The burden of proof in civil cases is fairly low. A plaintiff wins a lawsuit if he is 51 percent convincing, and then he collects 100 percent of his damages. Is this result reasonable? Should a plaintiff in a civil case be required to prove his case beyond a reasonable doubt? Or, if a plaintiff is only 51 percent convincing, should he get only 51 percent of his damages?

NOTE:

-Not Allowed: Statements starting with opinions, "I feel, I think, I believe, in my opinion, in my view, etc" Start with facts then state your opinion.

-This discussion question is from Chapter 5 of Textbook: Introduction to Business Law, 6th Edition-Jeffrey F. Beatty; Susan s. Samuelson: Patricia Sanchez Abril ISBN-10:1-337-40434-1