Legal Definitions - point of error

A point of error refers to a specific claim made by a party in a lawsuit, asserting that a lower court made a mistake during the legal proceedings. This alleged mistake is then presented to a higher court (an appellate court) as a reason to review, and potentially overturn or modify, the lower court's decision.

Here are some examples illustrating a point of error:

• Example 1: Incorrect Evidentiary Ruling

  During a civil trial for medical malpractice, the trial judge refused to allow the plaintiff's key medical expert to testify, ruling that the expert's methodology was not scientifically sound. The jury subsequently found in favor of the defendant doctor. The plaintiff's attorney could then file an appeal, arguing that the trial judge's decision to exclude the expert witness was a point of error. They would assert that the judge misapplied the rules for admitting expert testimony, thereby preventing crucial evidence from being presented to the jury and unfairly influencing the verdict.

• Example 2: Flawed Jury Instruction

  In a criminal case involving theft, the judge instructed the jury that they could convict the defendant even if they had reasonable doubt about a key element of the crime. The jury then returned a guilty verdict. The defendant's appellate lawyer would identify this specific instruction as a point of error. They would argue that the judge provided an incorrect statement of law to the jury, violating the defendant's right to due process by lowering the standard for conviction, and therefore, the verdict should be overturned.

• Example 3: Misapplication of Law in Sentencing

  After a defendant was convicted of a non-violent drug offense, the trial judge imposed a sentence that included a mandatory minimum prison term. However, this specific mandatory minimum only applied to offenses involving a much larger quantity of drugs than what the defendant was found to possess. The defendant's attorney could appeal, citing the judge's application of the incorrect sentencing statute as a point of error. They would argue that the judge made a legal mistake by applying a law that did not fit the facts of the case, resulting in an unlawfully harsh sentence.