Laws - Rules - Justice

Scale of Justice Law is a legal document setting forth the rules that govern a particular kind of activity. A law can help people stay safe when everyone agrees to follow a certain rule, like stopping at a stop sign and not driving through red light. A law can help us to define activities that do more harm than good. A law can help discourage certain behaviors that are proven to do more harm than good. A law can help us understand what is wrong or bad, but mostly by punishment or by the threat of punishment. A law is not a replacement for education. In order to have laws, you must educate people about every known subject that is related to law, which is almost everything. Ignorance of the law is not an excuse why you broke the law. And money or power should not let anyone be above the law. Laws don't stop all criminals, laws mostly punish people who are caught breaking the law and then prosecuted. So you see, the law can only do so much. You need to educate people, and not just control certain people that the justice system finds relevant. If ignorance was against the law, then the law would not be so ignorant, and the law would be just, just what we need.

Previous SubjectNext Subject

Law is a body of rules of conduct inherent in human nature and essential to or binding upon human society. Law is the branch of philosophy concerned with the principles that lead courts to make the decisions. Law is the learned profession that is mastered by graduate study in a law school and that is responsible for the judicial system. A law is a generalization that describes recurring facts or events in nature. Laws are supposed to be a collection of rules voted on by society, and that the compliance of laws is maintained by authorities, like policemen and the justice system. But not all laws are just, and not all Laws are followed or respected equally by everyone. So we have a lot of work to do. We can no longer transfer our shared responsibilities to just a few people, especially when people of authority can be easily corrupted and manipulated. Films and Movies.

Rule of Law - Code of Law - Public Interest Law - Criminal Law - Civil Law - Maritime Law - Contract Law - Regulators - Policy - Bylaw - Judge-Made Law - Interpretation of the Law - Supremacy - Challenging the Law - Courts - Terminology - Law School - Legal Help - Plea Deals - Innocence - Evidence

Man-Made Law is law that is made by humans, usually considered in opposition to concepts like natural law, divine Law or laws of nature.

Natural Law refers to the use of reason to analyze both social and personal human nature to deduce binding rules of moral behavior. Certain rights or values are inherent by virtue of human nature, and universally cognizable through human reason. The law of nature is determined by nature. The law of humans is determined by humans democratically.

Jusnaturalism or iusnaturalism is a theory of law, which holds that legal norms follow a human universal knowledge on justice and harmony of relations. Thus, it views enacted laws that contradict such universal knowledge as unjust and illegitimate.

Natural Order is the moral source from which natural law seeks to derive its authority. Natural order encompasses the natural relations of beings to one another in the absence of law, which natural law attempts to reinforce.

Positive Laws are human-made laws that oblige or specify an action. Positive law also describes the establishment of specific rights for an individual or group. (Latin: ius positum).

Common Purpose Law is a common law legal doctrine that imputes criminal liability to the participants in a criminal enterprise for all that results from that enterprise. A common application of the rule is to impute criminal liability for wounding a person to participants in a riot who knew, or were reckless as to knowing, that one of their number had a knife and might use it, despite the fact that the other participants did not have knives themselves.

Common Law is the body of law created by judges and similar quasi-judicial tribunals by virtue of being stated in written opinions. Common law is also known as judicial precedent, judge-made law, or case law. Courts.

Customary Law or legal custom is the established pattern of behavior that can be objectively verified within a particular social setting. A claim can be carried out in defense of "what has always been done and accepted by law". Customary law or unofficial law exists where: a certain legal practice is observed, and the relevant actors consider it to be law (opinio juris).

Statutory Law or statute law is written law passed by a body of legislature. This is opposed to oral or customary law; or regulatory law promulgated by the executive or common law of the judiciary. Statutes may originate with national, state legislatures or local municipalities.

Procedural Law - Martial Law - Constitutional Law - Amendments - Precedent

Edict is a law or order made or given by an authority or ruler. Edict is a decree or announcement of a law, often associated with monarchism, but it can be under any official authority. Synonyms include "dictum" and "pronouncement". A legally binding command or decision entered on the court record as if issued by a court or judge.

Code of Law, also called a law code or legal code, is a systematic collection of statutes. It is a type of legislation that purports to exhaustively cover a complete system of laws or a particular area of law as it existed at the time the code was enacted, by a process of codification. which is the process of collecting and restating the law of a jurisdiction in certain areas, usually by subject, forming a legal code, i.e. a codex (book) of law.

Sources of Law are the origins of laws, the binding rules that enable any state to govern its territory.

Jus commune or ius commune is Latin for "common law" in certain jurisdictions. It is often used by civil law jurists to refer to those aspects of the civil law system's invariant legal principles, sometimes called "the law of the land" in English law.

Convention is a set of agreed, stipulated, or generally accepted standards, norms, social norms, or criteria, often taking the form of a custom.

Public Law is the part of law that governs relations between legal persons and a government, between different institutions within a state, between different branches of governments, as well as relationships between persons that are of direct concern to society. Public law comprises constitutional law, administrative law, tax law and criminal law, as well as all procedural law. Laws concerning relationships between individuals belong to private law. Charged.

Private Law is that part of a civil law legal system which is part of the jus commune that involves relationships between individuals, such as the law of contracts and torts.

Administrative Law is the division of law that governs the activities of executive branch agencies of government. Administrative law concerns executive branch rule making (executive branch rules are generally referred to as "regulations"), adjudication, or the enforcement of laws. Administrative law is considered a branch of public law. Separation of Powers.

Corporate Law regulates the governance, finance and power of corporations in US law. Every state and territory has its own basic corporate code, while federal law creates minimum standards for trade in company shares and governance rights, found mostly in the Securities Act of 1933 and the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended by laws like the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and the Dodd-Frank Act of 2010. The US Constitution was interpreted by the US Supreme Court to allow corporations to incorporate in the state of their choice, regardless of where their headquarters are. Over the 20th century, most major corporations incorporated under the Delaware General Corporation Law, which offered lower corporate taxes, fewer shareholder rights against directors, and developed a specialized court and legal profession. Nevada has done the same. Twenty-four states follow the Model Business Corporation Act, while New York and California are important due to their size.

Tax Law or revenue law is an area of legal study in which public or sanctioned authorities, such as federal, state and municipal governments (as in the case of the US) use a body of rules and procedures (laws) to assess and collect taxes in a legal context. The rates and merits of the various taxes, imposed by the authorities, are attained via the political process inherent in these bodies of power, and not directly attributable to the actual domain of tax law itself. Tax law is part of public law.

Universal Law refers as concepts of legal legitimacy actions, whereby those principles and rules for governing human beings' conduct which are most universal in their acceptability, their applicability, translation, and philosophical basis, are therefore considered to be most legitimate.

International Law - Commercial Law - Supremacy Clause - Frivolous

Right to a Fair Trial - Right to Counsel - Due Process - First Amendment - Human Rights - Don't Speak

Remedy - Repeal - Privacy - Crimes - Government Departments

Legal is something established by law or founded upon law. Legal is something declared as official or accepted rules relating to jurisprudence and based on law or concerned with the law. Law is an activity that is permitted by law. Law is having legal efficacy or force. Law is relating to or characteristic of the profession of law.

Illegal is something prohibited by law or something that is not official or accepted under current rules. An activity that is contrary to what is normal and excepted, so it is forbidden by law, especially.

Jurisprudence or legal theory is the theoretical study of law that seeks to explain the nature of law in its most general form and provide a deeper understanding of legal reasoning, legal systems, legal institutions, and the role of law in society. General jurisprudence can be divided into categories both by the type of question scholars seek to answer and by the theories of jurisprudence, or schools of thought, regarding how those questions are best answered. Contemporary philosophy of law, which deals with general jurisprudence, addresses problems internal to law and legal systems and problems of law as a social institution that relates to the larger political and social context in which it exists. Ancient natural law is the idea that there are rational objective limits to the power of legislative rulers. The foundations of law are accessible through reason, and it is from these laws of nature that human laws gain whatever force they have. Analytic jurisprudence or clarificatory jurisprudence rejects natural law's fusing of what law is and what it ought to be. It espouses the use of a neutral point of view and descriptive language when referring to aspects of legal systems. It encompasses such theories of jurisprudence as "legal positivism", which holds that there is no necessary connection between law and morality and that the force of law comes from basic social facts; and "legal realism", which argues that the real-world practice of law determines what law is, the law having the force that it does because of what legislators, lawyers, and judges do with it. Normative jurisprudence is concerned with "evaluative" theories of law. It deals with what the goal or purpose of law is, or what moral or political theories provide a foundation for the law. It not only addresses the question "What is law?", but also tries to determine what the proper function of law should be, or what sorts of acts should be subject to legal sanctions, and what sorts of punishment should be permitted.

Interpretivism is a school of thought in contemporary jurisprudence and the philosophy of law. The main claims of interpretivism are that Law is not a set of given data, conventions or physical facts, but what lawyers aim to construct or obtain in their practice. This marks a first difference between interpretivism and legal positivism. But the refusal that law be a set of given entities opposes interpretivism to natural law too. There is no separation between law and morality, although there are differences. This is not in accordance with the main claim of legal positivism. Law is not immanent in nature nor do legal values and principles exist independently and outside of the legal practice itself. This is the opposite of the main claim of natural law theory.

Legal Positivism as applied to law to include the contentions that: laws are commands of human beings, there is not any necessary relation between law and morality, that is, between law as it is and as it ought to be, analysis (or study of the meaning) of legal concepts is worthwhile and is to be distinguished from history or sociology of law, as well as from criticism or appraisal of law, for example with regard to its moral value or to its social aims or functions, a legal system is a closed, logical system in which correct decisions can be deduced from predetermined legal rules without reference to social considerations (legal formalism), moral judgments, unlike statements of fact, cannot be established or defended by rational argument, evidence, or proof ("noncognitivism" in ethics).

Equal Justice - Everyone is Equal in the Eyes of the Law

Equal Justice Under Law is based upon Fourteenth Amendment jurisprudence, and has historical antecedents dating back to ancient Greece. The Fourteenth Amendment is a guarantee to equal protection of the law.

Right to a Fair Trial - Habeas Corpus - Natural Rights - Due Process - Cruel and Unusual Punishment - Innocent Until Proven Guilty - Double Standards - Bad Judges - Justice

Equal Justice Under Law is an organization dedicated to achieving equality in our justice system by challenging wealth-based discrimination. We believe everyone should be treated equally, regardless of wealth-status. Unfortunately, our society currently operates two systems of justice: one for the rich and another for everyone else.

Justice - Legal Help - Public Interest

Equality before the Law is the principle under which all people are subject to the same laws of justice and due process. Everyone must be treated equally under the law regardless of their race, gender, national origin, color, ethnicity, religion, disability, or other characteristics, without privilege, discrimination, or bias.

"Punishable by fine means that something is legal for a price."

Equal Protection Clause is from the text of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. The clause, which took effect in 1868, provides "nor shall any State ... deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws". It mandates that individuals in similar situations be treated equally by the law. A primary motivation for this clause was to validate the equality provisions contained in the Civil Rights Act of 1866, which guaranteed that all citizens would have the guaranteed right to equal protection by law. As a whole, the Fourteenth Amendment marked a large shift in American constitutionalism, by applying substantially more constitutional restrictions against the states than had applied before the Civil War. Right to Education.

Court of Equity is a court that is authorized to apply principles of equity, as opposed to law, to cases brought before it.

Every Law can be Debated, but it doesn't mean you will have the chance to debate it in court.

Presumption of Innocence states the burden of proof is on the one who declares, not on one who denies.

Everyone is Innocent until Proven Guilty..but not always.

Legal Burden of Proof - Cause - Suspicion - Rules of Engagement - Frivolous - Drug War - False Accusation - Slander - Invalid Argument - Witness.

Color of Law - Loopholes in the Law

Color of Law or the Color of Authority means that a person is claiming or implying that the criminal acts he or she is committing are related to and legitimized by his or her role as an agent of governmental power, especially if the acts are unlawful. When people are allowed to be above the law, it allows criminals to commit crimes without being held accountable and without being punishment. Just because something is done with the "color of law" does not mean that the action was lawful. When police, politicians or CEO's act outside their lawful authority and violate the civil rights of a citizen, the FBI is usually tasked with investigating. But if people in charge of prosecution can be manipulated, then there is no law.

Laws of Conflict - Unconstitutional Laws

Privilege is a certain entitlement to immunity granted by the state or another authority to a restricted group, either by birth or on a conditional basis. Pay-to-Stay City Jails.

Attorney–Client Privilege - Disclosure Agreements - Repeal - Plea Deals

Conflict of Laws concerns relations across different legal jurisdictions between persons, and sometimes also companies, corporations and other Legal Entity, which is a legal construct through which the law allows a group of natural persons to act as if they were a single person for certain purposes. The most common purposes are lawsuits, property ownership, and contracts. (also known as private international law). Conflict of Interest.

Letter of the Law and the Spirit of the Law are two possible ways to regard rules, or laws. To obey the letter of the law is to follow the literal reading of the words of the law, whereas following the spirit of the law means enacting the intent behind the law. Although it is usual to follow both the letter and the spirit, the two are commonly referenced when they are in opposition. "Law" originally referred to legislative statute, but in the idiom may refer to any kind of rule. Intentionally following the letter of the law but not the spirit may be accomplished through exploiting technicalities, loopholes, and ambiguous language. Rules as written (RAW) versus rules as intended (RAI) is a similar expression originating from the tabletop role-playing game community. Violating the perceived intention of the law has been found to affect people's judgments of culpability above and beyond violations of the letter of the law such that (1) a person can violate the letter of the law (but not the spirit) and not incur culpability, (2) a person can violate the spirit of the law and incur culpability, even without violating the letter of the law, and (3) the greatest culpability is assigned when both the letter and the spirit of the law are violated. Precedent.

If the penalty for a crime is a fine, then that law only exists for the lower class. Equal Justice.

Federal Preemption is the invalidation of a U.S. state law that conflicts with federal law. Precautionary Principle.

Straw Man is a common form of argument and is an informal fallacy based on giving the impression of refuting an opponent's argument, while actually refuting an argument that was not advanced by that opponent.

Legal Fiction is a fact assumed or created by courts which is then used in order to apply a legal rule. Typically, a legal fiction allows the court to ignore a fact that would prevent it from exercising its jurisdiction, by simply assuming that the fact is different.

Legal Technicality implies that strict adherence to the letter of the law has prevented the spirit of the law from being enforced. Any portion of the law that interferes with the outcome desired by the user of the term.

Article 1 Section 8: To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.

Habeas Corpus - Lawsuit - Sue - Lawyer - Attorney - Wills - Contracts

Legal Advice Help - Public Interest - Law Education - Evidence - Witness

Courtroom Case Decisions - Rulings in the Past - Precedent - Repeal

Legal Definitions - Courtroom Terminology - Judge - Jury

Bonds and Bails - Ransom Kidnapping

"I did not break the law, the law was already broken before I got here, so one cannot break what is already been broken. When Laws are use as weapons, we no longer communicate as humans, a law is to give reasons and not supposed to deny people their reasons. Laws are supposed to provide guidance in society, laws should not be used to attack people. How can a law deny reason?" Every Law Not Based on WISDOM is a Menace to the State.

Jargon - Just Tell Me What You Mean

Legalese is a traditional style of legal writing that is part of this specialized discourse of lawyers, used to confuse people who don't understand the words correctly, so that they can be easily manipulated.

Legal English refers to the type of English used in legal writing, which differs from ordinary language in vocabulary, morphology, syntax, and semantics, as well as other linguistic features. Meaning is skewed and could easily confuse people.

Jargon is a type of language that is used in a particular context and may not be well understood outside of it. Not in Laymen's terms or simple enough to understand. Lingo.

Alan Siegel: Simplify Legal Jargon (video and interactive text).

Mumbo Jumbo is a type of meaningless language that is intended to cause confusion or bewilderment, sometimes in the form of jargon that non-specialists have difficulty in understanding.

Legal Abuse - Frivolous - Babble - Vague - Rules - Simplification

Psychobabble is jargon used in popular psychology and a form of speech or writing that uses psychological jargon, buzzwords, and esoteric language to create an impression of truth or plausibility. The term implies that the speaker or writer lacks the experience and understanding necessary for the proper use of psychological terms. Additionally, it may imply that the content of speech deviates markedly from common sense and good judgment.

Civil Law

Civil Law is relating to civil wrongs and quasi-contracts is part of the civil law. The law of property is embraced by civil law. Civil law can, like criminal law, be divided into substantive law which is the set of laws that governs how members of a society are to behave, and procedural law which comprises the rules by which a court hears and determines what happens in Civil Lawsuit, criminal or administrative proceedings. The rules are designed to ensure a fair and consistent application of due process (in the U.S.) or fundamental justice (in other common law countries) to all cases that come before a court.

Civil Wrong involves the violation of a RightWrong - Tort (law suit -sue) - Remedy - Justice

Civil applies to ordinary citizens as contrasted with the military. Of or relating to or befitting citizens as individuals. Of or occurring within the state or between or among citizens of the state. Of or in a condition of social order. Civil also means not rude. Hate Crime.

Civil Procedure is the body of law that sets out the rules and standards that courts follow when adjudicating civil lawsuits (as opposed to procedures in criminal law matters). These rules govern how a lawsuit or case may be commenced; what kind of service of process (if any) is required; the types of pleadings or statements of case, motions or applications, and orders allowed in civil cases; the timing and manner of depositions and discovery or disclosure; the conduct of trials; the process for judgment; the process for post-trial procedures; various available remedies; and how the courts and clerks must function.

Procedural Law comprises the rules by which a court hears and determines what happens in civil, lawsuit, criminal or administrative proceedings. The rules are designed to ensure a fair and consistent application of due process (in the U.S.) or fundamental justice (in other common law countries) to all cases that come before a court.

Natural Rights and Legal Rights are two types of rights. Legal rights are those bestowed onto a person by a given legal system (i.e., rights that can be modified, repealed, and restrained by human laws). Natural Rights are those that are not dependent on the laws or customs of any particular culture or government, and therefore universal and inalienable (i.e., rights that cannot be repealed or restrained by human laws).

Consent - Everyone is Equal in the Eyes of the Law - Repeal - Legal Challenge

Private Law is that part of a civil law legal system which is part of the jus commune that involves relationships between individuals, such as the law of contracts or torts, which is a civil wrong that unfairly causes someone else to suffer loss or harm resulting in legal liability for the person who commits the tortious act, called a tortfeasor.

By-Laws - Public Interest - Commercial Law

Positive Law are human-made laws that oblige or specify an action. It also describes the establishment of specific rights for an individual or group. Etymologically, the name derives from the verb to posit. 1: Not breach the peace; 2: Cause no-one else any harm; 3: Cause no-one else any loss; 4: Not use mischief in your promises and agreements.

Constitutional Law is a body of law which defines the role, powers, and structure of different entities within a state, namely, the executive, the parliament or legislature, and the judiciary; as well as the basic rights of citizens and, in federal countries such as the United States and Canada, the relationship between the central government and state, provincial, or territorial governments.

Rigid Constitution is a constitution which stands above the other laws of the country, while flexible constitutions do not. A. V. Dicey defines a rigid constitution as one under which certain laws, called constitutional laws or fundamental laws "cannot be changed in the same manner as ordinary laws." A rigid constitution set forth "specific legal/constitutional obstacles to be overcome" before it may be amended, such as special approval of the people by referendum, a supermajority or special majority in the legislature, or both. In contrast, a flexible constitution is one in which the legislature may amend the constitution's content and principles through use of the ordinary legislative process. For example, the Constitution of Australia is rigid, while the British Constitution and the Israeli Constitution are flexible.

Substantive Law refers to the actual claims and defenses whose validity is tested through the procedures of procedural law, is different from procedural law.

Natural Person is a person (in legal meaning. i.e., one who has its own legal personality) that is an individual Human being, as opposed to a legal person, which may be a private (i.e., business entity or non-governmental organization) or public (i.e., government) organization.

Possession is Nine-Tenths of the Law

Legal Personality means to be capable of holding legal rights and obligations within a certain legal system, such as entering into contracts, suing, and being Sued. Legal personality is a prerequisite to legal capacity, the ability of any legal person to amend (enter into, transfer, etc.) rights and obligations. In international law, consequently, legal personality is a prerequisite for an international organization to be able to sign international treaties in its own name.

Personhood (corporate) - Legal Fiction

Lawful is conforming to, permitted by, or recognized by law or rules. Allowed or permitted by law; not contrary to law.
When something's legal, or the rules allow it, you can call it lawful.

Legal is when a person who acts in a legal manner or with legal authority. A person whose status is protected by law.

Capacity in law of natural and juridical persons, and legal persons in general, determines whether they may make binding amendments to their rights, duties and obligations, such as getting married or merging, entering into contracts, making gifts, or writing a valid Will. Assessments.

NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund is a leading United States civil rights organization and law firm based in New York City.

NAACP is a civil rights organization in the United States, formed in 1909 as an interracial endeavor to advance justice for African Americans by a group including W. E. B. Du Bois, Mary White Ovington, Moorfield Storey and Ida B. Wells. Its mission in the 21st century is "to ensure the political, educational, social, and economic equality of rights of all persons and to eliminate race-based discrimination". National NAACP initiatives include political lobbying, publicity efforts and litigation strategies developed by its legal team. The group enlarged its mission in the late 20th century by considering issues such as police misconduct, the status of black foreign refugees and questions of economic development. Its name, retained in accordance with tradition, uses the once common term colored people, referring to those with some African ancestry. The NAACP bestows annual awards to African Americans in two categories: Image Awards are for achievement in the arts and entertainment, and Spingarn Medals are for outstanding achievement of any kind. Its headquarters is in Baltimore, Maryland. National Association for the Advancement of Colored People.

Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law is a civil rights organization founded in 1963 at the request of President John F. Kennedy. Its mission is to secure equal justice for all through the rule of law by enlisting the leadership of the private bar. While the Lawyers’ Committee works to stop all civil rights violations, the majority of its work targets the inequities that confront African Americans and other minorities. When the Lawyers’ Committee was created, its existence was a major change in how the bar and how local and state judiciaries were able to help oppressed racial minorities during the civil rights movement. The organization has assisted with some major civil rights advancements over the years, including significant amendments to the Voting Rights Act of 1965 that were made in 1982; it has also had substantial impact to civil rights legislation, including Executive Order 11246—preventing employers from discriminating based on race—and a number of voting rights cases. Since its creation, the Lawyers’ Committee has served as an expert on civil rights matters, often testifying before Congress and issuing public statements on pressing civil rights challenges. There are eight local affiliates of the Lawyers’ Committee: Boston, Massachusetts (created in 1968); Chicago, Illinois (created in 1969); Denver, Colorado (created in 1978); Jackson, Mississippi (created in 1965); Los Angeles, California (created in 1970); Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (created in 1969); San Francisco, California (created in 1968); and the District of Columbia (created in 1968). Each affiliate is independently funded and governed, and together with the national Lawyers’ Committee, they work on both national and state policy issues.

Partnership for Civil Justice Fund is a nonprofit progressive legal organization that focuses on cases regarding free speech and dissent, domestic spying and surveillance, police misconduct, and government transparency. The Partnership is known for litigating on behalf of protesters in First Amendment cases. It has frequently sued the District of Columbia government and D.C. police department. In addition to its litigation work in the courts, the Partnership also pursues freedom of information requests to obtain public records relating to police surveillance of activist groups. In 2003, the Washington Post called the organization "the constitutional sheriffs for a new protest generation. based in Washington, D.C. Founded by Carl Messineo and Mara Verheyden-Hilliard.

Criminal Law

Criminal Law regulates social conduct and proscribes whatever is threatening, harmful, or otherwise endangering to the property, health, safety, and moral welfare of people.

Genocide - Murder - Crimes - Corruption - Justice

Criminal Justice or Justice System, is the system of practices and institutions of governments directed at upholding social control, deterring and mitigating crime, or sanctioning those who violate laws with criminal penalties and rehabilitation efforts. Those accused of crime have some protections against abuse of investigatory and prosecution powers.

Mandate in criminal law as part of a legal process on a person accused of a crime consisting of an obligation to engage in certain conditions or activities in exchange for suspension or reduction in penalty; such as, conditions of probation, conditional discharges, or other conditional sentences. For example, a defendant convicted of driving while intoxicated or drug possession may be mandated to engage in alcoholism or substance abuse rehabilitation.

Corporate Law - Regulations (statute) 

Federal Law is the body of law created by the federal government of a country. A federal government is formed when a group of political units, such as states or provinces join together in a federation, delegating their individual sovereignty and many powers to the central government while retaining or reserving other limited powers. As a result, two or more levels of government exist within an established geographic territory. The body of law of the common central government is the federal law. Legislation.

State Law refers to the law of a federated state, as distinguished from the law of the federation of which it is a part. It is used when the constituent components of a federation are themselves called states. Federations made up of provinces, cantons, or other units use analogous terms like provincial law or cantonal law. The fifty American states are separate sovereigns with their own state constitutions, state governments, and state courts. All states have a legislative branch which enacts state statutes, an executive branch that promulgates state regulations pursuant to statutory authorization, and a judicial branch that applies, interprets, and occasionally overturns both state statutes and regulations, as well as local ordinances. States retain plenary power to make laws covering anything not preempted by the federal Constitution, federal statutes, or international treaties ratified by the federal Senate. Normally, state supreme courts are the final interpreters of state institutions and state law, unless their interpretation itself presents a federal issue, in which case a decision may be appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court by way of a petition for writ of certiorari. State laws have dramatically diverged in the centuries since independence, to the extent that the United States cannot be regarded as one legal system as to the majority of types of law traditionally under state control, but must be regarded as 50 separate systems of tort law, family law, property law, contract law, criminal law, and so on. Most cases are litigated in state courts and involve claims and defenses under state laws. In a 2012 report, the National Center for State Courts' Court Statistics Project found that state trial courts received 103.5 million newly filed cases in 2010, which consisted of 57.8 million traffic cases, 20.4 million criminal cases, 19.0 million civil cases, 5.9 million domestic relations cases, and 1.9 million juvenile cases.[6] In 2010, state appellate courts received 272,795 new cases. By way of comparison, all federal district courts in 2010 together received only about 282,000 new civil cases, 77,000 new criminal cases, and 1.5 million bankruptcy cases, while federal appellate courts received 56,000 new cases.

Case Law is the collection of past legal decisions written by courts and similar tribunals in the course of deciding cases, in which the law was analyzed using these cases to resolve ambiguities for deciding current cases. These past decisions are called "case law", or precedent. Stare decisis—a Latin phrase meaning “let the decision stand”—is the principle by which judges are bound to such past decisions. These judicial interpretations are distinguished from statutory law, which are codes enacted by legislative bodies, and regulatory law, which are established by executive agencies based on statutes. In some jurisdictions, case law can be applied to ongoing adjudication; for example, criminal proceedings or family law. Precedent is a principle or rule established in a previous legal case that is either binding on or persuasive for a court or other tribunal when deciding subsequent cases with similar issues or facts.

Early Case Assessment refers to estimating risk, cost of time and money to prosecute or defend a legal case. Global organizations deal with legal discovery and disclosure requests for electronically stored information "ESI" and paper documents on a regular basis. Over 90% of all cases settle prior to trial. The early case assessment lifecycle will typically include all of the following: Perform a risk-benefit analysis. Place and manage a legal hold on potentially responsive documents (paper and ESI) in appropriate countries. Preserve information abroad. Gather relevant information for attorney and expert document review. Process potentially relevant information for purposes of filtering, search term, or data analytics. Information hosting for attorney and expert document review, commenting, redaction. Produce documents to parties in the case. Reuse information in future cases. Early case assessment software is typically used by attorneys, corporate legal departments, risk managers, forensics teams, IT professionals and independent consultants to help them analyze unstructured electronically stored information. The software approach to early case assessment typically includes the following: Determine the source files to analyze. Point the analysis tool to the files to be analyzed. Set parameters for the assessment. Allow the program to automatically scan and assess the data, which may be located on local hard drives, removable media, file servers, whole networks, etc.). Review reports generated by the software.

Common Law is characterized by case law developed by judges, courts, and similar tribunals, when giving decisions in individual cases that have precedential effect on future cases. Equity in law (wiki).

Martial Law

Martial Law involves the suspension of ordinary law. Military assumes the responsibility of governance. Instead of police officers, you would see soldiers. The rights of citizens are usually limited during martial law. It is usually imposed temporarily when the government or civilian authorities fail to function effectively (e.g., maintain order and security, or provide essential services). International Law.

Tyrant is an absolute ruler unrestrained by law or constitution, or one who has usurped legitimate sovereignty.

Police State is a term denoting a government that exercises power arbitrarily through the power of the police force. Sometimes characterized by the overbearing presence of the civil authorities.

Presidential Proclamation is a statement issued by a president on a matter of public policy. They are generally defined as, "The act of causing some state matters to be published or made generally known. A written or printed document in which are contained such matters, issued by proper authority; as the president's proclamation, the governor's, the mayor's proclamation."In the United States, the President's proclamation does not have the force of law, unless authorized by Congress.

Corruption - War Profiteering - AI Weapons

Executive Order have the full force of law when they take authority from a legislative power which grants its power directly to the Executive by the Constitution, or are made pursuant to Acts of Congress that explicitly delegate to the President some degree of discretionary power (delegated legislation).

Code of Law

Code of Law is a type of legislation that documents a complete system of laws or a particular area of law as it existed at the time the code was enacted, by a process of codification. Though the process and motivations for codification are similar in different common law and civil law systems, their usage is different.

Codification in law is the process of collecting and restating the law of a jurisdiction in certain areas, usually by subject, forming a legal code or code of law, i.e. a Codex (book) of law. Codification is the defining feature of civil law jurisdictions.


Legislation is law which has been promulgated (or "enacted") by a legislature or other governing body or the process of making it. Before an item of legislation becomes law it may be known as a bill, and may be broadly referred to as "legislation", while it remains under consideration to distinguish it from other business. Legislation can have many purposes: to regulate, to authorize, to outlaw, to provide (funds), to sanction, to grant, to declare or to restrict. It may be contrasted with a non-legislative act which is adopted by an executive or administrative body under the authority of a legislative act or for implementing a legislative act.

Legislator is a person who writes and passes laws, especially someone who is a member of a legislature. Legislators are usually politicians and are often elected by the people of the state. Nat. Conference of State Legislatures - State Legislature.

Bill is proposed legislation under consideration by a legislature or by either of the two chambers of Congress. A Bill does not become a Law until it is passed by the legislature and, in most cases, approved by the executive. Once a bill has been enacted into law, it is called an act or a statute. Anyone elected to either body can propose a bill. After both chambers approve a bill, it is sent to the President of the United States for consideration.

3,000 Bills a year are introduced and Only 300 Pass. (what does pass mean?) Another sad fact that many bills are attacked by criminals in our government. (we need to hire more legislators or force them to do their job).

Sponsor is a legislator who presents a bill or resolution for consideration. Those who support it are known as cosponsors or copatrons, who are senators or representatives who adds his or her name as a supporter to the sponsor's bill.

Joint Resolution is a legislative measure that requires approval by the Senate and the House and is presented to the president for his approval or disapproval. Generally, there is no legal difference between a joint resolution and a bill. Both must be passed, in exactly the same form, by both chambers of Congress, and then must — with one exception — be presented to the President and signed by him/her (or, re-passed in override of a presidential veto; or, remain unsigned for ten days while Congress is in session) to become a law. Only joint resolutions may be used to propose amendments to the United States Constitution and these do not require the approval of the President. Laws enacted by virtue of a joint resolution are not distinguished from laws enacted by a bill, except that they are designated as resolutions as opposed to acts (see for example War Powers Resolution).

Law of the United States comprises many levels of codified and uncodified forms of law, of which the most important is the United States Constitution, the foundation of the federal government of the United States. The Constitution sets out the boundaries of federal law, which consists of acts of Congress, treaties ratified by the Senate, regulations promulgated by the executive branch, and case law originating from the federal judiciary. The United States Code is the official compilation and codification of general and permanent federal statutory law.

Advice and Consent in enacting formulae of bills and in other legal or constitutional contexts. It may describe two situations, either where a weak executive branch of a government enacts something previously approved of by the legislative branch or where the legislative branch concurs and approves something previously enacted by a strong executive branch.

List of Enacting Clauses is a short phrase that introduces the main provisions of a law enacted by a legislature. It usually declares the source from which the law claims to derive its authority. In many countries, an enacting formula is not considered necessary and is simply omitted.

Coming into Force refers to the process by which legislation, regulations, treaties and other legal instruments come to have legal force and effect. The term is closely related to the date of this transition.

Repeal - Improve - Amend - Appeal

Repeal is the removal or reversal of a law. There are two basic types of repeal, a repeal with re-enactment or replacement of the repealed law, or a repeal without replacement.

Challenge - Remove from Record - Bad Judgments - Unconstitutional - Remedy - Ballot Measures

Appeal is a petition to a higher court by the losing party in a lawsuit to overturn a lower court's ruling. Appellate courts and other systems of error correction have existed for many millennia. Although some scholars argue that "the right to appeal is itself a substantive liberty interest", the notion of a right to appeal is a relatively recent advent in common law jurisdictions. Court of Appeals.

Judicial Review is a process under which executive or legislative actions are subject to review by the judiciary. A court with authority for judicial review may invalidate laws, acts and governmental actions that are incompatible with a higher authority: an executive decision may be invalidated for being unlawful or a statute may be invalidated for violating the terms of a constitution. Judicial review is one of the checks and balances in the separation of powers: the power of the judiciary to supervise the legislative and executive branches when the latter exceed their authority. The doctrine varies between jurisdictions, so the procedure and scope of judicial review may differ between and within countries.

Redress is an act of correcting an error or a fault or an evil. Make reparations or amends for. Remedy.

Rescind is to cancel a law officially. To reverse, repeal, void, revoke or overturn an order or agreement.

Recission in law the act of rescinding; the cancellation of a contract and the return of the parties to the positions they would have had if the contract had not been made.

Moratorium is a delay or suspension of an activity or a law. In a legal context, it may refer to the temporary suspension of a law to allow a legal challenge to be carried out. A legally authorized postponement before some obligation must be discharged.

Abatement is an interruption in the intensity or amount of something. Abating is to make less active or intense. To become less in amount or intensity.

"Just because something is legal, it doesn't necessarily make it a good thing."

Motion in law is a written request or proposal to the court or to a judge (or judges) to make a decision about the case and ask-for order, ruling, or direction. The party requesting the motion may be called the movant, or may simply be the moving party. The party opposing the motion is the nonmovant or nonmoving party. There are a variety of motions, and it has become standard practice to file certain kinds of motions with the court based on the type of case.

Amend as a Motion is used to modify another motion. An amendment could itself be amended.

Amend is to improve, revise, change or correct a law or regulation. Adapt.

Amendment is a formal or official change made to a law, contract, Constitution, or other legal document. It is based on the verb to amend, which means to change for better. Amendments can add, remove, or update parts of these agreements. They are often used when it is better to change the document than to write a new one. Amendment is a statement that is added to or revises or improves a proposal or document. It is sometimes better to change the document than to write a new one.

Constitutional Amendment refers to the modification of the constitution of a nation or state. List of Amendments to the United States Constitution (wiki). Article Five of the United States Constitution describes the process whereby the Constitution, the nation's frame of government, may be altered. Under Article V, the process to alter the Constitution consists of proposing an amendment or amendments, and subsequent ratification. Referendum - Equal Justice.

Amenable is something open to being acted upon in a certain way. Readily reacting to suggestions and influences. Liable to answer to a higher authority. Disposed or willing to comply. Not stubborn or extreme.

In 2023, there were 62 Republican members of the Ohio House voted to approve a resolution to make it harder to amend the constitution, which would make it impossible for America to progress, advance and develop as a nation. The Republican majority has made it very clear that they are dangerous extremists who don't mind exploiting gullible and ignorant people who have extremist views. More than 250 unions and community groups have come out in opposition to this resolution that is suggested by Republican members.

Constitutional Ruling is a legal case in the United States in which the United States Supreme Court interprets the Constitution of the United States and makes a ruling that binds all states. It is contrasted with a common law case which sets precedent in federal cases, but is not binding in state cases.

Evisceration is altering a legislative act or a statement in such a manner as to reduce its value or take away a vital or essential part of it. Evisceration also means to surgically remove an organ or the contents of an organ from a patient. To be disemboweled or to remove the entrails or internal organs, especially those in the abdominal cavity. To be Gutted.

Congressional Review Act is an expedited legislative process to overrule a regulation. Once a rule is thus repealed, the CRA also prohibits the reissuing of the rule in substantially the same form or the issuing of a new rule that is substantially the same, "unless the reissued or new rule is specifically authorized by a law enacted after the date of the joint resolution disapproving the original rule" (5 U.S. Code § 801(b)(2)). Congress has a window of time lasting 60 legislative days (i.e., days that the U.S. Congress is actually in session, rather than calendar days) to disapprove of any given rule; otherwise the rule will go into effect at the end of this period. It allows lawmakers to overturn any regulation imposed during the final six months of the previous administration, with a simple majority vote in each chamber of Congress.

Congress has the Power to Override a Supreme Court Ruling. Congress could overturn simply by tweaking the statute to remove whatever ambiguity the court claimed to find in its text. Even where the court has ruled on constitutional grounds, there is often much room left to legislate the boundaries, just as conservatives have done in relation to Roe v. Wade and abortion restrictions. From salvaging the Voting Rights Act gutted by Shelby County v. Holder in 2013 to protecting workers’ free speech rights on the job or safeguarding reproductive rights, the list of cases awaiting a creative Congress runs long. Overrides can be passed on an individual basis, as part of larger omnibus bills, or even tacked on to unrelated appropriations or debt ceiling bills. Congress can place an important and ever-needed check from a co-equal branch on an increasingly conservative judiciary, which has not shied from defanging legislation, especially regulatory law. Just as the court sets the boundaries of congressional intent, Congress can move those boundaries. While changing the rules and the makeup of the judiciary holds promise, demoralized activists should not lose sight of Congress’s power to temper or reverse existing court decisions.

or Revoked is to Cancel Officially. Annulled is to Declare Invalid. Overturned, Reversed or Overruled is to Rule against.

Vacated Judgment makes a previous legal judgment legally void. A vacated judgment is usually the result of the judgment of an appellate court, which overturns, reverses, or sets aside the judgment of a lower court. An appellate court may also vacate its own decisions. A trial court may have the power under certain circumstances, usually involving fraud or lack of jurisdiction over the parties to a case, to vacate its own judgments. A vacated judgment may free the parties to civil litigation to re-litigate the issues subject to the vacated judgment.

Implied Repeal is a concept in constitutional theory which states that where an Act of Parliament or an Act of Congress (or of some other legislature) conflicts with an earlier one, the later Act takes precedence and the conflicting parts of the earlier Act become legally inoperable.

Obrogation is the enacting of a contrary law that is a revocation of a previous law. It may also be the partial cancellation or amendment of a law, decree, or legal regulation by the imposition of a newer one.

Statutory Interpretation is the process by which courts interpret and apply legislation. Some amount of interpretation is often necessary when a case involves a statute. Sometimes the words of a statute have a plain and a straightforward meaning. But in many cases, there is some ambiguity or vagueness in the words of the statute that must be resolved by the judge. To find the meanings of statutes, judges use various tools and methods of statutory interpretation, including traditional canons of statutory interpretation, legislative history, and purpose. In common law jurisdictions, the judiciary may apply rules of statutory interpretation both to legislation enacted by the legislature and to delegated legislation such as administrative agency regulations. Interpretation of Law.

