Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Thus shall is used with the meaning of obligation, and will with the meaning of desire or intention. An illustration of the supposed contrast between shall and will (when the prescriptive rule is adhered to) appeared in the 19th century, [11] and has been repeated in the 20th century [12] and in the 21st: [13] I shall drown; no one will save me!
must: It must be hot outside. Sam must go to school. – shall: This shall not be viewed kindly. You shall not pass. – should: That should be surprising. You should stop that. – will: She will try to lie. – – would: Nothing would accomplish that. – – ought That ought to be correct. You ought to be kind.
The English modal auxiliary verbs are a subset of the English auxiliary verbs used mostly to express modality, properties such as possibility and obligation. [a] They can most easily be distinguished from other verbs by their defectiveness (they do not have participles or plain forms [b]) and by their lack of the ending ‑(e)s for the third-person singular.
Shall is much more commonly used by the British than by modern-day Americans, who generally prefer will. [21] Some prescriptions about the distinction exist, which are now esoteric in AmE. [21] However shall is still common in American legal documents.
The Four Corners Rule is a legal doctrine that courts use to determine the meaning of a written instrument such as a contract, will, or deed as represented solely by its textual content. The doctrine states that where there is an ambiguity of terms, the Court must rely on the written instrument solely and cannot consider extraneous evidence.
The key difference between using phrases or paragraphs from other legal documents, and copying in other contexts or copying the entire document, arises from the fact that lawyers are effectively drawing upon a common pool of clauses that they adjust and modify for their own purposes. [10]
Where allowed, such an endorsement gives the document the same weight as an affidavit, per 28 U.S.C. § 1746 [2] The document is called a sworn declaration or sworn statement instead of an affidavit, and the maker is called a "declarant" rather than an "affiant", but other than this difference in terminology, the two are treated identically by ...
Clearly this is an exceptional case where shall is better. --Sluggoster 09:31, 5 November 2007 (UTC) As for shall vs should, my (northwestern US) ears prefer shall but the difference is very slight. Shall focuses on your magnimony, and you may already be half-standing when you say it.