Who typically bears the burden of proof in a civil fraud case?

In a civil fraud case, the burden of proof typically rests with the plaintiff. This means that it is the plaintiff's responsibility to provide sufficient evidence to support their claim of fraud. The plaintiff must demonstrate, typically by a preponderance of the evidence, that the defendant engaged in fraudulent behavior that resulted in harm or damages to the plaintiff. This standard is generally lower than the "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard that applies in criminal cases.

The plaintiff must present evidence that establishes the elements of fraud, which may include misrepresentation, reliance on the misrepresentation, and the resulting damages. As a result, the plaintiff plays a crucial role in the litigation process by constructing a compelling case to persuade the court.

While the jury and the judge are important participants in the case adjudication process, they are not responsible for proving the claims made in the lawsuit. The judge's role is to oversee the proceedings and ensure that the law is applied correctly, while the jury (if one is present) assesses the evidence and determines the facts of the case. The defendant, on the other hand, may present defenses and evidence to counter the plaintiff's claims, but the onus of proof remains with the plaintiff.