Search results
The earliest known use of the noun preponderance is in the late 1600s. OED's earliest evidence for preponderance is from 1681, in the writing of Nehemiah Grew, botanist and physician.
When and why did the Board for Certification of Genealogists (R) stop using the term "preponderance of the evidence" to describe how genealogists evaluate evidence. Today, genealogists who work to follow BCG's standards apply the Genealogical Proof Standard (GPS)?
The earliest known use of the noun preponderancy is in the mid 1600s. OED's earliest evidence for preponderancy is from 1646, in the writing of Thomas Browne, physician and author.
- General rights
- When is the Preponderance of the Evidence Standard Optimal?
- Abstract
- Introduction
- Why preponderance of the evidence maximizes deterrence
- On the non-use of ex-ante information
- No risk-aversion
- Zero social cost of imposing penalties
- Investigations may occur even if there is no unlawful action
- Discussion
- Summary
Copyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights.
Henrik Lando, Department of Industrial Economics and Strategy Copenhagen Business School, e-mail: hl.ivs@cbs.dk
This paper defines the preponderance of the evidence standard and establishes it as a benchmark, optimal under certain idealized conditions. The main conditions are: only efficiency matters (not fairness); people are risk-neutral; sanctions are socially costless; and a suit may be brought even if no violation of the law has occurred. Concerning the...
Different standards of proof are employed in different kinds of legal disputes. Beyond a reasonable doubt is the standard mainly used in criminal law, proof by clear and convincing evidence is the standard required e.g. for civil commitment of the mentally ill1, while preponderance of the evidence is generally held to be the standard employed in ci...
It will now be argued that preponderance of the evidence, as just defined, maximizes deterrence11. Using the notation above, this follows from the fact that if p > q for the evidence x in a given case, then p ∗ s > q ∗ s , where s is the (positive) sanction. This means that preponderance of the evidence ensures that the expected sanction will be hi...
One easily takes for granted that a judge should establish the probability of guilt. The implicit notion behind this view is (in a Bayesian world) that the judge should up-date prior beliefs concerning “guilt” with the weight of the evidence in order to arrive at the (ex-post) probability of guilt. To express this mathematically, when A expresses t...
When social welfare includes only efficiency and not fairness, whether or not potential offenders are risk-averse does not affect the result that preponderance of the evidence maximizes deterrence. This can 12 For example for the issue whether or not to allow character-evidence in court. This question is analyzed by Schrag and Scotchmer [11], but n...
As when people are risk-averse, when it is costly to impose sanctions, this will tend to make the optimal standard stricter; the benefit of sanctioning in some state of nature must be balanced by the cost of so doing. For those states of nature that occur with only a slightly increased probability if the unlawful act is committed, the cost of sanct...
Even if people could be assumed to be risk-neutral and sanctions could be assumed to be simply transfers of wealth, there would remain an important set of circumstances for which it is misleading to think of preponderance of the evidence standard as an optimal standard of proof. This class of cases has not, in my view, been sufficiently noted in th...
It may be asked whether the preponderance of the evidence standard remains optimal when the possibility is opened up that the sanction could depend on the weight of the evidence. It was implicit in the arguments above that a sanction is either applied or not. It turns out that the answer is affirmative. In the above example when p > q, the sanction...
This article has put forward a simple incentive argument in favor of preponderance of the evidence: it maximizes deterrence since it maximizes the difference in expected utility between adhering to and violating the law. This establishes preponderance of the evidence standard as a benchmark in civil law. However, maximal deterrence is not the only ...
Apr 27, 2023 · Relevance for standards was initially found in ‘borrowing’ from academic style and legal criteria. In most classic 19th century books or articles on genealogical methods and problem-solving, you will find reference to the preponderance of evidence principle.
Jan 1, 2009 · In the example we have employed, the preponderance of the evidence makes it seem highly likely that a high calcium intake affects body composition by some combination of favoring lean over fat mass, reducing the tendency to gain weight, and augmenting weight loss on energy-restricted diets.
People also ask
When was preponderance first used?
When was preponder first used?
What is preponderance of the evidence?
Why is a genealogical proof standard important?
The earliest known use of the verb preponder is in the early 1600s. OED's earliest evidence for preponder is from 1614, in the writing of John Norden, cartographer. preponder is formed within English, by derivation.
