Source: https://www.jameseducationcenter.com/articles/elements-of-proof-rubric/
Timestamp: 2019-04-20 00:31:29+00:00

Document:
Claims and defenses, with evidence proving or disproving.
Four months before trial, litigation files will be at various stages of preparation. Some will be solid and nearly ready to go, leaving the attorney begging for a jury. Others may have been somewhat neglected because the attorney fully expected the case to settle at mediation. Seemingly ideal cases suddenly fall apart as witnesses disappear or new issues emerge. Sometimes a case was prepared as though it involved a minor injury, and then the “minor injury” was treated with major surgery. However a case has developed, a systematic review of the entire case enables you to see the big picture and also is a means of getting the case and yourself organized for trial.
This process requires a review of the entire file. I call this review “refreshing,” because, unless you just inherited the case, very little should be new to you. If it is a file you have worked for months or years, then you created much of the work product you’ll be reviewing. Still, rereading the file at this stage, 120 days before trial, permits you to see the information in a new light. Some statements made in an early deposition suddenly seem important. Omissions become more obvious. Gaps in your evidentiary proof become more alarming.
Pleadings Index [see §1:11; see also Form 1-02 at the end of this chapter].
Medical Record Summary [see §1:51; see also Form 1-04 at the end of this chapter].
Motion in Limine Topics Log [see §1:61].
Demonstrative Evidence Log [see §1:62; see also Form 1-06 at the end of this chapter].
Quantifying Pain and Suffering Log [see §1:63; see also Form 1-07 at the end of this chapter].
Theme Log [see §1:64; see Form 1-08 at the end of this chapter].
Other trial logs, lists and files [see §§1:65-1:70].
This “refreshing” review should usually start with the pleadings. Read the complaints and answers from cover to cover. While doing so, make a list of all claims alleged and the corresponding defenses.
The first column of the Elements-of-Proof Rubric is made up of the claims and defenses at issue in the trial. After the first column has been completed, the next step is to determine what elements will be necessary to establish each claim and defense. A good place to start is the standard or uniform set of jury instructions and verdict forms for your jurisdiction.
Even though the judge may not demand proposed jury instructions and verdict forms until shortly before trial, four months earlier you should have a fairly good idea how the jury will be charged. In the typical cases, standard instructions will be available for your claims. When the standard, uniform instructions do not cover particular aspects of the case, or are no longer good law, look to the statutes and case law for language for custom-drafted instructions.
In many jurisdictions, at four months prior to trial, you will still not know how the judge will charge the jury. Thus, at this stage, you should assume that you may lose all the battles down the road. If the judge holds you to the most difficult standards, what must you establish? What is the minimum that the opposition will need to prove to defeat your claims? Approach your Elements-of-Proof Rubric with these tougher standards in mind, and then your job can only get easier as trial approaches.
Each of the claims and defenses must be carefully broken down into the necessary elements using the jury instructions, special verdicts, cases, statutes, other relevant statements of law, and the facts of your particular case. While some of the elements will be straight-forward, others may need to be broken down into several different sub-elements. For example, in a negligent operation of motor vehicle case, it is fairly obvious that the driver of the automobile had a duty to operate the automobile safely; the real issue is one of a breach of that duty of ordinary care. However, in other negligence cases, there may be a real issue as to whether or not the person owed any duty of care. This issue may be raised as to the parent of a minor driver, the owner of the automobile involved in the accident, or in a case involving an injured trespasser.
Sometimes questions of fact will necessitate breaking down an element into many parts. In the sample case presented here, it is assumed a question of fact was raised as to whether or not the defendant was actually the driver of the car involved in the accident. If this may be an issue, it should be listed in the Rubric so that you may be certain you have evidence to address the contention.
Once you have decided upon your issues, take the time to complete the Elements-of-Proof Rubric with this information. As every case is unique, every list of elements should be specially tailored to the issues presented.
Plaintiff will say that she never had time to brake, because defendant was driving too fast.
2. Plaintiff failed to use ordinary care for own safety in way that contributed to injuries, i.e., Was the fault a proximate cause of the injuries? Plaintiff admitted she was not wearing a seatbelt.
Defendant has not named a biomechanical who could testify about enhanced injuries.
2. Co-worker D will say pl. can no longer sit for 30 minutes without making faces.
D got fired for theft. (D’s depo at 6.).
3. Humiliation and anxiety. 1. Medical records say that pl. had no concerns.
2. Spouse says that their marriage has never been better.
Plaintiff had no money to pay for treatment.
2. Treatment was necessary as a result of the accident. 1. Dr. G will testify as to cause to the proper standard.
3. Pl. will say she never had the pain before the accident.
3. Bills were reasonable and necessary for the treatment provided. Dr. G will give the opinion at trial.
2. Plaintiff’s current problems are the natural result of the prior problem. See above.

References: §1
 §1
 §1
 §1
 §1
 §1