Anglo-French, from Latin legalis, from Latin leg-, lex law, means in a judicial chamber. Often means outside the presence of a jury and the public. In private. A written statement filed in court or an appeal that explains a party`s legal and factual arguments. Latin, which means “new”. A de novo study is a completely new study. The de novo review of the appeal does not imply any consideration for the trial judge`s decision. A term that refers to a date or place used in a complaint in a criminal prosecution or complaint, if there is any uncertainty, to protect the person making the factual allegations from the challenge as inaccurate. Thus, a complaint will read as follows: “On or about 11. In July 1994, the defendant operated his vehicle negligently and without due diligence at or around the corner of Sunset Street and Vine Street … See: Complaint, Indictment) The phrase about or about it is used to avoid being linked to a more specific statement than required by law. For example, if a person wants to buy a home, the date on which the transaction is completed and the transfer of title and ownership from the seller to the buyer is usually set at or around a specific date. The term is used to indicate that the parties recognize the fact that, although the exact date is not favorable for both, the transaction should be completed as close as possible to that date.
Non-insolvency proceedings in which an applicant or creditor attempts to submit its claim to a debtor`s future wages. In other words, the creditor requests that part of the debtor`s future salary be paid to him for a debt owed to him. A penalty or other type of enforcement used to ensure compliance with the law or rules and regulations. In criminal law, the constitutional guarantee that an accused receives a fair and impartial trial. In civil law, the legal rights of a person who is confronted with an adverse act that threatens liberty or property. A legal procedure to deal with the debt problems of individuals and companies; in particular, a case filed under one of the chapters of title 11 of the United States Code. A full-time lawyer hired by federal courts to legally defend defendants who cannot afford a lawyer. The judiciary administers the Federal Defence Counsel Programme in accordance with criminal law.
The right as set out in previous court decisions. Synonymous with precedent. Similar to the common law, which stems from tradition and judicial decisions. With respect to civil actions in “equity” and not in “law”. In English legal history, courts of “law” could order the payment of damages and could offer no other remedy (see damages). A separate “fairness” tribunal could order someone to do something or stop something (e.g., injunction). In U.S. jurisprudence, federal courts have both legal and just power, but the distinction is always important. For example, a jury trial is generally available in “legal cases,” but not in “fairness” cases.
The use of the term and/or is ubiquitous in legal language. Lawyers use it in all sorts of legal contexts – including laws, contracts, and briefs. Beginning in the 1930s, however, many judges decided that the term and/or should never be used in legal writing. Passionate attacks on the term included accusations that it was vague, if not meaningless, with some authorities calling it a “verbal monstrosity in the face of Janus,” “inexcusable barbarism,” a “mestizo expression,” a “despicable invention,” a “crutch of sloppy thinkers,” and “crazy jargon.” Even today, critics argue that construction and/or inherently ambiguous and should be avoided as much as possible – which, as many critics will well say, is still the case. And/or is not ambiguous at all. It has a specific and agreed meaning: when used correctly, the building means “A or B or both”. In most jurisdictions, there is simply no compelling reason to avoid using and/or using it. The term is clear and concise. It draws criticism mainly from people`s inability to use it properly. Pleadings, treaties, laws, and patent claims all allow for compelling use of and/or.
Conversely, some areas of law – such as jury directions, search warrants and jury verdicts – generally do not allow an author to offer appropriate or inappropriate options. Despite the few contexts in which and/or should be avoided, the concept should not be dismissed simply because individuals occasionally abuse the term. Finally, legal writers and courts often have difficulty using and interpreting “and” and “or”, words that are themselves riddled with ambiguity. And/or has an exact meaning; It allows the possibility of promoting alternative options.