Search for: "Standard Jury Instructions-Civil Cases"
Results 41 - 60
of 1,145
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
7 Feb 2020, 3:45 am
The Divisional Court had determined that the civil standard of proof should also apply to such cases. [read post]
14 Aug 2020, 12:00 am
In Arizona, standard DUI cases have six jurors on the panel. [read post]
6 Apr 2023, 5:55 am
South Korea’s experience is instructive. [read post]
4 Dec 2019, 11:00 pm
Jury nullification also exists in civil cases but is relatively uncommented-on. [read post]
4 Jan 2008, 4:48 pm
Further to the extent the challenged instruction in this case went on to reference the 'triumph of truth' as essential to justice 'in any case, whether it be civil or criminal,' such language, without more, fails to alert the jury that a higher standard of proof is demanded in criminal than in civil cases. [read post]
30 May 2018, 2:03 pm
If we hold, as the court apparently does, that one implication of the existence of such precise, independent standards is that juries must be instructed to find facts according to those standards, we raise the spectre of requiring trial judges in defamation cases to instruct juries as to four separate and distinct burdens of proof, falling variously on the plaintiff and defendant. [read post]
30 May 2018, 1:31 pm
If we hold, as the court apparently does, that one implication of the existence of such precise, independent standards is that juries must be instructed to find facts according to those standards, we raise the spectre of requiring trial judges in defamation cases to instruct juries as to four separate and distinct burdens of proof, falling variously on the plaintiff and defendant. [read post]
24 Jul 2015, 10:04 am
The Supreme Court deferred this question because it determined that harm could be shown using the standard for demonstrating harm that is more commonly used in civil cases. [read post]
24 Jul 2015, 10:04 am
The Supreme Court deferred this question because it determined that harm could be shown using the standard for demonstrating harm that is more commonly used in civil cases. [read post]
24 Jul 2015, 10:04 am
The Supreme Court deferred this question because it determined that harm could be shown using the standard for demonstrating harm that is more commonly used in civil cases. [read post]
12 Jun 2008, 8:26 pm
The Supreme Court, agreeing with the intermediate appellate court, held that reliance on a civil standard for criminal liability was improper because the use of civil standards which had not migrated into substantive criminal law provided insufficient notice to an accused and violated due process principles. [read post]
10 Dec 2014, 9:00 am
But in civil trials, such as this one, the party who is required to prove something need prove only that it is more likely to be true than not true” (Civil Jury Instruction 200). [read post]
20 Apr 2016, 4:58 am
Cases that concluded before submission to the jury or court but after opening statement and the examination of witnesses. [read post]
28 Oct 2012, 5:46 pm
Why should a civil case be any different especially where the burden of proof is substantially less. [read post]
15 Mar 2017, 11:09 am
Defendant’s argument that the trial court was wrong to use Mich Civil Jury Instruction 12.01, which allowed the jury to infer negligence from lack of record keeping. [read post]
10 Sep 2011, 1:00 pm
Diallo’s civil case cannot stand a chance of succeeding. [read post]
9 Feb 2021, 12:00 am
A fair and proper reading of the majority’s opinion does not support this forced portrayal.Granted, Wecht noted in his majority opinion in Graham that the sudden emergency doctrine “should not be understood as a ‘defense’ in the common sense, and the majority finds it ill-advised to use the word ‘defense’ in sudden emergency jury instructions in future cases, notwithstanding that the term features in the current suggested… [read post]
4 Jul 2015, 3:12 pm
The Supreme Court of Delaware is silent about the matter -- and that means you have to hunt through case law to create non-standard instructions. [read post]
Does the "clear and convincing evidence" standard of proof for punitive damages make any difference?
13 Aug 2012, 11:33 am
In California and many other U.S. jurisdictions, plaintiffs seeking punitive damages must meet a higher burden of proof than the usual "preponderance of the evidence" standard that applies to civil cases. [read post]
23 Jan 2010, 1:53 pm
The trial court's refusal to honor the jury's request for written instructions was not plain error requiring reversal. [read post]
