Legal Definitions - scintilla-of-evidence rule

The scintilla-of-evidence rule is a legal principle, primarily applied in some state court systems, that determines whether a judge can decide a case or a specific issue within a case without involving a jury. The term "scintilla" means a tiny spark or a trace.

Under this rule, if there is even the slightest amount of relevant evidence—a "scintilla"—that supports a party's claim or defense, then a judge cannot dismiss that claim or issue. Instead, the judge must allow the issue to be presented to the jury for their deliberation and verdict. This rule is designed to ensure that if there's any minimal factual basis for an argument, the jury, as the designated fact-finder, has the opportunity to weigh that evidence, no matter how weak it may seem to the judge.

It's important to note that federal courts generally do not follow this rule. They typically require a higher standard of evidence, often referred to as "substantial evidence," before sending an issue to a jury. However, some state courts continue to apply the scintilla-of-evidence rule.

Here are some examples illustrating how the scintilla-of-evidence rule might apply:

• Example 1: Personal Injury Claim

  Imagine a customer sues a grocery store after slipping on a wet floor. The store presents overwhelming evidence that its employees regularly inspect and clean the aisles, and that a "wet floor" sign was clearly visible. However, the customer testifies that they *vaguely remember* seeing a sign, but it was partially obscured by a display and they couldn't read it clearly. In a state that follows the scintilla-of-evidence rule, even this very weak and uncertain testimony from the customer might be considered a "scintilla" of evidence suggesting the store's warning was inadequate. Consequently, a judge would likely deny the store's motion to dismiss the case and allow the jury to decide whether the store was negligent, based on this minimal evidence.

• Example 2: Contract Dispute

  Consider a small business suing a supplier for breach of contract, claiming a crucial component was delivered late, causing production delays. The supplier provides official shipping records showing on-time delivery. The small business's only counter-evidence is a single, undated, handwritten note from a former employee (who has since moved out of state and cannot be easily contacted) that simply says, "Component X - arrived late." In a jurisdiction applying the scintilla-of-evidence rule, this single, potentially unreliable note, despite its flaws and the conflicting official records, could be deemed a "scintilla" of evidence supporting the claim of late delivery. A judge would then be compelled to send the issue of whether the contract was breached to the jury, rather than granting a summary judgment for the supplier.

• Example 3: Employment Discrimination Lawsuit

  An employee sues their former employer for age discrimination after being laid off. The employer presents strong documentation of the employee's declining performance and a company-wide restructuring that led to the layoff. The employee's only piece of evidence suggesting discrimination is an email sent by a different manager (not the one who made the layoff decision) to a group of colleagues several months prior, which contained a general, somewhat insensitive joke about "older workers struggling with new technology." Under the scintilla-of-evidence rule, even though this email is not directly linked to the layoff decision and was sent by a different individual, it might be considered a "scintilla" of evidence that a discriminatory attitude existed within the company. This could be enough for a judge to deny the employer's motion to dismiss the discrimination claim, allowing the jury to consider this minimal evidence alongside all other facts.