Talk:New trial

"Trial de novo" versus "new trial"

Literally, "Trial de novo" means the same thing as "new trial." However, the Wikipedia article on trial de novo says, "the expression trial de novo means a 'new trial' by a different tribunal" (emphasis added). Because the above definition does not account for the possibility of a new trial before the same judge (and because of the ambiguity as to whether a new trial before a different jury in the same court is a trial "by a different tribunal" or not), I am breaking the redirect that earlier had pointed from new trial to trial de novo. Another possible solution would be to reinstate the redirect but remove the phrase "by a different tribunal" from the definition of "trial de novo," but I do not know if that would be legally correct or not (attention from an expert may be needed). 69.140.152.55 (talk) 15:56, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think these terms may be used slightly differently in different legal systems. In New York, the distinction being made between "new trial" and "trial de novo" is generally, though not universally, correct. Newyorkbrad (talk) 05:09, 2 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Newyorkbrad may be correct, but I have not heard of the distinction between "new trial" and "trial de novo" It is my (possibly incorrect) understanding that any new trial remanded back to the lower courts is deemed a trial de novo. Also, I would presume that the concept of a new tribunal does not necessarily mean a different court/venue, but rather that the trial does not necessarily need to be in front of the same judge and jury (note the distinction between an appeal and an interlocutory appeal). In other words, it is as if the first trial never happened. Lawblogger18 (talk) 00:15, 6 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The "Trial de novo"" article is a confused mash-up of (i) de novo review of lower court or tribunal decisions by appellate courts and (ii) new trials by trial courts as the result of a remand by an appellate court. They are two completely different things, but the trial de novo article has managed to mix them up. Not suprising, given that the article is virtually unsourced. NYBrad is correct to break the redirect, but the trial de novo article must be rewritten. Fladrif (talk) 02:37, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A trial de novo is similar to an appeal. The subsequent court is not bound by the decisions of the lower court. Commonly, an appeal from a traffic court or similar minor tribunal will be a trial de novo in a higher municipal court. A New Trial is a generic term which isn't precise. When a motion for a new trial is granted in a civil case, typically, but not always, the judge will remain the same. Additionally, most court rulings on evidentiary issues will stand such as motions to suppress etc. In a de novo trial, none of the motions in the lower court bind the subsequent court. Related to a trial de novo is de novo review, which is a term used by appellate courts concerning the scope of their examination of the lower court. When an appellate court reviews a case for abuse of discretion, its scope of inquiry is very limited. When an appellate court reviews a case de novo, its review is plenary. This is similar to the distinction between a new trial and a trial de novo. In a trial de novo, there are typically no restrictions on the trial court by the previous one. In a new trial, there are typically restrictions imposed either by the previous trial judge or the appellate tribunal. A new trial is not free of restriction, whereas a trial de novo is truly a blank slate upon which the case is drawn. 24.38.31.81 (talk) 18:26, 30 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]