When Georgia's new rules of evidence were adopted in 2010, the statute never included new language for defining "a preponderance of evidence" to a jury. Michael Arndt of Brodhead law, representing plaintiff-appellants in an auto tort, asked the Georgia Court of Appeals on June 21 to determine what that language will be and whether his client can have a new trial.

At trial, the definition of "preponderance of evidence" given to the jury was partially construed from a definition in Georgia's old evidentiary code. The plaintiff-appellants asked the court for a new trial as, according to Arndt, this was "harmful." The trial ultimately resulted in a defense verdict.

A photo of Michael Arndt, smiling at the camera with his arms crossed. Michael Arndt of Brodhead Law. (Courtesy photo)