Also known as: preponderance of the evidence test · preponderance of the evidence · preponderance-of-evidence test · preponderance standard · more likely than not standard
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A standard of proof requiring the party bearing the burden of persuasion to establish that a fact is more likely true than not true. The standard governs most civil proceedings and certain preliminary determinations in criminal cases. It supplies the default measure of persuasion unless a statute, constitutional provision, or doctrine demands a higher threshold such as clear and convincing evidence.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
After Dorothy's plane crash, Hannah petitions the probate court to bar Catherine from inheriting shares under the will. The court receives evidence of pre-flight modifications and Catherine's statements about assuming control. Applying the preponderance standard, the court finds Catherine responsible for the killing and denies her any benefit from the estate.
The prosecution offers evidence of Steve's earlier consulting payments at another nonprofit to prove motive and absence of mistake in the current embezzlement charges. The trial court admits the evidence after finding sufficient proof for the jury to conclude the prior acts occurred. No separate preliminary finding by a preponderance is required before the jury weighs the evidence.
Daniel's will leaves the south field and grain operation to the grandson who runs the farm. After subdivision, both Mark and Ethan claim the devise. The probate court admits extrinsic evidence of Daniel's statements and farming arrangements. Finding by a preponderance that Daniel intended Mark to receive the property, the court awards the devise to Mark.
After David's divorce, state law would revoke Donna's beneficiary status on his pension. Donna claims the state revocation statute is preempted. The court weighs the evidence of congressional intent and plan administration burdens. Finding by a preponderance that federal law controls, the court holds the state statute preempted and allows Donna to retain the benefits.
Wes seeks modification of the custody order after Rexayne begins cohabiting with her partner. The court hears testimony on the children's exposure to the new living arrangement and Wes's improved financial stability. Finding by a preponderance that a material change warrants modification to protect the boys, the court alters the custody arrangement.
The standard is satisfied when the fact finder concludes that the proposition is more probable than not. Evidence tipping the scales even slightly in favor of the burdened party meets the test. A tie or equipoise defeats the claim.
Supporting sources
…divorce revocation statutes. Compare Ariz. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 14-2803(F) (1995) (requiring proof, in a civil proceeding, under preponderance of the evidence standard); Haw. Rev. Stat. §56Q:2-803(g) (1999) (same), with Ga. Code Ann. § 53-1-5(d) (Supp. 1996) (requiring proof under clear and convincing evidence standard); Me. Rev. Stat. Ann., Tit.…
…the evidence de now, but will not reverse a chancellor’s findings unless they are clearly erroneous or clearly against the
…to establish the community character of the property. Finally, the court concluded that Connell had failed to establish by a preponderance of the evidence
…to leave his estate to his family. After considering the evidence, the probate court found that Petitioners did not prove by a
A final judgment of conviction for felonious and intentional killing conclusively establishes slayer status in the civil action. The higher criminal standard necessarily satisfies the lower civil threshold. Absent a conviction, the civil court must independently weigh the evidence under the preponderance standard.
Supporting sources
Admission under Rule 404(b) requires only sufficient evidence for a reasonable jury to find the prior act occurred. The trial court need not itself decide the issue by a preponderance. Rule 403 balancing still applies to guard against unfair prejudice.
Supporting sources
When no rule of construction resolves an ambiguity, the court determines the donor's actual intention to the extent it is established by a preponderance of the evidence. Extrinsic evidence of usage or mistaken description is admissible. The court then construes the text to match the proven intention.
Supporting sources
Due process demands a higher standard because termination involves a fundamental liberty interest in the parent-child relationship. Preponderance is constitutionally insufficient to protect that interest. Clear and convincing evidence supplies the necessary additional assurance before the state may permanently sever parental rights.