Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
An unpublished opinion is a decision of a court that is not available for citation as precedent because the court deems the case to have insufficient precedential value. In the system of common law, each judicial decision becomes part of the body of law used in future decisions. However, some courts reserve certain decisions, leaving them ...
Term used in contract law to specify terms that are voided or confirmed in effect from the execution of the contract. Cf. ex nunc. Ex turpi causa non oritur actio: ex nunc: from now on Term used in contract law to specify terms that are voided or confirmed in effect only in the future and not prior to the contract, or its adjudication. Cf. ex ...
Precedent is a judicial decision that serves as an authority for courts when deciding subsequent identical or similar cases. [1] [2] [3] Fundamental to common law legal systems, precedent operates under the principle of stare decisis ("to stand by things decided"), where past judicial decisions serve as case law to guide future rulings, thus promoting consistency and predictability.
In criminal law. Contributing to or aiding in the commission of a crime. One who, without being present at the commission of a felonious offence, becomes guilty of such offence, not as a chief actor, but as a participator, as by command, advice, instigation or concealment; either before or after the fact or commission; a particeps criminis .
The Federal Appendix was a case law reporter published by West Publishing from 2001 to 2021. It collected judicial opinions of the United States courts of appeals that were not expressly selected or designated for publication. Such "unpublished" cases are ostensibly without value as precedent.
Common law (also known as judicial precedent, judge-made law, or case law) is the body of law primarily developed through judicial decisions rather than statutes. [ 2 ] [ 3 ] Although common law may incorporate certain statutes , it is largely based on precedent —judicial rulings made in previous similar cases. [ 4 ]
The ruling does not call into question prior cases that relied on the Chevron doctrine, Roberts wrote. Here is a look at the court's decision and the implications for government regulations going ...
Canadian legal scholar Donald J. Netolitzky defined pseudolaw as "a collection of legal-sounding but false rules that purport to be law", [2] a definition that distinguishes pseudolaw from arguments that fail to conform to existing laws such as novel arguments or an ignorance of precedent in case law.