Strict Scrutiny when a court finds that a law infringes a fundamental constitutional right, it may apply the strict scrutiny standard to nevertheless hold the law or policy constitutionally valid if the government can demonstrate in court that the law or regulation is necessary to achieve a "compelling state interest". The government must also demonstrate that the law is "narrowly tailored" to achieve the compelling purpose, and uses the "least restrictive means" to achieve the purpose. Failure to show these conditions may result in a judge striking down a law as unconstitutional. The standard is the highest and most stringent standard of judicial review and is part of the levels of judicial scrutiny that courts use to determine whether a constitutional right or principle should give way to the government's interest against observance of the principle. The lesser standards are rational basis review and exacting or intermediate scrutiny. These standards are applied to statutes and government action at all levels of government within the United States. The notion of "levels of judicial scrutiny", including strict scrutiny, was introduced in Footnote 4 of the U.S. Supreme Court decision in United States v. Carolene Products Co. (1938), one of a series of decisions testing the constitutionality of New Deal legislation. The first and most notable case in which the Supreme Court applied the strict scrutiny standard and found the government's actions constitutional was Korematsu v. United States (1944), in which the Court upheld the forced relocation of Japanese Americans in internment camps during World War II. In another case, it has been held that restricting access to unapproved prescription drugs is a compelling government interest. The burden of proof falls on the state in cases that require strict scrutiny or intermediate scrutiny, but not the rational basis. Rational Basis Review is the normal standard of review that courts apply when considering constitutional questions, including due process or equal protection questions under the Fifth Amendment or Fourteenth Amendment. Courts applying rational basis review seek to determine whether a law is "rationally related" to a "legitimate" government interest, whether real or hypothetical. The higher levels of scrutiny are intermediate scrutiny and strict scrutiny. Heightened scrutiny is applied where a suspect or quasi-suspect classification is involved, or a fundamental right is implicated. In United States Supreme Court jurisprudence, the nature of the interest at issue determines the level of scrutiny applied by appellate courts. When courts engage in rational basis review, only the most egregious enactments, those not rationally related to a legitimate government interest, are overturned.

Landmark Court Decision substantially changes the interpretation of existing law. Such a decision may settle the law in more than one way: establishing a significant new legal principle or concept; overturning prior precedent based on its negative effects or flaws in its reasoning; distinguishing a new principle that refines a prior principle, thus departing from prior practice without violating the rule of stare decisis; establishing a test or a measurable standard that can be applied by courts in future decisions.

Ratify is to sign or give formal consent to a treaty, contract, or agreement, making it officially valid. To approve and express assent, responsibility, or obligation.

Ratification is the official way to confirm something, usually by vote. It is the formal validation of a proposed law. The approval from the legislative branch required to validate government agreements. is a principal's approval of an act of its agent where the agent lacked authority to legally bind the principal. Ratification defines the international act whereby a state indicates its consent to be bound to a treaty if the parties intended to show their consent by such an act.

Federal Preemption is the invalidation of a U.S. state law that conflicts with federal law.

Preemption is the judicial principle asserting the supremacy of federal law over state law on the same subject. When state law and federal law conflict, federal law displaces or preempts state law, due to the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution. U.S. Const. art. VI., § 2. Preemption applies regardless of whether the conflicting laws come from legislatures, courts, administrative agencies, or constitutions. For example, the Voting Rights Act, an act of Congress, preempts state constitutions, and FDA regulations may preempt state court judgments in cases involving prescription drugs. Federal government wins in the case of conflicting legislation. Basically, if a federal and state law contradict, then when you're in the state you can follow the state law, but the fed can decide to stop you. State or local laws held to be preempted by federal law are void because they conflict with a federal statute or treaty, and through operation of the Supremacy Clause.

Unconstitutional Laws - Bylaws - Charlatans - Bad Judges - Bad Justices

Preempted is to take the place of or have precedence over.

Supremacy Clause of the United States Constitution (Article VI, Clause 2) establishes that the Constitution, federal laws made pursuant to it, and treaties made under its authority, constitute the supreme law of the land. Congress has preempted state regulation in many areas. In some cases, such as medical devices, Congress preempted all state regulation. In others, such as labels on prescription drugs, Congress allowed federal regulatory agencies to set national minimum standards, but did not preempt state regulations imposing more stringent standards than those imposed by federal regulators. Where rules or regulations do not clearly state whether or not preemption should apply, the Supreme Court tries to follow lawmakers’ intent, and prefers interpretations that avoid preempting state laws. Federal Preemption is the rule of law that if the federal government through Congress has enacted legislation on a subject matter it shall be controlling over state laws and/or preclude the state from enacting laws on the same subject if Congress has specifically stated it has "occupied the field." A doctrine based on the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution that holds that certain matters are of such a national, as opposed to local, character that federal laws preempt or take precedence over state laws. As such, a state may not pass a law inconsistent with the federal law. A doctrine of state law that holds that a state law displaces a local law or regulation that is in the same field and is in conflict or inconsistent with the state law. Article VI, Section 2, of the U.S. Constitution provides that the "… Constitution, and the Laws of the United States … shall be the supreme Law of the Land." This Supremacy Clause has come to mean that the national government, in exercising any of the powers enumerated in the Constitution, must prevail over any conflicting or inconsistent state exercise of power. The federal preemption doctrine is a judicial response to the conflict between federal and state legislation. When it is clearly established that a federal law preempts a state law, the state law must be declared invalid. A state law may be struck down even when it does not explicitly conflict with federal law, if a court finds that Congress has legitimately occupied the field with federal legislation. Questions in this area require careful Balancing of important state and federal interests. Problems arise when Congress fails to make its purpose explicit, which is often the case. The court must then draw inferences based on the presumed objectives of federal law and the supposed impact of related State Action. The federal right to regulate interstate commerce under the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution has resulted in federal preemption of state labor laws. Likewise, the Supreme Court, in Burbank v. Lockheed Air Terminal, 411 U.S. 624, 93 S. Ct. 1854, 36 L. Ed. 2d 547 (1973), declared that state and local laws that interfere with comprehensive federal environmental laws and regulations are invalid. In California v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 495 U.S. 490, 110 S. Ct. 2024, 109 L. Ed. 2d 474 (1990), the Supreme Court held that state regulations imposing minimum flow rates on rivers used to generate hydroelectric power were preempted by the Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C.A. § 791 et seq. [1933]). In Mississippi Power and Light Company v. Mississippi ex rel. Moore, 487 U.S. 354, 108 S. Ct. 2428, 101 L. Ed. 2d 322 (1988), the Court held that the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's regulations preempted a state's authority to set electric power rates. At the state level, preemption occurs when a state statute conflicts with a local ordinance on the same subject matter. Preemption within the states varies with individual state constitutions, provisions for the powers of political subdivisions, and the decisions of state courts. For example, if a state legislature enacts Gun Control legislation and the intent of the legislation is to occupy the field of gun control, then a municipality is preempted from enacting its own gun control ordinance. The issue of preemption has dominated litigation over the right of states to require insurance companies and Health Maintenance Organizations (HMOs) to accept "any willing [healthcare] provider" rather than to force consumers to stay within the health providers' exclusive networks. HMOs and insurance companies have argued that the 1974 federal Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) preempted these state laws. ERISA is an extremely complex and technical set of provisions that seek to protect employee benefit programs, which include Pension plans and healthcare plans. Healthcare providers have pointed to the comprehensive nature of ERISA as demonstrating the intent of Congress to maintain a uniform national system. Therefore, they argued, state laws must be preempted to affect this purpose. The Supreme Court rejected the ERISA preemption argument in two cases involving Health Insurance. In Moran v. Rush Prudential HMO, Inc., 536 U.S. 355, 122 S. Ct. 2151, 153 L. Ed. 2d 375 (2002), the Supreme Court in a 5–4 decision upheld an Illinois law that required HMOs to provide independent review of disputes between the primary care physician and the HMO. In Kentucky Association of Health Plans, Inc. v. Miller, 538 U.S. 329, 123 S. Ct. 1471, 155 L. Ed. 2d 468 (2003), the Court tackled the "any willing provider rule." In a unanimous decision the Court held that Kentucky laws were not preempted by ERISA. The Court concluded that the laws did not deal with employee benefit plans as defined by ERISA but instead were insurance regulations. This was an important distinction because state insurance regulations are not preempted by ERISA. Commercial Law.

Legitimate is something that is in accordance with recognized and accepted standards or principles, and based on known statements, events or conditions, and affirmed to be just. Authorized and sanctioned and in accordance with law.

Legitimacy is the conformity to the law or to rules. Lawfulness by virtue of being authorized or in accordance with law. The property of being genuine or valid, not being a fake or forgery. Legitimacy is the right and acceptance of an authority, usually a governing law or a regime. An authority viewed as legitimate often has the right and justification to exercise power.

Legal Challenge - Challenge Law

Challenge is to question the truth or the validity of something; To question a statement and to demand an explanation. A formal objection to the selection of a particular person as a juror. Take exception to. Ask for identification.

Challenge in Law refers to a formal questioning of the legality of a person, act or thing. Challenge becomes a crime when one party calls upon or challenges another to fight and is usually liable to punishment.

Constitutional Challenge is a question or a claim that a law is unconstitutional. A challenge that an act or statute is unconstitutional on its face is a facial challenge.

Truth is Debatable - Every Law can be Debated - Repeal - Appeal - UnconstitutionalMalicious

Facial Challenge is a challenge to a statute in which the plaintiff alleges that the legislation is always unconstitutional, and therefore void. It is contrasted with an as-applied challenge, which alleges that a particular application of a statute is unconstitutional. "It is as clear as such matters can be that the Framers of the Constitution specifically, if tacitly, expected that the federal courts would assume a pass on the constitutionality of actions of the Congress and the President." Judicial review also covers the evaluation of the constitutionality of the states' actions. It is even recognized that federal judges in the U.S. are appointed for life to ensure their ability to engage in judicial review."

Challenged Books is an attack on free speech that uses free speech to attack free speech. A dumb down education makes dumb adults who attack free speech using dumb reasons as an excuse, and the media loves sharing stories about how stupid people are because the media is part of the dumbing down process.

Oversight Committee - Confirmations - Picking your own Judge

Jury Selection is the process by which the judge, the prosecutor, and the defense attorney screen citizens who have been called to jury duty to determine if they will hear the evidence and decide guilt or innocence in a particular trial. Jury Selection is the selection of the people who will serve on a jury during a jury trial. The group of potential jurors (the "jury pool", also known as the venire) is first selected from among the community using a reasonably random method. Jury lists are compiled from voter registrations and driver license or ID renewals. From those lists, summonses are mailed. A panel of jurors or jury panel is then assigned to a courtroom. The prospective jurors are randomly selected to sit in the jury box. At this stage, they will be questioned in court by the judge and/or attorneys in the United States. Depending on the jurisdiction, attorneys may have an opportunity to mount a challenge for cause argument or use one of a limited number of peremptory challenges. In some jurisdictions that have capital punishment, the jury must be death-qualified to remove those who are opposed to the death penalty. Jury selection and techniques for voir dire are taught to law students in trial advocacy courses. However, attorneys sometimes use expert assistance in systematically choosing the jury, although other uses of jury research are becoming more common. The jury selected is said to have been "empaneled". This entire group is called the panel. Jury Questioner for Qualifications and Disqualifications (PDF).

Empanel is to enter into a list of prospective jurors.

After the jurors are selected, they are required to take a solemn oath and to affirm that they will, "well and truly try the matters in issue and a true verdict render according to the evidence and the law." When jurors take this oath, they become a judge of all questions of fact and are duty bound to act fairly and impartially in considering them. Jury Instructions.

Jury Tampering is the crime of unduly attempting to influence the composition and/or decisions of a jury during the course of a trial.

Gag Order is when a judge prohibits the attorneys, parties, or witnesses in a pending lawsuit or criminal prosecution from talking about the case to the public. The supposed intent is to prevent prejudice due to pre-trial publicity which would influence potential jurors. Judges can threaten gag order violators with fines or jail time. Suppressing - Free Speech - Propaganda.

Analysis of court transcripts reveals biased jury selection. Cornell researchers have shown that data science and artificial intelligence tools can successfully identify when prosecutors question potential jurors differently, in an effort to prevent women and Black people from serving on juries.

Witness Tampering - Fair Trial - Right to Counsel

Death-Qualified Jury is a jury in a criminal law case in the United States in which the death penalty is a prospective sentence. Such a jury will be composed of jurors who: Are not categorically opposed to the imposition of capital punishment; Are not of the belief that the death penalty must be imposed in all instances of capital murder—that is, they would consider life imprisonment as a possible penalty. The creation of such a jury requires the striking during voir dire of jurors who express opposition to the death penalty such that they are unable or unwilling to set aside personal, moral, or emotional objections toward the supporting of a death sentence, and is designed to produce a fair and impartial jury of which the members will fairly consider all options, including the death penalty and life imprisonment. Expressing opposition to the death penalty does not automatically disqualify a juror. A party may attempt to rehabilitate the juror by asking questions as to whether, personal convictions notwithstanding, they might consider the death penalty. A juror who expresses exorbitant support for the death penalty who would thus otherwise be struck may be rehabilitated should they state a willingness to consider life imprisonment. Death-qualified juries are often criticized because they have a similar effect as excluding jurors based on race or gender, which intentional exclusion, in Batson v. Kentucky in 1986, was held as inconsistent with the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

Challenge for Cause is a request that a prospective juror be dismissed because there is a specific reason to believe the person cannot be fair, unbiased or capable of serving as a juror. It is usually made during the voir dire phase (questioning of the jurors) in a lawsuit. Dismissing a Juror based on perceived prejudices or biases. What about a bad Judge? What about a bad Lawyer?

Peremptory Challenge is a defendant's or lawyer's objection to a proposed juror without needing to give a reason. It is a right in jury selection for the attorneys to reject a certain number of potential jurors without stating a reason. Other potential jurors may be challenged for cause, i.e. by giving a good reason why they might be unable to reach a fair verdict, but the challenge will be considered by the presiding judge and may be denied. A peremptory challenge can be a major part of voir dire. A peremptory challenge also allows attorneys to veto a potential juror on a "hunch". The idea behind peremptory challenges is that if both parties have contributed in the configuration of the jury, they will find its verdict more acceptable. The existence of peremptory challenges is argued to be an important safeguard in the judicial process, allowing both the defendant and the prosecution to get rid of potentially biased jurors. Their use allows attorneys to use their training and experience to dismiss jurors who might say the correct thing, but might otherwise harbor prejudices that could infringe the rights of the defendant to a fair trial.

Batson Challenge was a landmark decision of the US Supreme Court ruling that a prosecutor's use of a peremptory challenge in a criminal case may not be used to exclude jurors based solely on their race. A dismissal of a juror without stating a valid cause for doing so is a violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. (Batson v. Kentucky 476 U.S. 79, 1986).

Trial Consulting is the use of social scientists, particularly psychologists and communication experts, and economists, to aid attorneys in the presentation of a criminal trial or civil lawsuit. Modern trial consultants help prepare witnesses, improve arguments and rhetoric, and select juries. Although traditionally sophisticated jury selection methods were a mainstay of trial consultants, they now "place far less emphasis on jury selection than they did in the past", and many in the field now prefer the term "trial consulting" to "jury consulting".


Policy is a deliberate system of principles to guide decisions and achieve rational outcomes. A policy is a statement of intent, and is implemented as a procedure or protocol. Policy differs from rules or law. While law can compel or prohibit behaviors like theft or murder, policy merely guides actions toward those that are most likely to achieve a desired outcome. policy is a course or principle of action adopted or proposed by a government, party, business, or individual.

Public Policy is the principled guide to action taken by the administrative executive branches of the state with regard to a class of issues, in a manner consistent with law and institutional customs. Not a Law, only by consent.

Social Policy - Public Interest

Policy Studies is the combination of policy analysis and program evaluation. It "involves systematically studying the nature, causes, and effects of alternative public policies, with particular emphasis on determining the policies that will achieve given goals." Policy Studies also examines the conflicts and conflict resolution that arise from the making of policies in civil society, the private sector, or more commonly, in the public sector (e.g. government).

Policy Analysis is a technique used in public administration to enable civil servants, activists, and others to examine and evaluate the available options to implement the goals of laws and elected officials. The process is also used in the administration of large organizations with complex policies. It has been defined as the process of "determining which of various policies will achieve a given set of goals in light of the relations between the policies and the goals." Policy analysis can be divided into two major fields: Analysis of existing policy, which is analytical and descriptive – it attempts to explain policies and their development. Analysis for new policy, which is prescriptive – it is involved with formulating policies and proposals (for example: to improve social welfare). The areas of interest and the purpose of analysis determine what types of analysis are conducted. A combination of two kinds of policy analyses together with program evaluation is defined as policy studies. Policy analysis is frequently deployed in the public sector, but is equally applicable elsewhere, such as nonprofit organizations and non-governmental organizations. Policy analysis has its roots in systems analysis, an approach used by United States Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara in the 1960s.

Policy Resources - Policy Archive - Brookings - Heritage Foundation - Pioneer Institute - American Policy - Public Policy Research - Institute for Policy Studies - Cato Institute - Federal Register - Rand - Act.

Impact Assessment are formal, evidence-based procedures that assess the economic, social, and environmental effects of public policy. They have been incorporated into policy making in the OECD countries and the European Commission. Key types of impact assessments include global assessments (global level), policy impact assessment (policy level), strategic environmental assessment (programme and plan level), and environmental impact assessment (project level). Impact assessments can focus on specific themes, such as social impact assessments and gender impact assessments. IAs can improve legislation by: Informing policy makers about potential economic, social, and environmental ramifications. Improving transparency so that contributions to sustainability and "better regulation" are disclosed and special interest lobbying is discouraged. Increasing public participation in order to reflect a range of considerations, thereby improving the legitimacy of policies. Clarifying how public policy helps achieve its goals and priorities through policy indicators. Contributing to continuous learning in policy development by identifying causalities that inform ex-post review of policies. The department which is responsible for the policy proposal usually has to carry out the IA. Although the purpose and orientation of IA procedures differ, IA guidelines in the various jurisdictions all follow a similar set of steps to be followed by desk officers: Planning of the IA. Carrying out the impact analysis. Consultation of affected stakeholders and the general public. Coordination with affected departments. Summary and presentation of findings in a report. Forwarding findings to decision makers. Publication of the IA report (not in all countries). The analytical steps, which mainly relate to step 2, can be set out as i. Problem definition ii. Definition of policy objectives iii. Development of policy options iv. Analysis of impacts v. Comparison of policy options and recommendation of one option vi. Defining monitoring measures. Throughout the IA process, methods can be used for support. In recent years governments have increasingly invested in developing and applying methods and tools for IA. Depending on usage, IA methods can be classified as methods for Scoping (e.g., checklists). For qualitative analysis (e.g., focus groups). For quantitative analysis (e.g., life-cycle assessment, material flow accounting, modelling). Aggregation and comparison of options (e.g., cost–benefit analysis). Analysing coherence (e.g., Gender IA). Supporting participation and involvement (e.g., internet consultation). Data presentation and involvement (e.g., GIS). Monitoring and evaluation (e.g., indicators).

Impact Evaluation assesses the changes that can be attributed to a particular intervention, such as a project, program or policy, both the intended ones, as well as ideally the unintended ones. In contrast to outcome monitoring, which examines whether targets have been achieved, impact evaluation is structured to answer the question: how would outcomes such as participants' well-being have changed if the intervention had not been undertaken? This involves counterfactual analysis, that is, "a comparison between what actually happened and what would have happened in the absence of the intervention." Impact evaluations seek to answer cause-and-effect questions. In other words, they look for the changes in outcome that are directly attributable to a program. Impact evaluation helps people answer key questions for evidence-based policy making: what works, what doesn't, where, why and for how much? It has received increasing attention in policy making in recent years in the context of both Western and developing countries. It is an important component of the armory of evaluation tools and approaches and integral to global efforts to improve the effectiveness of aid delivery and public spending more generally in improving living standards. Originally more oriented towards evaluation of social sector programs in developing countries, notably conditional cash transfers, impact evaluation is now being increasingly applied in other areas such as the agriculture, energy and transport.

Outcomes Theory provides the conceptual basis for thinking about, and working with outcomes systems of any type. An outcomes system is any system that: identifies; prioritizes; measures; attributes; or hold parties to account for outcomes of any type in any area. Outcomes systems go under various names such as: strategic plans; management by results; results-based management systems; outcomes-focused management systems; accountability systems; evidence-based practice systems; and best-practice systems. In addition, outcomes issues are dealt with in traditional areas such as: strategic planning; business planning and risk management. Outcomes theory theorizes a sub-set of topics covered in diverse ways in other disciplines such as: performance management, organizational development, program evaluation, policy analysis, economics and the other social sciences. The different treatment of outcomes issues in different technical languages in these different disciplines means that it is hard for those building outcomes systems to gain quick access to a generic body of principles about how to set up outcomes systems and fix issues with existing outcomes systems.

Program Evaluation is a systematic method for collecting, analyzing, and using information to answer questions about projects, policies and programs, particularly about their effectiveness and efficiency. In both the public and private sectors, stakeholders often want to know whether the programs they are funding, implementing, voting for, receiving or objecting to are producing the intended effect. While program evaluation first focuses around this definition, important considerations often include how much the program costs per participant, how the program could be improved, whether the program is worthwhile, whether there are better alternatives, if there are unintended outcomes, and whether the program goals are appropriate and useful. Evaluators help to answer these questions, but the best way to answer the questions is for the evaluation to be a joint project between evaluators and stakeholders. The process of evaluation is considered to be a relatively recent phenomenon. However, planned social evaluation has been documented as dating as far back as 2200 BC. Evaluation became particularly relevant in the U.S. in the 1960s during the period of the Great Society social programs associated with the Kennedy and Johnson administrations. Extraordinary sums were invested in social programs, but the impacts of these investments were largely unknown. Program evaluations can involve both quantitative and qualitative methods of social research. People who do program evaluation come from many different backgrounds, such as sociology, psychology, economics, social work, and public policy. Some graduate schools also have specific training programs for program evaluation.


Bylaw is a rule made by a company or society to control the actions of its members. By-Law is a rule or law established by an organization or community to regulate itself, as allowed or provided for by some higher authority. The higher authority, generally a legislature or some other government body, establishes the degree of control that the by-laws may exercise. By-laws may be established by entities such as a business corporation, a neighborhood association, or depending on the jurisdiction, a municipality. Bylaws are the internal legal rules applicable to a corporation and must be followed by the company, its directors, shareholders, and officers when conducting business. Generally, bylaws are legal documents that formally set out the rules of a company. Self Manage - Validity.

Municipal By-Laws are Public Regulatory Laws which apply in a certain area. The main difference between a by-law and a law passed by a national/federal or regional/state body is that a by-law is made by a non-sovereign body, which derives its authority from another governing body, and can only be made on a limited range of matters. A local council or municipal government derives its power to pass laws through a law of the national or regional government which specifies what things the town or city may regulate through by-laws. It is therefore a form of delegated legislation. Within its jurisdiction and specific to those areas mandated by the higher body, a municipal by-law is no different than any other law of the land, and can be enforced with penalties, challenged in court and must comply with other laws of the land, such as the country's constitution. Municipal by-laws are often enforcable through the public justice system, and offenders can be charged with a criminal offence for breach of a by-law. Common by-laws include vehicle parking and stopping regulations, animal control, building and construction, licensing, noise, zoning and business regulation, and management of public recreation areas. Law Types.

By-Law does Not Supersede State Law or Federal Law, but a state law and a federal law can be in conflict. Federal law supersedes state laws. Federal law is superseded by the US Constitution. The preemption doctrine originates from the supremacy clause of Article 6 of the U.S. Constitution. This doctrine states that any federal law, even if it is only a regulation from a federal agency, supersedes any conflicting state law, even if that law is part of the state's constitution. SCOTUS can declare that the federal government is exceeding its Constitutional mandate. Supremacy Clause.

Supersede is to take the place of something or move into the position of replacing something.

Quasi-contract is a fictional contract recognized by a court. Quasi-contractual actions were generally (but not exclusively) used to remedy what would now be called unjust enrichment. In most common law jurisdictions the law of quasi-contract has been superseded by the law of unjust enrichment.

Ordinance is a piece of legislation enacted by a municipal authority. Ordinance is an authoritative rule. Public Nuisance.

Local Ordinance is a law usually found in a code of laws for a political division smaller than a state or nation, i.e., a local government such as a municipality, county, parish, prefecture, etc. Code of Ordinances - Building Codes.

Task Forces and Committees
are setup to bring expertise to the policymaking process, so why not always bring expertise to the policymaking process? Why are politicians so easy to bribe?

Subcommittees considers specified matters and reports back to the full committee. Subcommittees are formed by most committees to share specific tasks within the jurisdiction of the full committee. Subcommittees are responsible to, and work within the guidelines established by, their parent committees. In particular, standing committees usually create subcommittees with legislative jurisdiction to consider and report bills. They may assign their subcommittees such specific tasks as the initial consideration of measures and oversight of laws and programs in the subcommittees’ areas. Service on subcommittees enables members to develop expertise in specialized fields. Subcommittees diffuse the legislative process. For the most part, they are independent, autonomous units with written jurisdictions, and, pursuant to longstanding practice, most bills are referred by a full committee to them.

Deliberative Assembly is a gathering of members (of any kind of collective) who use parliamentary procedure to make decisions. Characteristics of a deliberative assembly: A group of people meets to discuss and make decisions on behalf of the entire membership. They meet in a single room or area or under equivalent conditions of simultaneous aural communication. Each member is free to act according to own judgment. Each member has an equal vote. A member can remain part of the group, even after disagreeing with a decision. The members at the meeting act for the entire group, even if there are members absent.

Legal Awareness (PDF) 

Sociology of Law studies disciplines of law and sociology.

Legal Education is the education of individuals who intend to become legal professionals in Business law, Human resource and Labour laws, Property laws, Family laws, Human Rights & Legal awareness, Taxation law and many more.

Regulations - Statue - Mandate - Act

Regulation is a principle or condition that customarily governs behavior according to a set of rules, trends or evidence-based information. The management of complex systems using actions or the processes of regulating.

Regulatory Agency is a public authority or government agency responsible for exercising autonomous authority over some area of human activity in a regulatory or supervisory capacity. An independent regulatory agency is a regulatory agency that is independent from other branches or arms of the government

Commission is a special group delegated to consider some matter. The act of granting authority to undertake certain functions. A group of representatives or delegates. A special assignment that is given to a person or group. Commissioner.

Regulatory Law usually means law put into effect by formal declaration by an executive branch agency under a delegation from a legislature.

Regulatory Compliance means conforming to a rule, such as a specification, policy, standard or law. Regulatory compliance describes the goal that organizations aspire to achieve in their efforts to ensure that they are aware of and take steps to comply with relevant laws and regulations. Compliance Officer.

Watch Dogs are necessary because some people with authority believe that they are above the law. Negligence.

Controls - Compliance - Rules - Codes - Procedures - Quality Control - Governance

"Too many wealthy scumbags can get around regulations, while everyone else has to follow the rules, which makes everyone else less competitive to the criminal corporations who are allowed to break the rules."

Self-Regulatory Organization is an organization that exercises some degree of regulatory authority over an industry or profession. The regulatory authority could exist in place of government regulation, or applied in addition to government regulation. The ability of an SRO to exercise regulatory authority does not necessarily derive from a grant of authority from the government. Cherry Picking Data - Sponsored Content.

Self-Regulatory - Self Manage - Intervention - Policy - Riders

Waiver is when regulatory agencies or governments may issue waivers to exempt companies from certain regulations, or to protect them from crimes they committed. Deregulation (red tape).

Contracts - Public Good - Bureaucracy - Red Tape

Primary and Secondary Legislation are two forms of law, created respectively by the legislative and executive branches of government. Charter.

Building Codes - Zoning

Administrative Procedure Act is the United States federal statute that governs the way in which administrative agencies of the federal government of the United States may propose and establish regulations and grants U.S. federal courts oversight over all agency actions. It is one of the most important pieces of United States administrative law, and serves as a sort of "constitution" for U.S. administrative law. The APA applies to both the federal executive departments and the independent agencies. U.S. Senator Pat McCarran called the APA "a bill of rights for the hundreds of thousands of Americans whose affairs are controlled or regulated" by federal government agencies. The text of the APA can be found under Title 5 of the United States Code, beginning at Section 500. There is a similar Model State Administrative Procedure Act (Model State APA), which was drafted by the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws for oversight of state agencies. Not all states have adopted the model law wholesale, as of 2017. The federal APA does not require systematic oversight of regulations prior to adoption, unlike the Model APA. According to the Attorney General's Manual on the Administrative Procedure Act, drafted after the 1946 enactment of the APA, the basic purposes of the APA are the following: To require agencies to keep the public informed of their organization, procedures and rules; To provide for public participation in the rulemaking process, for instance through public commenting; To establish uniform standards for the conduct of formal rulemaking and adjudication; To define the scope of judicial review.

Implement is to apply in a manner consistent with its purpose or design.

Statute is a law passed, enacted or acted by a legislative body. Statute is a formal written enactment of a legislative authority that governs a state, city or country. Typically, statutes command or prohibit something, or declare policy. Statutes are rules made by legislative bodies and distinguished from common law, which is decided by courts, and regulations issued by government agencies. Statute law is written by a government's legislative body and signed into law by its executive. (These types of rules needs your consent in order to be enforced. The law of the Land or common law is not the same as a statute). Since the government was created by man means that it can not be above man. Every Human is Sovereign.

Statutory Law is written law set down by a body of legislature or by a singular legislator (in the case of an absolute monarchy). This is as opposed to oral or customary law; or regulatory law promulgated by the executive or common law of the judiciary. Statutes may originate with national, state legislatures or local municipalities.

Decree is a legally binding command or decision entered on the court record or issued by a court or judge. Decree is a Rule of law usually issued by a head of state such as the president of a republic or a monarch, according to certain procedures that are usually established in a constitution. It has the force of law. Decree is a rule of law usually issued by a head of state (such as the president of a republic or a monarch), according to certain procedures (usually established in a constitution). It has the force of law. The particular term used for this concept may vary from country to country. The executive orders made by the President of the United States, for example, are decrees (although a decree is not exactly an order). In non-legal English usage, however, the term refers to any authoritarian decision. Documents or archives in the format of royal decrees or farming were issued by rulers.

Enactment is the passing of a law by a legislative body. A legal document codifying the result of deliberations of a committee, society or legislative body.

Act as a document is an instrument that records a fact or something that has been said, done, or agreed. Acts generally take the form of legal instruments of writing that have probative value and executory force. They are usually accepted as self-authenticating demonstrative evidence in court proceedings, though with the precarious status of notaries public and their acts under common law, this is not always so. Common types of acts are legislative, judicial, and notarial acts. Act is a legal document codifying the result of deliberations of a committee or society or legislative body.

Act of Congress is a statute enacted by the United States Congress. It can either be a Public Law, relating to the general public, or a Private Law, relating to specific institutions or individuals. Acting.

Administrative Procedure Act is a statute that governs the way in which administrative agencies of the federal government of the United States may propose and establish regulations.

Administrative Law is the body of law that governs the activities of administrative agencies of government.

Guideline is a statement by which to determine a course of action. A guideline aims to streamline particular processes according to a set routine or sound practice. By definition, following a guideline is never mandatory. Guidelines are not binding and are not enforced. Guidelines may be issued by and used by any organization (governmental or private) to make the actions of its employees or divisions more predictable, and presumably of higher quality.

Mandatory is something required by law or rule. Something compulsory or obligatory or authoritatively ordered.

Mandate is an official order or commission to do something. A document giving an official instruction or command. The authority to carry out a policy or course of action, regarded as given by the electorate to a candidate or party that is victorious in an election.

Mandate in politics is the authority granted by a constituency to act as its representative.

Mandate in criminal law is part of a legal process on a person accused of a crime consisting of an obligation to engage in certain conditions or activities in exchange for suspension or reduction in penalty; such as, conditions of probation, conditional discharges, or other conditional sentences. For example, a defendant convicted of driving while intoxicated or drug possession may be mandated to engage in alcoholism or substance abuse rehabilitation.

Imperative Mandate is a political system in which "representatives enact policies in accordance with mandates and can be recalled by people’s assemblies". It requires a context in which "power is not monopolized by the state, but distributed in a plurality of municipalities and assemblies with specific political authority

Individual Mandate is a requirement by law for certain persons to purchase or otherwise obtain a good or service.

Health Insurance Mandate is either an employer or individual mandate to obtain private health insurance instead of (or in addition to) a national health insurance plan.

Writ is a formal written order issued by a body with administrative or judicial jurisdiction; in modern usage, this body is generally a court. Warrants, prerogative writs, and subpoenas are common types of writ, but many forms exist and have existed.

Commercial Law

Commercial Law also known as business law or corporate law, is the body of law that applies to the rights, relations, and conduct of persons and businesses engaged in commerce, merchandising, trade, and sales. It is often considered to be a branch of civil law and deals with issues of both private law and public law. Commercial law includes within its compass such titles as principal and agent; carriage by land and sea; merchant shipping; guarantee; marine, fire, life, and accident insurance; bills of exchange and partnership. It can also be understood to regulate corporate contracts, hiring practices, and the manufacture and sales of consumer goods. Many countries have adopted civil codes that contain comprehensive statements of their commercial law. Outline of Commercial Law (wiki).

Law of Agency is an area of commercial law dealing with a set of contractual, quasi-contractual and non-contractual fiduciary relationships that involve a person, called the agent, that is authorized to act on behalf of another (called the principal) to create legal relations with a third party. Succinctly, it may be referred to as the equal relationship between a principal and an agent whereby the principal, expressly or implicitly, authorizes the agent to work under his or her control and on his or her behalf. The agent is, thus, required to negotiate on behalf of the principal or bring him or her and third parties into contractual relationship. This branch of law separates and regulates the relationships between: Agents and principals (internal relationship), known as the principal-agent relationship; Agents and the third parties with whom they deal on their principals' behalf (external relationship); and principals and the third parties when the agents deal.

Private Law is that part of a civil law legal system which is part of the jus commune that involves relationships between individuals, such as the law of contracts and torts (as it is called in the common law), and the law of obligations (as it is called in civil legal systems). It is to be distinguished from public law, which deals with relationships between both natural and artificial persons (i.e., organizations) and the state, including regulatory statutes, penal law and other law that affects the public order. In general terms, private law involves interactions between private individuals, whereas public law involves interrelations between the state and the general population.

Corporate Law is the body of law governing the rights, relations, and conduct of persons, companies, organizations and businesses. The term refers to the legal practice of law relating to corporations, or to the theory of corporations. Corporate law often describes the law relating to matters which derive directly from the life-cycle of a corporation. It thus encompasses the formation, funding, governance, and death of a corporation. While the minute nature of corporate governance as personified by share ownership, capital market, and business culture rules differ, similar legal characteristics - and legal problems - exist across many jurisdictions. Corporate law regulates how corporations, investors, shareholders, directors, employees, creditors, and other stakeholders such as consumers, the community, and the environment interact with one another. Whilst the term company or business law is colloquially used interchangeably with corporate law, business law often refers to wider concepts of commercial law, that is, the law relating to commercial or business related purposes and activities. In some cases, this may include matters relating to corporate governance or financial law. When used as a substitute for corporate law, business law means the law relating to the business corporation (or business enterprises), including such activity as raising capital, company formation, and registration with the government.

Supremacy Law states that laws or beliefs can't violate federal laws.

Principal in commercial law is a person, legal or natural, who authorizes an agent to act to create one or more legal relationships with a third party. This branch of law is called agency and relies on the common law proposition.

International Law - Maritime Law

International Law is the set of rules generally regarded and accepted as binding in relations between states and between nations. It serves as a framework for the practice of stable and organized international relations. International law differs from state-based legal systems in that it is primarily applicable to countries rather than to private citizens. Martial Law.

Customary International Law are those aspects of international law that study the principle of custom.

Distinguish International Law from Municipal Law

World Courts (International Case Law Database) - Interpol

International Court of Justice is the primary judicial branch of the United Nations (UN). Seated in the Peace Palace in The Hague, Netherlands, the court settles legal disputes submitted to it by states and provides advisory opinions on legal questions submitted to it by duly authorized international branches, agencies, and the UN General Assembly.

International Court of Justice - Deportation - Immigration - War Crimes - Genocide

International Criminal Court is an intergovernmental organization and international tribunal that sits in The Hague, Netherlands. The ICC has jurisdiction to prosecute individuals for the international crimes of genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and crimes of aggression. It is intended to complement existing national judicial systems and it may therefore exercise its jurisdiction only when certain conditions are met, such as when national courts are unwilling or unable to prosecute criminals or when the United Nations Security Council or individual states refer situations to the Court. International Criminal Court  (ICC).

World Policy Forum rights, laws, policies, research.

Incorporation of International Law (wiki)

Geneva Conventions (wiki)

Transparency International

Legal Systems National List (wiki)

Law of the Sea is a body of international law governing the rights and duties of states in maritime environments. It concerns matters such as navigational rights, sea mineral claims, and coastal waters jurisdiction. While drawn from a number of international customs, treaties, and agreements, modern law of the sea derives largely from the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), effective since 1994, which is generally accepted as a codification of customary international law of the sea, and is sometimes regarded as the "constitution of the oceans". Law of the sea is the public law counterpart to admiralty law (also known as maritime law), which applies to private maritime issues, such as the carriage of goods by sea, rights of salvage, ship collisions, and marine insurance.

Admiralty Law or Maritime Law is a body of law that governs nautical issues and private maritime disputes. Admiralty law consists of both domestic law on maritime activities, and private international law governing the relationships between private parties operating or using ocean-going ships. While each legal jurisdiction usually has its own legislation governing maritime matters, the international nature of the topic and the need for uniformity has, since 1900, led to considerable international maritime law developments, including numerous multilateral treaties. Admiralty law may be distinguished from the law of the sea, which is a body of public international law dealing with navigational rights, mineral rights, jurisdiction over coastal waters, and the maritime relationships between nations. The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea has been adopted by 167 countries and the European Union, and disputes are resolved at the ITLOS tribunal in Hamburg. Admiralty Law is a distinct body of law that governs maritime questions and offenses. It is a body of both domestic law governing maritime activities, and private international law governing the relationships between private entities that operate vessels on the oceans. It deals with matters including marine commerce, marine navigation, marine salvaging, shipping, sailors, and the transportation of passengers and goods by sea. Admiralty law also covers many commercial activities, although land based or occurring wholly on land, that are maritime in character.

United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea defines the rights and responsibilities of nations with respect to their use of the world's oceans, establishing guidelines for businesses, the environment, and the management of marine natural resources.

Mandate in international law is a binding obligation issued from an inter-governmental organization (e.g. the United Nations) to a country which is bound to follow the instructions of the organization. Mandate.

Municipal Law is the national, domestic, or internal law of a sovereign state defined in opposition to international law. Municipal law includes many levels of law: not only national law but also law at the state, provincial, territorial, regional or local levels. While the state may regard these as distinct categories of law, international law is largely uninterested in this distinction and treats them all as one. Similarly, international law makes no distinction between the ordinary law of the state and its constitutional law.

Harmonisation of Law is the process of creating common standards across the internal market.

Manifesto's - United Nations

Ratification is a principal's approval of an act of its agent where the agent lacked authority to legally bind the principal. Ratification defines the international act whereby a state indicates its consent to be bound to a treaty if the parties intended to show their consent by such an act. In the case of bilateral treaties, ratification is usually accomplished by exchanging the requisite instruments, while in the case of multilateral treaties the usual procedure is for the depositary to collect the ratifications of all states, keeping all parties informed of the situation. The institution of ratification grants states the necessary time-frame to seek the required approval for the treaty on the domestic level and to enact the necessary legislation to give domestic effect to that treaty. The term applies to private contract law, international treaties, and constitutions in federations such as the United States and Canada. The term is also used in parliamentary procedure in deliberative assemblies.

