A legal presumption is distinct from a presumption of fact, which is an argument for a fact based on a fact; a conclusion in relation to an unknown fact based on a known fact. This conclusion may emerge from an earlier history of their connection; The hypothesis of the truth or the real existence of something, although there is no direct or positive evidence of the fact, but is based on circumstantial or probable evidence that makes it credible. Our law firm, for example, at a domestic violence hearing, may agree that domestic violence has occurred, but we may not agree that the presumption should apply. Remember that only the facts show how to proceed in any case of domestic violence. An example of a presumption without basic facts is the presumption of innocence. [1] There are two types of presumption: the rebuttable presumption and the conclusive presumption. A rebuttable presumption is presumed until a person proves otherwise (for example, the presumption of innocence). On the other hand, a conclusive (or irrefutable) presumption can in no way be rebutted (such as the defence of children in some jurisdictions). Hire the best business lawyers and save up to 60% on legal fees For example, in comparing the two concepts, one court found that “`constructive communication` is a legal presumption that makes it impossible to deny the matter about which a communication is being made, while `implied communication` is a factual presumption about what can be learned through reasonable research. and results from actual knowledge of the circumstances and not from constructive communication. Charles V.
Roxana Petroleum Corporation, C.C.A.Okl., 282 F. 983, 988. There are two types of legal presumptions: first, as established by the law itself, or presumptions of simple law; second, those that must be established by a jury, or presumptions of law and fact. In order to establish such a presumption, prior experience of the connection between the known fact and the derived fact is essential, so that, once the existence of one has been established, admitted or supposed, a conclusion about the existence of the other arises, independently of any reasoning on that subject. It follows that a conclusion may or may not be certain, but only probable and can therefore be refuted by evidence to the contrary. In general, a presumption is more or less strong, since the alleged fact is a necessary, usual or rare consequence of the fact or facts that have been seen, known or proven. If the derived fact is the necessary consequence of the known fact(s), the presumption is equivalent to the proof if it is the usual but not immutable consequence, the presumption is weak; But if sometimes, although rarely, it is the consequence of the known fact or facts, the conjecture is without weight. n. A rule of law that allows a court to presume that a fact is true until there is a predominance (greater weight) of the evidence that refutes or outweighs (rebuts) the presumption. Each conjecture is based on a specific set of obvious facts, associated with established laws, logic, reasoning, or individual rights. A presumption is rebuttable to the extent that it can be rebutted by factual evidence. Facts can be presented to convince the judge that the presumption is not true.
Examples: a child born to a husband and wife is considered the husband`s natural child, unless there is conclusive evidence that this is not the case; A person who has disappeared and has not been heard for seven years is presumed dead, but the suspicions could be refuted if found alive; The accused is presumed innocent until proven guilty. They are sometimes called rebuttable presumptions to distinguish them from absolute, conclusive or irrebuttable presumptions when legal and logical rules dictate that there is no way to rebut the presumption. However, if a fact is absolute, it is not real conjecture at all, but a certainty. A legal presumption is a conclusion based on a specific set of facts, combined with established laws, logic, or reasoning. It is a rule of law that allows a court to presume that a fact is true until it is rebutted by the greatest preponderance of evidence against it. Presumptions of simple law are either absolute and conclusive; because, for example, the legal presumption that a bond or other specialty was entered into on the basis of good consideration cannot be rebutted by evidence until the act is accused of fraud or is absolute, and the evidence can be rebutted; For example, the law assumes that a change in good consideration was assumed, but this presumption can be rebutted by proving otherwise. An example of a presumption with basic facts is declared dead in absentia, for example the law says that if a person has been missing for seven years or more (fundamental fact), that person is considered dead. [ref. necessary] A fact that is believed to be true according to the law is called a presumption.3 min spent reading CONJECTURE, proof. A conclusion about the existence of one fact from the existence of another fact based on previous experience of its context. 3 Strong.
Ev. 1234; 1 Phil. 116; Gilb. Ev. 142; Poth. Tr. des. Ob.part. 4, c. 3, p. 2, no. 840.
Or it is an opinion about the circumstances that give rise to a fact in which they are supposed to participate. Menthuel on Conventions, liv. 1, tit. 5. 2. In order to establish such a presumption, prior experience of the link between known facts and derived facts is essential, so that, once the existence of one has been established, admitted or supposed, it must be concluded that the other exists, independently of any reasoning. It follows that a conclusion may or may not be certain, but only probable and can therefore be refuted by evidence to the contrary. 3. In general, a presumption is more or less strong, depending on whether the alleged fact is a necessary, usual or rare consequence of the fact or facts that have been seen, known or proven.
If the derived fact is the necessary consequence of the known fact(s), the presumption is equivalent to the proof if it is the usual but not immutable consequence, the presumption is weak; But if sometimes, although rarely, it is the consequence of the known fact or facts, the conjecture is without weight. Menthuel on Conventions, Tit. 5. See Domat, liv. 9, Tit. 6 Dig. De probationibus et praesumptionibus. 4. The presumptions are either legitimate, artificial or natural.
5.-1. Legal or artificial presumptions are those that derive from the law a technical or artificial operation and effect that go beyond their mere natural way. Tendency to generate faith and work uniformly without applying the argumentation process on which they are based to the circumstances of the individual case. For example, after twenty years, satisfaction must be presumed without payment of interest on an obligation or other acknowledgement of its existence; but when a single day of less than twenty years has elapsed, the presumption of satisfaction does not arise by the mere passage of time; This is, of course, an artificial and arbitrary distinction. 4 Greenl. 270; 10 John. R. 338; 9 Cowen, r.
653; 2 McCord, r. 439; 4 ridges. 1963; Lofft, 320; 1 R. T. 271; 6 East, r. 215; 1 campb. A. 29. A different kind of example is given under this heading by civilians.
If a mother and her child die at the breast in the same conflagration, the law assumes that the mother survived and that the child died first because of her weakness, and for this reason the estate belongs to the heirs of the mother. See Dead, 9-14-6. There are two types of legal presumptions: first, as established by the law itself, or presumptions of simple law; second, those that must be established by a jury, or presumptions of law and fact. 7.-1. Presumptions of simple law are either absolute or definitive; such that the legal presumption that a surety or other speciality has been executed on the basis of good consideration cannot be rebutted by evidence until the act is accused of fraud; 4 ridges.