Legal Definitions - burden of going forward with evidence

The burden of going forward with evidence, also known as the burden of production, refers to a party's legal obligation in a lawsuit to present enough evidence on a specific issue to make it a legitimate point of contention for the judge or jury. It is not about proving the issue definitively, but rather about introducing sufficient evidence that a reasonable person could potentially agree with that party's position.

If a party fails to meet this burden, the judge may decide the issue against them without needing the opposing party to present their own evidence, effectively ending that particular claim or defense. This burden can shift between parties during a trial as different issues arise.

• Example 1: Personal Injury Lawsuit

  In a personal injury lawsuit, a plaintiff claims they were injured due to the defendant's negligence. The plaintiff has the burden of going forward with evidence to show some proof of negligence (e.g., testimony from a witness who saw the defendant run a red light, a doctor's report confirming injuries). If the plaintiff presents no evidence at all of the defendant's actions or their resulting injury, the judge might dismiss the case before the defendant even needs to present their defense, because the plaintiff hasn't met their initial burden to show a plausible claim.

• Example 2: Affirmative Defense in a Criminal Case

  In a criminal trial for assault, the defendant claims self-defense. While the prosecution has the overall burden to prove the defendant committed assault, the defendant has the burden of going forward with evidence to support their claim of self-defense. This means they must introduce some evidence (e.g., their own testimony, a witness account, forensic evidence) suggesting they reasonably feared for their safety and used appropriate force. If they offer no evidence whatsoever to support self-defense, the judge might instruct the jury not to consider self-defense as an option, as the defense hasn't met its burden of production on that specific issue.

• Example 3: Contract Dispute Regarding a Specific Clause

  A company sues a supplier for breach of contract, alleging the delivered goods were defective. The supplier argues that the contract included a clause limiting their liability for such defects. The supplier, in asserting the liability-limiting clause, has the burden of going forward with evidence to show that such a clause exists and applies. They would need to present the contract itself, highlight the relevant clause, and perhaps offer testimony explaining its terms. If the supplier fails to produce the contract or any other evidence supporting the existence or applicability of this clause, the court would likely disregard that defense, and the supplier would not be able to rely on it to limit their liability.