Treaty - Sovereignty (self manage)

Foreign Policy consists of self-interest strategies chosen by the state to safeguard its national interests and to achieve goals within its international relations milieu. The approaches are strategically employed to interact with other countries. The study of such strategies is called foreign policy analysis. In recent times, due to the deepening level of globalization and transnational activities, the states will also have to interact with non-state actors. The aforementioned interaction is evaluated and monitored in attempts to maximize benefits of multilateral international cooperation. Since the national interests are paramount, foreign policies are designed by the government through high-level decision making processes. National interests accomplishment can occur as a result of peaceful cooperation with other nations, or through exploitation. Usually, creating foreign policy is the job of the head of government and the foreign minister (or equivalent). In some countries the legislature also has considerable effects. Foreign policies of countries have varying rates of change and scopes of intent, which can be affected by factors that change the perceived national interests or even affect the stability of the country itself. The foreign policy of a country can have profound and lasting impact on many other countries and on the course of international relations as a whole, such as the Monroe Doctrine conflicting with the mercantilism policies of 19th-century European countries and the goals of independence of newly formed Central American and South American countries.

Conflict of Laws or private international law, is the set of rules or laws a jurisdiction applies to a case, transaction, or other occurrence that has connections to more than one jurisdiction.

Choice of Law is a procedural stage in the litigation of a case involving the conflict of laws when it is necessary to reconcile the differences between the laws of different legal jurisdictions, such as sovereign states, federated states (as in the US), or provinces.

Immunity - Exemptions

Sovereign Immunity is a legal doctrine by which the sovereign or state cannot commit a legal wrong and is immune from civil suit or criminal prosecution. It is a principle of international law which exempts a sovereign state from the jurisdiction of foreign national courts. Sovereign immunity is based on the concept of sovereignty in the sense that a sovereign may not be subjected without its approval to the jurisdiction of another sovereign. As Lord Atkin observed, The courts of a country will not impede a foreign sovereign, that is, they will not by their process make him against his will a party to legal proceedings whether the proceedings involve process against his person or seek to recover from him specific property or damages. The law of sovereign immunity connotes that a state, unless it chooses to waive its immunity, is immune to the jurisdiction of foreign courts and the enforcement of court orders. It also precludes the assertion of jurisdiction by the national courts of a foreign country over a sovereign or state, without the latter’s consent. There are two forms of sovereign immunity: immunity from suit (also known as immunity from jurisdiction or adjudication). Immunity from enforcement. Immunity from suit means a state is immune from the jurisdiction of another state in its courts. Immunity from enforcement means that even if a state successfully brings another state to court and wins in the case, the judgment cannot be enforced. However, sovereign immunity of a state entity may be waived. A state entity may waive its immunity by: Prior written agreement. Instituting proceedings without claiming immunity. Submitting to jurisdiction as a defendant in a suit. Intervening in or taking any steps in any suit (other than for the purpose of claiming immunity).In constitutional monarchies the sovereign is the historical origin of the authority which creates the courts. Thus the courts had no power to compel the sovereign to be bound by the courts, as they were created by the sovereign for the protection of his or her subjects. This principle is commonly expressed by the popular legal maxim rex non potest peccare, meaning "the king can do no wrong", oh yes he can. Sue the Government.

Legal Immunity From Prosecution is a legal status wherein an individual or entity can not be held liable for a violation of the law to facilitate societal aims that outweigh the value of imposing liability in such cases. Such legal immunity may be from criminal prosecution or from civil liability (being subject of lawsuit) or both. The most notable forms of legal immunity are diplomatic immunity, judicial immunity, and witness immunity. One author has described legal immunity as "the obverse of a legal power.

Diplomatic Protection is a means for a State to take diplomatic and other action against another State on behalf of its national whose rights and interests have been injured by the other State. Diplomatic protection, which has been confirmed in different cases of the Permanent Court of International Justice and the International Court of Justice, is a discretionary right of a State and may take any form that is not prohibited by international law. It can include consular action, negotiations with the other State, political and economic pressure, judicial or arbitral proceedings or other forms of peaceful dispute settlement.

Loop Holes - Scape Goat - Above the Law

Constitutional Monarchy is a form of monarchy in which the sovereign exercises their authorities in accordance with a written or unwritten constitution. Constitutional monarchy differs from absolute monarchy (in which a monarch holds absolute power), in that constitutional monarchs are bound to exercise their powers and authorities within the limits prescribed within an established legal framework. Constitutional monarchies range from countries such as Morocco, where the constitution grants substantial discretionary powers to the sovereign, to countries such as Sweden or Denmark where the monarch retains very few formal authorities.

Related Subjects - Sanctions - Embargo - Politics - Democide - Plague's - Epidemics - Governments - Departments - Corporate Crimes - Secrecy - War - Drug War - War Crimes - Treason - Tyranny - Policy.

Space Law encompasses national and international law governing activities in outer space. International lawyers have been unable to agree on a uniform definition of the term "outer space", although most lawyers agree that outer space generally begins at the lowest altitude above sea level at which objects can orbit the Earth, approximately 100 km (62 mi) (the Kármán line).

Birth Aboard Aircraft and Ships is one with a long history in public international law. The law on the subject is complex, because various states apply differing principles of nationality, namely jus soli and jus sanguinis, to varying degrees and with varying qualifications. All aircraft have the nationality of the state in which they are registered, and may not have multiple nationalities. The law of the aircraft's nationality is applicable on the aircraft. However, nationality laws of any country already apply everywhere, since it is for each country to determine who are its nationals. So this convention has no effect on nationality laws. The convention does not say that a birth on a country's aircraft is to be treated as a birth in that country for the purposes of nationality. a birth on a ship or aircraft in international waters or airspace shall be treated as a birth in the country of the ship or aircraft's registration. However, the convention applies only to births where the child would otherwise be stateless. Since in most cases a child would be covered by one or more countries' jus sanguinis at birth (getting the same citizenship as its parents), this convention rarely comes into play. In addition, there are still very few member states that are party to the 1961 convention. A person’s passport may say “holder born on an aeroplane.” Citizen of the World? UN Baby?

Authority - Power

Authority is the right to exercise power given by the State or from a form of government. Authority is a responsibility to protect human rights, it's not supposed to be a strong arm for criminals in power.

is being forced submission to control by others. The act of conquering.

Legitimacy is the right and acceptance of an authority.

Interpol is an intergovernmental organization facilitating international police cooperation. Focuses primarily on public safety and battling terrorism, crimes against humanity, environmental crime, genocide, war crimes, organized crime, piracy, illicit traffic in works of art, illicit drug production, drug trafficking, weapons smuggling, human trafficking, money laundering, child pornography, white-collar crime, computer crime, intellectual property crime, and corruption.

Europol is the law enforcement agency of the European Union (EU) formed in 1998 to handle criminal intelligence and combat serious international organized crime and terrorism through cooperation between competent authorities of EU member states. The Agency has no executive powers, and its officials are not entitled to arrest suspects or act without prior approval from competent authorities in the member states. Seated in The Hague, it comprised 1,065 staff in 2016.

Secret Police - Intelligence Agency - Not So Intelligent Agencies

Law Enforcement is any system by which some members of society act in an organized manner to enforce the law by discovering, deterring, rehabilitating, or punishing people who violate the rules and norms governing that society.

Law Enforcement Agency is any government agency responsible for the enforcement of the laws.

Capitol Police is overseen by the Capitol Police Board and has Congressional oversight by appropriations and authorizing committees from the U.S. House of Representatives and U.S. Senate.

Police Officer is a warranted law employee of a police force. Lowest police rank. Some police officers are plain-clothed in order to be in disguise as ordinary citizens.

Pinkerton - Judges - Prosecutors

SWAT or Special Weapons And Tactics is a term for law enforcement units which use specialized or military equipment and tactics in the United States. Operative Tactical (wiki).

Special Agent is usually a detective or investigator for a state, county, municipal, federal, or tribal government who primarily serve in investigatory roles. Not all agents are federal law enforcement officers, and hold either arrest authority or the right to conduct minor criminal and non-criminal investigations.

Sheriff is an official in a county who is responsible for keeping the peace and enforcing the law. Unlike most officials in law enforcement in the United States, sheriffs are usually elected, although many states (such as California) have state laws requiring that a person possess certain law enforcement qualifications before being able to run for the office. Elected sheriffs are accountable directly to the constitution of their state, the United States Constitution, statutes, and the citizens of their county. Deputy sheriff is deputized by a sheriff to perform the same duties as the sheriff. Constable is a lawman with less authority and jurisdiction than a sheriff.

Marshal is a term used in several official titles in various branches of society. As marshals became trusted members of the courts of Medieval Europe, the title grew in reputation. During the last few centuries, it has been used for elevated offices, such as in military rank and civilian law enforcement.

Deputy is a person whose immediate superior is a senior figure within an organization and who is empowered to act as a substitute for this superior.

Secretary of Defense - Types of Leaders

Bailiff is a manager, overseer or custodian; a legal officer to whom some degree of authority or jurisdiction is given. Bailiffs are of various kinds and their offices and duties vary greatly.

Espionage - Mass Surveillance - Injustice

Referee is an official who watches a game or match closely to ensure that the rules are adhered to and in some sports to arbitrate on matters arising from the play. Ref is the person of authority in a variety of sports who is responsible for presiding over the game from a neutral point of view and making on-the-fly decisions that enforce the rules of the sport, including sportsmanship decisions such as ejection. The official tasked with this job may be known, in addition to referee, by a variety of other titles as well (often depending on the sport), including official, umpire, judge, arbiter, arbitrator, linesman, commissaire, timekeeper, touch judge or Technical Official (by the International Olympic Committee).

We need less regulation and more education. The red tape is the blood of it's victims. We need to repeal the laws that are unconstitutional or that do more harm than good.

Bounty Hunter is a professional person who captures fugitives or criminals for a commission or bounty. The occupation, officially known as bail agency enforcer, bail enforcement agent, bail agent, recovery agent, bail recovery agent, or fugitive recovery agent, has traditionally operated outside the legal constraints that govern police officers and other agents of the state. This is because a bail agreement between a defendant and a bail bondsman is essentially a civil contract that is incumbent upon the bondsman to enforce. As a result, bounty hunters hired by a bail bondsman enjoy significant legal privileges, such as forcibly entering a defendant's home without probable cause or a search warrant; however, since they are not police officers, bounty hunters are legally exposed to liabilities that normally exempt agents of the state—as these immunities enable police to perform their designated functions effectively without fear—and everyday citizens approached by a bounty hunter are neither required to answer their questions nor allowed to be detained. Bounty hunters are typically independent contractors paid a commission of the total bail amount that is owed by the fugitive; they provide their own PLI and only get paid if they are able to find the "skip" and bring them in. Bounty hunting is a vestige of Common law which was created during the Middle Ages. Bounty hunters primarily draw their legal imprimatur from an 1872 Supreme Court decision, Taylor v. Taintor. The practice historically existed in many parts of the world; however, as of the 21st century, it is found almost exclusively in most of the United States and the Philippines, as the practice is illegal under the laws of most other countries. State laws vary widely as to the legality of the practice; Illinois, Kentucky, Oregon and Wisconsin have outlawed commercial bail bonds, while Wyoming offers few (if any) regulations governing the practice. Mercenary - Pinkerton.

Rules - Guides - Legal Principles

Rule is a prescribed guide for conduct or action. A basic generalization that is accepted as true and that can be used as a basis for reasoning or as a principle or condition that customarily governs behavior. A rule is something regarded as a normative example for behavior. A rule can also mean one of the directions that define the way a game or sport is to be conducted. Rule can also mean a law concerning a natural phenomenon or the function of a complex system. Rule can also mean a dominance or power through legal authority or control. Ruler is a measuring stick consisting of a strip of wood, metal or plastic with a straight edge that is used for drawing straight lines and measuring lengths.

Rule of Law is the legal principle that states a law should help control abusive behavior that is bad for a nation, as opposed to being governed by arbitrary decisions of individual government officials. Rule of law is the authority and influence of law in society, especially when viewed as a constraint on abusive behavior or as a method for stopping criminal behavior or for discouraging institutional behavior. Therefore, the principle whereby all members of a society, including those in government, are considered equally subject to publicly disclosed legal codes and processes. The term rule of law is closely related to constitutionalism, as well as Rechtsstaat and refers to a political situation, not to any specific legal rule. Regulations.

Play by the Rules is to adhere to the rules, strictures, or conditions that were imposed by someone or by a body of authority.

Law Abiding is following the laws of society by being honest, righteous, honorable, upright, upstanding, good, decent, virtuous, moral and dutiful.

Under the Law means in conformity with law or subject to the law.

is to accept or to act in accordance with a rule, decision, or recommendation even through hardship or adversity, or even when something is unpleasant or disagreeable.

Obey is to follow the commands or the guidance of some standard, or dutifully complying with the commands or instructions of those in authority.

Comply is to act in accordance with someone's rules, commands, or wishes. 

Pursuance is carrying out a plan or an action in order to achieve something.

Obedient is complying or willing to comply with orders or requests; Dutifully complying with the commands or instructions of those in authority or submissive to another's will.

Passive - Conforming - Followers

Play by your own Rules is to be in control of managing your own life in the best way possible by implementing your own set of rules to live by. To play the game by your own rules means that you follow a set of rules, guidelines or conditions that you have created for yourself, rather than simply conforming to the rules set by others, like with certain religions, ideologies or institutions. But playing by your own rules doesn't mean that you can violate human laws that everyone else follows, or does it mean that you can disrespect other people just because you think that you have privilege over other peoples right to play by their own rules. Everyone has differences and has their own way of doing things. This means that everyone should be able to temporally modify their behavior in order to respect the differences that we have between each other. We need to find ways to make compromises and find logical solutions. This way everyone can avoid conflicts, problems and abuses. Adaptation is life's self defense system. But we have to learn to how to adapt, especially adapt mentally and not just physically. If you respect your body, your body will respect you. If we respect each other, then our society will be respectable to everyone. Above the Law.

Rulemaking is the process that executive and independent agencies use to create and announce by formal declaration or a regulation.

Rule of Thumb is a principle with broad application that is not intended to be strictly accurate or reliable for every situation.

Business Rule is a rule pertaining to the structure or behavior internal to a business. Regulations.

School Rule is a rule that is part of school discipline. Justice.

Unspoken Rule is an assumed rule of human behavior that is not voiced or written down.

Military Rule is governance by a military body.

Monastic Rule is a collection of precepts that guides the life of monks or nuns in a religious order.

Rules of the Road is driving etiquette and the general practices and procedures that road users are required to follow. These rules usually apply to all road users, though they are of special importance to motorists and cyclists. These rules govern interactions between vehicles and with pedestrians.

Cross the Line is to overstep a boundary, or a rule, or a limit, or to go too far or do something unacceptable, abusive or negligent.

Rule of Inference or transformation rule, is a term in logic for a function which takes premises and returns a conclusion.

Rules of Engagement

Do everything by the Book means that a person follows official rules or procedures very strictly, and does things according to particular written rules and norms. Following applicable guidelines on how to do certain things.

Moral is a rule or element of a moral code for guiding choices in human behavior.

Norm is a term in sociology describing explicit or implicit rules used within society or by a group (i.e. social norms).

Natural Law - Policy - Procedures - By-Laws - Law Types - Law Breakers - Unwritten Rules - Disclosure Agreements - Unconstitutional

Custom in law is the established pattern of behavior that can be objectively verified within a particular social setting.

We make rules and laws for our protection and for our safety. We also use rules and laws to protect everyone's freedom to live, learn, love and prosper. We need to have agreements to make things fair for everyone. So making rules or laws that everyone can agree on is extremely important. But unanimous agreement on rules and laws never happens, why? Is it ignorance or the lack of knowledge on the writers of the rules and laws, or is it the ignorance or the lack of knowledge from the people who must obey and follow the rules and laws? And when some people are not following the same rules and laws that others obey, then this type of corruption creates serious problems. When people break the laws, or if ignorant rules or laws are made, then we have to find out why? We need to educate ourselves on how to update and improve the rules that govern our lives and our way of living. But a persons way of life cannot include making others suffer or include murdering people, because that is not a way of life, that is a way of death. People don't have to suffer and die just for you to live a normal life, but here we are. This is why we need to improve education and create more intelligent regulations that can't be manipulated using money or power.

Rechtsstaat is a doctrine in continental European legal thinking, originating in German jurisprudence. It can be translated into English as "rule of law", alternatively "legal state", "state of law", "state of justice", or "state based on justice and integrity". The most important principles of the Rechtsstaat are: The state is based on the supremacy of national constitution and guarantees the safety and constitutional rights of its citizens. Civil society is an equal partner to the state. Separation of powers, with the executive, legislative, and judiciary branches of government limiting one another's power and providing for checks and balances. The judicature and the executive are bound by law (not acting against the law), and the legislature is bound by constitutional principles. Both the legislature and democracy itself are bound by elementary constitutional rights and principles. Transparency of state acts and the requirement of providing a reason for all state acts. Review of state decisions and state acts by independent organs, including an appeal process. Hierarchy of laws and the requirement of clarity and definiteness. Reliability of state actions, protection of past dispositions made in good faith against later state actions, prohibition of retroactivity. Principle of the proportionality of state action.

Social Order refers to a particular set or system of linked social structures, institutions, relations, customs, values and practices, which conserve, maintain and enforce certain patterns of relating and behaving. A stable state of society in which the existing social order is accepted and maintained by its members.

Jurisprudence is the collection of rules imposed by authority. The branch of philosophy concerned with the law and the principles that lead courts to make the decisions they do. Principles and reasons behind law that make the law.

Infringe is to go against rules and laws beyond the usual limit. Freedom is not Permission to do what you want.

Monasticism or monastic rule is the document giving the way of life to be led by the members of the varying religious orders in the Catholic Church and other Christian groups which follow a monastic way of life, or a communal life sequestered from the world under religious vows.

Norm in philosophy is a kind of sentence or a reason to act, feel or believe.

Unwritten Law is a law based chiefly on custom rather than legislative enactments. Conformity.

Strict is something stringently enforced and incapable of compromise or flexibility or allowing no deviation from a standard. Severe and unremitting in making demands. Rigid is something incapable of adapting or changing to meet circumstances. Unchanging and unmoving.

Law of the Jungle is an expression that has come to describe a survival of the fittest scenario where anything goes, with reference to the superiority of brute force or self-interest in the struggle for survival.

Compulsory is something required by law or a rule. An obligation involving or exercising compulsion. (obligatory, mandatory, required, requisite, necessary, essential). Coercive.

Compulsion is the action or state of forcing or being forced to do something. Compulsion is also an irresistible urge to behave in a certain way, especially against one's conscious wishes. Compulsive Behavior - Constraint.

Sport Rule is a rule that defines how a sport is played. Winning and Losing.

Game Rule is a rule that defines how a game is played. Learning Games.

Foul is an unfair or invalid stroke or piece of play, especially one involving interference with an opponent. Wicked or immoral.

is a punishment imposed for breaking a law, rule, or contract.

Nixed is to command against something or disallow something.

Banned is something forbidden by law. Prohibit especially by legal means or social pressure. To expel from a community or group. To be censored.

Shunned is to deliberately avoid and stay away from someone or stay clear of something. To expel from a community or group. Slander.

Prohibited is to excluded from use or mention. Forbidden by law.

Forbidden is to excluded from use or mention. To keep something from happening or arising. To make impossible. Bad.

Taboo is to excluded something from use or mention. To be prejudice. An inhibition or ban resulting from social custom or emotional aversion. Perversion.

Curfew in law is an order that after a specific time certain activities such as being outside on the streets are prohibited. A signal or bell announcing the start of curfew restrictions. The time that the curfew signal is sounded.

Inhibition is the action of prohibiting, inhibiting or forbidding something. A conscious exclusion of unacceptable thoughts or desires. Self-Control - No Control (disinhibition).

Suppression is the forceful prevention of something by putting it down by power or authority. The conscious exclusion of unacceptable thoughts or desires. Oppression - Freedom of Speech.

Legal Help Resources - Law Knowledge - Law Tips

Use legal knowledge on this page at your own discretion. Some situations can be unique, so there is never a guarantee on the outcome or what kind of people you will have to deal with. Knowledge is power, but criminals are still extremely dangerous because some people don't always play by the rules, even people of authority. So try to avoid causing offense, and avoid revealing private information.

Defending Yourself - Legal Aid - Legal Advice - Bad Lawyers

"We are not a country of laws anymore. We are a country where laws are creatively interpreted, usually in favor of the rich and powerful, while the poor and minorities are routinely victimized by a corrupt and abusive justice system." The people in the justice system are paid by taxes collected from its citizens, so why don't they protect the rights of people who pay their salaries. The right side of the law is where our public servants should be, protecting humans rights and not violating human rights. Why waste all that time, energy, resources, money, people and potential just to abuse people. That's insane. You have nothing to gain and everything to lose. Prejudice and bias has no valid reasoning because it's just pure ignorance. This is one of the reasons why we have laws and human rights in the first place, so that people don't believe that they're above the law. Of course education and training needs to improve, just knowing the law doesn't imply that a person fully understands the law, or human rights. It's really difficult to find a good public defender, or a good lawyer, a good judge, a good doctor, a good dentist or any good professional, that's because ignorance has infected all levels of society, mostly from our inadequate education system along with our dysfunction mass media that fuels ignorance as well as enables ignorance to flourish and continue. The world is now filled with rabies infected hyena's that will attack innocent people in the name of money. The cure is knowledge and the vaccine is Basic Knowledge 101.

Police Misconduct - Malicious Prosecution - Know Your Rights - Public Attorney - Abuse of Judicial Discretion - Your Record

Lawyer Up means to obtain the services of a lawyer especially while being investigated for possible wrongdoing. While a statement admitting guilt is a powerful piece of evidence for the police and State's Attorney, the absence of a confession doesn't mean the State can't prove their case.

Remain Silent Miranda Rights Warning is part of a preventive criminal procedure rule that law enforcement are required to administer to protect an individual who is in custody and subject to direct questioning or its functional equivalent from a violation of his or her Fifth Amendment right against compelled self-incrimination.

Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution is part of the Bill of Rights that protects a person from being compelled to be a witness against themselves in a criminal case.

I invoke my fifth amendment privilege and respectfully decline to answer your question.

When you're questioned in a more formal setting, such as a deposition or a hearing in court, this is how you plead the fifth, "On the advice of counsel, I invoke my fifth amendment privilege against self-incrimination and respectfully decline to answer your question.” Silence or refusal to answer questions cannot be used against you in a criminal case. A prosecutor cannot argue to the jury that the defendant's silence implies guilt.

Trick Questions - Words are very unnecessary, they can only do harm - Deep Meditation - Silence can be Golden

If you can't remain silent, you can do what criminal scumbags do when they're questioned, they answer, "I Don't Recall". How convenient it is to be above the law. If they do answer, these people will lie to cover-up the truth. People will also lie about other lies they told. Or they will just give you the runaround and never truthfully answer questions, kind of like with political debates, instead of a magpie they give you a shit-pie.

Obstruction of Justice - Perjury - False Statement - False Evidence - Free Speech Abuse

Pleading the Fifth is a nice way of saying, "I don't want to say anything that can be misinterpreted by some ignorant moron who wants to be an asshole to me for no reason and maliciously prosecute me." Capisce?

When questioned by police you can claim your fifth amendment right in response to police questioning during a traffic stop. Pleading the fifth means that you refuse to answer a question and are exercising your right to remain silent or provide information to police that might incriminate you while in custody or in court as covered by the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

Pleading the Fifth is a colloquial term for invoking the right that allows a witness to decline to answer questions where the answers might incriminate him, and generally without having to suffer a penalty for asserting their right. A defendant cannot be compelled to become a witness at his own trial. If, however, they choose to testify, they are not entitled to their right, and inferences can be drawn from a refusal to answer a question during cross-examination. The Amendment requires that felonies be tried only upon indictment by a grand jury. Federal grand juries can force people to take the witness stand, but defendants in those proceedings have Fifth Amendment privileges until they choose to answer any question. To claim the privilege for failure to answer when being interviewed by police, the interviewee must have explicitly invoked the constitutional right when declining to answer questions. The Amendment's Double Jeopardy Clause provides the right to be tried only once in federal court for the same offense. The Amendment also has a Due Process Clause (similar to the one in the 14th Amendment) as well as an implied equal protection requirement (Bolling v. Sharpe). Finally, the Amendment requires that the power of eminent domain be coupled with "just compensation" for those whose property is taken.

Right to Silence is the right of the accused or the defendant to refuse to comment or provide an answer when questioned, either prior to or during legal proceedings in a court of law. This can be the right to avoid self-incrimination or the right to remain silent when questioned. The right usually includes the provision that adverse comments or inferences cannot be made by the judge or jury regarding the refusal by a defendant to answer questions before or during a trial, hearing or any other legal proceeding. This right constitutes only a small part of the defendant's rights as a whole.

Defense - Due Process - Equal Justice - Malicious Prosecution

Innocent until Proven Guilty - Don't Consent - Don't Talk to the Police (youtube) - Regent Law Professor James Duane gives viewers startling reasons why they should always exercise their 5th Amendment rights when questioned by government officials. Of course it's relative to your situation. But a least be aware of the risk.

You don't want to assume that every police officer is out to violate your constitutional rights. So you might not want to start of with the 5th because you don't want be seen as being overly defensive or untrusting or prejudice. But of course this would depend on the situation and the particular people involved. I would act normal until the questioning becomes insinuating or intrusive, that's when you remind them of your constitutional rights. You have a right to defend yourself, but you shouldn't have to offend anyone while you are defending yourself. Be nice but be firm.

10 Rules for Dealing with Police (video) - Barry Cooper's Never Get Busted (video)

Never Get Busted - Highway Robbery

Traffic Stop Info-Graph (image) - If a Cop Stops You Info-Graph (image)

Discretion is the quality of behaving or speaking in such a way as to avoid causing offense or revealing private information. The freedom to decide what should be done in a particular situation.

What if someone was listening to a private conversation that you were having, what would you do?

Trick Questions - Bail - Plea Bargain - Evasion

Attorney-Client Privilege is a "client's right privilege" to refuse to disclose and to prevent any other person from disclosing confidential communications between the client and the attorney. Beware of legalese and jargon.

Stipulation is a formal legal acknowledgement and agreement made between opposing parties prior to a pending hearing or trial. Plea Deal.

Do Not Consent to any Searches? Bill of Rights Amendments 4, 5, 6. - Rights.

You and the Law Tips (PDF)

Right to a Fair Trial is that everyone is entitled in full equality to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal, in the determination of a persons rights and obligations and of any criminal charge against them.

Don't make assumptions and don't make false accusations. Everyone is innocent until proven guilty.

Nicodemus is the law in the Sanhedrin that requires that a person be heard before being judged.

Our Law doesn't let us condemn people before we hear what they have to say. We cannot judge them before we know what they have done. John 7:50-51.

Due Process - Equal Justice - Injustice - Abusive Laws

Habeas Corpus is a recourse in law through which a person can report an unlawful detention or imprisonment to a court and request that the court order the custodian of the person, usually a prison official, to bring the prisoner to court, to determine whether the detention is lawful.

Refuse for Cause without Dishonor - No Contract, No Proof, No Loss, No Injury, No Victim.

Procedural Law comprises the rules by which a court hears and determines what happens in civil, lawsuit, criminal or administrative proceedings. The rules are designed to ensure a fair and consistent application of due process (in the U.S.) or fundamental justice (in other common law countries) to all cases that come before a court. Can also be referred to as remedial law or rules of court. Procedural rights may also refer not exhaustively to rights to information, access to justice, and right to counsel, rights to public participation, right to confront accusers as well as the basic presumption of innocence (meaning the prosecution regularly must meet the burden of proof, though different jurisdictions have various exceptions), with those rights encompassing general civil and political rights. In environmental law, these procedural rights have been reflected within the UNECE Convention on "Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters" known as the Aarhus Convention (1998).

Right to Confront Accusers or The Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution provides that "in all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right…to be confronted with the witnesses against him." The right only applies to criminal prosecutions, not civil cases or other proceedings.

Wrongful Convictions list in the United States (wiki)

Innocence Project

Miscarriage of Justice is the conviction and punishment of a person for a crime they did not commit.

gavel Social Abuses - Discrimination

Misconduct of Judges - Misconduct of Lawyers

Interrogation Abuse - Bond Abuse - Mistakes in Law

Civil Liberties Union

Filming Police - - Law

Victims of Crimes - Prisons

Legal Eagle (youtube channel) - Do you want to know how our legal system works? You’ve come to the right place. LegalEagle is all about giving you an insider’s view to the legal system. Have some fun and learn to think like a lawyer. Law School.

The difference between a Driver and a Traveler

Driver refers to the controlled operation and movement of a motorized vehicle, such as a car, truck, or bus for commercial purposes. 

Traveler is the movement of people between relatively distant geographical locations, and can involve travel by foot, bicycle, automobile, train, boat, airplane, or other means.

Freedom of Movement is a human rights concept encompassing the right of individuals to travel from place to place within the territory of a country, and to leave the country and return to it. The right includes not only visiting places, but changing the place where the individual resides or works. Such a right is provided in the constitutions of numerous states, and in documents reflecting norms of international law. For example, Article 13 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights asserts that: a citizen of a state in which that citizen is present has the liberty to travel, reside in, and/or work in any part of the state where one pleases within the limits of respect for the liberty and rights of others, and that a citizen also has the right to leave any country, including his or her own, and to return to his or her country at any time. Some people and organizations advocate an extension of the freedom of movement to include a freedom of movement – or migration – between the countries as well as within the countries. The freedom of movement is restricted in a variety of ways by various governments and may even vary within the territory of a single country. Such restrictions are generally based on public health, order, or safety justifications and postulate that the right to these conditions preempts the notion of freedom of movement. Stopping someone for not wearing a seatbelt is unconstitutional.

Defending Yourself - Pro se

Pro se is advocating on one's own behalf before a court, or being your own legal representation instead of being represented by a lawyer. This may occur in any court proceeding, whether one is the defendant or plaintiff in civil cases, and when one is a defendant in criminal cases. Pro se is a Latin phrase meaning "for oneself" or "on one's own behalf". This status is sometimes known as propria persona (abbreviated to "pro per") Propria Persona. adj. from Latin "for one's self," acting on one's own behalf, generally used to identify a person who is acting as his/her own attorney in a lawsuit. The popular abbreviation is "in pro per.". In San Diego, for example, the number of divorce filings involving at least one pro se litigant rose from 46% in 1992 to 77% in 2000. (McCue v. McCue - Law v. Law). Power of Attorney.

Barefoot Lawyer is a self-taught legal activist. Many barefoot lawyers teach themselves enough law to file civil complaints, engage in litigation, and educate fellow citizens about their rights.

Legal Awareness is the empowerment of individuals regarding issues involving the law. Legal awareness helps to promote consciousness of legal culture, participation in the formation of laws and the rule of law. Public legal education, sometimes called civics education, comprises a range of activities intended to build public awareness and skills related to law and the justice system. This term also refers to the fields of practice and study concerned with those activities, and to a social and professional movement that advocates greater societal commitment to educating people about the law. Anna-Marie Marshall explains that "in order to realize their rights, people need to take the initiative to articulate them. This initiative, in turn, depends on the availability and the relevance of legal schema to people confronting problems." This is because laws exist as part of a larger organizational ecosystem in which the interests of the organization as well as those of the actors become inextricably linked to the ways in which they are enacted.

Do Not Pay is a Robot Lawyer that helps users contest parking tickets in an easy to use chat-like interface.

Public Defender is an attorney appointed to represent people who cannot afford to hire one.

Constitutional Lawyer protects the rights granted by state and federal constitutions.

Civil Rights Lawyers - Public Interest

Community Legal Worker helps to advance social justice and racial equity through community organizing, public legal education and client services.

Legal Advice Resources - Frivolous

Legal Clinic or law clinic or law school clinic is a legal aid or law school program providing services to various clients and often hands-on-legal experience to law school students. Clinics are usually directed by clinical professors. Legal clinics typically do pro bono work in a particular area, providing free legal services to clients. Legal clinics originated as a method of practical teaching of law school students, but today they encompass also free legal aid with no academic links. There are practice-based law clinics with no academic link which provide hands-on skills to lawyers, judges and non-lawyers on practical ethical dimensions of the law at the same time offer free public defence legal services.

Judicial Activism refers to judicial rulings that are suspected of being based on personal opinion, rather than on existing law. It is sometimes used as an antonym of judicial restraint. The definition of judicial activism and the specific decisions that are activist are controversial political issues, particularly in the United States. The question of judicial activism is closely related to constitutional interpretation, statutory construction, and separation of powers.

Access to Justice - Promoting Accessibility — Eliminating barriers that prevent people from understanding and exercising their rights. Ensuring Fairness — delivering fair and just outcomes for all parties, including those facing financial and other disadvantages. Increasing Efficiency — delivering fair and just outcomes effectively, without waste or duplication.

National Center for Access to Justice - To enable people to secure the protection of the rule of law, whether to halt domestic violence, stop unlawful foreclosures and evictions, preserve family unity, claim wages and other employment protections, challenge unfair criminal prosecutions, and more, the National Center for Access to Justice works to make our courts more accessible and fair.

Justice Navigator - How to evaluate one’s case and determine its viability— Before even stepping foot in a courtroom; How to act in court so that you are well-prepared, confident, and equipped to win your case; How to deal with aggressive attorneys, difficult judges, and unhelpful court personnel; How to develop the theory of your case, including how to gather and assess evidence, properly interview witnesses, and prepare the initial filings for a lawsuit; The right way to shut down an opponent’s motion to dismiss or motion for summary judgment; How to avoid having a case dismissed on a technicality; The legal process and litigation procedure; and How to take a case to trial, including presentation of witnesses and evidence, jury selection, testimony, and delivering opening statements and closing arguments.

Community Legal Centre advance legal–and, by extension, social and political–equality by making the law accessible to the poor and otherwise marginalised members of Australian society.

Community legal provides free civil legal services to low-income and elderly residents of central and western Massachusetts.

Community Legal Aid serving the legal needs of low-income individuals and families in central northeast Ohio.

How do I Find a Lawyer - Public Counsel - Urban 75

Free Legal Forms - Find Legal Forms

Web-Based Legal Practice Management Software.

Ailira Artificially Intelligent Legal Information Research Assistant. Automates legal advice Automates legal research. Ailira’s advice function works like a chatbot. Ailira asks a number of questions via text (or speech) like an interview. That information is collated and can be analysed to provide advice, and also automatically generate documents.

Contingent - On Retainer

Contingent Fee is any fee for services provided where the fee is payable only if there is a favorable result. In the law, a contingent fee is defined as a fee charged for a lawyer's services that is payable only if a lawsuit is successful or results in a favorable settlement, usually in the form of a percentage of the amount recovered on behalf of the client. Contingent fees may make it easier for people of limited means to pursue their civil rights since otherwise, to sue someone for a tort, one must first be wealthy enough to pursue such litigation in the first place. Due to the risk of loss, attorneys will not take cases on a contingency basis unless they believe that the case has merit, although accepting cases on a contingency is not without risk.

Pro Bono is professional work undertaken voluntarily and without payment denoting work undertaken without charge, especially legal work for a client with a low income.

Probono Legal Services - Pro Bono - Contingency Fee Lawyers - Public Interest

Retainer Agreement is a work-for-hire contract. It falls between a one-off contract and permanent employment, which may be full-time or part-time. Its distinguishing feature is that the client or customer pays in advance for professional work to be specified later. A retainer agreement may incorporate other contractual provisions regarding the performance of services, or the parties may potentially enter into additional contracts that define the other terms of their working relationship. A retainer fee may be paid on a fixed, pre-negotiated rate or on a variable hourly rate depending on the nature of retainer and also, the practice of the professional being retained. It is common for a person seeking the services of a lawyer (attorney) to pay a retainer ("retainer fee") to the lawyer, to see a case through to its conclusion. A retainer can be a single advance payment or a recurring (e.g. monthly) payment. Absent an agreement to the contrary, a retainer fee is refundable if the work is not performed. The retainer agreement may serve as the basis of authority for a legal advocate. It may limit a lawyer's authority to specific tasks or services, as opposed to providing authority for general purposes. For example, if a lawyer is hired for purposes of litigation, during litigation the advocate will normally be authorized by the client to accept service of documents for which personal service upon the client is not required. In addition to being formally described in a retainer agreement, a client's grant of authority to an attorney may be implied, apparent or usual through the normal practice of the legal professional in providing representation to a client. To have a lawyer on retainer means that the client pays a lawyer a small amount on a regular basis. In return, the lawyer performs some legal services whenever the client needs them. Retainers are most useful for business that need constant legal work, but do not have enough money to hire a lawyer full time. Also, individuals who are likely to need a lot of legal work might want to have a lawyer on retainer. Stop and think about your legal situation first: What will you use the attorney for? Unless a major accident happens, most people need an attorney once every few years. If this is true for you, having an attorney on retainer may not be a financially sound decision. Check your insurance policies. Most insurance policies, including auto and homeowner's insurance, will pay for an attorney should you be involved in an accident. If this is so, there is no need to pay an attorney as additional insurance against these lawsuits. Check your employee benefits. If you are an employee of a large company, or a member of a union, a lawyer on call may be part of your benefits. These attorneys can handle most routine legal matters, such as wills and real estate transactions, as well as certain law suits. Paying another lawyer on retainer when you already have one through your employer usually does not make financial sense. Finally, don't be confused by the terms "retainer" or "retainer agreement." Generally, these are not the same as having a lawyer "on retainer." When a lawyer is "retained," that means that someone has hired her, and the money paid to the attorney is known as the retainer. The agreement signed when someone hires an attorney is called the retainer agreement.

Services for Legal Advice - Resources

Legal Advice
Free Legal Answers
Law Help
Free Legal Questions
Answers from Lawyers
Criminal Find Law
Legal Aid Society
Legal Services Corporation
Legal Help for the Elderly
Find Lawyers, Laws, Legal Jobs
Legal Services by State
Legal Help Lawyers
Legal Zoom
Incloud Counsel
Axiom Law
Peoples Law Information

Legal Knowledge - Courts

Car Lemon Help

Information Resources
Copyright Information
Government Agency's
Hand Cuffs Laws and Social Justice

Legal Terms Below

Legal Support Worker Job
The Institute for Justice
Justice Initiatives Institute
Open Society Justice Initiative
Equal Justice Initiative
Legal Services Corporation
Arbitration & Mediation
Find Law
National Lawyers Guild

Juvenile & Family Court Judges - Judgepedia

Justice News

There were over 800,000 lawyers in America in 2002, more than 4 times the amount in the entire world combined. In 2020, according to the American Bar Association, there are 1,352,027 licensed attorneys in the United States. Virtually unchanged from the previous year, and not much above the 2015 figure of 1.3 million.

How could we have the most lawyers in the world and have the most lawlessness? There must be something wrong with the bar exam if most lawyers are ignorant and corrupt? But of course it's not the lawyers, prosecutor or judges fault, it's our inadequate education system.

National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers - Legal Scholars (wiki) - Public Interest

This Just In - America is Arresting 14 million People a YearPrisons are a Racket.

I never sued anyone though I had many reasons to do so. I Believe that a lawsuit should only be about stopping a criminal from victimizing more people, or about stopping a social injustice that is abusing innocent people. It should never be about money.

Lawyer Jokes

"What do you get when you cross a Godfather with a Lawyer? An offer you can't understand."

"How do you know when a lawyer is lying? Their lips are moving."

"What's the difference between a hooker and a lawyer? A hooker will stop f*cking you when you die, and the lawyer will continue to f*ck you long after you're dead."

Brazil has 1,240 law schools, more than the rest of the world combined? And they have turned out some 800,000 lawyers, which means there are more lawyers per capita in Brazil than in the U.S. (the key word is per capita) There are 16,000 judges in Brazil, and many positions are not filled.

Justice System Horror Story in Brazil. In 1997 the family sued for compensation. It wasn't until 2009, 12 years later, that Melo won against the hospital's appeal. The hospital then wrangled over the amount of compensation. The case was finally settled this year in 2014. So after 17 years of fighting in the courts over what lawyers say was a clear case of medical malpractice.

