Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The term has been used by some justices themselves, with Justice Elena Kagan calling the Court's "shadow-docket decision-making" "every day becom[ing] more unreasoned, inconsistent, and impossible to defend" in a dissent to a denial of an application for injunctive relief in the case Whole Woman's Health v.
The term legal technicality is a casual or colloquial phrase referring to a technical aspect of law. The phrase is not a term of art in the law; it has no exact meaning, nor does it have a legal definition.
Frivolous litigation is the use of legal processes with apparent disregard for the merit of one's own arguments. It includes presenting an argument with reason to know that it would certainly fail, or acting without a basic level of diligence in researching the relevant law and facts.
In law, a summary judgment, also referred to as judgment as a matter of law or summary disposition, [1] is a judgment entered by a court for one party and against another party summarily, i.e., without a full trial. Summary judgments may be issued on the merits of an entire case, or on discrete issues in that case.
In extended form, or at full length. Often used to refer to publication of documents, where it means the full unabridged document is published. in extremis: in the extreme In extreme circumstances. Often used to refer to "at the point of death." in flagrante delicto: in blazing offense Caught in the actual act of committing a crime.
Nolle prosequi, [a] abbreviated nol or nolle pros, is legal Latin meaning "to be unwilling to pursue". [3] [4] It is a type of prosecutorial discretion in common law, used for prosecutors' declarations that they are voluntarily ending a criminal case before trial or before a verdict is rendered; [5] it is a kind of motion to dismiss and contrasts with an involuntary dismissal.
Merritt v Merritt [1970] EWCA Civ 6 is an English contract law case, on the matter of creating legal relations.While under the principles laid out in Balfour v Balfour, domestic agreements between spouses are rarely legally enforceable, this principle was rebutted where two spouses who formed an agreement over their matrimonial home were not on good terms.
A distinction without a difference is a type of logical fallacy where an author or speaker attempts to describe a distinction between two things where no discernible difference exists. [1]