The following excerpt is from Kurz v. Doerr, 180 N.Y. 88, 72 N.E. 926 (N.Y. 1904):
a case free from reasonable doubt. In criminal cases the law, out of tender regard for the rights of accused persons, and the presumption of innocence which always attaches to persons in that situation, gives to the defendant the benefit of any reasonable doubt existing as to his guilt; but in civil actions, unless the issue involves the commission of a crime by some of the parties thereto, the application of such a rule is, we think, unauthorized by the law of evidence. It was held in the case of Johnson v. Agricultural Insurance Co., 25 Hun, 251, where the defendant had, in answer to an action upon a policy of insurance to recover damages for a loss occasioned by fire, alleged that the plaintiff had himself fired the insured buildings, that it was sufficient if the defense was supported by a preponderance of evidence, and that it was error to require the defense to be proved beyond a reasonable doubt. The question decided in [180 N.Y. 91]that case has been the subject of considerable controversy among authors upon evidence, and we do not intend to express any opinion thereon.
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.