text: what is the difference between "facts" and "procedural history" when writing legal briefs? they seem the same all descriptions i have found online say the same thing for both: how the case got to where it is and why. so what is the difference, please? the headings i have to use are: case, remedy, facts, procedural history, issue, finding and reason. some of them seem to flow into each other. facts indicates the issues of fact that have already been decided or are not disputed. for instance, if someone were pleading an insanity defense, the facts section would include the specifics of the crime, since they are not in dispute. the procedural history would include facts about what happened since the crime, e.g. so and so was arrested and arraigned, blah blah, preliminary hearing, blah blah. facts covers everything before arrest, while procedural history covers everything afterward.  edit: in a child custody case, the facts could detail things like dates of support payments, number of days spent with one parent or the other, reasons for the divorce and/or separation, any convictions one of the parent received, etc. the procedural history would include only the facts about what the court has already done in this matter. if this is a first pleading on an issue that has not been heard before, there would likely be no procedural history. it really only applies to appeals.