Law School - Law Degree - Legal Practice

Law School is an institution specializing in legal education, usually involved as part of a process for becoming a lawyer within a given jurisdiction. List of Law Schools in the United States (wiki).

Law School Admission Test is designed to measure skills that are considered essential for success in law school, like reading comprehension, logical, and verbal reasoning proficiencies. LSAT standardized test administered four times each year at designated testing centers throughout the world. The purpose of the LSAT is to aid in predicting student success in law school.

Bar Examination is an examination administered by a jurisdiction's bar association a lawyer needs to pass before being admitted to the bar of that jurisdiction. Accreditation.

Taking the Bar Exam without going to Law School. Only four states allow aspiring lawyers to take the Bar Exam without going to law school. California, Virginia, Vermont, and Washington.

Baby Bar or the First-Year Law Students Examination is a daylong test given remotely in June or October and is required for those studying law through an apprenticeship or at an unaccredited law school, according to the State Bar of California. Passing the test means that a person can continue their legal studies and will be able to take the full bar exam. The test consists of four one-hour essay questions and 100 multiple-choice questions. The exam only covers three subjects: Contracts, Criminal Law, and Torts. Examinees must score at least 560 points out of a possible 800 points to pass the exam. this is the equivalent of answering 70% of the questions correctly. The exam is administered twice a year, in June and October. Study tips include creating a study schedule, focusing on memorizing the highly tested black letter law, practicing using multiple-choice and essay questions from recent exams, resolving any timing issues before exam day, and reviewing the answers to multiple-choice questions and essays.

60 Apprentices who took the bar exam in 2018, only 17 passed or 28%, gauged with an average pass rate of 73% for students who attended ABA-approved universities. Is this Teaching to the Test, or just Bad Studying, or Better Access to knowledge? Of course passing the Bar Exam will not make you a good lawyer. In 2014, out of 83,963 bar exam takers, only 60 were apprentices. A mere 17 succeeded in passing the bar exam and becoming eligible to practice law. The California Bar Exam is harder with only 54.3% passing rate, but Montana, Utah, Minnesota have easier Bar Exams with a passing rate 87.0%. Having a law degree increases your chances of passing a Bar Exam. If this is Teaching to the Test then how do the schools know what's on the test? If each state has it's own test, then what are the differences?

8 year old Brazilian Boy Passes Law School Entrance Exam.

Entry Tests - Intelligence Testing - Legal Eagle Law School Tips (youtube channel) - Law school application advice and resources.

Reading Law was the method used in common law countries, particularly the United States, for people to prepare for and enter the legal profession before the advent of law schools. It consisted of an extended internship or apprenticeship under the tutelage or mentoring of an experienced lawyer. The practice largely died out in the early 20th century. A few U.S. states still permit people to become lawyers by reading law instead of attending law school, although the practice is rare.

Unauthorized Practice of Law - If someone gives legal advice without a license, that's called the unauthorized practice of law . Rule 5.5: Unauthorized Practice of Law; Multijurisdictional Practice of Law. A lawyer may practice law only in a jurisdiction in which the lawyer is authorized to practice. A lawyer may be admitted to practice law in a jurisdiction on a regular basis or may be authorized by court rule or order or by law to practice for a limited purpose or on a restricted basis. Without a license to practice law, you can not initiate a lawyer-client relationship, carry out legal proceedings in a court of law, charge a fee for these legal services, provide legal advice, or provide any legal papers or pleadings on behalf of the client without being signed by a real lawyer.

Legal Expert is a person with extensive knowledge or experience of law, such as a judge, a distinguished law professor, or lawyer or an attorney or a barrister or counselor.

Jurist is a person with expert knowledge of law, a specialist legal scholar, mostly (but not always) with a formal qualification in law and often a legal practitioner. The jurist is a legal scholar who studies, analyzes, and comments on the law, which their entire work can be done inside a law library, which is a special library used by law students, lawyers, judges and their law clerks, historians and other scholars of legal history in order to research the law or do legal research, which is the process of identifying and retrieving information necessary to support legal decision-making. In its broadest sense, legal research includes each step of a course of action that begins with an analysis of the facts of a problem and concludes with the application and communication of the results of the investigation.

Law Degree is an academic degree conferred for studies in law. Such degrees are generally preparation for legal careers; but while their curricula may be reviewed by legal authority, they do not themselves confer a license. A legal license is granted (typically by examination) and exercised locally; while the law degree can have local, international, and world-wide aspects- e.g., in Britain the Legal Practice Course is required to become a British solicitor or the Bar Professional Training Course (BPTC) to become a barrister.

Legal Education is the education of individuals in the principles, practices, and theory of law. It may be undertaken for several reasons, including to provide the knowledge and skills necessary for admission to legal practice in a particular jurisdiction, to provide a greater breadth of knowledge to those working in other professions such as politics or business, to provide current lawyers with advanced training or greater specialization, or to update lawyers on recent developments in the law.

Law Clerk or judicial clerk or judicial assistant, is a person, often a lawyer, that provides direct counsel and assistance to a lawyer or judge by researching issues and drafting legal opinions for cases before the court. Judicial clerks often play significant roles in the formation of case law through their influence upon judges' decisions. Judicial clerks should not be confused with legal clerks/paralegals (also called "law clerks" in Canada), court clerks (clerks of the court), or courtroom deputies who perform administrative duties within the legal profession and perform more quasi-secretarial duties than law clerks, or legal secretaries that only provide secretarial and administrative support duties to attorneys and/or judges.

Paralegal or legal assistant or paralegal specialist is a professional who performs tasks that require knowledge of legal concepts but not the full expertise of a lawyer with a license to practice law. The market for paralegals is broad, including consultancies, companies that have legal departments or that perform legislative and regulatory compliance activities in areas such as environment, labor, intellectual property, zoning, and tax. Legal offices and public bodies also have many paralegals in support activities using other titles outside of the standard titles used in the profession[citation needed]. There is a diverse array of work experiences attainable within the paralegal (legal assistance) field, ranging between internship, entry-level, associate, junior, mid-senior, and senior level positions.

How many laws and codes does a lawyer need to know? Legislatures write general law, and judges interpret those laws in specific cases, thereby creating rules for subsequent matters to follow. Even in tiny jurisdictions, there are often thousands of decisions being published each year, making it impossible for a lawyer to keep up with every single development. The best a lawyer can do is understand the fundamentals of the law and keep up to date with important cases that represent shifts in the laws of their practice areas. And when one has a case, one then spends time conducting detailed research when necessary. But even in civil law countries, most bodies of law are so large that no one can know everything--lawyers therefore typically attempt to become experts in particular areas, not generalists. American law students study criminal law, civil procedure, contracts, torts, property, and Constitutional law. And then, there are numerous electives (such as tax, securities, environmental law, antitrust, administrative law, international law, etc.) for people to take based on their interests. Because most subjects are elective, it is possible to graduate law school and become a licensed lawyer without ever learning anything about a number of legal subjects. Bottom line, when you graduate from law school, you know the basics of law in multiple fields. You definitely don't know everything, however, just the fundamental rules and how important cases have interpreted/applied them. After graduating from law school, just about every student could tell you how a contract is formed, the elements of a negligence cause of action, the felony murder rule, and what the rule against perpetuities is, but they're hardly experts in any given field. Once you graduate from law school and enter practice, you begin to focus on specific areas of the law. A civil trial lawyer after 10 years of practice, will know a fair amount about civil procedure, contract law, trade secret law, and patent, among other things. But most days are spent researching the law to try to find new or additional points necessary for the work; no one knows the law verbatim. Verbatim is precisely the same words used by a writer or speaker.

Lawyer Services - Always Negotiate Legal Bills to Avoid Fee Disputes like overbilling and Bill Padding. Have a Signed Fee Agreement and have the lawyer list Expenses if you are being charged for expenses.

American Bar Association is a voluntary bar association of lawyers and law students, which is not specific to any jurisdiction in the United States. The ABA's most important stated activities are the setting of academic standards for law schools, and the formulation of model ethical codes related to the legal profession. As of fiscal year 2017, the ABA had 194,000 dues-paying members, constituting approximately 14.4% of U.S. attorneys. In 1979, half of all lawyers in the U.S. were members of the ABA. The organization's national headquarters are in Chicago, Illinois; it also maintains a significant branch office in Washington, D.C. ABA was founded August 21, 1878. American Bar Association - American Bar.

Bar Association is a professional association of lawyers. Some bar associations are responsible for the regulation of the legal profession in their jurisdiction; others are professional organizations dedicated to serving their members; in many cases, they are both. In many Commonwealth jurisdictions, the bar association comprises lawyers who are qualified as barristers or advocates in particular, versus solicitors. Membership in bar associations may be mandatory or optional for practicing attorneys, depending on jurisdiction.

Bar Council in a common law jurisdiction with a legal profession split between solicitors and barristers or advocates, is a professional body that regulates the profession of barristers. In such jurisdictions, solicitors are generally regulated by the law society. In common law jurisdictions with no distinction between barristers and solicitors (i.e. where there is a "fused profession"), the professional body may be called variously a Law Society, Bar Council or bar association.

Admission to Practice Law is acquired when a lawyer receives a license to practice law. In jurisdictions with two types of lawyer, as with barristers and solicitors, barristers must gain admission to the bar whereas for solicitors there are distinct practicing certificates. Becoming a lawyer is a widely varied process around the world. Common to all jurisdictions are requirements of age and competence; some jurisdictions also require documentation of citizenship or immigration status. However, the most varied requirements are those surrounding the preparation for the license, whether it includes obtaining a law degree, passing an exam, or serving in an apprenticeship. In English, admission is also called a law license. Basic requirements vary from country to country. In some jurisdictions, after admission the lawyer needs to maintain a current practicing certificate to be permitted to offer services to the public.

Practice of Law involves giving legal advice to clients, drafting legal documents for clients, and representing clients in legal negotiations and court proceedings such as lawsuits, and is applied to the professional services of a lawyer or attorney at law, barrister, solicitor, or civil law notary.

Practicing Certificate is a license to practice a particular profession. In the legal profession, solicitors and barristers may need a current practicing certificate before they can offer their services. The authority that administers the practicing certificate varies by jurisdiction.

Judgeship: You'll need to earn a bachelor's degree to apply for law school, take the Law School Admission Test, attend law school and earn a Juris Doctor, pass the bar exam, create your resume, consider becoming a clerk, practice law, and then earn your judgeship. New judges must apply through a judicial nominating commission or get recommended by legal organizations or governments. From there, new judges can be voted in or appointed by government officials. Keep in mind - it is improbable that a candidate will earn the judgeship on the first try.

Juris Doctor degree is a professional degree required to practice law. A Juris Doctor or JD degree is the professional degree necessary to become a lawyer. A JD degree is a terminal degree—or the highest level of degree you can achieve in a given discipline. is a graduate-entry professional degree in law. The JD is the standard degree obtained to practice law in the United States; unlike in some other jurisdictions, there is no undergraduate degree to practice in the United States. In the United States, along with Australia, Canada, and some other common law countries, the JD is earned by completing law school. A Juris Doctor is also called a Doctor of Jurisprudence, or a Doctor of Law, and abbreviated as JD.

The percentage of lawyers disbarred from 1998 to 2004, is roughly 0.07% to 0.08% of all active lawyers. That was down in 2012 to 2019, when 0.05% to 0.06% of all lawyers were disbarred each year. Professional misconduct is the most common reason for attorney discipline. Lawyers can also be disciplined for conduct in their personal lives. There were 1,327,010 active lawyers as of Jan. 1, 2022, according to the ABA National Lawyer Population Survey.

Many lawyers quit the profession because of the long hours, and in many cases, because of the lack of control over your work and your schedule as an attorney. When you're subject to the whims of the court and the partners or other senior lawyers you work for, and client demands, the lack of control can become highly frustrating.

Law firms can go bankrupt and collapse. Law firms are fragile because they are owned by their partners, rather than by investors. Partner ownership creates the conditions for a spiraling cycle of withdrawals that resembles a run on the bank. As the owners of the business, the partners of a law firm are the ones who suffer declines in profits and who have to disgorge their compensation in the event the firm becomes insolvent. So if one partner leaves and damages the firm, it is the remaining partners who bear the loss.

Bankruptcy Filings fell again for the 12-month period ending Dec. 31, 2021. A steady decline in filings has continued since the COVID-19 pandemic began. Annual bankruptcy filings in calendar year 2021 totaled 413,616, compared with 544,463 cases in 2020, according to statistics released by the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts. That is a decrease of 24.0 percent.

Public Interest

Public Interest Law refers to legal practices undertaken to help poor or marginalized people, or to effect change in social policies that are in the public interest. This is a legal action initiated in the court of law for the protection of public interest, instead of serving powerful corporate interests. Public Interest Law stands for the advocacy of otherwise under-represented or vulnerable individuals, especially those living in poverty. Public Interest Law has grown to encompass a broader range of activities, typically civil rights, civil liberties, women's rights, consumer rights, environmental protection, and so on. A common ethic for public-interest lawyers in a growing number of countries remains “fighting for the little guy”. Public Interest Law is usually not for profit or pro bono publico.

Social Policy is a plan or action of government or institutional agencies which aim to improve or reform society. Social policy aims to identify and find ways of reducing inequalities in access to services and support between social groups defined by socio-economic status, race, ethnicity, migration status, gender, sexual orientation, disability and age, and between countries.

Social Justice - Center for Public Interest Journalism - Watchdogs - Whistle Blowing - Defending Yourself - Freedom of the Press - Freedom of Assembly - Civil Rights

PIRG is an advocate for the public interest. We speak out for the public and stand up to special interests on problems that affect the public's health, safety and wellbeing. Public Interest Network.

Public Interest Lawyer or attorneys that serve the public's interest may practice law in several capacities. They offer individualized legal services to clients, as well as work on legal reformation. They are found in many nonprofit organizations and government agencies. Public lawyers work with charitable organizations, educational institutions and international organizations. They will often perform services for clients for reduced fees or at no cost to an individual. Educational Requirements: You need to earn a juris doctorate degree from an institution accredited by the American Bar Association. The student must obtain a license from their state in order to practice law. Continuing education is often required due to the fact that the law is fluid and changes often, especially as new public policies are set. Job Description & Skills Required: The primary characteristic of a public attorney that separates them from a private attorney is their clientele. They serve the public interest in some fashion. They may become a public defender taking on clients who are unable to afford an attorney, upholding the rights of all citizens to have legal representation. Or they may work for a large branch of government on international law. In both cases a public attorney's efforts benefit the public. Some of the cases a public lawyer may get involved with are: Administrative advocacy, Class action lawsuits, Community service and outreach, Legal writing, Professor of Law, Training workshops, Advice and help line. The best candidates will be able to write well. They also must have the ability to work with agency officials on all levels. Any lawyer needs to be well organized and analytical. As with any attorney, good communications skills are vital. They also must have a strong understanding of any particular regulations or rules unique to their area of practice. For instance, if an attorney works in patents, they will want to have a good understanding of patent law. Cases for Public Lawyers: Because the public lawyer will be an advocate for legal matters that affect private citizens or public policy, their caseloads reflect this fact. They may work with an individual or group. Here are just a few examples: Criminal Representation- a public defender will represent a client who is accused of a crime and cannot afford an attorney. When a suspect is arrested, this fact is stated in what is known as their Miranda Rights. The suspect has the right to legal representation even if they can't afford it. Class action lawsuit- a public attorney may represent a group of people who were affected by the wrongful actions of a corporation. In these cases, the attorney works for a private law firm that is representing public interest. Nonprofit work- a lawyer who works with a nonprofit organization may spend time creating handbooks and writing policy papers. While they may represent that organization in a court case, much of their work will be related to how the law affects the actions and duties of the organizations day-to-day activities. Public Lawyer Salary & Job Outlook: The salary for a public lawyer will largely depend on the employer. Public defenders salaries are regulated by U.S. circuit courts of appeals. They stipulate that a public defender's salary not exceed the U.S. attorney who makes $157,000 according to Other public lawyers' salaries are not as well defined. A New York public attorney may start out at $38,000 a year, less than the reported median entry-level salary of $42,000. The jobs available for public lawyers will continue to grow at about 10% a year according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. This figure covers all attorneys; therefore, the need for public attorneys may vary--especially as the economy continues to change.

Public Interest is the welfare or well-being of the general public; commonwealth. Also means appeal or relevance to the general populace. Examples include public benefit, the public good, and the common good and having a common purpose. It can also be a news worthy story of public interest.

 “The noblest motive is the public good.” - Virgil (wiki) - Benefit Corporation.

National Interest is a rationality of governing referring to a sovereign state's goals and ambitions, be they economic, military, cultural, or otherwise. National Interest is the interest of a nation as a whole held to be an independent entity separate from the interests of subordinate areas or groups and also of other nations or supranational groups. Not Corporate Interests.

Reason of State is a purely political reason for action on the part of a ruler or government, especially where a departure from openness, justice, or honesty is involved. Corruption.

Supranational is having power or influence that transcends national boundaries or governments.
Supranational Union is a type of multinational political union where negotiated power is delegated to an authority by governments of member nation states. Lobbyists.

Special Interest Group is a community within a larger organization with a shared interest in advancing a specific area of knowledge, learning or technology where members cooperate to affect or to produce solutions within their particular field, and may communicate, meet, and organize conferences. Lobbyists.

Social Issue is a problem that influences many citizens within a society. It is a group of common problem in present-day society and one that many people strive to solve. It is often the consequence of factors extending beyond an individual's control. Social issues are the source of a conflicting opinion on the grounds of what is perceived as morally correct or incorrect personal life or interpersonal social life decisions. Social issues are distinguished from economic issues; however, some issues (such as immigration) have both social and economic aspects. There are also issues that do not fall into either category, such as warfare. There can be disagreements about what social issues are worth solving, or which should take precedence. Different individuals and different societies have different perceptions. In Rights of Man and Common Sense, Thomas Paine addresses the individual's duty to "allow the same rights to others as we allow ourselves." The failure to do so causes the creation of a social issue. There are a variety of methods people use to combat social issues. Some people vote for leaders in a democracy to advance their ideals. Outside the political process, people donate or share their time, money, energy, or other resources. This often takes the form of volunteering. Nonprofit organizations are often formed for the sole purpose of solving a social issue. Community organizing involves gathering people together for a common purpose. A distinct but related meaning of the term "social issue" (used particularly in the United States) refers to topics of national political interest, over which the public is deeply divided and which are the subject of intense partisan advocacy, debate, and voting. In this case "social issue" does not necessarily refer to an ill to be solved, but rather a topic to be discussed.

Public Service - Social Learning

Social Conflict is the struggle for agency or power in society. Social conflict occurs when two or more actors oppose each other in social interaction, each exerts social power with reciprocity in an effort to achieve incompatible goals whilst preventing the other from attaining their own. It is a social relationship wherein action is intentionally oriented to carry out the actor's own will despite the resistance of others.

Cultural Conflict is a type of conflict that occurs when different cultural values and beliefs clash. Broad and narrow definitions exist for the concept, both of which have been used to explain violence (including war) and crime, on either a micro or macro scale.

Cause Lawyer is a lawyer dedicated to the usage of law for the promotion of social change to address a cause. Cause lawyering is commonly described as a practice of "lawyering for the good" or using law to empower members of the weaker layers of society. It may or may not be performed pro bono. Cause lawyering is frequently practiced by individual lawyers or lawyers employed by associations that aim to supply a public service to complement state-provided legal aid. Cause lawyering is performed by a lawyer or a firm that is "most frequently directed at altering some aspect of the social, economic, and political status quo." The content of the issue is not particularly relevant, only the advocacy of an issue and the attempt to bring about social change through legal or even quasi-legal avenues. Cause lawyering can include dedicated advocacy by public interest firms, pro bono work by attorneys in private practice and other non-traditional forms of law practice that advocates a cause. Lawyers who work for the government, whether federal, state, or local, can also be cause lawyers; although the majority of cause lawyering tends to be adversarial towards the state. Cause lawyer is also known as a public interest lawyer or social lawyer.

Amicus curiae is a person with a strong interest in a court case or has strong views on the subject matter of an action, but not a party to the action, may petition the court for permission to file a brief, ostensibly on behalf of a party but actually to suggest a rationale consistent with its own views. Someone who is not a party to a case who assists a court by offering information, expertise, or insight that has a bearing on the issues in the case. The decision on whether to consider an amicus brief lies within the discretion of the court. The phrase amicus curiae is legal Latin. In the United States, amicus curiae typically refers to what in some other jurisdictions is known as an intervenor: a person or organization who requests to provide legal submissions so as to offer a relevant alternative or additional perspective regarding the matters in dispute. In other jurisdictions, such as Canada, an amicus curiae is a lawyer who is asked by the court to provide legal submissions regarding issues that would otherwise not be aired properly, often because one or both of the parties is not represented by counsel. (friend of the court).

Intervention in law is a procedure to allow a nonparty, called intervenor or intervener, to join ongoing litigation, either as a matter of right or at the discretion of the court, without the permission of the original litigants. The basic rationale for intervention is that a judgment in a particular case may affect the rights of nonparties, who ideally should have the right to be heard.

Legal Mobilization is a tool available to paralegal and advocacy groups, to achieve legal empowerment by supporting a marginalized issues of a stakeholder, in negotiating with the other concerned agencies and other stakeholders, by strategic combined use of legal processes along with advocacy, media engagement and social mobilisation. As per Frances Kahen Zemans (1983) the Legal mobilisation is "a desire or want, which is translated into a demand as an assertion of one's rights".

Legal Awareness is the empowerment of individuals regarding issues involving the law. Legal awareness helps to promote consciousness of legal culture, participation in the formation of laws and the rule of law. Public legal education, sometimes called civics education, comprises a range of activities intended to build public awareness and skills related to law and the justice system. This term also refers to the fields of practice and study concerned with those activities, and to a social and professional movement that advocates greater societal commitment to educating people about the law. Anna-Marie Marshall explains that "in order to realize their rights, people need to take the initiative to articulate them. This initiative, in turn, depends on the availability and the relevance of legal schema to people confronting problems." This is because laws exist as part of a larger organizational ecosystem in which the interests of the organization as well as those of the actors become inextricably linked to the ways in which they are enacted. Distinct from the education of students in law school seeking a degree in law (which is often simply called "legal education") and the continuing professional education of lawyers and judges (which is sometimes called "continuing legal education"), public legal education is principally aimed at people who are not lawyers, judges, or degree-seeking law students. The term "public legal education" (PLE) is related to, and may encompass, several similar terms. The terms "public legal information" and "public legal education and information" (PLEI) emphasize a difference between educating and providing information. The term "community legal education" is common in Australia and the United States, where it often refers to community-based public legal education activities led by legal aid organizations. The term "law-related education" (LRE) usually refers to public legal education in primary and secondary schools (and sometimes in higher education), as opposed to PLE for adults and outside of school. Goals of the legal literacy programs can be broadly divided in three types. Namely educational, competency and critical. Recognize they have a legal right or responsibility, in order to exercise or assume it; Recognize when a problem or conflict is a legal conflict and when a legal solution is available; Know how to take the necessary action to avoid problems and where this is not possible, how to help themselves appropriately; Know how and where to find information on the law, and be able to find information that is accessible to them, Know when and how to obtain suitable legal assistance; Have confidence that the legal system will provide a remedy, and understand the process clearly enough to perceive that justice has been done. Civil Law - Justice.

Impact Litigation is the practice of bringing lawsuits intended to effect societal change. Impact litigation cases may be class action lawsuits or individual claims with broader significance, and may rely on statutory law arguments or on constitutional claims. Such litigation has been widely and successfully used to influence public policy, especially by left-leaning groups, and often attracts significant media attention.

Litigation Strategy is the process by which counsel for one party to a lawsuit intends to integrate their actions with anticipated events and reactions to achieve the overarching goal of the litigation. The strategic goal may be the verdict, or the damages or sentence awarded in the case. Alternatively, in the case of impact litigation (also known as strategic litigation) the goal may be more far-reaching, such as setting legal precedent, affecting consumer-safety standards, or reshaping the public's perception of a societal issue. Broader goals and more challenging cases require a strategist with a greater understanding of, and facility with, the tools of litigation strategy. Attorneys who apply advanced strategic concepts (such as Maneuver and the Boyd Loop), which are not taught in most law schools, may gain a decisive advantage over attorneys who are unfamiliar with the skill set and who, because of their unfamiliarity, can be unwittingly maneuvered into disadvantageous actions. The resulting imbalance has led to academic criticism of the use of advanced strategic techniques. Professor Hugh Selby of Australian National University's College of Law has been particularly critical of its use by prosecutors, who already wield the massive power of the state against often poorly resourced defendants. The counterargument is that strategy can correct already-existing imbalances in the system, allowing a sole or two-attorney law firm with an indigent client to level the playing field against a large law firm with a wealthy corporate client, and allowing attorneys with little trial experience to effectively try cases against vastly more experienced opposing counsel. A line of effort can organize the attorneys' planned actions in the way a case diagram organizes their evidence. Because of the uncertainty inherent in trial practice, the litigators’ strategic plan must be powerful, yet flexible, to remain effective. The line of effort produces the needed power and flexibility by structuring the plan around the purpose and an achievable end state that realizes the purpose, the aims (the elements necessary, or chosen to achieve the end state), and the levers or effects (the actions the counsel can take that are likely to bring about the targeted aims). The visual nature a line of effort allows the attorneys using it to see the entirety of the trial, ensuring their plan comprehensively addresses the situation, and identifying points of high uncertainty where having prepared branch plans would be prudent. It further allows the attorney to exploit unexpected opportunities with an understanding of what elements of his/her plan will be enhanced and which will require further adaptation, making the opportunistic action not only clear-sighted, but focused and efficient. In a fluid situation, any levers or aims rendered obsolete by changes in the situation are swapped out, retaining the bulk of the previously analyzed and validated plan intact, and providing a clear focus for the branch plan or substituted actions.

Indigenous Rights are those rights that exist in recognition of the specific condition of the indigenous peoples. This includes not only the most basic human rights of physical survival and integrity, but also the rights over their land (including native title), language, religion, and other elements of cultural heritage that are a part of their existence and identity as a people. This can be used as an expression for advocacy of social organizations, or form a part of the national law in establishing the relation between a government and the right of self-determination among its indigenous people, or in international law as a protection against violation of indigenous rights by actions of governments or groups of private interests.

International Human Rights Law is the body of international law designed to promote human rights on social, regional, and domestic levels. As a form of international law, international human rights law are primarily made up of treaties, agreements between sovereign states intended to have binding legal effect between the parties that have agreed to them; and customary international law. Other international human rights instruments, while not legally binding, contribute to the implementation, understanding and development of international human rights law and have been recognized as a source of political obligation. The relationship between international human rights law and international humanitarian law is disputed among international law scholars. This discussion forms part of a larger discussion on fragmentation of international law. While pluralist scholars conceive international human rights law as being distinct from international humanitarian law, proponents of the constitutionalist approach regard the latter as a subset of the former. In a nutshell, those who favors separate, self-contained regimes emphasize the differences in applicability; international humanitarian law applies only during armed conflict. A more systemic perspective explains that international humanitarian law represents a function of international human rights law; it includes general norms that apply to everyone at all time as well as specialized norms which apply to certain situations such as armed conflict between both state and military occupation (i.e. IHL) or to certain groups of people including refugees (e.g. the 1951 Refugee Convention), children (the Convention on the Rights of the Child), and prisoners of war (the 1949 Third Geneva Convention).

Jennifer Robinson is an Australian human rights lawyer and barrister with Doughty Street Chambers in London. Before coming to the Bar, she founded the Bertha Justice Initiative and is Director of Legal Advocacy for the Bertha Foundation in London. She is also an adjunct lecturer in Law at the University of Sydney Law School. Robinson is best known for her role as a long-standing member of the legal team defending Julian Assange and WikiLeaks. She has also provided legal assistance to activists from West Papua.

Customary International Law is an aspect of international law involving the principle of custom. Along with general principles of law and treaties, custom is considered by the International Court of Justice, jurists, the United Nations, and its member states to be among the primary sources of international law. Many governments accept in principle the existence of customary international law, although there are differing opinions as to what rules are contained in it.

Environmental Law is a collective term encompassing aspects of the law that provide protection to the environment. A related but distinct set of regulatory regimes, now strongly influenced by environmental legal principles, focus on the management of specific natural resources, such as forests, minerals, or fisheries. Other areas, such as environmental impact assessment, may not fit neatly into either category, but are nonetheless important components of environmental law.

Environmental Racism describes environmental injustice that occurs within a racialized context both in practice and policy. In the United States, environmental racism criticizes inequalities between urban and exurban areas after white flight, which is the sudden or gradual large-scale migration of white people from areas becoming more racially or ethnoculturally diverse.

Legal Drama Films - Law Films - Lawyer Movies

To Kill A Mockingbird is a 1962 American coming-of-age legal drama crime film about a white lawyer who chooses to defend Tom Robinson, an African-American who is falsly accused of raping a white girl. Atticus, a lawyer, strongly believes all people deserve fair treatment, in turning the other cheek, and in defending what you believe. Many of Atticus' clients are poor farmers who pay for his legal services in trade, often leaving him fresh produce, firewood, and so on.[5] Atticus' work as a lawyer often exposes Scout and Jem to the town's racism, aggravated by poverty. As a result, the children mature more quickly.

Philadelphia is a 1993 American legal drama film that tells the story of Attorney Andrew Beckett (Hanks) who comes to ask a personal injury attorney, Joe Miller (Washington), to help him sue his employers, who fired him after discovering he was gay and that he had AIDS.

The Verdict is a 1982 American legal drama film about a down-on-his-luck alcoholic lawyer who accepts a medical malpractice case to improve his own situation, but discovers along the way that he is doing the right thing.

A Few Good Men is a 1992 American legal drama film that follows the court-martial of two U.S. Marines charged with the murder of a fellow Marine and the tribulations of their lawyers as they prepare a case.

Kramer vs. Kramer is a 1979 American legal drama film that tells the story of a couple's divorce and explores the psychology and fallout of divorce and touches upon prevailing or emerging social issues such as gender roles, fathers' rights, work-life balance, and single parents, and how divorce impacts their young son, and the subsequent evolution of their relationship and views on parenting.

Miracle on 34th Street is a 1947 American Christmas comedy-drama film of a story that takes place between Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day in New York City, and focuses on the effect of a department store Santa Claus who claims to be the real Santa. At a hearing before Judge Henry X. Harper, District Attorney Thomas Mara gets Kris to assert that he is Santa Claus and rests his case, asking Harper to rule that Santa does not exist.

Erin Brockovich is a 2000 American biographical film of the true story of Erin Brockovich, who fought against the energy corporation Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E). Erin finds evidence that the groundwater in Hinkley is seriously contaminated with carcinogenic hexavalent chromium, but PG&E had been telling Hinkley residents that they use a safer form of chromium.

Dark Waters is a 2019 American legal thriller film about Robert Bilott's case against the chemical manufacturing corporation DuPont after they contaminated a town with unregulated chemicals.

A Civil Action is a 1998 American legal drama film tells the true story of a court case about environmental pollution that took place in Woburn, Massachusetts, in the 1980s. The film and court case revolve around the issue of trichloroethylene, an industrial solvent, and its contamination of a local aquifer. A lawsuit was filed over industrial operations that appeared to have caused fatal cases of leukemia and cancer, as well as a wide variety of other health problems, among the citizens of the city. The case involved is Anne Anderson, et al., v. Cryovac, Inc., et al.. The first reported decision in the case is at 96 F.R.D. 431 (denial of defendants' motion to dismiss). Duvall was nominated for an Oscar for his performance.

Primal Fear is a 1996 American legal thriller film that stars Richard Gere as a Chicago defense attorney who believes that his altar boy client (played by Edward Norton in his film debut) is not guilty of murdering an influential Catholic archbishop.

The Burial is a 2023 American legal drama film that is loosely based on the true story of lawyer Willie E. Gary and his client Jeremiah Joseph O'Keefe's lawsuit against the Loewen funeral company, as documented in the 1999 New Yorker article of the same name by Jonathan Harr.

The Rainmaker is a 1997 American legal drama film about a scumbag insurance company that denies insurance claims. A women sues the insurance company and wins. But the scumbag insurance company claims bankruptcy, so they get away with murder.

Runaway Jury is a 2003 American legal thriller film that is an adaptation of John Grisham's 1996 novel The Runaway Jury. In New Orleans, a failed day trader at a stock brokerage firm shows up at the office and opens fire on his former colleagues, then kills himself. Among the dead is Jacob Wood. Two years later, with attorney Wendell Rohr, Jacob's widow Celeste takes Vicksburg Firearms to court on the grounds that the company's gross negligence led to her husband's death. During Jury Selection, jury consultant Rankin Fitch and his team communicate background information on each of the jurors to lead defense attorney Durwood Cable in the courtroom through electronic surveillance.

What some TV lawyer shows or courtroom dramas do is that they show us how complex certain problems can be. Some problems are very difficult to solve because there is many variables, and if you don't have an open mind to other possibilities, then those possible outcomes could come back to bite you in the ass. Planning is one thing, being prepared is another. If you don't have a plan b or an option, or if you don't have an answer to a question, you can be in serious trouble, and you can lose an opportunity to fix a serious problem.

Suits is an American legal drama television series about a fictional New York City corporate law firm.

I know actors are just reading from a script, but it still shows how perfectly crafted answers and responses are extremely important in certain situations. Saying the right words at the right time can make all the difference. Sometimes the next sentence you speak could make or break a relationship. Think about what you want to say. But what if you don't know what to say?

Courtroom Terminology - Legal Definitions

Glossary - U.S. Courts Glossary - Legal Definitions - Legal Dictionary - Black's Law Dictionary (wiki) - Law Dictionary (wiki) - The Law - Common Legal Terms (Ct).

Absentia is in the absence or while absent.

Accused is when you are formally charged but not yet tried for committing a crime. The person who has been charged may also be called the defendant.

Implicate - Evidence - Blame - Not Guilty Yet - Miranda Rights - Due Process - Right to a Fair Trial

Accusation is a formal charge of wrongdoing brought against a person. The act of imputing blame or guilt. An assertion that someone is guilty of a fault or offence. 

Recrimination is an accusation in response to another accusation from someone else. Mutual accusation is when you accuse your opponent of refusing to compromise and he accuses you of the same thing. Recrimination is a defense in an action for divorce in which the accused party makes a similar accusation against the plaintiff. The defense of "you, too." Self-Recrimination is the act of accusing yourself or blaming oneself. Confessions.

Acquittal is when a person accused is not guilty of the crime for which he has been tried. A judgment of court, based on the decision of either a jury or a judge. Acquittal formally certifies that the accused is free from the charge of an offense, as far as the criminal law is concerned.

Pardon - Is it Still on your Record?

Appearance of Impropriety is a phrase referring to a situation which to a layperson without knowledge of the specific circumstances might seem to raise ethics questions. For instance, although a person might regularly and reliably collect money for her employer in her personal wallet and later give it to her employer, her putting it in her personal wallet may appear improper and give rise to suspicion, etc. It is common business practice to avoid even the appearance of impropriety.

Adjournment is putting off or postponing business or a session of court until another time or place.

Adjudication is the judicial decision that ends a criminal proceeding by a judgment of acquittal, conviction, or dismissal of the case.

Affidavit is a written statement that the writer swears is true.

Aggravating Factors are factors that make a crime worse than most similar crimes. Aggravating factors are often defined by law and include such things as: victim very old, gang related, done for hire, especially cruel, defendant does not support his family, or took advantage of a position of trust.

Aggravated Range indicates a sentence that is more severe than the “presumed” sentence for a given crime. A defendant may receive more time if the judge finds aggravating factors. If no aggravating factors are found, the sentence will come from either the “presumptive” or “mitigated” range.

Alleged is something said to be true, but not yet proven to be true; until the trial is over, the crime may be called the “alleged crime.” Implicate.

Allegation is a formal accusation against somebody, often in a court of law. Statements affirming or denying certain matters of fact that you are prepared to prove. Complaint.

Appeal is a request by either the defense or the prosecution that a higher court review the results of a decision on certain motions or in a completed trial. This can be an appeal from superior court to an appeals court, or an appeal from district court to superior court for a trial. Appellate Court.

Arbitration is a hearing and determination of a dispute by an impartial referee agreed to by both parties The act of deciding as an arbiter; giving authoritative judgment. Mandatory binding arbitration is a process by which parties “agree” to have a third party arbitrator (single arbitrator or a panel), instead of a jury or judge, resolve a dispute. Arbitrators are not required to have any legal training and they need not follow the law. Warning! Warning!

Arbiter is someone with the power to settle matters at will. Someone chosen to judge and decide a disputed issue.

Arbitration Clause is Signing Away Your Right to Sue. Waiving your right to sue. Warning! Waiver is the voluntary relinquishment or surrender of some known right or privilege. Arbitration.

Arraignment is to bring a prisoner before a judge to ask how he pleads to the charges against him. Arraignment is a formal reading of a criminal charging document in the presence of the defendant, to inform him of the charges against the defendant. In response to arraignment, the accused is expected to enter a plea. Acceptable pleas vary among jurisdictions, but they generally include "guilty", "not guilty", and the peremptory pleas (or pleas in bar) setting out reasons why a trial cannot proceed. Pleas of "nolo contendere" (no contest) and the "Alford plea" are allowed in some circumstances. Bond.

Arraigned is to call before a court to answer an indictment. Accuse of a wrong or an inadequacy. Hearing.

Arrest is the act of apprehending a person and taking them into custody, usually because they have been suspected of committing or planning a crime. After the person is taken into custody, usually at a police station, they can be questioned further and/or charged. An arrest is an important procedure in a criminal justice system. False Arrest.

Legal Custody includes detention in pursuance of any enactment or any instrument made under an enactment.

Arrest warrant is a written order issued by the District court or magistrate including a statement of the crime of which the person to be arrested is accused, and directing that the person be arrested and held to answer the accusation before a magistrate or other judge.

Suspected is believed to be a cause of a crime or at fault.

Extradition is the act by one jurisdiction of delivering a person who has been accused of committing a crime in another jurisdiction or has been convicted of a crime in that other jurisdiction into the custody of a law enforcement agency of that other jurisdiction. It is a cooperative law enforcement process between the two jurisdictions and depends on the arrangements made between them. Besides the legal aspects of the process, extradition also involves the physical transfer of custody of the person being extradited to the legal authority of the requesting jurisdiction.

Kidnapping is the unlawful carrying away (asportation) and confinement of a person against his or her will. Thus, it is a composite crime. It can also be defined as false imprisonment by means of abduction, both of which are separate crimes that when committed simultaneously upon the same person merge as the single crime of kidnapping.

Citizen's Arrest is an arrest made by a person who is not acting as a sworn law-enforcement official.

Power of Arrest is a mandate given by a central authority that allows an individual to remove a criminal's (or suspected criminal's) liberty. The power of arrest can also be used to protect a person, or persons from harm or to protect damage to property. Plea Bargain.

Assailant is a person identified as the attacker.


Attorney a practicing lawyer in certain jurisdictions. The term has its roots in the verb to "attorn", meaning to transfer one's rights and obligations to another.

Bad Attorney's - Power of Attorney

State's Attorney is a lawyer representing the interests of the state in a legal proceeding, typically as a prosecutor. It is an official title in the United States, sometimes appointed but most commonly an elected official serving as the chief law enforcement officer of his or her county, circuit, or district. The offices of district attorney, commonwealth's attorney, county attorney, county prosecutor, or prosecuting attorney are more frequently the case in the United States although South Carolina uses the term solicitor. Attorney General - Public Defender - Law Education.

