Section 5.1 Weight and Conclusiveness in General

LibraryEvidence 2017

I. (§5.1) Weight and Conclusiveness in General

General Rule: To make a submissible case, the plaintiff must present substantial evidence to support each element of the plaintiff’s claim. “Substantial evidence” is competent evidence that, if true, has probative force upon the issues and evidence from which the trier of facts can reasonably decide the case.

To be clear and convincing, evidence must instantly “tilt the scales” when weighed against the opposing evidence and leave the trier of fact with an “abiding conviction” of its truth. Jolly v. Clarkson, 157 S.W.3d 290, 294 (Mo. App. S.D. 2005) (quoting Robertson v. Robertson, 15 S.W.3d 407, 415 (Mo. App. S.D. 2000)).

A plaintiff must submit substantial evidence to support each element of the plaintiff’s claim. Spring v. Kansas City Area Transp. Auth., 873 S.W.2d 224 (Mo. banc 1994). “Substantial evidence” has been defined as:

· competent evidence that, if true, “has probative force upon the issues and evidence from which the trier of facts can reasonably decide the case,” Garrett v. Overland Garage & Parts, Inc., 882 S.W.2d 188, 191 (Mo. App. E.D. 1994), reh’g and transfer denied;

· “such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion,” Hajek v. Shalala, 30 F.3d 89, 92 (8th Cir. 1994); and

· “such evidence as reasonable minds would accept as adequate in support of a conclusion,” Garrett v. Richardson, 337 F. Supp. 877, 882 (W.D. Mo. 1972), remanded, 471 F.2d 598 (8th Cir. 1972) (this is a disability benefits case in which evidence established that the claimant suffered physical impartment as a result of pulmonary disease but also sustained a finding that the...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT