NCJ Number
84346
Date Published
Unknown
Length
0 pages
Annotation
The word 'presumption' is used in at least three major senses, but only one usage is correct -- the presumption of law, or rebuttable presumption.
Abstract
True presumption states that if basic fact A is true, the jury must swing to fact B unless there is rebutting evidence. The U.S. Supreme Court has stated that for a presumption to be constitutional, a rational connection must exist between fact A and fact B. An outline of the relationship between presumption and burdens of proof first delineates the minimum elements of a common law trial: judge, jury at least two participants, and at least one point of disagreement. Described in terms of boxes, points of judicial and jury decisionmaking are analyzed. The judge must decide if the trial is to continue after evidence is submitted. This juncture is called the Burden of Going Forward. If the evidence fills up the box, the judge continues the trial. The jury then must decide if the evidence is sufficient to resolve in favor of the plaintiff (if the evidence fills up a second box). This juncture is called the Burden of Proof box, which comes in three sizes: medium (by a fair preponderance of the evidence), large (by clear and convincing evidence), and largest (beyond a reasonable doubt). Cases teach that the two boxes can be allocated between the defendant and plaintiff in several ways (one box on each side, both boxes on one side or the other). The Bursting Bubble Theory and the Uniform Rules Theory are explained to show these various allocations and how presumption can shift the burden of proof from one side to the other.