During the closing arguments of a civil trial, the plaintiff's attorney requests that the judge include a specific jury instruction regarding the standard of 'clear and convincing evidence.' The defense attorney objects, arguing that this standard was already adequately covered. What should the judge do in response to the plaintiff's request?
Grant the plaintiff's request and include the additional instruction to ensure the jury understands the standard of 'clear and convincing evidence.'
Postpone the decision until after the trial to avoid interrupting the proceedings.
Allow the defense attorney to present an alternative instruction before deciding on the plaintiff's request.
Deny the plaintiff's request because the standard was already discussed during the trial.
The correct action is to grant the plaintiff's request if the judge determines that the existing instructions do not sufficiently clarify the standard of 'clear and convincing evidence.' This ensures the jury has a clear understanding of the burden of proof required. Denying the request without evaluating the adequacy of current instructions may result in confusion or insufficient guidance for the jury. Alternative options, such as modifying existing instructions, should be considered if they adequately address the plaintiff's concerns.
Ask Bash
Bash is our AI bot, trained to help you pass your exam. AI Generated Content may display inaccurate information, always double-check anything important.
What is 'clear and convincing evidence'?
Open an interactive chat with Bash
Why would a judge grant a specific jury instruction?
Open an interactive chat with Bash
What happens if the jury does not understand the burden of proof?