District Attorney is the chief prosecutor for a local government area, typically a county. The exact name of the office varies by state. Except in the smallest counties, a district attorney leads a staff of prosecutors, who are most commonly known as deputy district attorneys (DDAs). The Deputy who serves as the supervisor of the office is often called the Assistant District Attorney. The majority of prosecutions will be delegated to DDAs, with the district attorney prosecuting the most important cases and having overall responsibility for their agency and its work. Depending upon the system in place, DAs may be appointed by the chief executive of the jurisdiction or elected by local voters. The district attorney, and assistant district attorneys under the district attorney’s authority, are the attorneys representing a government body as prosecutors who are responsible for presenting cases against individuals and groups who are suspected of breaking the law, initiating and directing further criminal investigations, guiding and recommending the sentencing of offenders, and are the only attorneys allowed to participate in grand jury proceedings. Assistant District Attorney (ADA) is an assistant district attorney works for the elected District Attorney. An ADA will review and prosecute cases as assigned. ADA's meet with law enforcement, witnesses, and victims. They generally have authority to dispose of those cases assigned to them.

Bail is an amount of money set by the court that allows a person charged with a crime to be released from custody. The purpose of bail is to insure that the offender will return to court. Bail Bonds.

Bailiff is a uniformed officer who keeps order in the courtroom.

Barratry is the act of repeated legal actions for the purpose of greed or harassment. Barratry (common law) (wiki).

Bench is how the judge is sometimes referred to as in “the bench;” also where the judge sits during the proceedings.

Bench Warrant is an order issued by a judge to bring to court an accused person who has been released before trial and does not return to court when ordered to do so; or a witness who has failed to appear when ordered to do so.

Beyond a Reasonable Doubt is the degree of proof needed for a jury or judge to convict an accused person of a crime. Terry Stop.

Bond in criminal court, a term meaning the same thing as “bail;” generally a certificate or evidence of a debt. Bond Types.

Bond Forfeiture is a hearing to determine if the bond on a defendant is to be forfeited after a defendant fails to show for court. Forfeited bond money goes to the public schools.

Bondsman is also Bail Bondsman, a licensed person or person working for a licensed company, who will post bond for a defendant upon payment of a fee. The fee is generally fifteen per cent (15%) of the bond.

Booking is an official police record of the arrest of a person accused of committing a crime which identifies the accused, the time and place of arrest, the arresting authority, and the reason for the arrest.

Calendar is a document listing cases for hearing before a court. Calendars may be for district court, superior court, motions, forfeitures, criminal docket management, plea, or trials.

Case or legal case is a dispute between opposing parties resolved by a court, or by some equivalent legal process. A legal case may be either civil or criminal law. In each legal case there is an accuser and one or more defendants.

Capital Case is a first-degree murder case in which the jury can impose either a life sentence or the death penalty. If a person is guilty of first-degree murder and there are any statutory aggravating factors then the State has to seek the death penalty.

Charge is the formal accusation filed by the prosecutor’s office that a specific person has committed a specific crime; the filing may be called “pressing charges.” Complaint - Indictment - Criminal.

Criminal Charge is a formal accusation made by a governmental authority asserting that somebody has committed a crime. A charging document, which contains one or more criminal charges or counts, can take several forms, including: complaint, information, indictment, citation, traffic ticket. The charging document is what generally starts a criminal case in court. But the procedure by which somebody is charged with a crime and what happens when somebody has been charged varies from country to country and even, within a country, from state to state. Before a person is proven guilty, the charge must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

Charges Dropped by the prosecutor may happen for several reasons: New, credible witnesses have come forward to refute the current witnesses' stories. The defense has enough evidence to sway a jury in their favor. The physical evidence against the accused is weak. New evidence exonerates the accused. An example of this is DNA evidence that was not available when the crime occurred. The prosecution's best evidence has been ruled inadmissible. This can happen if the evidence was obtained without a valid warrant. The prosecutor may drop more serious charges in exchange for a guilty plea to lesser charges. Remedy - Injunction - Most Wanted.

Arraignment is a formal reading of a criminal charging document in the presence of the defendant to inform the defendant of the charges against the defendant. In response to arraignment, the accused is expected to enter a plea. Acceptable pleas vary among jurisdictions, but they generally include "guilty", "not guilty", and the peremptory pleas (or pleas in bar) setting out reasons why a trial cannot proceed. Pleas of "nolo contendere" (no contest) and the "Alford plea" are allowed in some circumstances. Alford plea is a guilty plea in criminal court. Private Arbitration.

Circumstantial Evidence - Implicate - Allegation - Complaint - Lawsuit

Extradition is the surrender by one state to another of an individual accused or convicted of an offense outside its own territory and within the territorial jurisdiction of the other.

Challenging is to raise a formal objection in a court of law.

Citation is the act of citing (as of spoken words or written passages or legal precedents etc.).

Citation is a summons that commands the appearance of a party at a proceeding.

Case Citation is a system used by legal professionals to identify past court case decisions called a Law Report, which are a series of books that contain judicial opinions from a selection of case law decided by courts. When a particular judicial opinion is referenced, the law report series in which the opinion is printed will determine the case citation format.

Clerk of Court is an officer of a court of justice who has charge of the clerical part of its business -- who keeps its records and seal, issues process, enters judgments and orders, gives certified copies from the records, et cetera.

Commitment is the warrant or order by which a court or magistrate directs an officer to take a person to prison.

Complaint is a term in civil cases that signifies a filing of a suit. In criminal court, the complaint is the reporting of a crime to authorities. Complaint is any formal legal document that sets out the facts and legal reasons (see: cause of action) that the filing party or parties (the plaintiff(s)) believes are sufficient to support a claim against the party or parties against whom the claim is brought (the defendant(s)) that entitles the plaintiff(s) to a remedy (either money damages or injunctive relief). Criminal Charge.

Nuisance means something that causes offence, annoyance, trouble or injury. A nuisance can be either public (also "common") or private. Bias - Perception.

Contempt of Court is the offence of being disobedient to or discourteous towards a court of law and its officers in the form of behavior that opposes or defies the authority, justice, and dignity of the court. It manifests itself in willful disregard of or disrespect for the authority of a court of law, which is often behavior that is illegal because it does not obey or respect the rules of a law court.

Bad Judges - Censorship - Freedom of Speech - Appeals

Concurrent Sentence is when two or more sentences are served at the same time. Running together; Opposite of consecutive sentence.

Consecutive Sentence is one sentence beginning at the completion of another. Successive; Succeeding one another in regular order.

Contest is to make the subject of dispute, contention, or litigation. Will Contest is a formal objection raised against the validity of a will, based on the contention that the will does not reflect the actual intent of the testator (the party who made the will) or that the will is otherwise invalid. Contract.

Continuance is a postponement of a court hearing; putting it off until another day.

Criminal Court is a court that hears cases concerned with the alleged violation of criminal law. Courts.

Criminal Justice System are the government agencies in charge with law enforcement, prosecution of alleged violations of the criminal law, the court hearing of charges against the accused, and the punishment and supervision of those convicted.

Criminal Law is the law whose violation is considered an offense against the state and is punishable upon conviction by imprisonment and other penalties for adult offenders and by action of a juvenile court for juvenile offenders.

Cross Examination is the examination of a witness by the party opposed to the one who produced him during a trial or hearing, or upon taking a deposition.

District Attorney or DA is an attorney elected by the people of the community in his/her district to represent the interests of the general public, including crime victims, in court proceedings against people accused of committing crimes. Other jurisdictions use other terms: Prosecutor, such as U.S. Attorney or a federal prosecutor, solicitor, or state’s attorney.

District Attorney’s Report is a report that is prepared by law enforcement in felony cases to inform the District Attorney what the facts are in a case. This is also known as a “felony report.”

Defendant is a person who has been formally charged with committing a crime; the person accused of a crime. Defendant is a person or entity accused of a crime in criminal prosecution or a person or entity against whom some type of civil relief is being sought in a civil case. Plaintiff.

Defense is when a defendant may raise a defense (or defence) in an attempt to avoid civil liability or criminal conviction. A defense is put forward by a party to defeat a suit or action brought against the party, and may be based on legal grounds or on factual claims. Not Guilty - Innocent.

Defense Attorney is the lawyer who represents the defendant in legal proceedings. Victims are usually not required to speak with defense attorneys except in court, but may do so if they choose.

Defense Strategy is a product of a defendant and defense attorney fitting together their version of the truth that is most likely to produce a satisfactory defense outcome or a verdict of not guilty, a verdict of guilt of a lesser charge, or an acceptable plea bargain. A defense attorney defends the individual that a prosecutor is trying to convince the jury is guilty. In a criminal court, these attorneys are on opposite sides. The prosecutor must charge the accused with a specific crime or crimes, then present evidence that proves beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused is guilty. The defense attorney must defend their client against criminal charges. The client is innocent until proven guilty. A prosecutor's job is easier than a defense attorney generally. A prosecutor represents the interests of public safety, working to prove that a person or group has committed a crime and deserves to be punished and locked up and separated from the public to keep the public safe from repeated offenses. 8 key factors drive what your best defense strategy is: Defendant’s explanation of what happened, why and credibility. Witness testimony and credibility. Provable facts and physical evidence. Police reports, errors and credibility. Expert, 3rd party reports and testimony. Penal code charge and the required crime elements to prove. Criminal prosecutor strategy & history. Judicial precedent & the judge’s history. Best Criminal Defense Strategies. 1. Mistaken identity. 2. Accident. 3. Duress or immediate danger, and Necessity, done only to avoid a greater harm, or Self defense or defense of others. 4. Beyond a reasonable doubt, with clear and convincing evidence and facts, probable cause and reasonable suspicion. 5. Defendant has an alibi. 6. Entrapment. 7. Police misconduct. 8. Compelled or false confessions. 9. Falsely accused. 10. Mistake of fact. 11. Involuntary intoxication or drugged. 12. Plea of insanity and did not understand the nature of the criminal act or did not understand that the act was morally wrong. 13. Double jeopardy, can not be prosecuted for the same crime twice or face multiple punishments for the same crime. 14. Statute of limitations, which forbids criminal prosecutors from charging someone with a crime that was committed more than a specified number of years ago.

Deferred Sentence is when a defendant enters a guilty plea, receives probation for a certain amount of time, and gives up the right to trial. The DA dismisses the case if the probation is completed successfully. Sentencing Guidelines.

Deposed is to testify to or give (evidence) on oath, typically in a written statement.

Direct Examination is the first interrogation or examination of a witness during trial by the party on whose behalf he is called.

Discovery is the process by which the DA provides to a Defense Attorney information gathered during the investigation of a felony; the ascertainment of that which was previously unknown.

Dismissal is a decision by the prosecutor or other judicial officer to end a case for legal or other reasons. To remove from the record. Not the same as nullified. Not Guilty.

Disposition is the final judicial decision which ends a criminal proceeding by a judgment of acquittal or dismissal, or which states the sentence if the accused is convicted. Plea Bargain.

District Court is where misdemeanor cases are heard concerning the violation of state statutes.

Double Jeopardy is putting a person on trial more than once for the same offense; double jeopardy is forbidden by the U.S. Constitution.

Due Process is the administration of justice according to established rules and principles; based on the principle that a person cannot be deprived of life or liberty or property without appropriate legal procedures and safeguards.- Due Process.

Electronic House Arrest is when defendants are placed on supervised probation and monitored electronically twenty-four hours a day. Defendants on this program must remain in their homes when not at their employment or receiving treatment. A response team responds to violations twenty-four hours a day.

Endorsement of Witnesses is when all prosecution witnesses must be named.

Enhanced Intensive Probation is intensive probation with the added requirement of electronic monitoring of the defendant similar to that used in electronic house arrest.

Exculpatory is clearing or tending to clear from alleged fault or guilt. Evidence.

Ex parte is on one side only, done for one party.

Expert Witness is a person possessing special knowledge acquired from practical experience, training and education. A woman or a man with a degree or accreditation that pertains to a particular science specialty. Expert witness (wiki).

Subject Matter Expert - Evidence - Witnesses - Consensus - Experts?

Eye Witness Failures (Mistaken Identity and Memory Limits). Bias.

Cross-Examination is the interrogation of a witness called by one's opponent.

Direct Examination is the questioning of a witness by the party who called him or her, in a trial. Direct examination is usually performed to elicit evidence in support of facts which will satisfy a required element of a party's claim or defense.

Questioning - Trick Questions

Allegation is a claim of a fact by a party in a pleading, charge, or defense. Until they can be proved, allegations remain merely assertions without evidence.

False Accusations is when there is insufficient supporting evidence to determine whether an accusation is true or false, it is described as "unsubstantiated" or "unfounded". False Arrest.

Hearsay is something that was heard through another person rather than directly from the person. Something that can not be verified and may be just gossip or propaganda.

Probable Cause is the standard by which police authorities have reason to obtain a warrant for the arrest of a suspected criminal. The standard also applies to personal or property searches.

Affirming the Consequent is a formal fallacy of taking a true conditional statement and invalidly inferring its converse even though the converse may not be true. One way to demonstrate the invalidly of this argument form is with a counterexample with true premises but an obviously false conclusion. For example: If someone owns Fort Knox, then he is rich. Bill Gates is rich. Therefore, Bill Gates owns Fort Knox. So Owning Fort Knox is not the only way to be rich. Any number of other ways exist to be rich.

Denying the Antecedent is a formal fallacy of inferring the inverse from the original statement or the invalidity of certain arguments.

Specific facts that can be expressed using words with rational inferences from those facts.

Suspicion as an emotion is a cognition of mistrust in which a person doubts the honesty of another person or believes another person to be guilty of some type of wrongdoing or crime, but without sure proof.

Reasonable Suspicion must be based on specific and articulable facts that are taken together with rational inferences from those facts, and the suspicion must be associated with the specific individual.

Jury Instructions - Past Rulings

Precedent is an example that is used to justify similar occurrences at a later time. A law established by following earlier judicial decisions. A system of jurisprudence based on judicial precedents rather than statutory laws. A subject mentioned earlier (preceding in time).

Evidence - Proof - Make Your Case

Evidence is witnesses, expert testimony and physical evidence, which is any material object that proves a fact in issue based on the object's demonstrable physical characteristics.

Best Evidence Rule is a legal principle that holds an original of a document as superior evidence. The rule specifies that secondary evidence, such as a copy or facsimile, will be not admissible if an original document exists and can be obtained.

Trier of Fact is a person, or group of persons, who determines facts in a legal proceeding, usually a trial. To determine a fact is to decide, from the evidence, whether something existed or some event occurred. Various aspects of a case that are not in controversy may be the "facts of the case" and are determined by the agreement of the separate parties; the trier of fact need not decide such issues. Discovery.

Preponderance of the Evidence is when a greater weight of the evidence is required. Evidence must be convincing and give more than a 50% chance that a claim is true or accurate and beyond a reasonable doubt, and that evidentiary standards and the burden of proof is met.

Burden of Proof is producing enough evidence that is persuasive enough to establish the truth of facts that are needed to satisfy all the required legal elements of a legal dispute. Producing at least enough evidence for the trier of fact to consider a disputed claim. Legal Burden of Proof states that the burden of proving the defendant's guilt is on the prosecution, and they must establish that fact beyond a reasonable doubt. In civil cases, the plaintiff has the burden of proving his case by a preponderance of the evidence. Legal Burden of Proof is the duty of a party in a trial to produce the evidence that will shift the conclusion away from the default position to that party's own position. Burden of Proof in philosophy is the obligation on a party in a dispute to provide sufficient warrant for their position.

Proof - Assume - Guilt - Missing Evidence

Evidentiary is something that has the characteristics of an evidence and qualifies as evidence. An evidentiary hearing is a hearing in which only the evidence is recorded by the court.

Preliminary Hearing is a proceeding, after a criminal complaint has been filed by the prosecutor, to determine whether there is enough evidence to require a trial. At such a hearing, the defendant may be assisted by a lawyer. A preliminary hearing is also known as a preliminary examination, preliminary inquiry, evidentiary hearing or probable cause hearing. Jury.

Reasonable Doubt is when the prosecution in criminal matters typically bears the burden of proof and is required to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt. This means that in order for a defendant to be found guilty the case presented by the prosecution must be enough to remove any reasonable doubt in the mind of the jury that the defendant is guilty of the crime with which they are charged. Reasonable doubt is a legal standard of proof required to validate a criminal conviction in most adversarial legal systems. It is a higher standard of proof than the balance of probabilities (commonly used in civil matters) and is usually therefore reserved for criminal matters where what is at stake (e.g. someone's liberty) is considered more serious and therefore deserving of a higher threshold. Jurisdictions are reliant on this standard of proof and often rely on additional or supplemental measures, such as specific jury directions, which simplify or qualify what is meant by a "reasonable doubt". The principle for the requirement that a criminal case to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt (as opposed to on the balance of probabilities) can be traced to Blackstone's formulation that "it is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer", i.e. if there is any doubt that a person is guilty, it is better that they be acquitted than to risk an innocent person being convicted. Beyond Reasonable Doubt (wiki).

Exculpatory Evidence is evidence favorable to the defendant in a criminal trial that exonerates or tends to exonerate the defendant of guilt. It is the opposite of inculpatory evidence, which tends to present guilt.

Prejudicial Evidence is evidence that has a tendency to unduly influence the fact-finder to decide a matter on an improper basis. The court may exclude relevant evidence if its probative value is substantially outweighed by its likely prejudicial effect. Excluding relevant evidence in federal court trials when the potential for prejudice, confusion, or waste of time outweighs its probative value. Prejudicial is something unfairly biased, damaging, detrimental and harmful to someone.

Circumstantial Evidence is evidence that relies on an inference to connect it to a conclusion of fact—such as a fingerprint at the scene of a crime. Relevance - Relevant Evidence.

Direct Evidence supports the truth of an assertion. In criminal law, an assertion of guilt or of innocence directly, i.e., without an intervening inference.

Mitigating Factor or extenuating circumstance, is any information or evidence presented to the court regarding the defendant or the circumstances of the crime that might result in reduced charges or a lesser sentence. Unlike a legal defense, the presentation of mitigating factors will not result in the acquittal of a defendant.

Aggravating Factor refers to circumstances surrounding a crime or tort that are sufficient to raise its severity and punishment to the aggravated version of the offense.

False Pretenses - Bias in Research - Unconstitutional - Invalid Argument

Forged Evidence is an item or information manufactured, or altered, to support some agenda, is not admissible in many courts, including U.S. criminal courts.

Tampering with Evidence is an act in which a person alters, conceals, falsifies, or destroys evidence with the intent to interfere with an investigation (usually) by a law-enforcement, governmental, or regulatory authority. Frivolous.

Spoliation of Evidence is the intentional, reckless, or negligent withholding, hiding, altering, fabricating, or destroying of evidence relevant to a legal proceeding.

Planted Evidence is an item or information which has been moved, or planted at a scene, to seem related to the accused party, is not admissible in many courts, including U.S. criminal courts.

Tainted Evidence is information which has been obtained by illegal means or has been revealed (or traced) using evidence acquired by illegal search, and/or seizure, is called the "fruit of the poisonous tree" and is not admissible in many courts, including U.S. criminal courts.

False Evidence is information created or obtained illegally in order to manipulate the verdict in a court case. Falsified evidence could be created by either side in a case (including the police/prosecution in a criminal case), or by someone sympathetic to either side. Misleading by suppressing evidence can also be considered a form of false evidence by omission, however, in some cases, suppressed evidence is excluded because it cannot be proved the accused was aware of the items found or of their location. The analysis of evidence or forensic evidence may also be forged if the person doing the forensic work finds it easier to fabricate evidence and test results than to perform the actual work involved. Parallel construction is a form of false evidence in which the evidence is truthful but its origins are untruthfully described, at times in order to avoid evidence being excluded as inadmissible due to unlawful means of procurement such as an unlawful search. (fabricated evidence, forged evidence or tainted evidence). False Evidence (probable cause).

Parallel Construction or Tainted Evidence is when the origin of the evidence is untruthfully represented, preventing discussion of whether it was legally obtained or not. Planted Evidence.

Rule 3.4: Fairness to Opposing Party & Counsel. A lawyer shall not: (a) unlawfully obstruct another party' s access to evidence or unlawfully alter, destroy or conceal a document or other material having potential evidentiary value. A lawyer shall not counsel or assist another person to do any such act; (b) falsify evidence, counsel or assist a witness to testify falsely, or offer an inducement to a witness that is prohibited by law; (c) knowingly disobey an obligation under the rules of a tribunal except for an open refusal based on an assertion that no valid obligation exists; (d) in pretrial procedure, make a frivolous discovery request or fail to make reasonably diligent effort to comply with a legally proper discovery request by an opposing party; (e) in trial, allude to any matter that the lawyer does not reasonably believe is relevant or that will not be supported by admissible evidence, assert personal knowledge of facts in issue except when testifying as a witness, or state a personal opinion as to the justness of a cause, the credibility of a witness, the culpability of a civil litigant or the guilt or innocence of an accused; or (f) request a person other than a client to refrain from voluntarily giving relevant information to another party unless: (1) the person is a relative or an employee or other agent of a client; and (2) the lawyer reasonably believes that the person's interests will not be adversely affected by refraining from giving such information.

Evidence of Absence is evidence of any kind that suggests something is missing or that it does not exist. Per the traditional aphorism, "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence", positive evidence of this kind is distinct from a lack of evidence or ignorance of that which should have been found already, had it existed. Fallacy.

Without a Shred of Evidence means there is an absence of confirmation, basis for belief, corroboration, documentation, grounds to believe, indicia of evidence, modicum of eviience, modicum of proof, some evidence, some grounds, some means of proof, some persuasive evidence, some proof, some proof of facts, substantiation, validation.

Relevant Evidence is evidence that is applicable to the issue and which ought to be received. Irrelevant evidence is that which is not so applicable, and which must be rejected. Relevance.

Suppressed Evidence is an item or information which a court judge has ruled as "inadmissible" is forbidden to be presented in a court case. Suppressed evidence might be excluded because it was found hidden or locked away in areas the accused could not be proven to know. Suppression of Evidence describes the lawful or unlawful act of preventing evidence from being shown in a trial. Motion to Suppress (wiki).

Withheld Evidence - Censorship - Tampering with Evidence - Exculpatory - Discovery - Flawed Reasoning - Cherry Picking Data - Lying by Omission - Malicious Prosecution

Inadmissible Evidence is unreliable information that's not based on facts.

Admissible Evidence is any testimonial, documentary, or tangible evidence that may be introduced to a factfinder—usually a judge or jury—to establish or to bolster a point put forth by a party to the proceeding. For evidence to be admissible, it must be relevant and "not excluded by the rules of evidence", which generally means that it must not be unfairly prejudicial, and it must have some indicia of reliability. The general rule in evidence is that all relevant evidence is admissible and all irrelevant evidence is inadmissible, though some countries (such as the United States and, to an extent, Australia) proscribe the prosecution from exploiting evidence obtained in violation of constitutional law, thereby rendering relevant evidence inadmissable. This rule of evidence is called the exclusionary rule. Disclosure Agreements.

Corroboration is material facts require to be proved by evidence from two independent sources.

Substantiation is confirmed evidence, evidence which bears out the truth, evidence which proves a supposition, evidence which ratifies a position, evidence which validates a supposition, supporting evidence or verification.

How to Challenge Evidence in Court.

Exhibit is an artifact or document itself that is presented for the jury's inspection. Examples may include a weapon allegedly used in the crime, an invoice or written contract, a photograph, or a video recording. The main concept behind correct evidence handling is that the item recovered is the same as that produced in the court room. Before you ever go to court, think about the evidence you want to use to prove your case. Mark each piece of evidence with an exhibit number (attach a sticker labeled “Exhibit 1,” “Exhibit 2,” etc.). Bring these marked Exhibits with you to court. When you want to show the court one of the exhibits, do the following things: 1.) Show the exhibit to the other party or the other party’s attorney. 2.) Then “lay the foundation” for the evidence. To do this, you must show that the evidence is relevant to your case and authentic (not a forgery). Depending upon what you want the court to consider, follow the rules listed in this pamphlet for “laying the foundation” -explaining why and how the exhibit is connected to your case. 3.) Either you or your witness must testify about the exhibit. 4.) Ask the court to admit the exhibit into evidence. The other party or attorney may object to the exhibit for some reason. Try to answer these objections as best you can. If you can’t, let the judge decide. 5.) If there are no objections from the other party, or the judge has ruled in your favor, ask the court to “admit the Exhibit into evidence.” To lay the foundation for a photograph, follow these steps: 1.) Explain why a photo is connected to your case. For example: “This photo shows the injury I suffered after my ex-boyfriend punched and kicked me.” 2.) Explain how you know about what is in the photo. For example: “I had my sister take this photograph two hours after the incident occurred.” 3.) Explain that the photo is timely. For example: “At the bottom right-hand corner of the photo is the date on which it was taken. As you can see, the photo was taken on the same day that the incident occurred, which is also the same day the police arrested my ex-boyfriend.” 4.) Explain that the photo “fairly and accurately” shows what is depicted in the photo as it appeared on the date relevant to your case. For example: “This photo is a fair and accurate depiction of how my face and side looked two hours after the incident and for the next two weeks. To lay the foundation for a letter or a document, follow these steps:1.) Explain why the letter or document is connected to your case. For example:“ This is the letter that I received from my ex-boyfriend shortly before he beat me up." 2.) Explain when and how you got the letter or document. For example: “This letter was shoved under the door to my apartment some time before 6 p.m. on January 2. I found it on the floor when I came home from work that day.” 3.) Prove that the signature is that of a party to the case by testifying that you are familiar with the signature or call a witness who is familiar with the party’s signature. 4.) Explain that the letter is in the same condition now as when you received it. For example: “The letter was kept in a safe place and nothing has been changed since I received it.” I Present to you Exhibit Number One.

Make Your Case means to give arguments supporting your position or ideas.

Chain of Custody is the chronological documentation or paper trail that records the sequence of custody, control, transfer, analysis, and disposition of physical or electronic evidence. Of particular importance in criminal cases, the concept is also applied in civil litigation—and sometimes more broadly in drug testing of athletes, and in supply chain management. An example of chain of custody would be the recovery of a bloody knife at a murder scene: Officer Andrew collects the knife and places it into a container, then gives it to forensics technician Bill. Forensics technician Bill takes the knife to the lab and collects fingerprints and other evidence from the knife. Bill then gives the knife and all evidence gathered from the knife to evidence clerk Charlene. Charlene then stores the evidence until it is needed, documenting everyone who has accessed the original evidence (the knife, and original copies of the lifted fingerprints). The chain of custody requires that from the moment the evidence is collected, every transfer of evidence from person to person be documented and that it be provable that nobody else could have accessed that evidence. It is best to keep the number of transfers as low as possible. In the courtroom, if the defendant questions the chain of custody of the evidence it can be proven that the knife in the evidence room is the same knife found at the crime scene. However, if there are discrepancies and it cannot be proven who had the knife at a particular point in time, then the chain of custody is broken and the defendant can ask to have the resulting evidence declared inadmissible. Chain of Custody is also used in most chemical sampling situations to maintain the integrity of the sample by providing documentation of the control, transfer, and analysis of samples. Chain of custody is especially important in environmental work where sampling can identify the existence of contamination and can be used to identify the responsible party. Evidence Management (wiki).

I Rest My Case is said when you believe that you have shown enough evidence that proves your point and proves your argument and that you are right and you are telling the truth. Closing Argument - Conclusions.

Whitewashing or censorship is a metaphor meaning "to gloss over or cover up vices, crimes or scandals or to exonerate by means of a perfunctory investigation or through biased presentation of data".

Police Corruption is undermining criminal prosecutions by withholding evidence or failing to appear at judicial hearings, for bribery or as a personal favor. Lying to protect other officers or oneself in a court of law or a department investigation.

Refute is to overthrow by argument, evidence, or proof. To prove something to be false or incorrect. To prove that a perceived claim or assumption or false evidence or a manipulation of a law is not accurate or right, and that someone is lying.

Mistake of Law - Mistake in criminal law - Mens rea

NIST Experts Urge Caution in Use of Courtroom Evidence Presentation Method. Arguing that it risks allowing personal preference to creep into expert testimony and potentially distorts evidence for a jury. An expert’s judgment often involves complicated statistical techniques that can give different Likelihood Ratios depending on which expert is making the judgment. As a result, one expert’s specific LR number can differ substantially from another’s.

Forensic Evidence (science) - Research - DNA

Attorney-Client Privilege is a "client's right privilege to refuse to disclose and to prevent any other person from disclosing confidential communications between the client and the attorney." The attorney–client privilege is one of the oldest recognized privileges for confidential communications. The United States Supreme Court has stated that by assuring confidentiality, the privilege encourages clients to make "full and frank" disclosures to their attorneys, who are then better able to provide candid advice and effective representation. (Is this just another loophole for the wealthy and white privileged to commit more crimes?)

Confidant is a person with whom one shares a secret or private matter and trusting them not to repeat it to others. Someone to whom private matters are confided. To reveal information in private and tell confidentially.

Confidante is a female confidant.

Joint Defense Privilege is an extension of the attorney–client privilege. Under “common interest” or “joint defense” doctrine, parties with shared interest in actual or potential litigation against common adversary may share privileged information without waiving their right to assert attorney–client privilege. Because the joint defense "privilege sometimes may apply outside the context of actual litigation, what the parties call a ‘joint defense’ privilege is more aptly termed the ‘common interest’ rule.

Spousal Privilege prevents spouses from having to condemn, or from being condemned by their spouses. The spousal communications privilege or confidences privilege is a form of privileged communication that protects the contents of confidential communications between spouses during their marriage from testimonial disclosure, while spousal testimonial privilege (also called spousal incompetency and spousal immunity) protects the individual holding the privilege from being called to testify in proceedings relating to their spouse. However, in some countries, the spousal privileges have their roots in the legal fiction that a husband and wife were one person. This term is used in the law of evidence to describe two separate privileges that apply to spouses: the spousal communications privilege and the spousal testimonial privilege. Spousal Privilege is also called marital privilege or husband-wife privilege.

Physician-Patient Privilege is a legal concept, related to medical confidentiality, that protects communications between a patient and his or her doctor from being used against the patient in court. It is a part of the rules of evidence in many common law jurisdictions. Almost every jurisdiction that recognizes physician–patient privilege not to testify in court, either by statute or through case law, limits the privilege to knowledge acquired during the course of providing medical services. In some jurisdictions, conversations between a patient and physician may be privileged in both criminal and civil courts.

Priest-Penitent Privilege is a rule of evidence that forbids judicial inquiry into certain communications (spoken or otherwise) between clergy and members of their congregation. The law recognises certain communication as privileged and not subject to otherwise obligatory disclosure; for example, this often applies to communications between lawyers and clients.

State Secrets Privilege results in exclusion of evidence from a legal case based solely on affidavits submitted by the government stating that court proceedings might disclose sensitive information which might endanger national security.

Public-Interest Immunity is when the English courts can grant a court order allowing one litigant to refrain from disclosing evidence to the other litigants where disclosure would be damaging to the public interest. This is an exception to the usual rule that all parties in litigation must disclose any evidence that is relevant to the proceedings. In making a PII order, the court has to balance the public interest in the administration of justice (which demands that relevant material is available to the parties to litigation) and the public interest in maintaining the confidentiality of certain documents whose disclosure would be damaging. PII orders have been used in criminal law against large organized criminal outfits and drug dealers where the identity of paid police informants could be at risk.

Privilege Evidence is a rule of evidence that allows the holder of the privilege to refuse to disclose information or provide evidence about a certain subject or to bar such evidence from being disclosed or used in a judicial or other proceeding.
Journalist Reporter Privilege.

Precedent is a principle or rule established in a previous legal case that is either binding on or persuasive for a court or other tribunal when deciding subsequent cases with similar issues or facts.

What if a Lawyer withholds evidence from their client that hurts the client?

The Right to Evidence Disclosure: The defense is entitled to know about the prosecution’s case before trial. Someone who’s been formally accused of a crime is normally entitled to certain kinds of evidence and information. In general, a defendant has a right to receive this kind of material, called “discovery,” before trial. But the prosecution’s duty to hand over discovery is usually ongoing—it doesn’t end merely because a trial has begun.

Missing Evidence - Half Truth - Law of Non-Contradiction - Censorship - Witnesses - Tampering with Evidence

Exculpatory Evidence: The Constitution does, however, require that the prosecution disclose to the defense exculpatory evidence within its possession or control. “Exculpatory” generally means evidence that tends to contradict the defendant’s supposed guilt or that supports lesser punishment. The evidence doesn’t have to strongly indicate innocence in the way that an alibi, for example, would. It’s generally enough that the evidence provides significant aid to the defendant’s case. So, information that affects the credibility of a critical prosecution witness—like the fact that the prosecution offered its witness leniency in exchange for testimony—is among the kinds of evidence prosecutors have disclose. (Giglio v. United States, 405 U.S. 150 (1972).) Exculpatory Evidence is evidence favorable to the defendant in a criminal trial that exonerates or tends to exonerate the defendant of guilt. It is the opposite of inculpatory evidence, which tends to prove guilt. In many countries, including the United States, police and prosecutors are required to disclose to the defendant exculpatory evidence they possess before the defendant enters a plea (guilty or not guilty). When Prosecutors break the law.

Ignorance of the Law - Secrecy - Censorship - Freedom of Information

Estoppel is preventing someone from asserting a particular fact in court, or exercising a certain right, or from bringing a particular claim.

Validation (evidence)

Brady Violations. If the defense learns about a Brady violation.

Brady Disclosure is the suppression by the prosecution of evidence favorable to a defendant who has requested it violates due process. Following Brady, the prosecutor must disclose evidence or information that would prove the innocence of the defendant or would enable the defense to more effectively impeach the credibility of government witnesses. Evidence that would serve to reduce the defendant's sentence must also be disclosed by the prosecution. Consists of exculpatory or impeaching information and evidence that is material to the guilt or innocence or to the punishment of a defendant.

Discovery in law is a pre-trial procedure in a lawsuit in which each party, through the law of civil procedure, can obtain evidence from the other party or parties by means of discovery devices such as a request for answers to interrogatories, request for production of documents, request for admissions and depositions. Discovery can be obtained from non-parties using subpoenas. When a discovery request is objected to, the requesting party may seek the assistance of the court by filing a motion to compel discovery.

Missing Evidence - Withheld Evidence - Half Truth - Law of Non-Contradiction - Document Dump - Investigation - Testimony - Witnesses

Work-Product Doctrine protects materials prepared in anticipation of litigation from discovery by opposing counsel. It is also known as the work-product rule, the work-product immunity, the work-product exception, and the work-product privilege, though there is debate about whether it is truly a "privilege." This doctrine does not apply in other countries, where such communications are not protected, but where the legal discovery process itself is much more limited.

Presumption in law is an inference of the truth of a fact from other facts proved or admitted or judicially noticed.

Inspection of Documents in pre-trial discovery, parties may have the right to inspect documents that are relevant to the case. In civil cases, the concept of "documents" has been interpreted broadly, and it generally includes any item that contains descriptive information, including electronic records. Electronic Discovery the information sought is in electronic format (often referred to as electronically stored information or ESI).

Legal Hold is a process that an organization uses to preserve all forms of potentially relevant information when litigation is pending or reasonably anticipated. The legal hold is initiated by a notice or communication from legal counsel to an organization that suspends the normal disposition or processing of records, such as backup tape recycling, archived media and other storage and management of documents and information. A legal hold will be issued as a result of current or anticipated litigation, audit, government investigation or other such matter to avoid evidence spoliation. Legal holds can encompass business procedures affecting active data, including backup tape recycling.

Questions for Your Attorney: What are the procedures for obtaining discovery in my case? How does the defense get discovery from a third party (someone or some entity other than the prosecution)? When in the proceedings does the prosecution have to provide discovery? What happens when evidence that should be disclosed is lost or destroyed? Does anything else, like ethics rules or the state constitution, require that the prosecution disclose more material? Are depositions allowed in my jurisdiction? What remedies are available in my jurisdiction if the prosecution violates its discovery duties? What kind of discovery does the defense have to provide the prosecution?

Failure to Appear is when the defendant does not appear for court, order for arrest is issued. (FTA)

Felony is a crime of graver or more atrocious nature than those designated as misdemeanors, carrying more potential jail time for an offender.

Fugitive is one who flees or escapes from some duty or penalty.

Guilty is the state of being responsible for the commission of an offense. Guilt in law means that one has committed a violation of criminal law, or performed all the elements of the offense set out by a criminal statute. Confession.

Conviction is a formal declaration that someone is guilty of a criminal offense, made by the verdict of a jury or the decision of a judge in a court of law. Conviction is the verdict that usually results when a court of law finds a defendant guilty of a crime.

Plea is simply an answer to a claim made by someone in a criminal case under common law using the adversarial system. A person can plead guilty, or plead not guilty, or plead nolo contendere or no contest, or make an Alford plea. Plea Bargain.

Alford plea is a guilty plea in criminal court, whereby a defendant in a criminal case does not admit to the criminal act and asserts innocence. In entering an Alford plea, the defendant admits that the evidence presented by the prosecution would be likely to persuade a judge or jury to find the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Alford pleas are legally permissible in nearly all U.S. federal and state courts, but are not allowed in the state courts of Indiana, Michigan, and New Jersey, or in the courts of the United States Armed Forces. Alford plea is also called a Kennedy plea in West Virginia, an Alford guilty plea and the Alford doctrine, in United States law. Plea Deal.

Caught Red Handed means to catch someone in the act of a crime. To witness a wrongdoing accidentally or unexpectedly. (This term was first used as a reference to seeing the blood on a murderer's hands at a crime scene, signifying that they committed a crime).

Culpable is deserving blame or censure as being wrong or evil or injurious. Culpability is a state of guilt. A measure of the degree to which an agent, such as a person, can be held morally or legally responsible for action and inaction.

Mens rea is the mental element of a person's intention to commit a crime or knowledge that one's action or lack of action would cause a crime to be committed. It is a necessary element of many crimes. (guilty mind).

Presumption of Guilt is the burden of proof is on the one who denies, not on one who declares, is the principle that one is considered guilty unless proven innocent. Generally, this is an argument from ignorance, a philosophical concept in which a thing is assumed to be true because it is not proved false.

Presumption of Innocence is the legal principle that one is considered innocent until proven guilty. Innocent Before Proven Guilty. Not Guilty.

Complicity is guilt as an accomplice in a crime or offense.

is having complicity, involved with a crime or offense.

Concurrence is the apparent need to prove the simultaneous occurrence of both actus reus ("guilty action") and mens rea ("guilty mind"), to constitute a crime; except in crimes of strict liability. In theory, if the actus reus does not hold concurrence in point of time with the mens rea then no crime has been committed.

Grand Jury is a Jury composed of eighteen citizens meet in felony cases to determine whether a crime probably occurred and whether the defendant probably committed the crime. If twelve of the eighteen jurors, agree then they return a true bill of indictment. The office of the District Attorney prepares indictments.

Habeas Corpus is the civil right to obtain a writ of habeas corpus as protection against illegal imprisonment. A writ ordering a prisoner to be brought before a judge. Habeas Corpus.

Writ is a legal document issued by a court or judicial officer.

Hearing (jurisdiction)

Hung Jury is a jury whose members cannot agree whether the accused is guilty or not; mistrial.

Impeach is to discredit the truthfulness of a witness. Competence.

Indictment is a formal written accusation, made by a grand jury after submission by the prosecutor and filed in a court, alleging that a specific person committed a specific crime. The office of the District Attorney prepares Indictments, a formal accusation that a person has committed a crime. In jurisdictions that use the concept of felonies, the most serious criminal offence is a felony; jurisdictions that do not use the concept of felonies often use that of an indictable offence—an offence that requires an indictment.

Accuse - Blame - Charge - Allegation - Probable Cause

is to show someone to be involved in a crime.

Alleged is something declared but not yet proven.

Suspect is to imagine something to be the case, true or probable. Suspect is a known person accused or suspected of committing a crime.

