005/05/programs-get-your-programs.html (922 words)

	Decision Analysis and FDA Drug Review
		Instead, the issue is whether the standard of proof used to judge whether a drug is "effective" varies with benefits and risks.
		"Standard of proof" refers most obviously to the level of statistical significance required but includes all other factors relevant to assessing the evidentiary burden a drug sponsor has to bear -- e.g., the number of studies, the comparability of control groups or the use of surrogate endpoints of less certain clinical validity.
		This acknowledgment that the choice of the standard of proof for assessing effectiveness involves policy judgments makes this an opportune time to ask what those standards currently are and what they should be.
	www.fplc.edu /RISK/vol6/summer/mendelof.htm (3607 words)

	DeNuptiis v. Unocal Corp. (1/31/2003) sp-5657
		Alaska Statute 44.62.460(e) directs that the standard of proof in administrative hearings be by a preponderance of the evidence, unless applicable law specifies a different standard.
		In effect, the board decided that the heightened standard of proof was necessary to maintain a fair balance between the interests of employees and those of employers.
		Considering, then, the three Mathews factors, the presumption of statutory validity, the standard we use in civil fraud cases, and the nature of the civil cases in which a heightened standard of proof has been found to be constitutionally required, we conclude that employing a preponderance standard in subsection.250(b) cases does not violate due process.
	www.touchngo.com /sp/html/sp-5657.htm (2882 words)

	FindLaw for Legal Professionals - Case Law, Federal and State Resources, Forms, and Code
		While the language of 7 (c) suggests, therefore, that Congress intended the statute to establish a standard of proof, the language of the statute is somewhat opaque concerning the precise standard of proof to be used.
		D.C. 301, 304, 562 F.2d 820, 823 (1977) ("The traditional standard of proof in a civil or administrative proceeding is the preponderance standard.
		The critical inquiry thus is the identification of the standard of proof desired by Congress.
	www.findlaw.com /cgi-bin/getcase.pl?navby=case&court=us&vol=450&invol=91#97 (4966 words)

	[1996] 2 Web JCLI
		One of the main issues to be considered was the standard of proof required to satisfy the threshold criteria in s 31 (2)(a), and the nature of the evidence required to establish whether a child "is likely to suffer significant harm".
		Their Lordships were of the view that the standard of proof, even in a case involving sexual abuse, was that of the civil law in general - the balance of probabilities.
		"the standard of proof to be required is nevertheless commensurate with the serious nature of the issues raised.
	webjcli.ncl.ac.uk /1996/issue2/rodgers2.html (2094 words)

	The Shipman Inquiry - First Report - Standard of Proof
		This high standard of proof is required because the convicted defendant faces punishment by the court, acting on behalf of the state and in the name of society.
		The courts have not attempted to specify the standard of proof required, although it is clear that the standard is not as high as the criminal standard.
		The judge must remind himself or herself that, as the allegation is very serious and the consequences for the defendant of an adverse finding may be very serious indeed, he or she will wish to feel a greater degree of confidence that the allegation has been proved than on the mere balance of probabilities.
	www.the-shipman-inquiry.org.uk /fr_page.asp?ID=133 (593 words)

	BCCLA Position Paper: The standard of proof in the Police Complaint Process, 1988
		In what follows we argue that the present use of the criminal standard of proof ("beyond a reasonable doubt") should be abandoned, and replaced by the civil standard of proof ("on the balance of probabilities").
		The use of the civil standard of proof simply makes good sense—it balances the competing needs and is most conducive to a fair and impartial outcome.
		There is a special reason why using the criminal standard of proof in police disciplinary proceedings is inappropriate: because of the unique role that police have in our communities, the police need to be more, not less, sensitive and responsive to allegations of misconduct than other employees.
	www.bccla.org /positions/police/88proof.html (1157 words)

	Amendment No. 57 deals with...: 26 Feb 2002: House of Commons debates (TheyWorkForYou.com)
		Current legislation uses the standard of proof that is applicable to civil proceedings.
		It is not practical for the burden of proof in civil recovery ever to be as high as that in criminal proceedings, or one would not be able to succeed where one had already failed.
		I found in the latest edition of the textbook, that the civil standard of proof and the balance of probabilities were dealt with as though they were exactly the same thing.
	www.theyworkforyou.com /debate/?id=2002-02-26.657.0 (745 words)

	Standard of proof (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-10-20)
		Standard of proof - Indicates the degree to which the point must be proven.
		In a civil case, the burden of proof rests with the plaintiff, who must establish his or her case by such standards of proof as a preponderance of evidence or clear and convincing evidence.
		For legal advise regarding Standard of proof, you can contact our legal staff via phone (800) 341-2684 or email myweblawyer@aol.com.
	www.mylawterms.com /Standard-of-proof.html (81 words)

	[No title]
		Standard 10-5.4(a)(i) requires that the defendant "has been charged with a felony involving acts causing, threatening, or creating a substantial risk of death or serious bodily harm." Standard 10-5.10(e)(i)(A) requires that the prosecutor "bear the burden of establishing by a prima facie case that the defendant committed the predicate offense."
		It is stricter than the concluding part of ABA Standard 10-5.4(b)(i)(A) ("represents a danger to the community or the administration of criminal justice") applicable to situations described in clause (1) and (2) of subsection (b)'s definition of dangerous conduct.
		Compare ABA Standard 10-5.8(b) ("A law enforcement officer having probable cause to believe that a released defendant has violated a condition of release should be authorized, when it would be impracticable to secure a warrant, to arrest the defendant and take him or her forthwith before the judicial officer setting the condition of release"); Ark.
	www.law.upenn.edu /bll/ulc/fnact99/1980s/upda89.htm (13337 words)

