0

Is there a danger that if a Plaintiff in a civil case does not sue all co-conspirators but calls these unnamed conspirators as witnesses, that a jury might attribute less fault or no fault to the defendant party co-conspirators?

If so, how can the Plaintiff balance the need for these unnamed witnesses to prove the extent of the conspiracy with the risk that the jury might find that the unnamed witness is more at fault than the actual defendants?

3
  • 2
    This seems to be so fact-dependent that only your lawyer can answer. But you might consider that a civil case is not deciding who was at fault so much as whether each (or any) defendant caused damage to the plaintiff. Oct 15, 2019 at 9:21
  • Also, “conspiracy” is something that happens in criminal law rather than civil law. It’s extremely rare for a civil case to be based on defendant who actively conspired to harm the plaintiff.
    – Dale M
    Oct 15, 2019 at 10:50
  • 1
    @Dale M civil conspiracy is actually pretty common and can attach to most underlying intentional civil torts, i.e. fraud, etc. If you look at some state cases, you'll see that it isn't rare at all.
    – Gill Hamel
    Oct 15, 2019 at 10:52

0

You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .