Conflicting Evidence

Learn about the definition for this legal term.

What is Conflicting Evidence?

Conflicting evidence is two or more pieces of evidence that point to irreconcilable conclusions. Conflicting evidence can include conflicting witness testimony or conflicting reports from officers who were present at the crime scene.

Example

Janet and Samson, two neighbors living in separate apartments, overheard screams from a nearby unit. They opened their doors and saw a man in a ski mask running down the hall. Janet states that the man was about six feet tall and wearing a face mask. But Samson states that the man was only five feet six and didn’t have a mask on. Moreover, Samson states that after running down the stairs of the apartment building, the man called out to his accomplice, got in a car driven by the accomplice, and was driven away. But Janet states that she never heard the man call out to anyone, and the man drove away by himself. These contrasting eyewitness accounts are conflicting evidence.

Case Examples

  • Juries: Juries have to determine the weight they are going to give conflicting evidence and what evidence they are going to believe. See Equal Emp. Opportunity Comm'n v. Mod. Grp., Ltd., 725 F. Supp. 3d 644, 658 (E.D. Tex. 2024). In EEOC, both parties brought in experts who gave conflicting testimony. The losing party appealed, claiming that the other party’s expert was unqualified; therefore, the court should have discounted their testimony. Id. The Court disagreed, finding that the expert was qualified to testify and it was up to the jury to determine what evidence was credible. Id.
  • Verdicts based on conflicting evidence: “A verdict on conflicting evidence will not be disturbed in the absence of legal error.” Gartland v. Pennsylvania R Co, 112 F. 488 (C.C.E.D. Pa. 1901)
  • “It is court's duty to direct verdict when conflicting evidence is so conclusive that contrary verdict should be set aside.” Wheelock v. Clay, 13 F.2d 972 (8th Cir. 1926). In Wheelock, a plaintiff sued the defendant for the death of her husband in a railway accident. The Court found that the defendant had proven that they had done everything they could to avoid the accident and therefore could not be held responsible for it. Id.

Further Reading

For more detailed information, see our related Evidence terms:

Pass the Bar, Guaranteed

BarPrepHero Premium offers the most complete collection of real bar exam questions licensed directly from NCBE (the organization that writes the exam).
Bar Exam starts in:
Days
Hrs
Mins
Secs
Study better now