	OSCN Found Document:Bottles v. State ex rel. Okl. State Bd.
		Board applied preponderance-of-the-evidence standard of proof, changed presiding officer during hearing, excluded three of doctor's witnesses, and conclusorily stated findings of facts.
		The Board argues in the alternative the proper standard of proof is a preponderance of the evidence.
		In Johnson, this Court held that the constitutionally mandated standard of proof in disciplinary cases involving a professionally licensed person was clear-and-convincing evidence.
	www.oscn.net /applications/oscn/DeliverDocument.asp?citeID=4483 (531 words)

	Standard of Proof
		The standard of proof in judicial hearings is different from those used in criminal cases.
		Preponderance of the evidence - simply stated, preponderance means what is most likely to have occurred based on the evidence.
		It is the standard of proof used by Georgia Southern University.
	students.georgiasouthern.edu /judicial/proof.htm (55 words)

	Unlikely allies oppose change in standard of proof (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-10-20)
		The most controversial of the amendments would lower the standard of proof needed to find a student guilty of a conduct violation -- including rape, theft, cheating or disruption of normal university operations -- from "beyond a reasonable doubt" to "clear and convincing" evidence.
		Particularly vocal in their opposition to the burden of proof amendment are 19 Stanford alumni and faculty who were active in the campus upheavals of the 1960s, and attorneys who once defended Stanford students involved in those demonstrations.
		They add that changing the standard of proof would not endanger innocent students, but would marginally improve chances of convicting the guilty.
	www.stanford.edu /dept/news/relaged/911119Arc1050.html (849 words)

	Standards for School Mathematics: Reasoning and Proof (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-10-20)
		Reasoning and proof must be a consistent part of student's mathematical experiences in prekindergarten through grade 12.
		Reasoning mathematically is a habit of mind, and like all habits, it must be developed through consistent use in many contexts and from the earliest grades.
		For example, even a first grader can use an informal proof by contradiction to argue that the number 0 is even: "If 0 were odd, then 0 and 1 would be two odd numbers in a row.
	standards.nctm.org /document/chapter3/reas.htm (227 words)

	Debate on standard of proof in customs prosecutions continues (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-10-20)
		Notwithstanding this conclusion, it has long been the opinion of the author that given the nature of the prosecutions the appropriate standard of proof is the criminal standard of proof.
		It is also interesting that the Explanatory Memorandum to the amending Act recognised the doubt in the standard of proof applicable in Customs prosecutions (at page 164) and merely stated that the issue will be left to the "existing law" rather than attempting to resolve the issue.
		Accordingly, it is the opinion of the author that it is imperative that the uneasy application of the civil standard of proof in Customs prosecutions be removed by legislative amendment and that it is made clear that the standard of proof in Customs prosecutions is the criminal standard of proof.
	www.findlaw.com.au /article/1400.htm (426 words)

	Tennessee Business Litigation Law Blog: Standard of Proof for Fraud Cases (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-10-20)
		It's not clear what standard of proof should be applied to cases alleging fraud.
		The clear and convincing standard of proof is appropriate to those cases where a party seeks the reform or rescission of a written instrument due to fraudulent inducement.
		But in all other cases involving claims of fraud, the standard of proof is preponderance of evidence.
	www.tnbusinesslitigation.com /85-print.html (154 words)

	[No title]
		That issue is whether Congress, in adopting a strict procedural standard governing the method of pleading scienter in private securities law cases, intended to alter the substantive scope of the securities laws in such cases by changing what scienter means.
		Nowhere did the Conference Committee suggest that it was eliminating recklessness as satisfying the scienter requirement, or, indeed, that it was eliminating evidence of motive and opportunity or circumstantial evidence of fraudulent intent (be it conscious or reckless) as factors that the courts might consider in determining whether the strong inference had been established.
		While codifying a uniform and strict standard for the pleading of scienter, the Reform Act in general (except in the case of the safe harbor), and Section 21D(b)(2) in particular, leave unchanged the degree of scienter required for private liability under Section 10(b) and Rule 10b-5.
	www.sec.gov /news/extra/silicon.txt (2654 words)

	USADA Eases Proof Standard (washingtonpost.com) (Site not responding. Last check: 2007-10-20)
		That standard falls between the low "preponderance of the evidence" standard used in many civil cases, and the strict "beyond a reasonable doubt" applied in criminal cases.
		Brian Getz, the attorney for Collins, said USADA raised the issue of standard of proof during a meeting with him and Collins in Dallas on May 23.
		The burden of proof is likely to be just one of a number of contested legal issues as attorneys not only seek every advantage for their clients but also strive to put in place the basis for filing suit in U.S. court should they lose in arbitration.
	www.washingtonpost.com /wp-dyn/articles/A37304-2004Jun12.html (1170 words)

Try your search on: Qwika (all wikis)