Legal Definitions - Prejudice

In legal contexts, the term "prejudice" has two distinct meanings, primarily related to the finality of court decisions and the fairness of evidence presented in a trial.

• 1. In Civil Procedure: Finality of a Case Dismissal

  When a court dismisses a case, the term "prejudice" refers to whether the lawsuit can be brought again. This distinction is crucial for understanding the ultimate outcome of a legal action.

  • Dismissal "With Prejudice"

    A dismissal "with prejudice" means that the court's decision is final and conclusive. The plaintiff is permanently barred from refiling the same claim against the same defendant in any court. This type of dismissal acts as a final judgment on the merits of the case, even if the case didn't go to a full trial. It signifies that the legal issue has been fully resolved and cannot be revisited.

    • Example 1: Repeated Non-Compliance

      A plaintiff files a lawsuit but repeatedly fails to respond to court orders, misses deadlines for submitting documents, and refuses to participate in discovery (the process of exchanging information). After several warnings, the judge dismisses the case with prejudice due to the plaintiff's deliberate and persistent failure to prosecute their case. This means the plaintiff cannot simply refile the same lawsuit later, as the court has effectively ruled that their claim, as handled, is permanently closed.

    • Example 2: Settlement Agreement

      Two parties in a business dispute reach a settlement agreement outside of court. They then ask the judge to dismiss their lawsuit with prejudice. This ensures that neither party can later change their mind and try to sue the other again over the same issues covered by the settlement, providing a definitive end to the legal conflict.

  • Dismissal "Without Prejudice"

    A dismissal "without prejudice" means the court is closing the current case, but the plaintiff retains the right to refile the same claim in the future. This usually happens when there's a procedural issue that can be corrected, rather than a final judgment on the merits of the claim itself. It allows the plaintiff to address the problem (e.g., filing in the wrong court, missing a technical requirement) and then bring the lawsuit again.

    • Example 1: Procedural Error

      A plaintiff files a personal injury lawsuit in a state court, but the judge determines that the case should have been filed in federal court due to the specific nature of the claim and the parties involved. The judge dismisses the case without prejudice. This allows the plaintiff to refile their lawsuit in the correct federal court, rather than losing their opportunity to pursue the claim entirely.

    • Example 2: Lack of Necessary Party

      A lawsuit is filed against a company, but it becomes clear during initial proceedings that another key individual or entity, essential for a complete resolution of the dispute, was not included as a defendant. The court might dismiss the case without prejudice, giving the plaintiff an opportunity to amend their complaint to include the necessary party and then refile the lawsuit.

• 2. In Evidence Law: Unfair Bias or Harm

  In the context of evidence, something is considered "prejudicial" if it has the potential to unfairly bias a jury or judge against a party, or to distract them from the actual facts of the case. Judges have the power to exclude evidence if its potential for unfair prejudice outweighs its actual relevance to the case.

  • Example 1: Inflammatory Photos

    In a personal injury trial stemming from a car accident, the plaintiff's attorney attempts to introduce extremely graphic, close-up photographs of the plaintiff's injuries taken immediately after the accident. While the injuries are relevant, the judge might rule these specific photos are unduly prejudicial if less graphic images or detailed medical reports already clearly describe the injuries. The judge's concern would be that the gruesome nature of the photos might inflame the jury's emotions and lead them to decide based on sympathy rather than objective evidence of damages.

  • Example 2: Irrelevant Past Conduct

    During a trial for a breach of contract, one party tries to introduce evidence that the opposing party was once arrested for a minor, unrelated offense (like shoplifting) ten years ago, even though they were never convicted. The judge would likely exclude this evidence as highly prejudicial. While it might make the jury think less of the opposing party's character, it has no direct relevance to whether they fulfilled their contractual obligations and could unfairly bias the jury against them on an unrelated matter.