Legal Definitions - error of law

An error of law occurs when a judge or court makes a mistake in understanding, interpreting, or applying the correct legal rules, principles, or procedures to the facts of a case. This is distinct from an "error of fact," which would be a mistake about what actually happened. When an error of law is identified, it can often be a basis for appealing a court's decision to a higher court.

• Example 1: Incorrect Jury Instruction

  During a criminal trial, the judge instructs the jury that the prosecution must prove the defendant's guilt by a "preponderance of the evidence," which means it's more likely than not. However, the correct legal standard for criminal cases is "beyond a reasonable doubt," a much higher bar.

  How it illustrates the term: The judge's instruction to the jury is a statement of law. By providing the wrong standard of proof, the judge made a mistake in applying a fundamental legal principle. This constitutes an error of law because the court misapplied the law, potentially affecting the jury's verdict.

• Example 2: Misinterpretation of a Statute

  A judge rules in a civil case that a particular type of digital communication is not protected under a state's privacy statute, citing an interpretation of the law that has been explicitly overturned by a higher court in a recent precedent-setting decision. The judge was unaware of this updated legal interpretation.

  How it illustrates the term: The judge's decision on the scope of the privacy statute is an interpretation and application of written law. By relying on an outdated or incorrect understanding of the statute, especially one contradicted by higher court precedent, the judge committed an error of law. This mistake in applying the current legal standard could significantly impact the outcome for the parties involved.

• Example 3: Improper Exclusion of Evidence

  In a personal injury lawsuit, the plaintiff attempts to introduce expert testimony regarding the long-term medical effects of their injury. The judge, citing a rule of evidence, prohibits the testimony, stating that the expert's qualifications are insufficient, even though the expert clearly meets all established legal criteria for qualification under the applicable rules of evidence.

  How it illustrates the term: The judge's decision to exclude evidence is based on their interpretation and application of the rules of evidence, which are part of the law. If the judge incorrectly applies the legal standards for expert qualification, thereby preventing relevant and admissible testimony from being heard, it is an error of law. This mistake affects the legal process and could prevent a fair consideration of the facts.