Legal Definitions - trial de novo

A trial de novo is a completely new trial of a case, conducted as if no previous hearing or trial had ever taken place. When a court grants a trial de novo, it means that all issues – both the facts of the case and the legal questions involved – will be re-examined from scratch. The court does not review the previous decision for errors; instead, it hears all evidence and arguments again and makes its own independent decision, entirely disregarding the outcome of the earlier proceeding.

This type of trial is most commonly requested by a party who is dissatisfied with the outcome of a mandatory arbitration proceeding. Because individuals often have a constitutional right to have their case heard by a judge or jury, courts typically allow a party to demand a trial de novo after a compulsory arbitration, effectively giving them a "do-over" in a traditional courtroom setting. It's important to note that the entire case is reopened; a party cannot pick and choose which parts of the prior decision they want to challenge. The previous arbitration award is entirely set aside.

Here are a few examples illustrating how a trial de novo might apply:

• Example 1: Challenging a Mandatory Arbitration Award in a Consumer Dispute

  A customer purchased a new appliance, which quickly malfunctioned. The warranty agreement included a clause requiring mandatory arbitration for any disputes. After an arbitration hearing, the arbitrator ruled largely in favor of the manufacturer, awarding the customer only a small portion of the repair costs. Dissatisfied with this outcome, the customer believes the arbitrator overlooked key evidence and wants their case heard by a jury.

  How this illustrates the term: The customer can file a timely demand for a trial de novo in the appropriate court. This means the court will not simply review the arbitrator's decision for mistakes. Instead, the entire case – including all evidence about the appliance's malfunction, the warranty terms, and the repair costs – will be presented and argued again from the beginning to a judge or jury, as if the arbitration never happened. The arbitration award will be completely disregarded.

• Example 2: Appeal from a Small Claims Court Decision

  A dispute between neighbors over property damage was heard in a local small claims court. The small claims judge ruled in favor of one neighbor, awarding a specific amount for damages. The losing neighbor believes the judge misapplied the law and wants a full re-evaluation of the case.

  How this illustrates the term: In many jurisdictions, appeals from small claims court are handled as a trial de novo in a higher court (e.g., a district or superior court). This means the higher court does not merely review the small claims judge's decision for legal errors. Instead, both neighbors will present their evidence and arguments again, and the higher court will make a completely new decision based on the evidence presented to it, without giving any weight to the previous small claims ruling.

• Example 3: Rejecting an Uninsured Motorist Arbitration Award

  After a car accident with an uninsured driver, a policyholder's insurance company invoked a mandatory arbitration clause to determine the extent of damages under the policyholder's uninsured motorist coverage. The arbitrator awarded an amount significantly lower than the policyholder's medical bills and lost wages. The policyholder believes the arbitrator undervalued their injuries and wants a full judicial review.

  How this illustrates the term: The policyholder can demand a trial de novo within the timeframe specified by law. This action effectively cancels the arbitration award. The court will then conduct a brand new trial, allowing both the policyholder and the insurance company to present all evidence related to the accident, injuries, and damages to a judge or jury, who will then make an independent determination of the appropriate compensation, entirely separate from the arbitrator's previous findings.