What happens right before the jury starts deliberating? The closing argument is each side's final chance to explain the evidence, connect it to the law, and argue for the result they want. It comes after all testimony and exhibits have been presented and after the judge has ruled on what the jury may consider. Unlike witness examination, closing argument is not evidence. Lawyers may discuss reasonable inferences from the record, point out weaknesses in the other side's proof, and explain how the burden of proof applies, but they may not add new facts.

In practice, closing argument often shapes how jurors organize a complicated case. In an injury lawsuit, it is where counsel ties together medical records, expert opinions, photographs, and testimony about how an accident happened and what harm followed. A strong closing can clarify causation, damages, and liability; a weak one can leave the jury focused on gaps or inconsistencies.

In New York civil trials, closing argument follows the proof and comes before the court's jury instructions under the CPLR framework governing trial procedure. In cases involving New York Labor Law § 240, for example, a closing may focus the jury on remaining issues such as damages when liability is established or heavily constrained by statute. Improper remarks in closing can lead to objections, curative instructions, a mistrial, or appellate review if the comments likely affected the verdict.