Perpetrator is a person who carries out a harmful, illegal, or immoral act.

Person of Interest is someone involved in a criminal investigation who has not been arrested or formally accused of a crime.

Indigent is an accused person who has been found by the court to be too poor to pay for his/her own attorney.

Infraction are minor violations of the law that do not rise to the level of misdemeanor. Driving offense make up the bulk of charges designated as infractions.

Innocent is being free from guilt; Free from legal fault. This should not be confused with the term “not guilty.” Innocence is a lack of guilt, with respect to any kind of crime, or wrongdoing. In a legal context, innocence is to the lack of legal guilt of an individual, with respect to a crime. In other contexts, it is a lack of experience. Not guilty is a verdict by a judge or a jury that a person accused of a crime did not commit it or that there is not enough evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused committed the crime. A dismissal is better than Nullified.

Presumption of Innocence is the legal principle that one is considered innocent until proven guilty. Innocent Before Proven Guilty.

Not Guilty - Dismissal - Clear Name - Exonerate - False Criminal Allegations - False Accusation

Malicious Prosecution - Miscarriage of Justice

Vexatious Litigation - Legal Threat - Fair Trial

Abuse of Process - Trick Questions - The 5th

Intensive Probation is when defendants are on supervised probation, have curfews, and see probation officer at least once a week.

Investigation is the gathering of evidence for presentation to prove that the accused did commit the crime. Journalism.

Jail is a confinement facility. Technically, a jail is administered by a local law-enforcement agency for adults and sometimes juveniles who have been accused of committing a crime but whose trials are not yet over, and persons who have been convicted and sentenced to imprisonment for one year or less.

Juvenile is a person accused of an offense who is too young at the time of the alleged offense to be subject to criminal court proceedings as an adult and is therefore handled in the juvenile justice system.

Judge is a judicial officer who has been elected or appointed to preside over a court of law. Judges.

Judgment is a court’s final determination of the rights and obligations of the parties in a case. This may be in answer to a motion or trial.


Jury is a group of citizens who decide whether the accused is guilty or not guilty. They are selected by law and sworn to determine certain facts by listening to testimony in order to reach a decision as to guilt or innocence. Jury is a sworn body of people convened to render an impartial verdict (a finding of fact on a question) officially submitted to them by a court, or to set a penalty or judgment. Juror is someone who serves on a jury. Jury Selection.

Venire is a group of people summoned for jury service from whom a jury will be chosen.

Jury Duty or jury service is providing a service as a juror in a legal proceeding.

Voir dire is a legal phrase for a variety of procedures connected with jury trials. It originally referred to an oath taken by jurors to tell the truth (Latin: verum dicere); i.e., to say what is true, what is objectively accurate or subjectively honest, or both.

Jury Trial or trial by jury, is a lawful proceeding in which a jury makes a decision or findings of fact. It is distinguished from a bench trial in which a judge or panel of judges makes all decisions. Argumentum ad Populum - Conformity?

"It is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer." English jurist William Blackstone 1760s . "Its better to see 10 guilty men go free and escape justice than to see one innocent man go to jail for a crime he did not commit." Gods of Guilt.

Grand Jury is a jury or a group of citizens or legal body that is empowered to conduct official proceedings and to investigate potential criminal conduct, and to determine whether criminal charges should be brought. A grand jury may compel the production of documents and compel sworn testimony of witnesses to appear before it. Grand jury is separate from the courts, which do not preside over its functioning. Watchdogs.

Deliberation is a long and careful consideration or discussion. Slow and careful movement or thought. A process of thoughtfully weighing options, usually prior to voting. Deliberation emphasizes the use of logic and reason as opposed to power-struggle, creativity, or dialog. Group decisions are generally made after deliberation through a vote or consensus of those involved.

Hung Jury is a judicial jury that cannot agree upon a verdict after extended deliberation and is unable to reach the required unanimity or supermajority.

Deadlocked is a situation when opposing parties come to a point where no progress can be made because of fundamental disagreement.

Mistrial - Bad Judges - Evidence Tampering - Jury Selection

Jurors recommend death penalty based on looks, but new training can correct the bias. A new study shows that people use facial appearance to make sentencing decisions, and finds an intervention to counter the bias. Certain facial features -- like downturned lips and a heavy brow -- are known to make someone appear untrustworthy to others, even though these do not indicate a person's actual character. Such facial biases influence our everyday social interactions as well as high-stakes decisions, including who we hire, or elect to political office.

Jury Nullification occurs in a trial when a jury acquits a defendant they believe to be guilty of the charges against them. This may occur when members of the jury disagree with the law the defendant has been charged with breaking, or believe that the law should not be applied in that particular case. A jury can similarly convict a defendant on the ground of disagreement with an existing law, even if no law is broken (although in jurisdictions with double jeopardy rules, a conviction can be overturned on appeal, but an acquittal cannot). Jury Nullification is a finding by a trial jury in contradiction to the jury's belief about the facts of the case.

Jury Instructions

Jury Instructions are the set of legal rules that jurors ought follow when deciding a case. Jury instructions are given to the jury by the jury instructor, who usually reads them aloud to the jury. They are often the subject of discussion of the case, how they will decide who is guilty, and are given by the judge in order to make sure their interests are represented and nothing prejudicial is said. Instructions to the Jury.

Why do Judges Instruct Jurors? Judges instruct jurors not to listen to the radio or watch television when they are a Juror during a trial. Why? What's the point? Especially when Judges can't stop a corrupt lawyer from saying the same things to jurors in court? Even though a judge can stricken the comments from the record, the judge cannot erase it from the minds of the jurors, so what's the point? You would be better off teaching jurors how not to be manipulated by misinformation and propaganda? Whether it's from our corrupted media, or corrupted lawyers.

Fully Informed Jury Association - Jury Selection - Perjury.

Jury Tampering is the crime of unduly attempting to influence the composition and/or decisions of a jury during the course of a trial. In the United States, people have also been charged with jury tampering for handing out pamphlets and flyers indicating that jurors have certain rights and obligations, including an obligation to vote their conscience notwithstanding the instructions they are given by the judge. The means by which this crime could be perpetrated can include attempting to discredit potential jurors to ensure they will not be selected for duty. Once selected, jurors could be bribed or intimidated to act in a certain manner on duty. It could also involve making unauthorized contact with them for the purpose of introducing prohibited outside information and then arguing for a mistrial. Lawyer Misconduct.

How do you control racial bias in jury deliberations? How do you control racial bias in jury selection? Integrity of the Jury Trial. In the years 1865 and 1866, all-white juries in Texas heard a total of 500 prosecutions of white defendants for killing African-Americans. In all 500 cases, the white defendants were acquitted.

Voir dire is a legal phrase that refers to a variety of procedures connected with jury trials. It originally referred to an oath taken by jurors to tell the truth.

Eye Witness Memory Flaws - Experts? - Expert Testimony

"When you judge another, you do not define them, you define yourself."

The Rule: Jury members cannot consult outside texts or resources , even dictionaries, during deliberation. ???
The Place: All federal and state courts. The Reason: Even if they don’t know the meaning of a word, juries must confine their knowledge of a case to what’s presented in court. While dictionaries might seem like a harmless text, most courts have ruled that consulting one is in fact misconduct because it could color a jury’s decision. Take the word “malice.” Merriam-Webster defines it as “a desire to cause harm to another person,” while jury instructions have defined it as “that condition of mind that prompts a person to intentionally inflict damage without just cause, excuse, or justification.”
The Repercussions: If a jury member does use a dictionary, it doesn’t necessarily mean the case will be retried; attorneys have to prove that the definition inappropriately swayed the decision. There have been several cases in which looking up everything from “assault” to “intent” to “wanton” wasn’t enough to warrant overturning a jury’s ruling. But judges in other cases have found that a jury’s use of a dictionary or encyclopedia was enough reason to do it all over again. In 2007, courts overturned a Kentucky man’s rape conviction when it was discovered his jury had looked up the definition of “rape” in the dictionary. Webster and Oxford don’t require “penetration” for something to be considered rape. Kentucky law does. (this sounds really stupid).

Story Model rests on the assumption that jurors organize evidence they hear during trial in a narrative, story-like format. According to the story model, the process of decision making takes place in three steps: story construction, learning verdict alternatives, and rendering a verdict. Both on the story model and on the scenario theory it is not sufficient for a scenario to be internally consistent, it must also be consistent with the evidence of the case and with general background knowledge.

Scenario Theory builds on the descriptive psychological account featuring factfinders who think in terms of a story when they are reasoning about evidence.

Justice - Just

Just is what is legally or ethically right, proper or fitting, and fair to all parties as dictated by reason and conscience. A decision that is free from favoritism or self-interest or bias or deception, and conforms with established standards or rules and moral excellence. Just indicates exactness or preciseness and nothing more. Just can also mean that something happened only a moment ago or only a very short time before. Something happened just now or exactly at this moment or the moment described.

Justice is judgment involved in the determination of rights and the assignment of rewards and punishments. Justice is the quality of being just or fair. Justice is the legal or philosophical theory by which fairness is administered by a public official authorized to decide questions brought before a court of justice. Ensure observance of laws and rules. Justice a concept of moral rightness based on ethics, rationality, law, religion, equity and fairness. Justice is a process of identifying a problem and then making changes and taking necessary actions to stop the problem from repeating and happening again.

Equal Justice - Due Process - Office of Justice - Justification - Unjust

Criminal Justice System is a series of government agencies and institutions. Goals include the rehabilitation of offenders, preventing other crimes, and moral support for victims. The primary institutions of the criminal justice system are the police, prosecution and defense lawyers, the courts and prisons. Criminal Justice is the system of practices and institutions of governments directed at upholding social control, deterring and mitigating crime, or sanctioning those who violate laws with criminal penalties and rehabilitation efforts. Those accused of crime have some protections against abuse of investigatory and prosecution powers.

Procedural Justice is the idea of fairness in the processes that resolve disputes and allocate resources.

Natural Justice is the rule against bias and the right to a fair hearing. "no-one should be a judge in his own cause." "no person can judge a case in which they have an interest".

Corruption - Criticism - Missing Evidence

Poetic Justice is experiencing a fitting or deserved retribution for one's actions. Ultimately virtue is rewarded and viciousness is punished.

Fundamental Justice is the fairness underlying the administration of justice and its operation.

Transitional Justice aims to provide recognition to victims, enhance the trust of individuals in State institutions, reinforce respect for human rights and promote the rule of law, as a step towards reconciliation and the prevention of new violations.

Cosmic Justice as the desire to rectify social inequities that people who, through no fault of their own, lack things which other people have.

Department of Justice - Justice just doesn't happen on its own, people need to make justice happen.

Interactional Justice consists of two specific types of interpersonal treatment. Interpersonal justice, reflects the degree to which people are treated with politeness, dignity, and respect by authorities or third parties involved in executing procedures or determining outcomes. And informational justice, that focuses on the explanations provided to people that convey information about why procedures were used in a certain way or why outcomes were distributed in a certain fashion.

Retributive Justice is a theory of justice which holds that the best response to a crime is a proportionate punishment, inflicted for its own sake rather than to serve an extrinsic social purpose, such as deterrence or rehabilitation of the offender. Retributivists hold that when an offender breaks the law, justice requires that the criminal suffer in return. They maintain that retribution differs from revenge, in that retributive justice is only directed at wrongs, has inherent limits, is not personal, involves no pleasure at the suffering of others and employs procedural standards.

Forgive - Not Guilty - Public Interest

Retribution a theory of justice that considers proportionate punishment an acceptable response to crime.

Social Justice is the fair and just relation between the individual and society. The process of ensuring that individuals fulfill their societal roles and receive what was their due from society. This is measured by the explicit and tacit terms for the distribution of wealth, opportunities for personal activity and social privileges.

Participatory Justice refers to the direct participation of those affected most by a particular decision, in the decision-making process itself: this could refer to decisions made in a court of law or by policymakers.

Obstruction of Justice

Obstruction of Justice refers to the crime of obstructing prosecutors or other investigating officials from accurately determining the severity of a law that has been broken. Perverting the course of justice. Witness Tampering.

Perverting the course of justice is an offence committed when a person prevents justice from being served on him/herself or on another party.

Cover up - Flawed Testimony - Perjury - Corrupt Judges - Corrupt Lawyers

False Reporting or filing a false police report is a criminal offense when making false or misleading statements to police or public officials. Most state laws require that the person knew the statement theywere given was false and that they intended to mislead police or hinder an investigation by making a false statement. A false statement made under oath can amount to perjury. This offense is a felony. Unless you're above the law.  Telling someone they're under oath is a joke to criminals.

Interrogation - Torture - False Arrest - Silent

Contempt of Court is the offence of being disobedient to or disrespectful towards a court of law and its officers in the form of behavior that opposes or defies the authority, justice, and dignity of the court. It manifests itself in willful disregard of or disrespect for the authority of a court of law, which is often behavior that is illegal because it does not obey or respect the rules of a law court. Non-Conforming.

Distributive Justice concerns the nature of a socially just allocation of goods in a society.

Procedural Justice is the idea of fairness in the processes that resolve disputes and allocate resources. One aspect of procedural justice is related to discussions of the administration of justice and legal proceedings. Procedural justice concerns the fairness and the transparency of the processes by which decisions are made, and may be contrasted with distributive justice (fairness in the distribution of rights or resources), and retributive justice (fairness in the punishment of wrongs). Fair Trial.

A Theory of Justice is a work of political philosophy and ethics by John Rawls, in which Rawls attempts to solve the problem of distributive justice (the socially just distribution of goods in a society) by utilising a variant of the familiar device of the social contract. The resultant theory is known as "Justice as Fairness", from which Rawls derives his two principles of justice: the liberty principle and the difference principle. First published in 1971, A Theory of Justice was revised in both 1975 (for the translated editions) and 1999.

Justice as Fairness is an essay by John Rawls, published in 1985 that describes his conception of justice. It comprises two main principles of liberty and equality; the second is subdivided into Fair Equality of Opportunity and the Difference Principle.

Injustice or Unjust is the practice of being unjust or unfair. Not fair; marked by injustice or partiality or deception. Violating principles of justice. Not equitable or fair. Fair is being free from favoritism or self-interest or bias or deception; conforming with established standards or rules. Bad Judges

"Let us be enraged by injustice, but let us not be destroyed by injustice". Baynard Rustin - Unreported Crimes

Unwarranted is something incapable of being justified or explained and without a basis in reason or fact. Lacking justification or authorization. Frivolous.

Undue is something not appropriate or proper and lacking justification or authorization and beyond normal limits.

Miscarriage of Justice is the conviction and punishment of a person for a crime they did not commit.

Perverting the course of Justice is an offence committed when a person prevents justice from being served on him/herself or on another party.

False Evidence is information created or obtained illegally, to sway the verdict in a court case.

False Accusation is when there is insufficient supporting evidence to determine whether an accusation is true or false, it is described as "unsubstantiated" or "unfounded". Accusations that are determined to be false based on corroborating evidence can be divided into three categories: An allegation that is completely false in that the events that were alleged did not occur; An allegation that describes events that did occur, but were perpetrated by an individual who is not accused, and in which the accused person is innocent. An allegation that is partially true and partially false, in that it mixes descriptions of events that actually happened with other events that did not occur.

False Arrest - Malicious Prosecution - Frivolous Lawsuit - Perjury - Color of Law - Obstruction of Justice - Remedy

Innocent people can go to jail while guilty people walk free. The justice system works mostly like it should, but it doesn't always work when it should.
Money controls ignorant people who can't measure true cost. Money is a carrot on a stick when the person who controls it is a dick. Reality is not a standard when reality can be manipulated by money. They don't teach reality in schools or anywhere.

Lawyer is a person who practices law, as an advocate, barrister, Attorney, counselor or solicitor or chartered legal executive. Working as a lawyer involves the practical application of abstract legal theories and knowledge to solve specific individualized problems, or to advance the interests of those who hire lawyers to perform legal services. The role of the lawyer varies greatly across legal jurisdictions, and so it can be treated here in only the most general terms.

Attorney General - Prosecutor

Constitutional Lawyer protects the rights granted by state and federal constitutions.

Public Interest Lawyer - Public Defender

Counsel is the lawyer or lawyers conducting a case or a lawyer who pleads cases in court, and usually gives advice formally and gives direction and helpful suggestions regarding a decision or future course of action.

Barrister is a type of lawyer in common law jurisdictions. Barristers mostly specialize in courtroom advocacy and litigation. Their tasks include taking cases in superior courts and tribunals, drafting legal pleadings, researching the philosophy, hypothesis and history of law, and giving expert legal opinions. Barristers are distinguished from solicitors, who have more direct access to clients, and may do transactional-type legal work. It is mainly barristers who are appointed as judges, and they are rarely hired by clients directly.

Solicitor is a legal practitioner who traditionally deals with most of the legal matters in some jurisdictions. A person must have legally-defined qualifications, which vary from one jurisdiction to another, to be described as a solicitor and enabled to practise there as such. For example, in England and Wales a solicitor is admitted to practise under the provisions of the Solicitors Act 1974. With some exceptions, practicing solicitors must possess a practicing certificate. There are many more solicitors than barristers in England; they undertake the general aspects of giving legal advice and conducting legal proceedings.

Practice of Law (law education)

Bar Examination is a test intended to determine whether a candidate is qualified to practice law in a given jurisdiction.

Bad Lawyers

Law Clerk is an individual—generally an attorney—who provides direct assistance and counsel to a judge in making legal determinations and in writing opinions by researching issues before the court. Judicial clerks often play significant roles in the formation of case law through their influence upon judges' decisions. Judicial clerks should not be confused with legal clerks (also called "law clerks" in Canada), court clerks, or courtroom deputies who only provide secretarial and administrative support to attorneys and/or judges. Judicial clerks are generally recent law school graduates who performed at or near the top of their class. Serving as a judicial clerk is considered to be one of the most prestigious positions in legal circles, and tends to open up wide-ranging opportunities in academia, law firm practice, and influential government work. In some countries, judicial clerks are known as judicial associates or judicial assistants.

Court Clerk is an officer of the court whose responsibilities include maintaining records of a court. Another duty is to administer oaths to witnesses, jurors, and grand jurors.

Officer of the Court is applied to all those who, in some degree in the function of their professional or similar qualifications, have a part in the legal system. Officers of the court should not be confused with court officers, the law enforcement personnel who work in courts. Officers of the court have legal and ethical obligations. They are tasked to participate to the best of their ability in the functioning of the judicial system as a whole, in order to forge justice out of the application of the law and the simultaneous pursuit of the legitimate interests of all parties and the general good of society. Officers of the court can be divided into the following functional groups. In most case various synonyms and parallels exist as well as a variety of operational variations, depending on the jurisdiction and the changes in relevant legislation:

Legislature or law-maker are persons who make or amend or repeal laws.

State Legislatures full and part time. While a few big states have full-time legislatures with higher pay (California pays lawmakers $100,113 a year and Pennsylvania pays $85,339) but in most states, legislators are paid like it's a part-time job. Lawmakers in Georgia make $17,342 a year, plus a per diem for lodging and meals when the legislature is in session and reimbursement for mileage. Serving in the Georgia Legislature is considered a part-time job but it took much more of Jones' time than that and she had to hire extra help for her law firm. 30 states pay $30,000 a year or less to legislators. New Mexico doesn't pay lawmakers at at all while those in New Hampshire make just $200 per two year term.

Magistrate is person who can issue warrants when a person is accused of a crime. The are clothed with power as a public civil officer and have additional duties such as setting bond, hearing small claims, and accepting payment for certain infractions and misdemeanors. Judge.

Mediation - Motion

Misdemeanor are offenses lower than felonies and generally those punishable by fine or imprisonment otherwise than in penitentiary. These crimes are generally punishable by no more than 150 days in jail.

Mitigating Factor is a factor that makes a crime less deserving of punishment than most similar crimes. Mitigating factors are often defined by law and include such things as: defendant was very young; the person was honorably discharged from the armed forces, et cetera.

Not Guilty is a verdict by a judge or a jury that a person accused of a crime did not commit it or that there is not enough evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused committed the crime. Dismissed.

Not Guilty Plea is a formal response by a person accused of committing a specific crime in which the accused says that the charges are not true and he did not commit the crime. Innocent - Acquit.

No Contest is a no-contest plea. Latin for "I do not wish to contend" The defendant neither admits nor disputes a charge has the same immediate effect as a guilty plea, and is often offered as a part of a plea bargain. Nolo Contendere is a plea of no contest.

Warning: Please be aware that Pleading Guilty gives up Certain Rights.

Nullification is when a state has the right to nullify, or invalidate, any federal law which that state has deemed unconstitutional with respect to the United States Constitution. A jury can nullify a law if it believes it's either immoral or wrongly applied to the defendant whose fate they are charged with deciding. To void a law or refuse to enforce a federal law. Not the same as Case Dismissed.

Innocent is being free from evil or guilt and lacking intent or capacity to injure.

Prosecutor's Fallacy involves assuming that the prior probability of a random match is equal to the probability that the defendant is innocent. For instance, if a perpetrator is known to have the same blood type as a defendant and 10% of the population share that blood type, then to argue on that basis alone that the probability of the defendant being guilty is 90% makes the prosecutor's fallacy (in a very simple form).

is freed from any question of guilt. Show to be right by providing justification or proof. Maintain, uphold, or defend. Clear of accusation, blame, suspicion, or doubt with supporting proof. Case Dismissed.

Vacear Hearing is vacating a judgment. Conviction Review Unit (CRU) - Advising Clients of Arbitration Awards and Vacatur of an Award.

Notice is a written order to appear in court at a certain time and place.

Offender an adult who has been convicted of a crime. Guilty.

Offense is a crime; technically, in some jurisdictions, only the most minor crimes are called offenses.

Objection is a formal protest raised in court during a trial to disallow a witness's testimony or other evidence which would be in violation of the rules of evidence or other procedural law. An objection is typically raised after the opposing party asks a question of the witness, but before the witness can answer, or when the opposing party is about to enter something into evidence. "I object your honor."  The Judge then makes a Ruling on whether the objection is "Sustained" (the judge agrees with the objection and disallows the question, testimony, or evidence) or "Overruled" (the judge disagrees with the objection and allows the question, testimony, or evidence). An Attorney may choose to "rephrase" a question that has been objected to, so long as the judge permits it. Lawyers should make an objection before there is an answer to the question. Objection is a procedure whereby a party to a suit says that a particular line of questioning or a particular witness or a piece of evidence or other matter is improper and should not be continued and asks the court to rule on its impropriety or illegality. The act of expressing earnest opposition or protest. Legal Challenge.

Proper reasons for objecting to a question asked to a witness include: Ambiguous, confusing, misleading, vague, unintelligible: the question is not clear and precise enough for the witness to properly answer. Arguing the law: counsel is instructing the jury on the law. Argumentative: the question makes an argument rather than asking a question. Asked and Answered: when the same attorney continues to ask the same question and they have already received an answer. Usually seen after direct, but not always. Asks the jury to prejudge the evidence: the jury cannot promise to vote a certain way, even if certain facts are proved. Asking a question which is not related to an intelligent exercise of a peremptory challenge or challenge for cause: if opposing counsel asks such a question during voir dire (i.e. the jury selection process.) Assumes facts, not in evidence: the question assumes something as true for which no evidence has been shown. Badgering: counsel is antagonizing the witness in order to provoke a response, either by asking questions without giving the witness an opportunity to answer or by openly mocking the witness. Best evidence rule: requires that the original source of evidence is required, if available; for example, rather than asking a witness about the contents of a document, the actual document should be entered into evidence. A full original document should be introduced into evidence instead of a copy, but judges often allow copies if there is no dispute about authenticity. Some documents are exempt from hearsay rules of evidence. Beyond the scope: A question asked during cross-examination has to be within the scope of direct, and so on. Calls for a conclusion: the question asks for an opinion rather than facts. Calls for speculation: the question asks the witness to guess the answer rather than to rely on known facts. Compound question: multiple questions asked together. Hearsay: the witness does not know the answer personally but heard it from another. However, there are several exceptions to the rule against hearsay in most legal systems. Incompetent: the witness is not qualified to answer the question. Inflammatory: the question is intended to cause prejudice. Leading question (Direct examination only): the question suggests the answer to the witness. Leading questions are permitted if the attorney conducting the examination has received permission to treat the witness as a hostile witness. Leading questions are also permitted on cross-examination, as witnesses called by the opposing party are presumed hostile. Narrative: the question asks the witness to relate a story rather than state specific facts. This objection is not always proper even when a question invites a narrative response, as the circumstances of the case may require or make preferable narrative testimony. Privilege: the witness may be protected by law from answering the question. Irrelevant or immaterial: the question is not about the issues in the trial. Misstates evidence / misquotes witness / improper characterization of evidence: this objection is often overruled, but can be used to signal a problem to witness, judge and jury. Counsel is testifying: this objection is sometimes used when counsel is "leading" or "argumentative" or "assumes facts not in evidence". A few of the foregoing objections may also apply to the witness's response, particularly hearsay, privilege, and relevance. Proper reasons for objecting to material evidence include: Lack of foundation: the evidence lacks testimony as to its authenticity or source. Fruit of the poisonous tree: the evidence was obtained illegally, or the investigative methods leading to its discovery were illegal. Can be circumvented; Inevitable discovery Incomplete: opposing party only introducing part of the writing (conversation/act/declaration), taken out of context. Under the evidence rule providing for completeness, other parties can move to introduce additional parts. If any documents presented for the review, the judge and other party entitled to a complete copy, not a partial copy, of the document. When a witness is presented with a surprise document, he should be able to take time to study it, before he can answer any questions. Best evidence rule or hearsay evidence: requires that the original source of evidence is required, if available. However, some documents are self-authenticating under Rule 902, such as (1) domestic public documents under seal, (2) domestic public documents not under seal, but bearing a signature of a public officer, (3) foreign public documents, (4) certified copies of public records, (5) official publications, (6) newspapers and periodicals, (7) trade inscriptions and the like, (8) acknowledged documents (i.e. by a notary public), (9) commercial paper and related documents, (10) presumptions under Acts of Congress, (11) certified domestic records of regularly conducted activity, (12) certified foreign records of regularly conducted activity. More prejudicial than probative: Under Federal Rule of Evidence 403, a judge has the discretion to exclude evidence if "its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or misleading the jury." Proper reasons for objecting to a witness's answer include: Narrative: the witness is relating a story in response to a question that does not call for one. Not all witnesses' answers are susceptible to this objection, as questions can and often do call for a narrative response, especially on direct examination. Non-responsive: the witness's response constitutes an answer to a question other than the one that was asked, or no answer at all. Nothing pending: the witness continues to speak on matters irrelevant to the question. Example: “Did your mother call?” “Yeah. She called at 3:00." Opposing counsel can object to the latter part of this statement since it answers a question that was not asked. With some concern for annoying the court, counsel will selectively use this to prevent a witness from getting into self-serving answers

Opening Statement is an outline of anticipated proof. Its purpose is to advise the jury prior to testimony of the facts relied upon and of issues involved; and to give the jury a general picture of the facts and the situations so that the jury will be able to understand the evidence.

Order of Arrest is an order for the arrest of a defendant following the filing of charges or failure to appear when required by the court.

Paralegal is an individual, qualified by education, training or work experience, who is employed or retained by a lawyer, law office, corporation, governmental agency, or other entity and who performs specifically delegated substantive legal work for which a lawyer is responsible. Legal assistant, also called a paralegal, works either with individual lawyers at a firm or with legal teams.

Parole is the conditional release of a convicted offender from a confinement facility before the end of his sentence with requirements for the offender’s behavior set and supervised by a parole agency.

Penitentiary is a state or federal prison.

Perjury is deliberate false testimony under oath involving a material fact.

Perpetrator is a person who actually commits a crime.

Personal Recognizance is the promise of an accused person to the court that he will return to court when ordered to do so; given in exchange for release before and during his trial.

Petition is a document filed in juvenile court alleging that a juvenile should come under the jurisdiction of the juvenile court for some offense or asking that the juvenile be transferred to criminal court for prosecution as an adult. Petitions.

Plea is a defendant’s formal answer in court to the charge that he has committed a crime. Some possible pleas include: guilty, not guilty, no contest, or not guilty by reason of insanity. Plea.

Plea Bargain agreement is a plea agreed to by a defendant and the prosecutor; a negotiated plea that may set out exact terms relating to punishment and disposition of a case. Plea Bargain.

Pre-Sentence Investigation is a report compiled by the Probation Department after plea and before sentencing to make sentencing recommendations to the judge.

Precedent (experts)

Probation is conditional freedom granted to an offender by the court after conviction or guilty plea with requirements for the offender’s behavior set and supervised by the court.

Probation Hearing is a hearing before a judge to review the performance of a defendant while on probation. Hearings are not generally held unless a probationer has violated some term of their probationary sentence.

Prosecutor is an attorney for the community elected by the voters of a district to represent the interests of the general public, including crime victims, in court proceedings against people accused of committing crimes. Some jurisdictions use other terms for the prosecutor, such as U.S. Attorney (a federal prosecutor), district attorney, or state’s attorney. Prosecutor is the chief legal representative of the prosecution in countries with either the common law adversarial system, or the civil law inquisitorial system. The prosecution is the legal party responsible for presenting the case in a criminal trial against an individual accused of breaking the law. Prosecuted is to conduct a prosecution in a court of law and bring a criminal action against someone. Prosecution is to bring legal proceedings against a defendant for criminal behavior using lawyers acting for the state to put the case against the defendant. "Prosecutors say they represent the people, but we know that's a lie most of the time because they represent corporations, the same way politicians do." Case Assessment.

Special Prosecutor is a lawyer from outside the government appointed by an attorney general or, in the United States, by Congress to investigate a government official for misconduct while in office. A reasoning for such an appointment is that the governmental branch or agency may have political connections to those it might be asked to investigate. Inherently, this creates a conflict of interest and a solution is to have someone from outside the department lead the investigation.

Internal Affairs - Ombudsman - Watchdogs

Floor Manager is a senator who is similar to a prosecutor. They are tasked with presenting a case, or designated to lead and organize the consideration of a bill or other measure on the floor. They usually are the chairman or a ranking minority member of the reporting committee or their designees. Congressional rules specify what the roles of the floor managers should be.

Floor of a legislature or chamber is the place where members sit and make speeches. When a person is speaking there formally, they are said to have the floor.

Public Defender is an attorney employed by a government agency to represent defendants who are unable to hire private counsel. Public Defender is an attorney appointed to represent people who cannot afford to hire one. 80% of defendants need a public defender, and most public defenders have case loads so over whelming that it's almost impossible for them to do their jobs effectively or efficiently. 265 Billion dollars is spent on the criminal justice system with only 2% spent on Public Defenders.

America's Public Defense System Is in Crisis (youtube) - Public Defenders report a lack of resources and the public defense function is under such strain that in too many places it barely functions. Challenge.

Right to Counsel refers to the right of a criminal defendant to have a lawyer assist in his defense, even if he cannot afford to pay for an attorney. Right to counsel means a defendant has a legal right to have the assistance of counsel (i.e., lawyers) and, if the defendant cannot afford a lawyer, requires that the government appoint one or pay the defendant's legal expenses. The right to counsel is generally regarded as a constituent of the right to a fair trial.

Assistance of Counsel Clause of the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution provides: "In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the have the Assistance of Counsel for his defense."

Due Process - Sixth Amendment - Fair Trial

Caseload is the amount of work or the number of cases that a lawyer has or a doctor or social worker has at one time. Case Management (wiki).

Missouri State Public Defender provides legal representation to all indigent citizens accused of or convicted of crimes in Missouri at the levels of the state trial court, state appellate court, Missouri Supreme Court, and the United States Supreme Court. Public defenders in Missouri are expected to handle 80 to 100 cases a week. When the public defender has hundreds of cases assigned to them, there's no way they can put the time and the effort into what's required. It's a sham to say there was representation when it's literally an assembly line." The National Registry of Exonerations reported that 2016 was a record year, with 166 people proving a wrongful conviction. Since 2011, the annual number of exonerations has more than doubled, according to the registry. Missouri indigent defense program, state's number of cases has still grown from 74,000 in 2016 to 82,000 this year.

Legal Defense is an attempt to avoid criminal or civil liability. Besides contesting the accuracy of any allegation made against them in a criminal or civil proceeding, a defendant may also make allegations against the prosecutor or plaintiff or raise a defense, arguing that, even if the allegations against the defendant are true, the defendant is nevertheless not liable. The defense phase of a trial occurs after the prosecution phase, that is, after the prosecution "rests". Other parts of the defense include the opening and closing arguments and the cross-examination during the prosecution phase. Since a defense is raised by the defendant in a direct attempt to avoid what would otherwise result in liability, the defendant typically holds the burden of proof. For example, if a defendant in an assault and battery case attempts to claim provocation, the victim of said assault and battery would not have to prove that he did not provoke the defendant; the defendant would have to prove that the plaintiff did.

Recourse is the act of turning to for assistance. Something or someone turned to for assistance or security.

Remand is to send back to a lower court. Typically refers to a situation where a Defendant in Superior Court asks to return a misdemeanor conviction to District Court for compliance with the judgment of that court.

Remedy is an act of correcting an error or a fault or an evil. Set straight or right. Provide relief for. Legal Remedy, or judicial relief or a judicial remedy, is the means with which a court of law, usually in the exercise of civil law jurisdiction, enforces a right, imposes a penalty, or makes another court order to impose its will. Equitable Remedy (wiki).

Plea Deal - Settlement

Redress is a remedy or set right an undesirable or unfair situation. Sue.

Legal Recourse is an action that can be taken by an individual or a corporation to attempt to remedy a legal difficulty. A lawsuit if the issue is a matter of civil law. Contracts that require mediation or arbitration before a dispute can go to court. Referral to police or prosecutor for investigation and possible criminal charges if the matter is a criminal violation. Petition to a legislature or other law-making body for a change in the law if a law is thought to be unjust. Petition to a president or governor or monarch other chief executive or other official with power to pardon.

Damages are a remedy in the form of a monetary award to be paid to a claimant as compensation for loss or injury. To warrant the award, the claimant must usually show that a breach of duty has caused foreseeable loss. To be recognized at law, the loss must involve damage to property, or mental or physical injury; pure economic loss is rarely recognized for the award of damages. Justice - Intervention (mitigate) - Mediate.

Reparations is compensation given for an abuse or injury.

Restitution is a state law that allows the prosecutor to request restitution or repayment for the victim’s losses as part of the sentence of any defendant who is found guilty of a crime. Reimbursable losses include out-of-pocket expenses (such as repair costs, medical bills, and stolen property) which have not previously been covered. Restitution is the law of gains-based recovery. It is to be contrasted with the law of compensation, which is the law of loss-based recovery. Obligations to make restitution and obligations to pay compensation are each a type of legal response to events in the real world. When a court orders restitution it orders the defendant to give up his/her gains to the claimant. When a court orders compensation it orders the defendant to pay the claimant for his or her loss. Forgiveness.

Compensation is something such as money that is given or received as payment or reparation as for a service or loss or injury. Punitive.

Declaration in law refers to a judgment of the court or an award of an arbitration tribunal is a binding adjudication of the rights or other legal relations of the parties which does not provide for or order enforcement. Where the declaration is made by a court, it is usually referred to as a declaratory judgment. Less commonly, where declaratory relief is awarded by an arbitrator, it is normally called a declaratory award.

Atonement is reparation for a wrong or injury. Atonement is the concept of a person taking action to correct previous wrongdoing on their part, either through direct action to undo the consequences of that act, equivalent action to do good for others, or some other expression of feelings of remorse.

Retainer is the fee a defendant pays for an attorney to represent him.

Injunction is an authoritative warning or judicial order that restrains a person from beginning or continuing an action threatening or invading the legal right of another, or that compels a person to carry out a certain act, e.g., to make restitution to an injured party. It's an equitable remedy in the form of a court order that compels a party to do or refrain from specific acts. A party that fails to comply with an injunction faces criminal or civil penalties, including possible monetary sanctions and even imprisonment. They can also be charged with contempt of court. Counterinjunctions are injunctions that stop or reverse the enforcement of another injunction.

Appeals - Punishment - Mitigating Circumstances

Rights of the Defendant are the powers and privileges which are constitutionally guaranteed to any person arrested and accused of committing a crime including: the right to remain silent; the right to an attorney at all stages of the proceedings; the right to a court-appointed attorney if the defendant does not have the financial means to hire her/his own counsel; the right to release on reasonable bail; the right to a speedy public trial before a jury or judge; the right to the process of the court to subpoena and produce witnesses; the right to see, hear and question the witnesses during the trial; and the right not to incriminate himself/herself.

Search Warrant is an order in writing, issued by a judge or magistrate, in the name of the state, directed to a sheriff, or other officer, commanding him to search a specific house, shop, or other premises, for specific property related to a crime.

Sentence in law is a decree of punishment. In law, a sentence forms the final explicit act of a judge-ruled process, and also the symbolic principal act connected to his function. The sentence can generally involve a decree of imprisonment, a fine and/or other punishments against a defendant convicted of a crime.

Statute is an act of the legislature declaring, commanding, or prohibiting something. A law.

Statute of Limitations are laws passed by legislative bodies in common law systems to set the maximum time after an event within which legal proceedings may be initiated. When the period of time specified in a statute of limitations passes, a claim might no longer be filed, or, if filed, may be liable to be struck out if the defense to that claim is, or includes, that it is statute barred as having been filed after the limitations period. The intention of these laws is to facilitate resolution within a "reasonable" length of time. What period of time is considered "reasonable" varies from country to country, and within countries such as the United States from state to state, and within countries and states from civil or criminal action to civil or criminal action. Some countries, and some crimes (depending on the country), have no statute of limitations whatsoever. In civil law systems, similar provisions are typically part of their civil or criminal codes and known collectively as periods of prescription. The cause of action dictates the statute of limitations, which can be reduced (or extended) to ensure a fair trial. When a statute of limitations expires in a criminal case, the courts no longer have jurisdiction. Analysis of a statute of limitations includes the examination of any associated statute of repose, tolling provisions, and exclusions.

Subpoena is a court paper requesting the appearance of a witness or documents to be present at a court proceeding. Subpoena is a writ or a formal written order issued by a government agency, most often a court, to compel testimony by a witness or production of evidence under a penalty for failure. There are two common types of subpoena: subpoena ad testificandum orders a person to testify before the ordering authority or face punishment. The subpoena can also request the testimony to be given by phone or in person. subpoena duces tecum orders a person or organization to bring physical evidence before the ordering authority or face punishment. This is often used for requests to mail copies of documents to requesting party or directly to court.

Summons is a citation requiring a defendant to appear in court to answer a suit to which has been brought against him. Summons is a legal document issued by a court. Citation - Remedy

Superior Court is a court wth judges.

Suspect is a person who is believed by criminal justice officials to be one who may have committed a specific crime, but who has not been arrested or formally charged. Once arrested a suspect is called a defendant.

Testimony are the statements made in court by people who have sworn or affirmed to tell the truth. Testimony is a form of evidence that is obtained from a witness who makes a solemn statement or declaration of fact. Testimony may be oral or written, and it is usually made by oath or affirmation under penalty of perjury.

Witness Testimony

Affidavit is a written sworn statement of fact voluntarily made by an affiant or deponent under an oath or affirmation administered by a person authorized to do so by law. Such statement is witnessed as to the authenticity of the affiant's signature by a taker of oaths, such as a notary public or commissioner of oaths.

Confession - Religious Confession

Transcript is a verbatim writing of what was said in court during a trial, or a paper writing setting out terms of a plea taken from a defendant. Also a copy of an original writing or deed. Verbatim is exactly the same words used by a writer or speaker.

Trial is an examination of issues of fact and law before a judge and sometimes a jury at which evidence is presented to determine whether or not the accused person is guilty of committing a specific crime. Right to a Fair Trial.

Traffic Court is an administrative court that hears only traffic matters, usually uncontested.

