Ask a Question
or
Create a Poll
  1. Home /
  2. Questions /
  3. Legal
  4. / Legal Definitions
  5. / Legal Definitions Information

by Anonymous on December 16th, 2004

Anonymous

Question

Help answer this question below.

What constitutes "substantial evidence"?

  • Like
  • Report
Share:
Other

Answers. Showing one answer.

  • by Aminor on June 14th, 2005

    Aminor

    There are a bunch of citations for this phrase; a search for "substantial evidence" (with the quote marks) will probably bring more than you want. Most of the explanations are of the "magic language" variety -- what the law does when real definition is impossible. Credible, relevant, tending in logic to lead to a certain conclusion, etc. etc. etc., but what it really adds up to is that when you look at the evidence on which the jury based its verdict, your jaw doesn't drop. The negative descriptions are perhaps more useful: substantial evidence is not speculative, conjectural, hypothetical, supposititious. It's supposed to be connected at least a little bit, by something resembling logic, to some actual fact or facts.

    It's not really the law's fault, and the people who write the definitions are doing their best. It's just that reallly basic issues like this are why we have courts -- you find out whether your evidence was substantial when you hear the verdict, and then perhaps read the appellate opinion. Did the defendant driver use "the care and prudence expected of a reasonable person under the circumstances"? Did the malpractice defendant have "such knowledge and expertise as are normally expected of a practitioner in [the profession]"? Was the issue submitted to the jury one "about which reasonable jurors could differ"?

    You can't answer these questions in advance by opening a dictionary to "care," "prudence," "knowledge and expertise," or whatever. You go and argue your case, and when there's a decision, we know a tiny bit more about what these words mean in yet another set of circumstances.

    Comments

    • good job with a difficult technical question

      LynfromNM

      by LynfromNM on January 22nd, 2006

    • That's a great answer! Really, we don't want there to be a definition of "substancial evidence". The whole point of having a jury is for human minds to look at the situation as a whole and decide. A mechanical definition would result in injustice.

      branciforte3241

      by branciforte3241 on December 13th, 2006

    • Like
    • Report

    2 comments | Post one | Permalink

Want to attach an image to your answer? Click here.

Did this answer your question? If not, then ask a new question or create a poll.

More Questions. Additional questions in this category.

You're reading What constitutes "substantial evidence"?

Follow us on Facebook!

Related Ads

Related Questions

Professionally Researched

Answerbag

a Demand Media company