37 ms·
This is a common misconception, proof beyond a reasonable doubt is only needed in criminal cases. In civil cases most often preponderance of the evidence (i.e.
by ithinkso 5y ago
This is a common misconception, proof beyond a reasonable doubt is only needed in criminal cases. In civil cases most often preponderance of the evidence (i.e. 'more likely that not') is enough
- kwdc 5y agoThis is an indication of the need for more people to get actual legal advice before assuming anything legal.
- cratermoon 5y agoTrue but that lower standard of proof is still not easy to meet.
- ithinkso 5y agoYes, I agree, but that's not what I was objecting to (pun intended). I'm not from the US though so bankrupting private individuals through court costs is a science fiction for me
- 1vuio0pswjnm7 5y ago"I'm not from the US though so bankrupting private individuals through court costs is science fiction to me." It's also science fiction to anyone in the US, where the term "court costs" generally does not mean attorneys fees.