U.S. Attorney is a Federal Prosecutor.

Vacated Judgment (repeal)

Venue is a neighborhood, place, or county in which an injury or crime was done; or where a hearing/trial is held.

Verdict is the decision of a judge or jury at the end of a trial that the accused defendant is either guilty or not guilty.

Victim Compensation Program is a program of the state designed to provide compensation to victims of certain crimes for their damages and expenses. Initial application for funds is generally made through the office of the District Attorney through the use victim impact statements.

Victim Impact Statement is a form provided to allow victims of crime to provide the court with their comments about the impact the crime had on them.

Victim Witness Assistant are employees of the District Attorney's Office that are assigned to provide information and assistance to the victims of crime. They act as liaison between the victim and the Assistant District Attorney assigned to a case.

Waiver is the intentional or voluntary relinquishment of a known right.

Warrant is a writ from a court commanding police to perform specified acts based on reasonable adequate facts. Warrant refers to a specific type of authorization, that is, a writ issued by a competent officer, usually a judge or magistrate, which permits an otherwise illegal act that would violate individual rights and affords the person executing the written protection from damages if the act is performed. According to the U.S. Constitution, the person being investigated, arrested or having their property seized is given a copy. Charged.

Arrest Warrant or Bench Warrant is a warrant authorizing law enforcement officials to apprehend an offender and bring that person to court.

Search Warrant is a court order that a magistrate, judge or Supreme Court official issues to authorize law enforcement officers to conduct a search of a person, location, or vehicle for evidence of a crime and to confiscate any evidence they find. In most countries a search warrant cannot be issued in aid of civil process. No Knock Warrant.

Witness is a person who has directly seen an event or has other knowledge or something such as a piece of physical evidence that is related to a court case or a crime. A witness is someone who has knowledge or claims to have knowledge that is relevant to an event or other matter of interest. In law a witness is someone who has authority to compel testimony, either voluntarily or under compulsion, provides testimonial evidence, either oral or written, of what he or she knows or claims to know about the matter before some official authorized to take such testimony. A percipient witness or eyewitness is one who testifies what they perceived through his or her senses (e.g: seeing, hearing, smelling, touching). That perception might be either with the unaided human sense or with the aid of an instrument, e.g: microscope or stethoscope, or by other scientific means, e.g: a chemical reagent which changes color in the presence of a particular substance. A hearsay witness is one who testifies what someone else said or wrote. In most court proceedings there are many limitations on when hearsay evidence is admissible. Such limitations do not apply to grand jury investigations, many administrative proceedings, and may not apply to declarations used in support of an arrest or search warrant. Also some types of statements are not deemed to be hearsay and are not subject to such limitations.

Firsthand Knowledge refers to something which the witness actually saw or heard, as distinguished from something they learned from some other person or source. It is also a knowledge that is gained through firsthand observation or experience, as distinguished from a belief based on what someone else has said.

Eye Witness is a person who has personally seen something happen and so can give a first-hand description of it.

Expert Witness - Hearsay - Anecdotal Evidence - Trick Questions - Real Conversations - Experience - Whistle Blowing - Public Interest - Facts - Honesty - Truth is Debatable - Interrogation

Eyewitness Testimony is the account a bystander or victim gives in the courtroom, describing what that person observed that occurred during the specific incident under investigation. Ideally this recollection of events is detailed; however, this is not always the case. This recollection is used as evidence to show what happened from a witness' point of view. Memory recall has been considered a credible source in the past, but has recently come under attack as forensics can now support psychologists in their claim that memories and individual perceptions can be unreliable, manipulated, and biased. Due to this, many countries and states within the US are now attempting to make changes in how eyewitness testimony is presented in court. Eyewitness testimony is a specialized focus within cognitive psychology.

Sworn Testimony is evidence given by a witness who has made a commitment to tell the truth. If the witness is later found to have lied whilst bound by the commitment, they can often be charged with the crime of perjury. The types of commitment can include oaths, affirmations and promises. The exact wording of the commitments vary from country to country.

Testimony is a formal written or spoken statement, especially one given in a court of law. Testimony is a solemn attestation as to the truth of a matter. When a witness is asked a question, the opposing attorney can raise an objection, which is a legal move to disallow or prevent an improper question to others, preferably before the witness answers, and mentioning one of the standard reasons, including: argumentative, asked and answered, best evidence rule, calls for speculation, calls for a conclusion, compound question or narrative, hearsay, inflammatory, incompetent witness (e.g., child, mental or physical impairment, intoxicated), irrelevant, immaterial (the words "irrelevant" and "immaterial" have the same meaning under the Federal Rules of Evidence. Historically, irrelevant evidence referred to evidence that has no probative value, i.e., does not tend to prove any fact. Immaterial refers to evidence that is probative, but not as to any fact material to the case. See Black's Law Dictionary, 7th Ed.). lack of foundation, leading question, privilege, vague, ultimate issue testimony. There may also be an objection to the answer, including: non-responsive.

Testify is to make a solemn declaration under oath for the purpose of establishing a fact, as in a court. To make a statement based on personal knowledge or a belief. To bear witness. To serve as evidence or proof. Before you testify, try to picture the scene, the objects there, the distances and exactly what happened. This will assist you in recalling the facts more accurately when asked a question. If the question is about distances or time, and if your answer is only an estimate, make sure you say it is only an estimate. Memory Flaws.

Declare is to announce something publicly or officially and to say something in a solemn and emphatic manner without question and beyond doubt. State authoritatively and proclaim one's support, sympathy, or opinion for or against.

Witness Tampering is the act of attempting to alter or prevent the testimony of witnesses within criminal or civil proceedings. Picking your own jury.

It's easy not to believe a eye witness when the person is perceived as having no credibility or believed to be lacking reasoning skills that would give them the ability to be an accurate and an unbiased observer. Memory Flaws - Lying.

Evidence - Expert Witness

Witness Chair is the chair sitting next to a judge in court, where witnesses are cross-examined or interrogated by both the defendant's and the plaintiff's.

Writ of Execution is a writ to put in force the judgment of decree of a court.

Deposition involves the taking of sworn, out-of-court oral testimony of a witness that may be reduced to a written transcript for later use in court or for discovery purposes. Depositions are commonly used in litigation in the United States and Canada. They are almost always conducted outside court by the lawyers themselves, with no judge present to supervise the examination. In the law of Canada it's called examination for discovery. Depositions usually take place at the office of the court reporter or in the office of one of the law firms involved in a case. However, depositions are also sometimes taken at a witness's workplace or home, or in a nearby hotel's conference room. Generally, the deposition is attended by the person who is to be deposed, their attorney, court reporter, and other parties in the case who can appear personally or be represented by their counsels. Any party to the action and their attorneys have the right to be present and to ask questions. Prior to taking a deposition, the court reporter administers the same oath or affirmation that the deponent would take if the testimony were being given in court in front of a judge and jury. Thereafter, the court reporter makes a verbatim digital or stenographic record of all that is said during the deposition, in the same manner that witness testimony is recorded in court. Some jurisdictions allow stenomask technology in lieu of traditional stenographic equipment, although many jurisdictions still prohibit stenomask because of its disconcerting effect on some lawyers and witnesses. Attorneys for the deposing litigant are often present, although this is not required in all jurisdictions. The attorney who has ordered the deposition begins questioning of the deponent (this is referred to as "direct examination" or "direct" for short). Since nods and gestures cannot be recorded, the witness is instructed to answer all questions aloud. After the direct examination, other attorneys in attendance have an opportunity to cross-examine the witness. The first attorney may ask more questions at the end, in re-direct, which may be followed by re-cross. During the course of the deposition, one attorney or another may object to questions asked. In most jurisdictions, only two types of objections are allowed: The first is to assert a privilege and the second is to object to the form of the question asked. Objections to form are frequently used to signal the witness to be careful in answering the question. Since the judge is not present, all other objections, in particular those involving the rules of evidence, are generally preserved until trial. They still can be made sometime at the deposition to indicate the serious problem to judge and witness, but the witness must answer the question despite these objections. If the form objection is made, the opposite party still has the right to re-phrase the same question and ask it again. Indeed, in Texas, lawyers were so aggressively using objections to indirectly coach their witnesses on the record that all objections outside four narrow categories are now prohibited and making such prohibited objections waives all objections to the question or answer at issue. California is the major "outlier" on deposition objections; under the California Civil Discovery Act as enacted in 1957 and heavily revised in 1986, most objections must be given on the record at the deposition (and must be specific as to the objectionable nature of the question or response) or they are permanently waived. As with oral examination at trial, depositions can become heated at times, with some attorneys asking harassing questions to provoke witnesses into losing their tempers, some witnesses giving evasive answers, and occasional use of profane language. In extreme situations, one side or the other may ask the reporter to mark the record, then may suspend the deposition, demand a rush transcript, and file an emergency motion to compel a response, for a protective order, or for sanctions. Some courts have magistrates or discovery commissioners who are on call for such contingencies, and the parties are supposed to use them to referee such disputes over the telephone or via email before resorting to filing motions. In extreme circumstances where the relationship between the lawyers, parties, or witnesses has totally broken down, the court may require the use of a discovery referee who will have authority to sit in on depositions and rule immediately on objections as they are presented, may order that all further depositions take place in court in the presence of a judge, or may grant terminating sanctions if the record is already clear as to which party or attorney is responsible for the breakdown in civility. Parties can bring documents to the deposition and ask document identification questions to build a foundation for making the documents admissible as evidence at trial, as long as the deponent admits their authenticity. The court reporter and all parties in the case are usually provided a copy of the documents during the deposition for review. In recent years, developments in litigation technology has allowed the use of paper documents to be replaced by electronic documents and exhibits in the deposition. In such cases, the examining attorney marks and distributes the official exhibits electronically using a laptop or tablet device. The deponent, court reporter, and all parties receive digital official exhibits or courtesy copies. Combined with live transcript feed technology and legal videography, digital exhibit technology has made participation in remote depositions more functional and popular. Under FRCP 30(d)(1) and its state counterparts, a deposition normally must take place for no longer than seven hours on one day per each deponent, unless otherwise stipulated by the parties or ordered by the court. The deposing party who knows that a deposition will require more than seven hours on one day must either ask the deponent to stipulate to more time, or, if the deponent is uncooperative, promptly file a motion for a longer deposition. For many years, California was the major exception to this rule, in that its Civil Discovery Act had no default time limit; depositions could theoretically proceed indefinitely, or at least until the deposition became so obviously excessive and burdensome that the deponent was able to move for a protective order. However, in January 2013, the California legislature amended the Civil Discovery Act to fall in line with the federal rule, by requiring that depositions will typically be limited to seven hours of total testimony. It is worth noting that this new rule does not apply to "any case brought by an employee or applicant for employment against an employer for acts or omissions arising out of or relating to the employment relationship. After the deposition, the transcript is then published in the form of a hardcopy booklet, which is provided to the deponent as well as to any party to the suit who wishes to purchase a copy. The booklet will have the case caption (the name of the court, case number, and names of the parties) on the front. Inside, the pages have line numbers along the left margin, so that the parties can precisely cite testimony by page and line in later court documents. Timestamps are inserted into the margin if a video recording is being made; in the event the witness is unavailable for trial, the parties or the court will use the timestamps to identify admissible segments which a video editor will stitch together to present to the jury. A concordance is automatically generated by the stenographic system's software and included in the back of the booklet. Finally, the booklet includes the court reporter's certificate in which they formally certify the truth and accuracy of the transcript. (In some states, the court reporter is also a notary public.) Most court reporters can also provide a digital copy of the transcript in ASCII, RealLegal, and PDF formats. The court reporter also keeps a copy of the documents provided to the deponent during the deposition for document identification questions, unless digital document and exhibit technology is employed, in which case the deponent and all parties receive the official exhibits in real time. The deponent normally has the right to read and sign the deposition transcript before it is filed with the court. The deponent cannot change his testimony as recorded by the court reporter in the deposition transcript, but under rule 30(e) the deponent can correct on an additional "errata sheet" any mistakes in the deposition transcript shortly after the transcript has been typed and bound. The errata sheet allows the deponent to make any modifications that make "changes in form or substance," giving the deponent the option to alter their record from the original transcript. Issues may arise where a party attempts to make substantive changes to testimony through errata sheets. The chief values of obtaining a deposition, as with any discovery proceeding, is to give all litigant parties in a contested case a fair preview of the evidence, and to provide support documents for further trials and dispositive motions. The process provides a "level playing field" of information among the litigants and avoids surprises at trial (traditionally regarded as an unfair tactic). Another benefit of taking depositions is to preserve a witness's recollection while it is still fresh, since the trial may still be months or years away. When a witness's testimony in open court is inconsistent with that given at deposition, a party can introduce the deposition to impeach (or contradict) the witness. In the event a witness is unavailable for trial (usually because they are deceased, seriously ill, or live hundreds of miles away), their deposition may be read or played before the jury and made part of the record in the case, with the same legal force as live testimony. In some states, stenographic, audio, or video records of depositions can be offered into evidence even if the witness is available. Deposition of the opposite party is often used to produce self-incriminating statements from the deponent, also document identification questions can make exhibits admissible for hearings and summary judgment motions. Sometimes, after a number of witnesses have been deposed, the parties will have enough information that they can reasonably predict the outcome of a prospective trial, and may decide to arrive at a compromise settlement, thus avoiding trial and preventing additional costs of litigation. Accordingly, while most depositions are not videotaped, opposing counsel may use the opportunity to get an impression of the witness's affect and appearance, because these are telling factors as to how that person will present in front of a jury. Furthermore, deposition transcripts are frequently submitted in support of motions for summary judgment as evidence that there is no triable issue of fact. The moving party may use transcripts to argue that even if all the testimony given at deposition was given again at trial, no reasonable factfinder could find in the opponent's favor on a material issue of fact. The rationale is that generally, a witness must give consistent testimony on all material issues of fact both at deposition and at trial (unless there is a very good reason for changing one's answers), or else the inconsistencies can and will be used to impeach his credibility. In some United States jurisdictions, depositions may be taken in criminal cases, for reasons that vary between jurisdictions. In federal criminal cases, Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure Rule 15 governs the taking of depositions. Each state has its own laws which govern the taking of depositions. Most jurisdictions provide that depositions may be taken to perpetuate the testimony of a witness, that is, preserve their testimony for trial. If the person requested to testify (deponent) is a party to the lawsuit or someone who works for an involved party, notice of time and place of the examination before trial can be given to the other side's attorney, but if the witness is an independent third party, a subpoena must be served on him/her if he/she is recalcitrant. This occurs when a witness may not be able to testify at trial. The deposition of the witness is taken and, if the witness is unable to appear at trial, the deposition may be used to establish the witness' testimony in lieu of the witness actually testifying. Regarding depositions to preserve testimony, the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution establishes a constitutional right of the defendant to be present during the deposition and to cross-examine the witness. The defendant may waive this right. Some jurisdictions provide that depositions may be taken for purposes of discovery. In these jurisdictions, the defendant does not have a constitutional right to be present, although such a right may be established by statute. Some jurisdictions require that because of the sensitive nature of taking a deposition of a minor, it must be videotaped. A defendant in a criminal case may not be deposed without his consent because of the Fifth Amendment right to not give testimony against oneself. Trick Questions - Real Conversations.

Will - Trust - Power of Attorney

Administrator in law is a person appointed by the court to handle the estate of someone who died without a will. The party appointed by a probate court to distribute the estate of someone who dies without a will or without naming an executor. Someone who manages a government agency or department. Someone one who is responsible for maintenance of a computer or network.

Representative - Conservatorship

Administrator of an Estate is a legal term referring to a person appointed by a court to administer the estate of a deceased person who left no will.  Where a person dies intestate, i.e., without a will, the court may appoint a person to settle their debts, pay any necessary taxes and funeral expenses, and distribute the remainder according to the procedure set down at law. Such a person is known as the administrator of the estate and will enjoy similar powers to those of an executor under a will. Rabalais Estate Planning, LLC (youtube).

Executor a person named by the maker of a will or nominated by the testator to carry out the instructions of the will. Is someone who is responsible for executing, or following through on, an assigned task or duty. An executor is a person or institution appointed by a testator to carry out the terms of their will. (Executor Office). Contracts.

Settler is a a negotiator who settles disputes. Mediator - Advocate - Arbitration - Diplomacy.

Settlor of a trust is the person who creates the trust. It's a person who settles property on trust law for the benefit of beneficiaries. In some legal systems, a settlor is also referred to as a trustor, or occasionally, a grantor or donor. Where the trust is a testamentary trust, the settlor is usually referred to as the testator. The settlor may also be the trustee of the trust (where he declares that he holds his own property on trusts) or a third party may be the trustee (where he transfers the property to the trustee on trusts). The settlor does two things. First, the settlor establishes the legal document that contains the trust's terms. Second, the settlor then transfers property into the trust, which is also known as funding the trust.

Revocable Trusts and Settlors
is the most common example of the settlor having multiple roles involves revocable trusts. Also known as living trusts, a revocable trust typically has the settlor also acting as the trustee of the trust as well as remaining one of the trust's primary beneficiaries. With a revocable trust, the settlor usually retains the right to make changes to any of the trust's terms at any time, including even the ability to terminate the trust and take back all of its property. Even though the settlor maintains substantial control in a typical revocable trust situation, the trust document will clearly state limitations on that power. For instance, if the settlor becomes unable to manage his or her own financial affairs, then a successor trustee can take control of the trust pursuant to its terms. The trust document will often include provisions that state conditions under which power can pass to a successor trustee.

Irrevocable Trusts and Settlors is with an irrevocable trust, the situation is quite different for the settlor. Most of the time, a settlor will establish an irrevocable trust for someone else's benefit. In that case, the trustee must follow the terms of the trust document, and the settlor does not retain the ability to make changes to the trust after its formation.

Cestui que is the person for whose benefit the trust is created. The person for whose use the feoffment was made. Feoffment was the deed by which a person was given land in exchange for a pledge of service.

William "Bill" Foust - Executor, Advocate & Revocate (youtube)

Power of Attorney is a written authorization to represent or act on another's behalf in private affairs, business, or some other legal matter, sometimes against the wishes of the other. The person authorizing the other to act is the principal, grantor, or donor (of the power). The one authorized to act is the agent or, in some common law jurisdictions, the attorney-in-fact (attorney for short). Formerly, a power referred to an instrument under seal while a letter was an instrument under hand, but today both are signed by the grantor, and therefore there is no difference between the two. Pro se. "Having power of attorney is like having a system backup, but it only works if that person truly represents you and personally knows you, so that they would do what you would do." A power of attorney can allow someone to manage your financial affairs or make health care decisions in the event you become incapacitated. An individual can designate power of attorney to his attorney, family member or friend and also name that same person as executor of the estate. Powers of attorney do not survive death. After death, the executor of the estate handles all financial and legal matters, according to the provisions of the will.

Proxy is a person authorized to act for another. A power of attorney document given by shareholders of a corporation authorizing a specific vote on their behalf at a corporate meeting. Proxy War.

You can also give someone authorization to speak on your behalf. You can authorize any person you trust to act on your behalf. It includes a friend or a family member. A signed letter should state..I authorize the following person to speak on my behalf. Write the salutation. Full name of the person you want to act on your behalf and their full address and their contact number. Keep the authorization letter short and precise. Specify the duties that your representative is authorized to do on your behalf. Give the dates for the authorization. Give the reason for the authorization. Explain any restrictions on the authorization. A person who speaks on your behalf in this way is often called an 'advocate'. You can only give authority to someone for your existing claims. How long your chosen person will have authority? If you give someone authority to talk about a single claim, they can do so for the life of that claim. Someone who has authority for all your existing claims will keep it until you cancel or change it.

Revoke your Power of Attorney whenever you want, as long as you are mentally competent. This revocation should be in writing, signed by you in front of a notary public, and delivered to the attorney-in-fact and any third parties with whom your agent has been in contact. Step 1: Create a statement, in writing, revoking your current power of attorney. Your lawyer can do this for you. You can also download a free, standard revocation form online. The statement should include your name and the date, a statement that you are of sound mind and a statement that you wish to revoke your power of attorney. Include the date of the original power of attorney and the agent's name. You should sign the revocation letter. Step 2: Prepare a witness certificate if you are revoking a durable power of attorney. Durable power of attorney documents only become effective in the event that you are incapacitated. The witness certificate shows that you are mentally competent to revoke the power of attorney. Step 3: Sign the revocation letter. Have two witnesses sign the revocation letter or the witness certificate. The witnesses should be people who know you but are not related to you -- and do not stand to inherit in the event of your death. Step 4: Draw up and sign a new power of attorney document naming a new agent. Make copies of this form. Step 5: Make copies of the revocation letter. Deliver a copy of the revocation letter to your former agent and to any institutions that received the original power of attorney, such as financial institutions, healthcare providers or attorneys. At the same time, deliver copies of the new power of attorney document to the new agent and any institutions that will be dealing with your new agent.

Transfer Power of Attorney from one agent to another, you will need to revoke the original power of attorney document and write a new one. A competent principal is free to revoke that authority at any time and confer it on another agent. The person named as agent can also decline to serve but cannot give or transfer her authority under the power of attorney to another. Unless your sibling has been named as an alternate agent in the original power of attorney document, your father is the only one who can change the choice of agent. And to make that change, the law requires that he must be mentally competent—that is, to understand the nature of the document and what it means.

Durable Power of Attorney. A power of attorney that enables a trusted person to handle your affairs if you become mentally incapable requires a durable power of attorney. The core power of attorney gives someone the authority to act on your behalf and has three variations: General Power of Attorney, Limited Power of Attorney, and Medical Power of Attorney. The word “durable" attached to any of them means that the assigned power of attorney continues to be effective even if you become mentally incompetent.  A power of attorney is a legal document that gives someone the authority to act on your behalf. The person who gives the authority is called the principal, and the person who is given authority is called the agent or the attorney-in-fact. There are basically three types of power of attorney: General Power of Attorney. This gives someone the authority to act in a broad range of matters, such as buying and selling real estate and personal property, managing your banking and investments, operating a business, handling taxes and lawsuits, and applying for government benefits. Limited Power of Attorney. Also called a special power of attorney, this gives someone the authority to act only in a limited situation, which you specify in the document. Medical Power of Attorney. This is a special type of power of attorney that gives someone the authority to make medical treatment decisions for you in the event you are mentally or physically unable to make your own decisions. Depending on the state you live in, you may see this type of document referred to by other names, such as a Durable Power of Attorney for Health Care, Designation of Patient Advocate, Designation of Health Care Surrogate, Health Care Proxy, or something similar. Unable to serve. The person or persons you appointed may be unable to serve if they have not survived you, or if they have become disabled or incapacitated themselves. For instance, if your spouse becomes very ill, he or she may not be able to act on your behalf. Unwilling. Acting as a durable power of attorney agent on your behalf is an enormous, oftentimes overwhelming responsibility. It could be discovered too late that the individual you appointed is not up to the task or that they had made a mistake in thinking they could serve when they initially agreed. Unreliable. Because the durable power of attorney document gives your agent virtually unlimited authority over your affairs, there is always potential that this power will be abused. If your agent is charged with mismanaging his or her responsibilities, a court may revoke their power and assign duties to the alternate agent you have named. If you are worried about what will happen to your assets and affairs should you become incapacitated, setting up an enduring power of attorney may ease your fears. An enduring power of attorney – referred to as a “durable” power of attorney in the United States – is a document granting another individual the right to handle certain financial or medical decisions on your behalf. A durable power of attorney differs from a standard power of attorney in that your representation, known as your “agent” or "attorney-in-fact" does not lose his right to manage your affairs should you become mentally incompetent. While an attorney can provide you with helpful information when completing this process, an attorney is not necessary to set up and execute a durable power of attorney. You can complete the documentation on your own, or use an online document preparation website.

Authorized Representative is the person you designate to assist or handle affairs related to your health care services. This may be someone you designate as a Power of Attorney, a family member, friend, caregiver, or an advocate you assign to assist with an exception, appeal or grievance. Political Representative.

Mediator - Proxy - Administrator - Responsibility

A representative could sign on someone else's behalf. It's called procuration. But when the person is deceased or incapacitated, then you need to have a power of attorney. Procuration is the action of taking care of, hence management, stewardship, agency. The word is applied to the authority or power delegated to a procurator, or agent, as well as to the exercise of such authority expressed frequently by procuration (per procurationem), or shortly per pro., or simply p.p.. Procurator is an agent representing others in a court of law in countries retaining Roman civil law. Agency.

Fiduciary is a person who holds a legal or ethical relationship of trust with one or more other parties. Typically, a fiduciary prudently takes care of money or other assets for another person. Typically, a fiduciary prudently takes care of money or other assets for another person. One party, for example, a corporate trust company or the trust department of a bank, acts in a fiduciary capacity to another party, who, for example, has entrusted funds to the fiduciary for safekeeping or investment. Likewise, financial advisers, financial planners, and asset managers, including managers of pension plans, endowments, and other tax-exempt assets, are considered fiduciaries under applicable statutes and laws. In a fiduciary relationship, one person, in a position of vulnerability, justifiably vests confidence, good faith, reliance, and trust in another whose aid, advice, or protection is sought in some matter. In such a relation good conscience requires the fiduciary to act at all times for the sole benefit and interest of the one who trusts. Fiduciary is relating to or of the nature of a legal trust (i.e. the holding of something in trust for another). A person who holds assets in trust for a beneficiary. Property Management.

Intermediary is a negotiator who acts as a link between parties. Executor.

Conservatorship is a guardian or a protector is appointed by a judge to manage the financial affairs and/or daily life of another due to physical or mental limitations, or old age. The conservator may be only of the "estate" (financial affairs), but may be also of the "person," wherein he/she takes charge of overseeing the daily activities, such as health care or living arrangements of the conservatee. Conservation.

Legal Guardian is a person who has the legal authority and the corresponding duty to care for the personal and property interests of another person, called a ward. Guardians are typically used in three situations: guardianship for an incapacitated senior (due to old age or infirmity), guardianship for a minor, and guardianship for developmentally disabled adults. Protector.

Child Custody and legal guardianship are legal terms which are used to describe the legal and practical relationship between a parent or guardian and a child in that person's care, such as the right to make decisions on behalf of a child and the duty to care for and support the child. Custody is the protective care or guardianship of someone or something.

Agent is a representative who acts on behalf of other persons or organizations.

Law of Agency is when a person is acting on behalf of another person. An area of commercial law dealing with a set of contractual, quasi-contractual and non-contractual fiduciary relationships that involve a person, called the agent, that is authorized to act on behalf of another (called the principal) to create legal relations with a third party. Succinctly, it may be referred to as the equal relationship between a principal and an agent whereby the principal, expressly or implicitly, authorizes the agent to work under his or her control and on his or her behalf. The agent is, thus, required to negotiate on behalf of the principal or bring him or her and third parties into contractual relationship. This branch of law separates and regulates the relationships between: agents and principals (internal relationship), known as the principal-agent relationship; agents and the third parties with whom they deal on their principals' behalf (external relationship); and principals and the third parties when the agents deal. Agency.

Principal-Agent Problem exists in circumstances where agents are motivated to act in their own best interests, which are contrary to those of their principals, and is an example of moral hazard.

Principal in Commercial Law is a person, legal or natural, who authorizes an agent to act to create one or more legal relationships with a third party. This branch of law is called agency and relies on the common law proposition qui facit per alium, facit per se (Latin "he who acts through another, acts personally"). It is a parallel concept to vicarious liability and strict liability (in which one person is held liable for the acts or omissions of another) in criminal law or torts.

Testator is a person who has written and executed a last will and testament that is in effect at the time of his/her death. It is any "person who makes a will.

Will and Testament is a legal document by which a person, the testator, expresses his or her wishes as to how his or her property is to be distributed at death, and names one or more persons, the executor, to manage the estate until its final distribution. For the devolution of property not disposed of by will, see inheritance and intestacy.

Holographic Will is a handwritten and testator-signed document and is an alternative to a will produced by a lawyer. Some states do not recognize holographic wills. States that do permit holographic wills require the document meet specific requirements to be valid. Traditionally, a will had to be signed by witnesses attesting to the validity of the testator's signature and intent, but in many jurisdictions, holographic wills that have not been witnessed are treated equally to witnessed wills and need only to meet minimal requirements in order to be probated: There must be evidence that the testator actually created the will, which can be proved through the use of witnesses, handwriting experts, or other methods. The testator must have had the intellectual capacity to write the will, although there is a presumption that a testator had such capacity unless there is evidence to the contrary. The testator must be expressing a wish to direct the distribution of his or her estate to beneficiaries. Holographic wills are common and are also often created in emergency situations, such as when the testator is alone, trapped, and near death. Jurisdictions that do not generally recognize unwitnessed holographic wills may grant exceptions to members of the armed services who are involved in armed conflicts and sailors at sea, though in both cases the validity of the holographic will expires at a certain time after it is drafted.

Trust Law is a relationship whereby property is held by one party for the benefit of another. A trust is created by a settlor, who transfers property to a trustee. The trustee holds that property for the trust's beneficiaries. A trust is a fiduciary arrangement that allows a third party, or trustee, to hold assets on behalf of a beneficiary or beneficiaries. Trusts can be arranged in many ways and can specify exactly how and when the assets pass to the beneficiaries. English Trust Law concerns the creation and protection of asset funds, which are usually held by one party for another's benefit. Constructive Trusts in English Law (wiki).

English Law are a form of trust created by the courts primarily where the defendant has dealt with property in an "unconscionable manner", but also in other circumstances; the property will be held in "constructive trust" for the harmed party, obliging the defendant to look after it.

Beneficiary is a natural person or other legal entity who receives money or other benefits from a benefactor. For example, the beneficiary of a life insurance policy is the person who receives the payment of the amount of insurance after the death of the insured. Third-Party Beneficiary in the law of contracts, is a person who may have the right to sue on a contract, despite not having originally been an active party to the contract.

Inheritance is the practice of passing on property, titles, debts, rights, and obligations upon the death of an individual. The rules of inheritance differ between societies and have changed over time. Heredity - Genealogy.

Trustee refers to any person who holds property, authority, or a position of trust or responsibility for the benefit of another. A trustee can also refer to a person who is allowed to do certain tasks but not able to gain income. The Trustee Act, 1893.

Public Trustee is an office established pursuant to national (and, where applicable, state or territory) statute, to act as a trustee, usually where a sum is required to be deposited as security by legislation, where courts remove another trustee, or for estates where either no executor is named by will or the testator elects to name the Public Trustee.

Estate in law is the net worth of a person at any point in time alive or dead. It is the sum of a person's assets – legal rights, interests and entitlements to property of any kind – less all liabilities at that time. The issue is of special legal significance on a question of bankruptcy and death of the person. Property List Attachment "A".

Literary Estate of an author who has died will consist mainly of the copyright and other intellectual property rights of published works, including for example film and translation rights. It may also include original manuscripts of published work, which potentially have a market value, unpublished work in a finished state or partially completed work and papers of intrinsic literary interest such as correspondence or personal diaries and records. In academia, the German term Nachlass for the legacy of papers is often used. A literary executor is a person granted (by a will) decision-making power in respect of a literary estate.

Digital Inheritance is the process of handing over personal digital media in the form of digital assets and rights to human beneficiaries. The process includes understanding what digital assets and rights exist and dealing with them after a person has died. A Digital Executor is responsible for managing your digital assets after you die, paying any debts or maintenance fees on behalf of your digital estate, and making sure that your digital assets are distributed to the people you want in the way you want. Digital media play an increasingly important role in life. The media in which a digital inheritance resides can be owned by or independent of the deceased. In contrast with physical assets, digital assets are ephemeral and subject to constant change. Intellectual property and privacy, particularly post-mortem privacy, are additional factors. Digital inheritance may present a challenge for data heirs in its complexity and intricacy, and may have legal implications. With the average person having multiple online accounts, digital inheritance has become a complex issue. Eulogy - Legacy - DNA Inheritance.

UCC-1 Uniform Commercial Code-1 is a legal form that a creditor files to give notice that it has or may have an interest in the personal property of a debtor (a person who owes a debt to the creditor as typically specified in the agreement creating the debt). This form is filed in order to "perfect" a creditor's security interest by giving public notice that there is a right to take possession of and sell certain assets for repayment of a specific debt with a certain priority. Such notices of sale are often found in the local newspapers. Once the form has been filed, the creditor establishes a relative priority with other creditors of the debtor. This process is also called "perfecting the security interest" in the property, and this type of loan is a secured loan. A financing statement may also be filed in the real estate records by a lessor of fixtures to establish the priority of the lessor's rights against a holder of a mortgage or other lien on the real property. The creditor's rights against the debtor and the lessor's rights against the lessee are based on the credit documents and the lease, respectively, and not the financing statement.

Grantor is an individual who conveys or transfers ownership of property. In real property law, an individual who sells land is known as the grantor.

Creditor is a party (e.g. person, organization, company, or government) that has a claim on the services of a second party. It is a person or institution to whom money is owed. The first party, in general, has provided some property or service to the second party under the assumption (usually enforced by contract) that the second party will return an equivalent property and service. The second party is frequently called a debtor or borrower. The first party is the creditor, which is the lender of property, service or money.

Contracts - Binding Agreements

Contract is a voluntary arrangement between two or more parties that is enforceable at law as a binding legal agreement. Contract is a branch of the law of obligations in jurisdictions of the civil law tradition. A contract arises when the parties agree that there is an agreement. Formation of a contract generally requires an offer, acceptance, consideration, and a mutual intent to be bound. Each party to a contract must have capacity to enter the agreement. Minors, intoxicated persons, and those under a mental affliction may have insufficient capacity to enter a contract. Some types of contracts may require formalities, such as a memorialization in writing. A legal agreement between two parties is when each agrees to do, make, buy, or sell a good or service, or in which one party grants a right or undertakes an obligation, often in exchange for a fee. A contract is less commonly called a binding agreement.

Binding is something executed with proper legal authority that creates social or emotional ties and an obligation.

Ceremony is a formal event or activity for a particular purpose.

Formal is being in agreement with established requirements and the standards of fact and truth.

Treaty - Documents - Waiver - Breaking your Word (backing out)

Unilateral Contract
is a legally enforceable promise - between legally competent parties - to do or refrain from doing a specified, legal act or acts. In a unilateral contract, one party pays the other party to perform a certain duty.

Bilateral Contract
is a is a reciprocal arrangement between two parties where each promises to perform an act in exchange for the other party's act. Each party is an (a person who is bound to another) to its own promise, and an obligee (a person to whom another is obligated or bound) on the other party's promise.

Breach of Contract is a legal cause of action and a type of civil wrong, in which a binding agreement or bargained-for exchange is not honored by one or more of the parties to the contract by non-performance or interference with the other party's performance. Breach occurs when a party to a contract fails to fulfill its obligation(s) as described in the contract, or communicates an intent to fail the obligation or otherwise appears not to be able to perform its obligation under the contract. Where there is breach of contract, the resulting damages will have to be paid by the party breaching the contract to the aggrieved party. If a contract is rescinded, parties are legally allowed to undo the work unless doing so would directly charge the other party at that exact time. It is important to bear in mind that contract law is not the same from country to country. Each country has its own independent, free standing law of contract. Therefore, it makes sense to examine the laws of the country to which the contract is governed before deciding how the law of contract (of that country) applies to any particular contractual relationship. In determining whether a failure to render or to offer performance is material, the following circumstances are significant: (a) the extent to which the injured party will be deprived of the benefit which he reasonably expected; (b) the extent to which the injured party can be adequately compensated for the part of that benefit of which he will be deprived; (c) the extent to which the party failing to perform or to offer to perform will suffer forfeiture; (d) the likelihood that the party failing to perform or to offer to perform will cure his failure, taking account of all the circumstances including any reasonable assurances; (e) the extent to which the behavior of the party failing to perform or to offer to perform comports with standards of good faith and fair dealing.

Legal Channeling is the act of legally making one entity responsible for an event, and thereby dismissing other parties from liability for an event.
a contractual or legal redirection of responsibilities from an organization to another.

Misrepresentation is a false or misleading statement of fact made during negotiations by one party to another, the statement then inducing that other party to enter into a contract. The misled party may normally rescind the contract, and sometimes may be awarded damages as well (or instead of rescission).

Contract Management is the management of contracts made with customers, vendors, partners, or employees. The personnel involved in contract administration required to negotiate, support and manage effective contracts are often expensive to train and retain. Contract management includes negotiating the terms and conditions in contracts and ensuring compliance with the terms and conditions, as well as documenting and agreeing on any changes or amendments that may arise during its implementation or execution. It can be summarized as the process of systematically and efficiently managing contract creation, execution, and analysis for the purpose of maximizing financial and operational performance and minimizing risk. Common commercial contracts include employment letters, sales invoices, purchase orders, and utility contracts. Complex contracts are often necessary for construction projects, goods or services that are highly regulated, goods or services with detailed technical specifications, intellectual property (IP) agreements, outsourcing and international trade. Most larger contracts require the effective use of contract management software to aid administration among multiple parties. A study has found that for 42% of enterprises, the top driver for improvements in the management of contracts is the pressure to better assess and mitigate risks and additionally, nearly 65% of enterprises report that contract lifecycle management or CLM has improved exposure to financial and legal risk. A contract is a written or oral legally-binding agreement between the parties identified in the agreement to fulfill the terms and conditions outlined in the agreement. A prerequisite requirement for the enforcement of a contract, amongst other things, is the condition that the parties to the contract accept the terms of the claimed contract. Historically, this was most commonly achieved through signature or performance, but in many jurisdictions - especially with the advance of electronic commerce - the forms of acceptance have expanded to include various forms of electronic signature. Contracts can be of many types, e.g. sales contracts (including leases), purchasing contracts, partnership agreements, trade agreements, and intellectual property agreements. A sales contract is a contract between a company (the seller) and a customer where the company agrees to sell products and/or services and the customer in return is obligated to pay for the product/services bought. A purchasing contract is a contract between a company (the buyer) and a supplier who is promising to sell products and/or services within agreed terms and conditions. The company (buyer) in return is obligated to acknowledge the goods / or service and pay for liability created. A partnership agreement may be a contract which formally establishes the terms of a partnership between two legal entities such that they regard each other as 'partners' in a commercial arrangement. However, such expressions may also be merely a means to reflect the desire of the contracting parties to act 'as if' both are in a partnership with common goals. Therefore, it might not be the common law arrangement of a partnership which by definition creates fiduciary duties and which also has 'joint and several' liabilities.

Non-Binding is a preliminary agreement that has no legal force or binding force, and has no obligations or promises, so it is not legally necessary to obey or follow, or is it officially requiring that you do something.

Non-Binding Contracts are typically used when two parties want to put down preliminary discussions on paper to make sure they're on the same page, but don't want to explicitly agree to anything yet. A letter of intent is a good example of a non-binding contract.

Letter of Intent is a document outlining one or more agreements between two or more parties before the agreements are finalized. The concept is similar to a heads of agreement, term sheet or memorandum of understanding. Such outlined agreements may be mergers and acquisitions transaction agreements, joint venture agreements, real property lease agreements and several other categories of agreements that may govern material transactions. A letter of intent may be presented by one party to another party and subsequently negotiated before execution (or signature). If carefully negotiated, an LOI may serve to protect both parties to a transaction. (LOI is sometimes capitalized as Letter of Intent in legal writing, but only when referring to a specific document under discussion).

Relational Contract is a contract whose effect is based upon a relationship of trust between the parties to which it pertains. The explicit terms of the contract are just an outline as there are implicit terms and understandings which determine the behaviour of the parties.

Memorandum of Understanding is a type of agreement between two (bilateral) or more (multilateral) parties. It expresses a convergence of will between the parties, indicating an intended common line of action. It is often used either in cases where parties do not imply a legal commitment or in situations where the parties cannot create a legally enforceable agreement. It is a more formal alternative to a gentlemen's agreement.

