Also known as: mandatory rebuttable presumption · mandatory rebuttable presumptive · rebuttable presumption · mandatory presumption
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A procedural device that requires the factfinder to accept a presumed fact upon proof of a basic fact unless the opposing party produces evidence sufficient to rebut it. The device shifts only the burden of production and leaves the burden of persuasion on the party that originally bore it.
Kenneth signed a document reciting that it was his last will and testament leaving everything to Jared. After Kenneth died, Elizabeth produced voicemails in which Kenneth stated the document was created only to deter Jared from cooperating with an internal investigation. The court admitted the extrinsic evidence and held the document ineffective because the presumption of testamentary intent was rebutted.
A partner who had represented a client in a substantially related matter joined a new firm. The new firm implemented timely ethical screens that prevented the partner from any involvement in the matter or receipt of fees from it. The court found the presumption of access to confidential information rebutted and denied the disqualification motion.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
A defendant facing the death penalty introduced statistical studies showing that killers of white victims received death sentences far more often than killers of Black victims. The prosecution responded with evidence that the particular jury had considered only the aggravating and mitigating circumstances of the case. The court held the presumption of unconstitutional discrimination rebutted.
A defendant charged with murder introduced lay and expert testimony showing that at the time of the killing he suffered from a mental disease that prevented him from knowing the nature and quality of his act. The prosecution offered no contrary evidence. The court instructed the jury that the presumption of sanity had been rebutted and that the prosecution must prove sanity beyond a reasonable doubt.
The prosecution proved that two defendants were in a car containing a loaded handgun visible on the front seat. The trial court instructed the jury that it must find the defendants possessed the weapon unless they produced evidence showing otherwise. The Supreme Court held the instruction created an unconstitutional mandatory presumption that relieved the prosecution of its burden of proof.
A statute provided that any burning of a cross on another's property constituted prima facie evidence of intent to intimidate. The defendants introduced evidence that their cross burning was a form of political protest rather than a threat. The Court held that the mandatory presumption violated the First Amendment because it prevented the jury from considering all the circumstances.
No. Under Federal Rule of Evidence 301 a presumption shifts only the burden of production. The burden of persuasion remains on the party that originally bore it.
A mandatory rebuttable presumption requires the factfinder to accept the presumed fact once the basic fact is proved unless rebutted. A permissive inference merely allows but does not require the factfinder to draw the inference.
Extrinsic evidence may rebut the presumption when the document on its face appears to be a will but was executed for a collateral non-testamentary purpose such as creating leverage in a business dispute.
The firm must demonstrate that effective timely screening measures were implemented that prevent the migrating lawyer from any involvement in the matter and from sharing in fees derived from it.
…performed, that reveals that race more likely than not infects capital sentencing decisions. The Court's position converts a rebuttable presumption into a virtually conclusive one. The Court also declines to find McCleskey's evidence sufficient in view of "the safeguards designed to minimize racial bias in the [capital sentencing]…