Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Hamilton, W.H. "The Ancient Maxim Caveat Emptor" (1931) 40 Yale Law Journal 1133, argues that caveat emptor never had any place in Roman law, civil law, or lex mercatoria and was probably a mistake when implemented into the common law. Rather, there was a duty of good faith. MacPherson v.
Capacity (law) Carltona doctrine; Castle doctrine; Caveat emptor; Caveat venditor; Child migration; Clausula rebus sic stantibus; Clean hands; Collateral source rule; Command responsibility; Commanding precedent; Common employment; Comparative negligence; Condemned property; Consideration; Convention (political norm) Constitutional conventions ...
Caveat is Latin for "beware". [1] In Australian property law and other jurisdictions using the Torrens title system, a caveat is a warning that someone other than the owner claims some right over or nonregistered interest in the property .
Seixas v. Wood relies heavily on the English case of Chandelor v Lopus, and is the American counterpart to Chandelor in developing the rule "caveat emptor." Laidlaw v. Organ, an 1817 decision by Chief Justice John Marshall, is believed to have been the first U.S. Supreme Court case which laid down the rule of caveat e
the law of the country in which an action is brought out lex lata: the carried law The law as it has been enacted. lex loci: the law of the place The law of the country, state, or locality where the matter under litigation took place. Usually used in contract law, to determine which laws govern the contract. / ˈ l ɛ k s ˈ l oʊ s aɪ / lex ...
Jefferson Law School Dallas: c. 1915: 1938 N/A South Texas College of Law: Houston: 1923 148-194 St. Mary's University School of Law: St. Mary's University: San Antonio: 1927 148-194 [Note 2] University of Texas School of Law: University of Texas at Austin: Austin: 1883 16 Texas A&M University School of Law: Texas A&M University: Fort Worth ...
Laidlaw v. Organ, 15 U.S. (2 Wheat.) 178 (1817), is a case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States that established the rule that buyers need not disclose advantageous information to sellers.
Nemo dat quod non habet, literally meaning "no one can give what they do not have", is a legal rule, sometimes called the nemo dat rule, that states that the purchase of a possession from someone who has no ownership right to it also denies the purchaser any ownership title.