Legal Definitions - marshaling the evidence

Marshaling the evidence refers to the strategic organization and presentation of information in a legal proceeding. This term has two primary applications:

• 1. Arranging a Party's Evidence for Presentation: This involves a legal team carefully organizing all the facts, documents, witness testimonies, and other pieces of information they intend to present in court. The goal is to create a logical, compelling narrative that supports their client's case and is easy for the judge or jury to follow.

  • Example A: In a lawsuit alleging medical malpractice, the plaintiff's attorney might marshal their evidence by first presenting the patient's medical records showing the initial injury, followed by expert testimony from a doctor explaining the standard of care that was allegedly breached, then witness accounts from family members detailing the patient's suffering, and finally, financial documents outlining the costs of ongoing treatment. This arrangement builds a chronological and logical case for negligence and damages.
  • Example B: A prosecutor in a criminal trial for theft might marshal their evidence by initially presenting security camera footage showing the defendant at the scene, then witness testimony identifying the defendant, followed by forensic evidence linking the defendant to the stolen items, and concluding with the defendant's own statements to police. This sequence aims to create a strong, cumulative case for guilt.

• 2. A Judge's Summary of Evidence in Jury Instructions: This refers to the judge's practice of summarizing or structuring the evidence presented by both sides when instructing the jury. While judges are expected to remain impartial, the way they arrange and highlight different pieces of evidence in their instructions can influence how the jury perceives the facts and ultimately interprets the case.

  • Example A: In a complex patent infringement case, the judge might marshal the evidence in the jury charge by first outlining the plaintiff's claims about the unique features of their patented invention, then summarizing the defendant's counter-arguments regarding prior art and non-infringement, and finally instructing the jury on how to weigh the conflicting expert testimonies from engineers and intellectual property specialists. The judge's structured summary helps the jury navigate the technical details.
  • Example B: During a jury charge in a contract dispute, a judge might choose to first summarize all the communications and documents presented by the party alleging breach, followed by the opposing party's evidence regarding performance and mitigating circumstances. This arrangement, even if intended to be balanced, structures the jury's review of the evidence in a particular sequence.