Legal Definitions - downright evidence

Downright evidence is a legal term, now rarely used, that refers to the standard of proof known as a preponderance of evidence. This standard means that the evidence presented in a case makes it more likely than not that a particular fact or claim is true. It's often visualized as tipping the scales of justice ever so slightly in favor of one side. This is the lowest standard of proof in the legal system and is typically applied in civil cases, as opposed to the higher "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard used in criminal cases.

Here are a few examples to illustrate this concept:

• Civil Lawsuit for Breach of Contract:

  Imagine a small business owner sues a supplier, claiming the supplier failed to deliver goods on time, causing the business to lose a major client. The business owner presents emails showing the agreed-upon delivery date, a signed contract, and a sworn statement from the lost client confirming the missed deadline. The supplier, in defense, offers a general denial and a log showing the goods were eventually shipped, albeit late.

  In this scenario, a court would likely find that the business owner has presented "downright evidence" (a preponderance of evidence). The combination of the contract, emails, and the client's statement makes it more likely than not that the supplier breached the contract and caused damages. The evidence tips the scales in the business owner's favor, even if the supplier disputes the claim.

• Insurance Claim Dispute:

  Consider a homeowner filing an insurance claim for damage to their roof after a severe hailstorm. The homeowner provides photographs of the damaged roof taken immediately after the storm, a detailed estimate from a licensed roofing contractor, and a copy of a local weather report confirming the hailstorm on that specific date. The insurance company, while not denying the storm, suggests the damage might have been pre-existing.

  An adjuster or court evaluating this claim would look for "downright evidence." The combination of contemporaneous photos, a professional estimate, and the corroborating weather report would likely establish a preponderance of evidence, making it more likely than not that the hailstorm caused the damage. This would typically obligate the insurance company to cover the repairs.

• Administrative Hearing for Professional Misconduct:

  A state board investigates a licensed therapist after a client complains about inappropriate conduct during sessions. The client provides detailed notes from their therapy sessions, text messages exchanged with the therapist that seem to cross professional boundaries, and testimony from a previous client who describes similar behavior. The therapist denies all allegations, stating the client misunderstood the nature of therapy.

  The professional board would need to determine if there is "downright evidence" of misconduct. If the client's notes are consistent and credible, supported by the text messages and the testimony of another client, this would likely constitute a preponderance of evidence. It would make it more likely than not that the therapist engaged in inappropriate conduct, leading to potential disciplinary action by the board.