Which party bears the burden of proof in a malicious prosecution case?

In a malicious prosecution case, the burden of proof lies with the plaintiff bringing the lawsuit. This means that it is the responsibility of the plaintiff to present sufficient evidence to establish their claims against the defendant. The plaintiff must prove that the previous legal action taken against them was initiated without probable cause and with malice, culminating in a conclusion that favors the plaintiff rather than the original prosecution.

This principle is rooted in the legal understanding that the party initiating a lawsuit bears the onus to substantiate their assertions and demonstrate the elements required to support their claim. In contrast, the other parties listed do not assume this burden. The defendant accused of malpractice would be defending against the allegations rather than proving a case, the state attorney general's role is generally as a representative of the state rather than a party in a malicious prosecution claim, and the jury's function is to assess the evidence presented by both sides rather than to bear a burden of proof. Thus, it's the plaintiff's responsibility to ensure that their case is supported with compelling evidence to succeed in a malicious prosecution claim.