What to know about the ‘preponderance of evidence’ standard

On Behalf of | Oct 20, 2023 | Personal Injury

There are many reasons why people who have suffered injuries – even very serious injuries – decide against pursuing a personal injury lawsuit.

Some are wary of the time and expense that will be incurred by pursuing such a case. For others, the experience of suffering the injury itself was traumatizing, and they just want to put it behind them. And, of course, there are others who probably think that they simply cannot prove their case against the prospective defendant.

Proving a personal injury case is, indeed, not always easy. But, North Dakota residents should know that the burden that must be met in a civil lawsuit is lower than it is in a criminal case. Personal injury cases do not need to be proven “beyond a reasonable doubt.” Instead, in a personal injury case, the burden to meet is a “preponderance of the evidence.”

In short, the term “preponderance of the evidence” can be defined as the “greater weight of the evidence,” in favor of one side over the other. “More likely than not” is oftentimes said to be analogous to the “preponderance of the evidence” standard.

It is a standard that can be somewhat subjective. But, mainly, the plaintiff in a personal injury case must prove each element of the case by showing that it is more likely than not that the evidence shows that the defendant was negligent or reckless, and caused the injury and damages in question.

Proving your case

If you have been injured due to the negligence or recklessness of another party, you may have a valid personal injury claim to pursue. Don’t be hesitant about all the reasons that might hold you back from pursuing the case. You may be able to receive financial compensation that could help you put your life back together again after the injury.