Rule 39. Rule 39. Trial by jury or by the court. (2) The court upon motion or of its own initiative finds that a right of trial by jury of some or all of those issues does not exist under the Constitution or statutes.
' In most cases, a presumption imposes the burden of proof upon the party against whom the presumption is operable. In certain cases, however, a presumption creates a burden which legally cannot be overcome.
“The collateral estoppel doctrine provides that 'when an issue of ultimate fact has once been determined by a valid and final judgment, that issue cannot again be litigated between the same parties in any future lawsuit.
Rule 37 provides generally for sanctions against parties or persons unjustifiably resisting discovery.
There are three burdens of proof that exist for most cases: proof beyond a reasonable doubt, clear and convincing evidence, and preponderance of the evidence.
The legal example: People accused of crimes are presumed innocent. The burden of proving that they are guilty rests on the prosecutor. The accused doesn't have to prove anything. If the prosecutor doesn't meet the burden, the presumption that the accused is innocent stands: Innocent until proven guilty.
The prevailing rule permits nonmutual collateral estoppel so long as: (1) there was a full and fair opportunity to litigate the identical issue in the prior action; (2) the issue was actually litigated in the prior action; (3) the issue was decided in a final judgment; and (4) the party against whom issue preclusion [ ...
Within contract law, promissory estoppel refers to the doctrine that a party may recover on the basis of a promise made when the party's reliance on that promise was reasonable, and the party attempting to recover detrimentally relied on the promise.
For example, remember the card that the judge ruled wasn't a forgery? If Barry sued the original collector for the forgery, the collector could claim non-mutual, collateral estoppel because the judge already ruled it wasn't a forgery.
The motion to compel is used to ask the court to order the non-complying party to produce the documentation or information requested, and/or to sanction the non-complying party for their failure to comply with the discovery requests.
Under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, spoliation is the loss or destruction of potentially relevant information that a party was under a duty to preserve for litigation. If information can be recovered, restored, or replaced, it is not lost and sanctions for spoliation are not available.
If the party disregards a motion to compel or subsequent order to show cause, the party may be subject to contempt of court. If the motion is granted, the court will conduct a hearing to determine whether attorney fees and other costs can be awarded to the movant.