What is typically the burden of proof in a civil tort case?

In a civil tort case, the burden of proof is established as "preponderance of evidence." This standard requires that the party bringing the lawsuit (the plaintiff) must demonstrate that their version of the facts is more likely true than not true. This means that the evidence presented by the plaintiff must exceed 50% in credibility compared to the evidence from the defendant.

This burden of proof is lower than in criminal cases, where the standard is "beyond a reasonable doubt." This difference reflects the nature of civil versus criminal proceedings; civil cases typically address disputes between private parties and seek compensation for damages rather than criminal penalties.

"Clear and convincing evidence," while a higher standard than preponderance of evidence, is not commonly applied in tort cases but may be relevant in certain areas such as fraud or termination of parental rights. "Substantial evidence" is also a term more typically associated with administrative law and judicial review of government actions, rather than a standard for proving cases in civil tort law. Thus, preponderance of evidence is the correct standard for civil tort cases, aligning with the established legal principles governing such matters.