Professional Documents
Culture Documents
McNoughton Carga de Producir Prueba PDF
McNoughton Carga de Producir Prueba PDF
Citations:
-- Your use of this HeinOnline PDF indicates your acceptance of HeinOnline's Terms and
Conditions of the license agreement available at
https://heinonline.org/HOL/License
-- The search text of this PDF is generated from uncorrected OCR text.
-- To obtain permission to use this article beyond the scope of your license, please use:
Copyright Information
DEFINITIONS
DIAGRAm I
I-
zA F K P T Z zZ
a. 0
a.
0 0L
0
'Accord, MAGuiRE, EViDENcE: COMMON SENSE AND COMMON LAW 18i (1947).
89 WIGMORF § 2487, at 283-84.
§9 Id. at 284.
10 Ibid. For the sake of simplicity, such a judicial ruling will be referred to
hereafter as "directed verdict."
19551 BURDEN OF PRODUCTION OF EVIDENCE 1385
THE FUNCTION
DIAGRAM 2
Persuasion of a Jury
0 50 100
w hz
0 A BC D
Q_ 0
mr 0..
BENCE 22 (I954); MODEL CODE or EvIDENcE rule I(Q) (1942) (omitted from
UNiroRR RuLES or EVIDENCE rule 1 (8) (I953) ). But see 9 WiG oRE § 2498a, at 336
(burden not met if "after considering all the evidence on that issue . . . [the jury]
cannot affirm their belief in respect to the fact in issue .... ") ; Sargent v. Massa-
chusetts Acc. Co., 307 Mass. 246, 250, 29 N.E.2d 825, 827 (1940) ("not enough
that mathematically the chances somewhat favor a proposition to be proved
.... ") ; Lampe v. Franklin Am. Trust Co., 339 Mo. 361, 384, 96 S.W.2d 710, 723
(1936) ("verdict must be based upon what the jury finds to be facts rather than
what they find to be 'more probable'").
1" It is of course unreal to describe by a single point the probabilities assessed
by a jury. All jurors on a given jury are not persuaded to exactly the same degree.
Every one of the jurors required for a verdict must believe that existence of the
fact is more than 5o% probable if Proponent is to win. For Opponent to
win, every required juror must believe that nonexistence of the fact is at least
5o%probable. For example, if Point C represents the minimum probability con-
stituting a "preponderance of the evidence," then that point necessarily marks the
degree of probability assessed by the least convinced of the required jurors. A
jury disagreement cannot be depicted by a single point'on 'this diagram. Points
B and C, if they represented respectively the degrees of persuasion of the least and
of the most convinced of the required jurors on a given jury would depict a dis-
agreement. See MORGAN, BAsIc PROBLEMS or EVIDENCE 20-21 (1954).
,()551 BURDEN OF PRODUCTION OF EVIDENCE 1387
DIAGRAM 3
Persuasion of a Reasonable Jury
(Judge's View)
0 50 100
z Z
z z
e_(2) a
0
CREDIBILITY FACTOR
DIAGRAM 4
Persuasion of a Reasonable jury
(Credibility Factor)
0 50 100
11111111I I 1111111
P 0
(4) 1 I-1
P 0
zP
"' (6) F- 0 1 "
z z
o 0
E_ P 0 a.
0I- (7) P I I 0
(8)
P 0
(9)
Range 4 (P) above might, in the judge's view, depict the limits
of reasonable probability applicable on Proponent's motion. The
judge estimates that, with questions of credibility resolved against
Proponent, no reasonable jury would believe the existence of the
fact to be more than 25 or less than 5 per cent probable. Range
4(0) might describe the limits applicable at the same moment on
Opponent's motion. With questions of credibility resolved against
Opponent, no reasonable jury would believe the existence of the
19551 BURDEN OF PRODUCTION OF EVIDENCE 1389
'" Susquehanna S.S. Co. v. A. 0. Andersen & Co., 239 N.Y. 285, 296-97, 146
N.E. 381, 385 (1925).
17 United States v. Feinberg, 14o F.2d 592, 594 (2d Cir. 1944).
1390 HARVARD LAW REVIEW [Vol. 69
No EVIDENCE ADDUCED
The examples discussed thus far have all assumed that some
evidence has been adduced - enough to permit a reasonable jury
to have a belief as to the degree of probability of the existence of
the facts. What if no evidence is adduced? Dean Wigmore's dia-
gram implies -by having both parties start at a "zero point"
- that the burden of production of first evidence is not a function
of burden of persuasion.21 Both parties at that time have ad-
duced no evidence. Both or neither have failed to persuade a
reasonable jury. How do we determine who has the onus of pro-
ducing evidence? The answer on Dean Wigmore's hypothesis is
that the burden of production is allocated to one party or the
other for external reasons. That may be the most sensible answer.
Another answer, consistent with the thesis of this Comment, might
be that the parties start not from a "zero point" but from an
"equilibrium point." A reasonable jury is expected to consider
existence and nonexistence of the fact as equally probable until
evidence is adduced. With such a 50-50 starting point, Opponent
has sustained his burden. Propofient has not. The burden to pro-
duce first evidence is thus on Proponent. When evidence is pro-
duced, probabilities may be assessed in the normal way at what-
ever value justified by the evidence.
CONCLUSION