Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
In common-law legal systems, laches (/ ˈ l æ tʃ ɪ z / LAT-chiz, / ˈ l eɪ-/; Law French: remissness, dilatoriness, from Old French: laschesse) is a lack of diligence and activity in making a legal claim, or moving forward with legal enforcement of a right, particularly in regard to equity. It is an unreasonable delay that can be viewed as ...
Acknowledging that laches has traditionally been understood as an equitable doctrine, the court rejected any distinction between law and equity, holding that it barred "any remedy flowing from this possessory land claim". [20] The court justified this holding with reference to the sui generis nature of aboriginal title. [21] "To summarize," the ...
Laches has a restricted scope in law for the following reasons: Its principal application was and is to claims of an equitable cast for which the legislature has provided no fixed time limitation. In the case, §507(b)'s three-year window provides for such a limitation. In addition, the Court has cautioned against invoking laches to bar legal ...
In common law legal systems, the legal doctrine of estoppel is ... the equitable doctrine of laches. ... Estoppel by acquiescence may arise when one person gives ...
Although not typically found in statutory law, the doctrine of acquiescence is well-supported by case law. One common context in which acquiescence is raised is when there is a dispute or disagreement over the location of a property line, followed by an extended period of time during which the parties respect a property line.
"Under the “doctrine of discovery,” County of Oneida v. Oneida Indian Nation of N. Y., 470 U. S. 226, 234 (1985) (Oneida II), “fee title to the lands occupied by Indians when the colonists arrived became vested in the sovereign—first the discovering European nation and later the original States and the United States,” Oneida Indian ...
Maxims of equity are legal maxims that serve as a set of general principles or rules which are said to govern the way in which equity operates. They tend to illustrate the qualities of equity, in contrast to the common law, as a more flexible, responsive approach to the needs of the individual, inclined to take into account the parties' conduct and worthiness.
On the federal level, nullum tempus is a legacy of British law, dating back to the nation's time as a group of British colonies. [11] It has been recognized by the Supreme Court as a valid legal doctrine since at least 1878. [12] Many states within the United States have court opinions or laws that mention or delineate the use of nullum tempus ...