Procedure in a Civil Case



Beginning the case

The person who begins a lawsuit is called the plaintiff, and the person against whom the lawsuit is brought is called the defendant. A suit is begun when the plaintiff states his or her claim in a document called a complaint, which is filed with the court. In response, the defendant states his or her defenses and other contentions in a document called an answer, which is also filed with the court.

These documents are referred to as the pleadings, and the points in the pleadings on which the parties disagree make up the issues in the lawsuit. Jurors should understand that the pleadings are not evidence, but merely state the contentions of the parties.


Jury Selection

In civil cases, potential jurors are asked questions by the judge and the lawyers to determine whether each person is qualified to serve. This questioning process, which is called voir dire, is conducted either individually or in groups or panels. A potential juror who is related to any of the parties or who has already formed an opinion about the case will be excused and another potential juror substituted.

In Superior Court, this process is continued until there is a full panel of 24 members from which a jury of 12 may be selected. One or more alternate jurors may be selected to replace any juror who becomes ill or must leave due to an emergency. Selection continues by a process called striking the jury, which is so named because the parties alternately strike names from the panel until the number of potential jurors is reduced by one-half. The remaining jurors will be administered the juror’s oath and will constitute the jury that will try the case. A lawyer’s decision to strike any potential juror should not be interpreted as a reflection on that person’s qualifications as a juror.


Opening Statements

The lawyers each make an opening statement outlining what they intend to prove. Jurors should understand that these opening statements are not evidence. Afterward, the plaintiff is usually the first to present evidence to support his or her position, and the defendant follows with his or her evidence.

Evidence

The plaintiff may then offer evidence to rebut or explain any of the defendant’s evidence. Most evidence is presented through the oral testimony of witnesses who speak under oath. The lawyer who has called a particular witness asks a series of questions referred to as the direct examination, and the opposing lawyer follows with the cross-examination. The first lawyer may then ask more questions on re-direct examination.

During the course of the trial, the lawyers may object to certain testimony or other evidence that the opposing party offers. The judge then decides whether the law allows such evidence to be presented. When the judge sustains an objection, the evidence is not allowed. When the judge overrules an objection, the evidence is allowed.

In a civil case, the plaintiff has the burden of providing the elements of his or her case by a preponderance of the evidence. A preponderance of the evidence is defined as that superior weight of evidence which, while not enough to completely free the mind from a reasonable doubt, is sufficient to incline a reasonable impartial mind to one side of the issue rather than the other.


Final Arguments & the Judge's Charge to the Jury

After the conclusion of the presentation of the evidence, the parties summarize their positions in final arguments. Jurors should understand that these final arguments are not evidence. The judge then charges or instructs the jury as to the question or questions the jury is to decide and the law that must be applied to the evidence presented. The judge also instructs the jury as to the form the verdict must take. Jurors should pay close attention to the judge’s charge.


Considering the Verdict

After the judge has charged the jury, the jury will retire to consider its verdict. The jury must decide the facts based on the evidence presented, and then apply the law to decide the question or questions involved. The fairness of the verdict is of vital importance to the parties. In considering the verdict, each juror should enter into the discussion of the case with an open mind and should freely exchange views. The law requires a unanimous verdict.