There are several basic but significant differences between civil cases and criminal cases. This paper explores these differences in the particular context of the O.J. Simpson case, which provides an opportunity to discuss how Simpson could seemingly have been found not guilty of murder and guilty of killing Nicole Brown Simpson and Ron Goldman in the same court system.
There are three primary differences between civil law and criminal law. First, a civil case involves a law suit between individuals or organizations. Thus, for example, in the O.J. Simpson case, Simpson was sued by the executor of his wife Nicole Brown Simpson's estate ("Brown Civil Suit") and Frederic and Kimberly Goldman, the father and sister respectively of Simpson's other alleged victim, Ronald Goldman ("Goldman Civil Suit").* It was a case of individuals suing another individual in court. Specifically, Brown's executor sued in what is known as a "survival action" while Goldman's family sued Simpson for causing the "wrongful death" of their loved one. In their two complaints, they alleged generally that Simpson's actions û the murder of Brown and Goldman û had damaged them by causing them monetary losses due to the loss of "the company, presence, companionship, society, comfort, attention, services, guidance and support of" their deceased loved one (See "Goldman Civil Suit").
Generally, under sections 377.60-377.62 of the California Code of Civil Procedure, certain related persons are authorized to sue an accused for the wrongful death of their loved one if they believe that the accused caused that person's death either through negligence of a wrongful act. In the Simpson case, of course, Goldman's family sued because they believed that Simpson had wrongfully murdered their loved one. Similarly, Brown's executor was able to sue Simpson pursuant to sections 377.30-377.35, California Code of Civil Procedure, which authorizes the deceased person (the d...