Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
A legal doctrine is a framework, set of rules, procedural steps, or test, often established through precedent in the common law, through which judgments can be determined in a given legal case. For example, a doctrine comes about when a judge makes a ruling where a process is outlined and applied, and allows for it to be equally applied to like ...
Equity (law) Erga omnes; Erie doctrine; Essential facilities doctrine; Estoppel; Evasion (law) Everything which is not forbidden is allowed; Ex turpi causa non oritur actio; Exceptional circumstances; Exclusionary rule; Executive privilege; Exhausted combination doctrine; Exhaustion doctrine under U.S. law; Exhaustion of intellectual property ...
In law, the substantial certainty doctrine is the assumption of intent even if the actor did not intend the result, but knew with substantial certainty the effect would occur as a result of his action. [1] The doctrine can be used by courts as a test to determine whether or not a defendant committed a tort. For example, in Garratt v.
Scots common law covers matters including murder and theft, and has sources in custom, in legal writings and previous court decisions. The legal writings used are called Institutional Texts and come mostly from the 17th, 18th and 19th centuries. Examples include Craig, Jus Feudale (1655) and Stair, The Institutions of the Law of Scotland (1681).
The promise must be real and unconditional. This doctrine rarely invalidates contracts; it is a fundamental doctrine in contract law that courts should try to enforce contracts whenever possible. Accordingly, courts will often read implied-in-fact or implied-in-law terms into the contract, placing duties on the promisor.
They believe that such a doctrine is inconsistent with an originalist interpretation of the Constitution—so much so that they believe the doctrine is a "judicial fraud". [20] A number of earlier Supreme Court justices also expressed dissatisfaction with the dormant Commerce Clause doctrine. For example, Chief Justice Taney said this in 1847: [32]
Res ipsa loquitur (Latin: "the thing speaks for itself") is a doctrine in common law and Roman-Dutch law jurisdictions under which a court can infer negligence from the very nature of an accident or injury in the absence of direct evidence on how any defendant behaved in the context of tort litigation.
The Erie doctrine is a fundamental legal doctrine of civil procedure in the United States which mandates that a federal court called upon to resolve a dispute not directly implicating a federal question (most commonly when sitting in diversity jurisdiction, but also when applying supplemental jurisdiction to claims factually related to a federal question or in an adversary proceeding in ...