Trivia-ish question about opening/closing statements...

The party with the burden of proof opens and closes first. In a criminal case, that means that the prosecution goes first, the defense goes second. In a civil case, the plaintiff typically goes first, the defendant goes second. State and federal are the same.

Note: this is far different from trials depicted on television and the movies, where the party with the most dramatic and compelling statement always goes last.

Thanks Joe!

By the way, you forgot to mention how its also mandatory that the attorney must nonchalantly button their jacket every time they stand up and start speaking

Just for the record I thought it was a good question. In my jurisdiction until a few years ago the rules on this were quite complex but now it's as joe has stated.

Joe, I recall from NITA classes that the party with the burden of proof opens first and closes last. This was a class in Delaware but a lot of the students were going to practice in PA, NJ or MD (also there were DE students). Could this be a regional thing?

Uh, I do that too.


Closing statements typically allow for the party with the burden of proof to offer a rebuttal, so the sequence of closing statements in a criminal trial, for instance, would go prosecution-defense-prosecution. Technically, then, the prosecution would open first and close last (although the rebuttal is not mandatory). The first closing statement, though, always goes to the party with the burden of proof.