Define: Concluding Argument

A concluding argument is the final opportunity for an attorney to present their case to the judge or jury. It is a summary of the evidence and arguments presented throughout the trial, aimed at persuading the decision-maker to rule in favor of their client.

The purpose of a concluding argument is to effectively summarize the key points of the case, highlight the strengths of the client’s position, and address any weaknesses in the opposing party’s arguments. It is meant to leave a lasting impression on the decision-maker and sway them towards a favorable outcome.

The length of a concluding argument can vary depending on the complexity of the case and the court’s guidelines. Generally, it can range from 15 minutes to several hours, with the time allocated by the court.

No, a concluding argument is not the appropriate time to introduce new evidence. It is solely meant for summarizing the evidence already presented during the trial. Any attempt to introduce new evidence during the concluding argument would likely be objected to by the opposing party and ruled inadmissible by the court.

In some cases, parties may choose to waive their right to a concluding argument. This can occur when both parties agree that the evidence and arguments presented throughout the trial are sufficient for the decision-maker to make an informed decision. However, it is generally advisable to take advantage of the opportunity to present a concluding argument, as it can significantly impact the outcome of the case.

While a concluding argument allows attorneys to challenge the opposing party’s arguments and evidence, it is generally not appropriate to attack their character or engage in personal attacks. The focus should remain on the facts and legal issues of the case, rather than personal attacks or irrelevant matters.

No, a concluding argument is not the appropriate time to introduce new legal theories. The legal theories and arguments should have been presented and argued earlier in the trial. The concluding argument is meant to summarize and reinforce the existing legal theories and arguments.

Yes, a concluding argument can include a request for a specific amount of damages if the case involves a claim for monetary compensation. However, the requested amount should be supported by the evidence and legal principles presented during the trial.

Yes, a concluding argument can include a request for a specific verdict, such as a guilty or not guilty verdict in a criminal trial. The attorney can summarize the evidence and legal standards to support their requested verdict, but ultimately, the decision rests with the judge or jury.