What is strict proof ?I'm the plaintiff defending myself in a small claims suit I filled against defendant.the defendant hired an attorney and there demanding strict proof .the defendant was behind a caravan in a left turning lane ,there light was red.I was driving northbound speed limit was 35mph and was not speeding.the defendant decided to switch lanes wiyhout using a signal light and without caution causing a accident and damages to vehicle.what is strict proof?

Small claims court/car accident /strict proff.
I'm the plaintiff ,there were two cars at a red light in a left turning lane,my light was red ,the second car decided to switch lanes without using caution or a signal light and caused a accident.I am suing for damages to my truck and do not have an attorney.the defendant attorny is demanding strict proof, my question "What is Strict Proof"? And how do I present it to court?

They are claiming they have no knowledge and deny your claim, they are asking that you produce evidence to prove your case.

Basically they are filing motions knowing you will not properly file them and lose just because you don't have an attorney.

If you can prove your case, though a police report or accident investigator, hire your attorney and ask for attorney costs when you win

First, the way to ask a question is to use the ASK option, not to post a response to someone else's question. So I've moved your post to its own thread.

If this is small claims they often don't allow an attorney. But they can demand anything they want. You will have to present evidence of your claim. Either witnesses, forensic evidence etc. If its just your word against their's it will be up to the judge to decide.

First please be patient, it can take a few hours to even a few days for some of the experts to answer.

Also your first question was posted as a answer to someone else's question, not as a question, Had Scott not saw it and moved it, it would not even be answsered at all.

I have merged your posts.

Thanks for all the advice.

... what is strict proof?

It's a redundant way of saying proof. All they had to say was that they were denying your allegations. Instead, they used this phrase for emphisis. It's sort of like saying "Not only 'no', but H*** no!"

Where are the insurance companies in all of this?

tfilmore does not find this helpful : n/a


I notice this is the second time you haven't understood how the board works. What the insurance companies are doing is VERY important in this scenario. The results of their investigation are good legal proof when you go to Court.

Before you post anything else, please read the AMHD rules.