Also known as: pro def. · for the defendant
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A Latin phrase denoting a judgment or ruling rendered in favor of the defendant. The phrase marks the outcome when a court resolves the matter against the plaintiff or prosecution after considering the governing legal standard.
After an indictment was filed, a trial court entered a final order dismissing the charges against Pierce Patterson because the evidence failed to establish an essential element of the offense. The order was never reversed or vacated. When the state later attempted a second prosecution on the same facts, the court ruled pro defendente and dismissed the new indictment.
Preston Pratt's lawyer filed an answer in a criminal case that challenged every element of the charged offense even though the facts were largely undisputed. The court accepted the pleading and ruled pro defendente on the contested issues after trial.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Priscilla Parks sued a publisher for using her name in a historical novel without consent. The court found the use was not primarily commercial exploitation and ruled pro defendente, entering judgment for the defendant.
When the city took a strip of land from Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad Co., the railroad contested the amount offered. The court determined the compensation was adequate and ruled pro defendente on the railroad's claim for additional payment.
Pamela Phillips sought production of an attorney's interview notes prepared in anticipation of litigation. The court found the notes constituted protected work product and ruled pro defendente on the discovery motion.
After the President exercised the line-item veto on portions of an appropriations bill, the City of New York challenged the action. The court upheld the veto as constitutional and ruled pro defendente, leaving the reduced funding provisions in place.
It signifies that the court has resolved the matter in favor of the defendant, typically because a prior final judgment or order necessarily determined a fact or legal proposition inconsistent with conviction.
Pro defendente indicates a judgment for the defendant while pro querente indicates a judgment for the plaintiff.
Yes. A lawyer defending a criminal case may require the government to establish every element even when the defense itself lacks independent factual support.
It bars relitigation when the prior order necessarily decided an issue that must be proved for the second claim and has not been reversed or vacated.
…226 U. S. 623, 629. But even if the particular facts are to govern, the statute should, in my opinion, be upheld in this case. For the defendant has failed to adduce any evidence from which it appears that to restrict its mining operations was an unreasonable exercise of the police power. Compare Reinman v. Little Rock , 237 U.…