Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Citing the CPR, a trial court rejected an amendment giving a new version of the pleading that was contradictory to the original. However, the Court of Appeal of England and Wales disagreed and found that the purpose of Part 22 of the CPR is not to "exclude the possibility of pleading inconsistent factual alternatives". [9] [10]
In common law, repugnancy refers to a contradiction or inconsistency between clauses of the same document, deed, or contract, or between allegations of the same pleading. [1] [2] In English law, the court will resolve contradictions in a document based on the primary intention of the parties; if this cannot be established, the court treats the earlier statement as effective in the case of a ...
In the common law, judicial estoppel (also known as estoppel by inconsistent positions) is an estoppel that precludes a party from taking a position in a case that is contrary to a position it has taken in earlier legal proceedings.
A party may state inconsistent (even mutually exclusive) claims or defenses. In addition to notice pleading, a minority of states (e.g., California) use an intermediate system known as code pleading, which is a system older than notice pleading and which is based upon legislative statute. It tends to straddle the gulf between obsolete common ...
Note that under California Evidence Code ("CEC") §§769, 770, and 1235, prior inconsistent statements may be used for both impeachment and as substantive evidence, even if they were not originally made under oath at a formal proceeding, as long as "the witness was so examined while testifying as to give him an opportunity to explain or to deny ...
Used in criticism of inconsistent pleadings, i.e. "one cannot argue uno flatu both that the company does not exist and that it is also responsible for the wrong." uno sumus animo: we are one of soul: Motto of Stedelijk Gymnasium Leiden unus multorum: one of many: An average person. unus papa Romae, unus portus Anconae, una turris Cremonae, una ...
Early federal and state civil procedure in the United States was rather ad hoc and was based on traditional common law procedure but with much local variety. There were varying rules that governed different types of civil cases such as "actions" at law or "suits" in equity or in admiralty; these differences grew from the history of "law" and "equity" as separate court systems in English law.
Code pleading sought to abolish the distinction between law and equity. [7] It unified civil procedure for all types of actions as much as possible. The focus shifted from pleading the right form of action (that is, the right procedure) to pleading the right cause of action (that is, a substantive right to be enforced by the law). [8]