Also known as: interests of justice · in the interest of justice · in the interests of justice
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A discretionary standard authorizing a court to grant procedural relief such as a new trial, transfer of venue, or deposition when fairness and the proper administration of justice require it. The standard focuses on reliability of outcomes and avoidance of unjust results rather than rigid application of technical rules.
Ivan Ivanov was convicted after a jury trial on fraud charges. Weeks later several witnesses produced internal hospital records showing Ivanov had attempted to halt the disputed procedures. Ivanov moved to vacate the judgment. The court granted the motion because the new materials cast substantial doubt on the reliability of the verdict.
Ibrahim Iqbal sued Integrity Partners in federal court in Florida. All witnesses and documents were located in California and the events occurred there. Integrity Partners moved to transfer the action. The court ordered transfer because the move would serve the convenience of the parties and witnesses.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Isla Ireland filed suit against Inertia Dynamics in a district lacking personal jurisdiction over the defendant. The court transferred the case to a proper district in California rather than dismissing. The transfer preserved the action and avoided statute-of-limitations problems.
Ian Iverson cohabited with Idina Iverson for five years in the good-faith belief they were married. When the relationship ended Ian sought maintenance. The court awarded relief because Ian qualified as a putative spouse whose rights were protected under the interest-of-justice apportionment rule.
Israel Irving faced trial on charges requiring testimony from a witness who was terminally ill. The defense moved to depose the witness. The court granted the motion because exceptional circumstances existed and the deposition served the interest of justice by preserving essential evidence.
Imperial Motors was indicted in a distant district. All key witnesses and corporate records were located elsewhere. The company moved to transfer the proceeding. The court granted the motion because the new district would be far more convenient for the parties, victims, and witnesses.
The court may vacate the judgment and grant a new trial whenever the interest of justice so requires. The standard focuses on fairness and reliability of the verdict rather than sufficiency of the original evidence.
Supporting sources
Yes. The absence of personal jurisdiction does not prevent transfer when the interest of justice favors moving the action to a proper district instead of dismissal.
Supporting sources
No. It is enough that the new material might have affected the factfinder's assessment or casts substantial doubt on the reliability of the original judgment.
Supporting sources
A court may grant a motion to depose a prospective witness when exceptional circumstances exist and the deposition is necessary in the interest of justice to preserve testimony for trial.
Supporting sources
The court considers the convenience of the parties, any victim, and the witnesses together with the interest of justice. The decision lies within the trial court's discretion.
Supporting sources
…determination whether to admit evidence. In the peculiar circumstances of this case, however, we have determined that the interests of justice and judicial economy will best be served by deciding those issues that are properly before us and, in the process, offering guidance on the application of the Daubert standard in this…