Gentlemen's Agreement is an informal and legally non-binding agreement between two or more parties. It is typically oral, though it may be written, or simply understood as part of an unspoken agreement by convention or through mutually beneficial etiquette. The essence of a gentlemen's agreement is that it relies upon the honor of the parties for its fulfillment, rather than being in any way enforceable. It is, therefore, distinct from a legal agreement or contract, which can be enforced if necessary.

Covenant is a formal agreement between two or more parties to perform or not perform some action. A solemn agreement. Convenat in religion is to enter into a formal agreement between God and his people in which God makes certain promises and requires certain behavior from them in return. Covenant is a solemn promise to engage in or refrain from a specified action. A formal agreement between two or more parties to perform or not perform some action. Under historical English common law a covenant was distinguished from an ordinary contract by the presence of a seal. Because the presence of a seal indicated an unusual solemnity in the promises made in a covenant, the common law would enforce a covenant even in the absence of consideration. In United States contract law, an implied covenant of good faith is presumed.

Collateral Contract is usually a single term contract, made in consideration of the party for whose benefit the contract operates agreeing to enter into the principal or main contract, which sets out additional terms relating to the same subject matter as the main contract. The collateral contract co-exists side by side. For example, a collateral contract is formed when one party pays the other party a certain sum for entry into another contract. A collateral contract may be between one of the parties and a third party. It can also be epitomized as follows: a collateral contract is one that induces a person to enter into a separate "primary" contract. For example, if X agrees to buy goods from Y that will, accordingly, be manufactured by Z, and does so on the strength of Z's assurance as to the high quality of the goods, X and Z may be held to have made a collateral contract consisting of Z's promise of quality given in consideration of X's promise to enter into the main contract with Y.

Four Corners Rule is the meaning of a written contract, will, or deed as represented solely by its textual content.

Be aware of Square Brackets, the text inside the brackets is optional OR that you should consider whether the text inside the brackets should be edited. The square brackets (only) will be removed (thereby confirming the clear intention of the contracting parties to incorporate the bracketed text into the agreement); OR Both the square brackets and the text within them are removed (thereby confirming the clear intention of the contracting parties NOT to incorporate the bracketed text into the agreement).

Fine Print is less noticeable print smaller than the more obvious larger print it accompanies that advertises or otherwise describes or partially describes a commercial product or service. The larger print that is used in conjunction with fine print by the merchant often has the effect of deceiving the consumer into believing the offer is more advantageous than it really is. This may satisfy a legal technicality which requires full disclosure of all (even unfavorable) terms or conditions, but does not specify the manner (size, typeface, coloring, etc.) of disclosure. There is strong evidence that suggests the fine print is not read by the majority of consumers. Fine print may say the opposite of what the larger print says. For example, if the larger print says "pre-approved" the fine print might say "subject to approval". Especially in pharmaceutical advertisements, fine print may accompany a warning message, but this message is often neutralized by the more eye-catching positive images and pleasant background music (eye candy). Sometimes television advertisements flash text fine print in camouflagic colors, and for brief periods of time, making it difficult or impossible for the viewer to read. The use of fine print is a common advertising technique in certain market niches, particularly those of high-margin specialty products or services uncompetitive with those in the mainstream market. The practice, for example, can be used to mislead the consumer about an item's price or value, or the nutritional content of a food product. US Federal Trade Commission (FTC) regulations state that, for an advertised offer to be lawful, the terms of the offer must be clear and conspicuous, not relegated to fine print. US FTC regulations state that unfair or deceptive acts or practices in or affecting commerce are unlawful. (15 USC § 45 (a)) In relevant part, they state that contingent conditions and obligations of an offer must be set forth clearly and conspicuously at the outset of the offer, and that disclosure of the terms of the offer set forth in a footnote of an advertisement to which reference is made by an asterisk or other symbol placed next to the offer, is not regarded as making disclosure at the outset. (16 CFR 251.1) Fine print is controversial because of its deceptive nature. Its purpose is to make the consumer believe that the offer is really great. Though the real truth about the offer is technically available to the consumer in the smaller print of the advertisement—thus virtually ensuring plausible deniability from claims of fraud—it is often designed to be overlooked. The unsuspecting customer, who can instantly see all the attractive aspects of the offer, will, due to natural impulsive behavior, time constraints, and/or personal need, generally not bother to learn the caveats, instead focusing on the positives of the deal. Many offers, advertised in large print, only apply when certain conditions are met. In many cases, these conditions are difficult or nearly impossible to meet. In many cases, the business states in fine print that it reserves the right to modify the terms of the contract at any time with little to no advance notice. This controversial practice is often seen in the banking and insurance industries. It is also widely abused in terms of use statements and privacy policies. In some cases, the seller who uses this technique will engage in the practice of bait and switch. The customer will be told when ready to purchase that for one reason or another, they will not be eligible for the advertised offer, and will be coerced into one that is higher priced (see Hard sell). Reasons they may be given include his/her age, race, religion, credit rating, size or location of residence, the type of vehicle s/he owns, the amount of prior business s/he has done with that company, or the variety of the item s/he wishes to purchase. Often when this occurs, the limitations that render him/her ineligible will apply to an overwhelming majority of consumers. Very frequently, consumers, eager to obtain a product or service they have the dire need or wish for, or that they have been coerced into obtaining, will sign their names on a binding contract. A court may find the consumer to be liable to the terms of the contract, although stated only by the fine print, and an exit from these terms may be costly or impossible. A common practice has been to use fine print in advertising on television. In such a case, the fine print is displayed at the bottom of the screen in a manner where it is not noticeable to many viewers, or is displayed for such a short time that no one has the time to read the entire paragraph without an artificial means of stopping the commercial, i.e. record it or freeze frame it, such as with a digital video recorder (DVR), in order to read it. The attention is drawn away from this little section by the more eye-catching or large print description of the offer, which alone is untrue. Fine print is often illegible, e.g., when a TV picture is noisy, low-resolution, or the viewer's sight is impaired. Banking offers have been displayed on video billboards by highways that are unreadable by passing drivers. Some TV and radio commercials are concluded with "fast talking", which is barely audible or comprehensible to most. While it is this very message that states all necessary disclaimers and exceptions to the advertisement, it is often stated too fast for the viewer or listener to comprehend. This is often coupled with pleasant background music and positive images, which in turn takes the consumer's focus off the disclaimer. Always read the labels.

Adhesion Contract or Contract of Adhesion is a standard form contract drafted by one party (usually a business with stronger bargaining power) and signed by the weaker party (usually a consumer in need of goods or services), who must adhere to the contract and therefore does not have the power to negotiate or modify the terms of the contract. Adhesion contracts are commonly used for matters involving insurance, leases, deeds, mortgages, automobile purchases, and other forms of consumer credit. Also known as adhesive contract or boilerplate contract; adhesory contract; adhesionary contract; take-it-or-leave-it contract; leonine contract. Courts carefully scrutinize adhesion contracts and sometimes void certain provisions because of the possibility of unequal bargaining power, unfairness, and unconscionability. Factoring into such decisions include the nature of the assent, the possibility of unfair surprise, lack of notice, unequal bargaining power, and substantive unfairness. Courts often use the “doctrine of reasonable expectations” as a justification for invalidating parts or all of an adhesion contract: the weaker party will not be held to adhere to contract terms that are beyond what the weaker party would have reasonably expected from the contract, even if what he or she reasonably expected was outside the strict letter of agreement. Reasonable expectation doctrine is a principle applied in insurance law which states whenever there is an ambiguity in an insurance-policy, it is resolved in favor of the insured's reasonable expectations. Usually an ambiguity arises when there are plausible, competing interpretations of a policy term. Unconscionability describes terms that are so extremely unjust, or overwhelmingly one-sided in favor of the party who has the superior bargaining power, that they are contrary to good conscience. Monopolies - Non-Disclosure Agreement.

Agency Agreement is a legal contract creating a fiduciary relationship whereby the first party ("the principal") agrees that the actions of a second party ("the agent") binds the principal to later agreements made by the agent as if the principal had himself personally made the later agreements. The power of the agent to bind the principal is usually legally referred to as authority. Agency created via an agreement may be a form of implied authority, such as when a person gives their credit card to a close relative, the cardholder may be required to pay for purchases made by the relative with their credit card. Many states employ the equal dignity rule whereby the agency agreement must be in writing if the later agreement would also necessarily be written, such as a contract to buy thousands of dollars' worth of goods.

Two Signature Rule - Two-Man Rule is a control mechanism designed to achieve a high level of security for especially critical material or operations. Under this rule all access and actions requires the presence of two authorized people at all times. A contract typically does not have to be Notarized.

Ratify is to approve and express agreement with a statement or proposal to do something, responsibility, or obligation.

Notary is a person authorized to perform certain legal formalities, especially to draw up or certify contracts, deeds, and other documents for use in other jurisdictions. Notary is a lawyer (though not necessarily so in the United States) or person with legal training who is licensed by the government to perform acts in legal affairs, in particular witnessing signatures on documents. The form that the notarial profession takes varies with local legal systems. A notary is a person licensed to approve other’s signatures. Any private contracts for sales of goods or services do not require a notary signature. In addition, come court papers, such as petitions and motions do not have to be notarized, mainly because the person filing the form is the person who drafted it. With a few states as exceptions, divorce papers do not require a notarized signature either. In addition, adoption papers, wills, trusts, and medical release forms all require a notary signature. In general, you will see a box at the bottom of the document that says, “notary signature” if the document has to be notarized.

Notary Public is a public officer constituted by law to serve the public in non-contentious matters usually concerned with estates, deeds, powers-of-attorney, and foreign and international business. A notary's main functions are to administer oaths and affirmations, take affidavits and statutory declarations, witness and authenticate the execution of certain classes of documents, take acknowledgments of deeds and other conveyances, protest notes and bills of exchange, provide notice of foreign drafts, prepare marine or ship's protests in cases of damage, provide exemplifications and notarial copies, and perform certain other official acts depending on the jurisdiction. Any such act is known as a notarization. The term notary public only refers to common-law notaries and should not be confused with civil-law notaries.

Witness for Signature is Person who observes (witnesses) the signing (execution) of a legal document (instrument) and verifies its authenticity by putting his or her signatures on it. Certain legal instruments (such as deeds and wills) are valid only if properly witnessed by one or more competent witnesses. As a general rule a witness to the execution of a legal document should: be 18 years old or older; know the person whose signature they are witnessing; be satisfied as to that person's identity; not be a party to the document, that is, they should be signing the document only as a witness. If a party to the agreement later says they did not sign, the person who witnessed the party signing can be called to confirm it. A witnesses signature can be useful for evidentiary purposes. If a party to the agreement later says they did not sign, the person who witnessed the party signing can be called to confirm it. The witness can confirm that the specific person signed and that that was the signature they made. Is a spouse or other family member acceptable to act as a witness? Generally the person you choose to witness a document should have no financial or other interest in an agreement. A neutral third party is the best choice. Most documents and contracts do NOT require a witness for them to be legally valid. A Notary Can Not Notarize His or Her Own Witness Signature. Most states allow notaries to act as witnesses to the execution of documents. If a document requires both the signer and witness's signature to be notarized, the notary can still act as the witness but he or she won't be able to notarize their signature. Signing as a witness will not generally make you liable on a contract. But, if you sign as a witness to something that you did not in fact witness, you could be liable for fraud or negligent misrepresentation is someone suffers harm as a result of you untrue statement that you witnessed the document being signed.

Co-Signing is promising to pay another person's debt arising out of contract if that person fails to do so. In finance it is a loan guarantee or a promise by one party (the guarantor) to assume the debt obligation of a borrower if that borrower defaults. A guarantee can be limited or unlimited, making the guarantor liable for only a portion or all of the debt.

Signature is a handwritten (and often stylized) depiction of someone's name, nickname, or even a simple "X" or other mark that a person writes on documents as a proof of identity and intent. The writer of a signature is a signatory or signer. Similar to a handwritten signature, a signature work describes the work as readily identifying its creator. A signature may be confused with an autograph, which is chiefly an artistic signature. This can lead to confusion when people have both an autograph and signature and as such some people in the public eye keep their signatures private whilst fully publishing their autograph.

Sign is to mark with one's signature; write one's name (on). Approve and express assent, responsibility, or obligation. Be engaged by a written agreement.

Electronic Signature or e-signature, refers to data in electronic form, which is logically associated with other data in electronic form and which is used by the signatory to sign. This type of signature provides the same legal standing as a handwritten signature as long as it adheres to the requirements of the specific regulation it was created under.

Standard Form Contract is a contract between two parties, where the terms and conditions of the contract are set by one of the parties, and the other party has little or no ability to negotiate more favorable terms and is thus placed in a "take it or leave it" position. While these types of contracts are not illegal per se, there exists a very real possibility for unconscionability. In addition, in the event of an ambiguity, such ambiguity will be resolved contra proferentem against the party drafting the contract language. Sometimes referred to as a contract of adhesion, a leonine contract, or a take-it-or-leave-it contract.

10 Rules of Commerce
1. You can only control that which you create. (Create a child)
2. You can not control that which you did not create. (State has no control over child)
3. All of commerce is based on Title. (Birth certificate, MSO, copyright)
4. The only true Title to anything is the MSO. (Geneses 1 verse 1)
5. When you register anything anywhere you give up Title. (Car, Child, vote)
6. There is no Money/ (there is no Spoon). (Only credit in circulation Public, and private)
7. There is no involuntary Servitude. (Amistad, Joseph)
8. First in line is first in time. (Recorded into public record at county)
9. Do not interfere with commerce.
10. Allow nothing to come between you and your Creator. (Eliminating paganism)

Disclaimers - Terms of Use Agreements

Waiver is the voluntary relinquishment or surrender of some known right or privilege. Key factors that some courts (depending on jurisdiction) may look at while determining the applicability of a waiver: In some jurisdictions, one may not prospectively waive liability for some or all intentional activities. Waivers generally must be made voluntarily and with the full knowledge (or the ability to know) of the right being waived. The waiver should be unambiguous and clear to a reasonable person. In some jurisdictions (not including the United States), it may be necessary that the parties to the waiver have equal bargaining power. A waiver may have limited application where one contracts for an "essential service" such that it may violate public policy for liability to be waived. A waiver that the courts will not enforce because the purpose of the agreement is to achieve an illegal end constitutes an illegal agreement. Non-Waiver Contract specifies that no rights are waived, particularly if a person's actions may suggest that rights are being waived. You should still be able to be a Whistleblower.

Confidentiality Agreement (non-discloser)

Reservation of Rights is a statement that one is intentionally retaining his full legal rights to warn others of those rights. The notice avoids later claims that one waived legal rights that were held under a contract, copyright law, or any other applicable law.

Unconscionability is a defense against the enforcement of a contract or portion of a contract. If a contract is unfair or oppressive to one party in a way that suggests abuses during its formation, a court may find it unconscionable and refuse to enforce it. A contract is most likely to be found unconscionable if both unfair bargaining and unfair substantive terms are shown. An absence of meaningful choice by the disadvantaged party is often used to prove unfair bargaining. Unconscionability is a doctrine in contract law that describes terms that are so extremely unjust, or overwhelmingly one-sided in favor of the party who has the superior bargaining power, that they are contrary to good conscience. Typically, an unconscionable contract is held to be unenforceable because no reasonable or informed person would otherwise agree to it. The perpetrator of the conduct is not allowed to benefit, because the consideration offered is lacking, or is so obviously inadequate, that to enforce the contract would be unfair to the party seeking to escape the contract.

Warning: People will lie and say they were coerced, mostly because they were advised to do so. This is a type of frivolous act is an attempt to extort money, which is punishable by law. Lying under oath and making false claims is also a criminal offense. Making Malicious Vexatious Legal Threats is extremely dangerous. Perjury - Cover-up.

Contract Clause Article I of the United States Constitution: No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility. The Contract Clause prohibits states from enacting any law that retroactively impairs contract rights. The Contract Clause applies only to state legislation, not federal legislation or court decisions.

Contract Clause
is a specific provision or section within a written contract. Each clause in a contract addresses a specific aspect related to the overall subject matter of the agreement. Contract clauses are aimed at clearly defining the duties, rights and privileges that each party has under the contract terms.

Specific Performance is an equitable remedy in the law of contract, whereby a court issues an order requiring a party to perform a specific act, such to complete performance of the contract. It is typically available in the sale of land, but otherwise is not generally available if damages are an appropriate alternative. Specific performance is almost never available for contracts of personal service, although performance may also be ensured through the threat of proceedings for contempt of court.

Never Give Up Your Right to Sue

Arbitration Clause or forced arbitration, is a clause in a contract that requires the parties to resolve their disputes through an arbitration process. Although such a clause may or may not specify that arbitration occur within a specific jurisdiction, it always binds the parties to a type of resolution outside the courts, and is therefore considered a kind of forum selection clause.

Disclaimers - Non-Disclosure Agreements

Mandatory Arbitration Deprives Workers and Consumers of their Rights. By delegating dispute resolution to arbitration, the Court now permits corporations to write the rules that will govern their relationships with their workers and customers and design the procedures used to interpret and apply those rules when disputes arise. Moreover, the Court permits corporations to couple mandatory arbitration with a ban on class actions, thereby preventing consumers or employees from joining together to challenge systemic corporate wrongdoing. This is a “get out of jail free” card for all potential transgressions by corporations. These trends are undermining decades of progress in consumer and labor rights.

Breaking your Word

Breach of Contract is a legal cause of action and a type of civil wrong, in which a binding agreement or bargained-for exchange is not honored by one or more of the parties to the contract by non-performance or interference with the other party's performance. Breach occurs when a party to a contract fails to fulfill its obligation(s) as described in the contract, or communicates an intent to fail the obligation or otherwise appears not to be able to perform its obligation under the contract. Where there is breach of contract, the resulting damages will have to paid by the party breaching the contract to the aggrieved party.

Renege is to break an agreement or go back on a promise. To abandon a responsibility and fail to act as one has promised. Not upholding his or her end of the deal. The other person given up. When you break your word, you break down relationships, which could make you become unreliable, unpredictable and unstable.

When agreement is grossly unfair, fraudulent or irrelevant, then you should negotiate a new contract.

Estoppel is a judicial device in common law legal systems whereby a court may prevent, or "estop" a person from making assertions or from going back on his or her word; the person being sanctioned is "estopped". Estoppel may prevent someone from bringing a particular claim, particularly if a promise unsupported by consideration is being relied on by the other party. Legal doctrines of estoppel are based in both common law and equity. Promissory Estoppel may prevent someone from exercising a right to terminate an agreement, even though the promise might not otherwise have been legally binding as a contract. Issue Estoppel is when the first person will not normally be able to argue before the courts of another country that the second person was negligent (whether in respect of the same claim or a related claim). The first person is precluded from asserting a specific claim.

Consideration is the concept of legal value in connection with contracts. It is anything of value promised to another when making a contract. An agreement made without consideration is void, unless– it is expressed in writing and registered under the law for the time being in force for the registration of documents, and is made on account of natural love and affection between parties standing in a near relation to each other; or unless it is a promise to compensate, wholly or in part, a person who has already voluntarily done something for the promisor, or something which the promisor was legally compellable to do, or unless it is a promise, made in writing and signed by the person to be charged therewith, or by his agent generally or specially authorized in that behalf, to pay wholly or in part a debt of which the creditor might have enforced payment but for the law for the limitation of suits. It can take the form of money, physical objects, services, promised actions, abstinence from a future action, and much more. Consideration to create a legally enforceable contract entails a bargained for, legal detriment incurred by the promisee OR a legal benefit to the promisor. Under the notion of "pre-existing duties", if either the promisor or the promisee already had a legal obligation to render such payment, it cannot be seen as consideration in the legal sense.

Mistake Contract Law The 'unilateral mistake', the 'mutual mistake' and the 'common mistake'. The distinction between the 'common mistake' and the 'mutual mistake' is important. Another breakdown in contract law divides mistakes into four traditional categories: unilateral mistake, mutual mistake, mistranscription, and misunderstanding.

Mistake of Fact
is where both the parties enter into an agreement are under a mistake as to a matter of fact essential to the agreement, the agreement is void, which means lacking any legal or binding force, Declare invalid.

Termination for “convenience”
provisions are standard clauses in construction contracts seen in both the public and private works settings, generally allowing one party to terminate a contract even in the absence of the other party's fault or breach, and without suffering the usual financial consequences of a breach.

Anticipatory Avoidance
is a unilateral repudiation by a party of its obligations when a fundamental breach of the contract by the other party is imminent.

Right of First Refusal is a contractual right that gives its holder the option to enter a business transaction with the owner of something, according to specified terms, before the owner is entitled to enter into that transaction with a third party. A first refusal right must have at least three parties: the owner, the third party or buyer, and the option holder. In general, the owner must make the same offer to the option holder before making the offer to the buyer. The right of first refusal is similar in concept to a call option. An ROFR can cover almost any sort of asset, including real estate, personal property, a patent license, a screenplay, or an interest in a business. It might also cover business transactions that are not strictly assets, such as the right to enter a joint venture or distribution arrangement. In entertainment, a right of first refusal on a concept or a screenplay would give the holder the right to make that movie first while in real estate, a right of first refusal would create incentive for the tenant to take better care of their leased apartment in case the opportunity to purchase arises in the future. Only if the holder turns it down may the owner then shop it around to other parties. Because an ROFR is a contract right, the holder's remedies for breach are typically limited to recovery of damages. In other words, if the owner sells the asset to a third party without offering the holder the opportunity to purchase it first, the holder can then sue the owner for damages but may have a difficult time obtaining a court order to stop or reverse the sale. However, in some cases, the option becomes a property right that may be used to invalidate an improper sale. ROFR also arises in visitation agreements/orders in divorce cases. In such cases, an ROFR may require a custodial parent to offer parenting time to the non-custodial parent (rather than having a child supervised by a third party) any time that the custodial parent or his/her family is unable to exercise his/her right to parenting time (such as the custodial parent needs to travel out of town). Under these circumstances a breach may result in a finding of contempt and any remedies for contempt. An ROFR differs from a Right of First Offer (ROFO, also known as a Right of First Negotiation) in that the ROFO merely obliges the owner to undergo exclusive good faith negotiations with the rights holder before negotiating with other parties. A ROFR is an option to enter a transaction on exact or approximate transaction terms. A ROFO is merely an agreement to negotiate.

Lawsuits - Legal Action - Suing - To Sue, or Not to Sue

Sue is to initiate legal proceedings against someone. To file a lawsuit and to seek a legal remedy and to correct an error or a fault or an evil. Petition - Repeal (motion).

Lawsuit is in reference to a Civil Action brought in a court of law in which a plaintiff, a party who claims to have incurred loss as a result of a defendant's actions, demands a legal or equitable Remedy. The defendant is required to respond to the plaintiff's complaint. If the plaintiff is successful, judgment is in the plaintiff's favor, and a variety of court orders may be issued to enforce a right, award damages, or impose a temporary or permanent injunction to prevent an act or compel an act. A declaratory judgment may be issued to prevent future legal disputes.

Remedy - Restitution - Complaint - Whistle Blowing - Charges - Wrongful Death

Action is a judicial proceeding brought by one party against another; one party prosecutes another for a wrong done or for protection of a right or for prevention of a wrong. Legal Action is a process to have a court of law settle an argument. The act of bringing a lawsuit, prosecution, or judicial proceeding to obtain some sort of legal remedy or to ascertain or protect a legal right.

Cause of Action is a set of facts sufficient to justify a right to sue to obtain money, property, or the enforcement of a right against another party. The term also refers to the legal theory upon which a plaintiff brings suit (such as Breach of Contract, battery, or false imprisonment). The legal document which carries a claim is often called a Statement of Claim in English law, or a Complaint in U.S. federal practice and in many U.S. states. It can be any communication notifying the party to whom it is addressed of an alleged fault which resulted in damages, often expressed in amount of money the receiving party should pay/reimburse. To pursue a cause of action, a plaintiff pleads or alleges facts in a complaint, the pleading that initiates a lawsuit. A cause of action generally encompasses both the legal theory (the legal wrong the plaintiff claims to have suffered) and the remedy (the relief a court is asked to grant). Often the facts or circumstances that entitle a person to seek judicial relief may create multiple causes of action. Although it is fairly straightforward to file a Statement of Claim in most jurisdictions, if it is not done properly, then the filing party may lose his case due to simple technicalities. There are a number of specific causes of action, including: contract-based actions; statutory causes of action; torts such as assault, battery, invasion of privacy, fraud, slander, negligence, intentional infliction of emotional distress; and suits in equity such as unjust enrichment and quantum meruit. The points a plaintiff must prove to win a given type of case are called the "elements" of that cause of action. For example, for a claim of negligence, the elements are: the (existence of a) duty, breach (of that duty), proximate cause (by that breach), and damages. If a complaint does not allege facts sufficient to support every element of a claim, the court, upon motion by the opposing party, may dismiss the complaint for failure to state a claim for which relief can be granted. The defendant to a cause of action must file an "Answer" to the complaint in which the claims can be admitted or denied (including denial on the basis of insufficient information in the complaint to form a response). The answer may also contain counterclaims in which the "Counterclaim Plaintiff" states its own causes of action. Finally, the answer may contain affirmative defenses. Most defenses must be raised at the first possible opportunity either in the answer or by motion or are deemed waived. A few defenses, in particular a court's lack of subject matter jurisdiction, need not be pleaded and may be raised at any time.

Class Action is a type of lawsuit where one of the parties is a group of people who are represented collectively by a member of that group. allow consumer organizations to bring claims on behalf of consumers. A class action is a type of legal proceeding in which one person (the plaintiff or applicant) brings a claim on behalf of a wider group of people who have been affected in a similar way, or by the same conduct.

Class Action Grievance means a grievance in which a member is grieving actions/nonactions of any individual other than his/her immediate supervisor, or one in which the action/nonaction of two (2) or more immediate supervisors in separate posts (work locations) are being grieved. Three Types of Grievances. Individual Grievance. One person grieves that a management action has violated their rights under the collective agreement. Examples of this type of grievance include: discipline, demotion, classification disputes, denial of benefits, etc. Group Grievance. A group grievance complains that management action has hurt a group of individuals in the same way. Policy or Union Grievance.

Libel Lawsuit or Slander Lawsuit seeks monetary damages for harm caused by the statement, such as pain and suffering, damage to the plaintiff's reputation, lost wages or a loss of ability to earn a living, and personal emotional reactions such as shame, humiliation, and anxiety.

Defamation is the act of communicating to a third party false statements about a person, place, or thing that results in damage to its reputation.

Get the Required Documents. Go to the clerk office at the courthouse and request the documents you need to file your petition, which include the petition form and any other documents such as a summons or a case-related cover-sheet, depending on the type of petition. You may choose to download the legal documents online from the court's website. Forms are available online so they can be brought to the courthouse already complete, but this is not compulsory. If you obtain the forms at the courthouse, bring a clipboard so you can complete them while you wait in line. The forms must be completed in their entirety.
Prove Your Identity. Provide a Social Security card and photo ID when asked by the court clerk. You must provide proof of identity to file any petition with a court or to request a trial.
Pay the Fees. Pay the appropriate filing fees. You can pay by check, money order, credit card and, in some cases, cash. If you can prove you are indigent, it may be possible to have the fees waived.
File the Petition. Make copies of the form and file the petition. Generally, you're required to provide three copies of any form when filing a petition. You must sign each of the three copies and present them to the court on the day you file the petition. Each will be stamped with a case number, a trial date or hearing date, and the court where the case will be heard.
Serve a Summons if Needed. If others are involved with your case, you will have to serve them a summons to get them to appear in court. This document would be provided to you when you file the petition. You may give the summons to the person yourself, through the sheriff's office, or through a service approved by the court you are filing with.
Prepare For Your Case. Research the requirements for you case as best you can, using online resources and by going to the local library. You may also submit evidence, if necessary, as well as other documents, such as a credit counseling certificate for a bankruptcy petition, date of separation for a divorce petition or statement of income for a spousal support petition. Review the petition for errors and correct any mistakes beforehand. Judge's typically aren't allowed to cut self-represented litigants any slack if they are not prepared or don't know the law.

Service of Process is the procedure by which a party to a lawsuit gives an appropriate notice of initial legal action to another party (such as a defendant), court, or administrative body in an effort to exercise jurisdiction over that person so as to enable that person to respond to the proceeding before the court, body, or other tribunal. Notice is furnished by delivering a set of court documents (called "process") to the person to be served. File to Defend. Filing an answer prevents the plaintiff from getting a default judgment against you. It signals to the court and the other side that you intend to defend the case. You must file a “Notice of Intention to Defend” within 15 days of being served the Summons and Complaint. In some cases, you have 60 days. Sewer Service is a long-running practice where debt collectors fail to serve complaints on debtors, and later falsely certify to courts that service was made and that the cases have merit.

Frivolous Lawsuits - Legal Threats

Most courts now have procedures that allow you to represent yourself in regular civil actions. The difference between civil courts and small claims court is that small claims procedures are not as strict, the filing fees are generally less, and the cases tend to move faster. But small claims has a limit of how much money you can sue for. Civil suits can sue for millions, which is why the cost more.

Plaintiff is a person who brings an action in a court of law, or the party who initiates a lawsuit or action before a court. Defendant is the person accused.

If someone hurts you or hurts your investment, then you have a legal right to seek damages or seek a remedy using the court system. And if someone breaks a law or violates a law, then they can be punished by the legal system as well. If someone is reducing your quality of life, then it’s your duty to protect yourself against this type of ignorant aggression that threatens your well being. We cannot just do nothing or just look the other way. We have to act. It is our duty as human beings to do what is right and too stop other people from doing something bad or wrong. The cost of doing nothing far exceeds the cost of defending yourself, especially when you factor in all the other people that you are fighting for. You are not just doing it for yourself, you're doing it for future generations, in the same way that your ancestors sacrificed for you.

The biggest reason for people to sue someone is when you know that the lawsuit will help stop abuse from this person, or persons, from victimizing other people, and this is not about money, this is about correcting a destructive flaw, no one should have the right to kill people or have the right to cause suffering of other people. So if someone manipulates or coerces you into an action that is illogical and possibly destructive, then that's when a lawsuit and justice is necessary. And you can't fight evil with evil or money with money, you have to fight injustice with justice, and you want to make sure that not only do the laws change, but more importantly, that people change, and also that everything learned in the lawsuit is thoroughly documented so that future generations are not exploited by the same kind of ignorance that we are currently suffering from today. Of course I'm more interested in educating people then I am suing people, But if I feel that a legal action could also be used as a learning platform and a public classroom with lessons on activism, politics, money and human behavior, then a lawsuit would be even more effective, because it not only attains to end the abuse, it also attains to make more people aware of this abuse. this way ignorance doesn't have a place to hide, so ignorance will gradually just fade away and become less and less of a burden on society. We have known for some time that knowledge is our most valuable resource and our most powerful tool for change, you can almost go as far as saying that learning is God, or at the least, that learning is something of great importance.

Punitive Damages, or exemplary damages, are damages assessed in order to punish the defendant for outrageous conduct and/or to reform or deter the defendant and others from engaging in conduct similar to that which formed the basis of the lawsuit. Although the purpose of punitive damages is not to compensate the plaintiff, the plaintiff will receive all or some of the punitive damages award. Punitive damages are often awarded if compensatory damages are deemed an inadequate remedy. The court may impose them to prevent undercompensation of plaintiffs and to allow redress for undetectable torts and taking some strain away from the criminal justice system. Punitive damages are most important for violations of the law that are hard to detect. Because they are usually paid in excess of the plaintiff's provable injuries, punitive damages are awarded only in special cases, usually under tort law, if the defendant's conduct was egregiously insidious.

Irreparable Harm is harm that would not be adequately compensated by monetary damages or an award of damages that cannot be provided with adequate compensation months later. It is a requirement for the issuance of preliminary injunction and temporary restraining order. Irreparable injury is the type of harm which no monetary compensation can cure or put conditions back the way they were.

Litigation is the process of taking legal action.

Intervention in law is a proceeding that permits a person to enter into a lawsuit already in progress; admission of person not an original party to the suit so that person can protect some right or interest that is allegedly affected by the proceedings. The purpose of intervention is to prevent unnecessary duplication of lawsuits. And the basic rationale for intervention is that a judgment in a particular case may affect the rights of nonparties, who ideally should have the right to be heard.

Tort is a civil wrong that unfairly causes someone else to suffer loss or harm resulting in legal liability or an action for damages for the wrongdoing from the person who commits the tortious act, called a tortfeasor. Although crimes may be torts, the cause of legal action is not necessarily a crime, as the harm may be due to negligence which does not amount to criminal negligence. The victim of the harm can recover their loss as damages in a lawsuit. In order to prevail, the plaintiff in the lawsuit, commonly referred to as the injured party, must show that the actions or lack of action was the legally recognizable cause of the harm. The equivalent of tort in civil law jurisdictions is delict. Justice.

Tort Law is a body of rights, obligations, and remedies that is applied by courts in civil proceedings to provide relief for persons who have suffered harm from the wrongful acts of others. The person who sustains injury or suffers pecuniary damage as the result of tortious conduct is known as the plaintiff, and the person who is responsible for inflicting the injury and incurs liability for the damage is known as the defendant or tortfeasor.

Statute of Limitations is a statute prescribing a period of limitation for the bringing of certain kinds of legal action. A statute of limitations is a law passed by a legislative body in a common law system to set the maximum time after an event within which legal proceedings may be initiated. The amount of time that is considered "reasonable" varies from country to country. Some nations have no statute of limitations whatsoever. The purpose and effect of statutes of limitations are to protect defendants. There are three reasons for their enactment: A plaintiff with a valid cause of action should pursue it with reasonable diligence. By the time a stale claim is litigated, a defendant might have lost evidence necessary to disprove the claim. This is why all countries should not have any statue of limitations, because it depends on the crime and the amount of evidence that proves that a crime was committed. To say that someone does not have evidence to prove their innocence because of the amount of time that passed would have to be proven. You can't make false claims, and a law can not protect false claims. Making false claims about someone else's false claims is ridiculous, someone has to prove something. Counter-rumors only can go so far. Crimes that involve public funds have no statutes of limitations. Felonies like murder and other offenses that are punishable by life imprisonment or death have no statute of limitations nor does the embezzlement of public money.

Countersue- Counter Claim

If you try to resolve a claim or a dispute with a company or person, and you cannot come to an agreement, then arbitration might be needed.


Arbitration is a form of alternative dispute resolution and a way to resolve disputes outside the courts. The dispute will be decided by one or more persons (the "arbitrators", "arbiters" or "arbitral tribunal"), which renders the "arbitration award". An arbitration award is legally binding on both sides and enforceable in the courts. Intervention - Judge - Mediate.

Consumer Arbitration disputes are between consumers and businesses that are arbitrated are resolved by an independent neutral arbitrator rather than in court. Although parties can agree to arbitrate a particular dispute after it arises or may agree that the award is non-binding, most consumer arbitrations occur pursuant to a pre-dispute arbitration clause where the arbitrator's award is binding. In forced arbitration, a company requires a consumer or employee to submit any dispute that may arise to binding arbitration as a condition of employment or buying a product or service. The employee or consumer is required to waive their right to sue, to participate in a class action lawsuit, or to appeal.

Binding Arbitration is a private process where disputing parties agree that one or several individuals can make a decision about the dispute after receiving evidence and hearing arguments. When arbitration is binding, the decision is final. It can be enforced by a court, and can only be appealed on very narrow grounds. There is no jury in binding arbitration.

Direct-Action Lawsuit is brought directly against an insurance company for a wrong done by the insured. In a lawsuit that is not direct-action, a plaintiff brings the claim against the insured, who actually wronged the plaintiff. Once judgment has been rendered against the defendant, there are a number of ways that the insurance company (assuming the defendant is insured) might later be made to pay the victorious plaintiff. If the plaintiff wants to avoid the extra time and process required to eventually be paid by the insurance company, the action can be brought directly against the insurance company. The plaintiff must still prove all of the same facts that would be the plaintiff's burden, had the action been brought against the insured. In addition, the plaintiff must prove that the insured was covered by the insurance company, and that the insurance policy covered the kind of wrong for which the plaintiff is seeking remedy. The insured is then treated as a third party to the litigation, and the insurance company itself is the defendant. This name can also be given to any lawsuit that is brought as a kind of direct action activism. One example can be a customer suing a company to repeal an action deemed an infringement on the rights of the customer as a citizen and thus a subject to federal or state law. The largest direct-action lawsuit in history ($333 million) was the subject matter of the motion picture Erin Brockovich.

International Arbitration is arbitration between companies or individuals in different states, usually by including a provision for future disputes in a contract. The power struggle between corporations and the state (1/2) | DW Documentary (youtube).

Private Arbitration is the referral of a dispute to a supposedly impartial third person chosen by the parties who agree in advance to be bound by the arbitrator's decision after a hearing in which both parties have an opportunity to be heard. A Plea Bargain behind closed doors without public debate.

Arbitral Tribunal is a panel of one or more adjudicators which is convened and sits to resolve a dispute by way of arbitration.

Arbitration Clause is a clause in a contract that requires the parties to resolve their disputes through an arbitration process. Although such a clause may or may not specify that arbitration occur within a specific jurisdiction, it always binds the parties to a type of resolution outside the courts, and is therefore considered a kind of forum selection clause. Non-Disclosure Agreement.

Subrogation occurs when an insurer pays an insured for a loss caused by a third party. The insurance company is then “subrogated” – or steps into the shoes of the insured – to sue that third party for the loss suffered by the insured. Subrogation is a legal doctrine whereby one person is entitled to enforce the support or the restoring of rights of another for one's own benefit.

Declaratory Judgment is the legal determination of a court that resolves legal uncertainty for the litigants. It is a form of legally binding preventive adjudication by which a party involved in an actual or possible legal matter can ask a court to conclusively rule on and affirm the rights, duties, or obligations of one or more parties in a civil dispute (subject to any appeal). The declaratory judgment is generally considered a statutory remedy and not an equitable remedy in the United States, and is thus not subject to equitable requirements, though there are analogies that can be found in the remedies granted by courts of equity. A declaratory judgment does not by itself order any action by a party, or imply damages or an injunction, although it may be accompanied by one or more other remedies. A declaratory judgment is generally distinguished from an advisory opinion because the latter does not resolve an actual case or controversy. Declaratory judgments can provide legal certainty to each party in a matter when this could resolve or assist in a disagreement. Often an early resolution of legal rights will resolve some or all of the other issues in a matter. A declaratory judgment is typically requested when a party is threatened with a lawsuit but the lawsuit has not yet been filed; or when a party or parties believe that their rights under law and/or contract might conflict; or as part of a counterclaim to prevent further lawsuits from the same plaintiff (for example, when only a contract claim is filed, but a copyright claim might also be applicable). In some instances, a declaratory judgment is filed because the statute of limitations against a potential defendant may pass before the plaintiff incurs damage (for example, a malpractice statute applicable to a certified public accountant may be shorter than the time period the IRS has to assess a taxpayer for additional tax due to bad advice given by the CPA). Declaratory judgments are authorized by statute in most common-law jurisdictions. In the United States, the federal government and most states enacted statutes in the 1920s and 1930s authorizing their courts to issue declaratory judgments.

Advisory Opinion is an opinion issued by a court or a commission like an election commission that does not have the effect of adjudicating a specific legal case, but merely advises on the constitutionality or interpretation of a law. Some countries have procedures by which the executive or legislative branches may certify important questions to the judiciary and obtain an advisory opinion. In other countries or specific jurisdictions, courts may be prohibited from issuing advisory opinions.

Frivolous Lawsuits - Intimidation

Vexatious Litigation is legal action which is brought, regardless of its merits, solely to harass or subdue an adversary. It may take the form of a primary frivolous lawsuit or may be the repetitive, burdensome, and unwarranted filing of meritless motions in a matter which is otherwise a meritorious cause of action. Filing vexatious litigation is considered an abuse of the judicial process and may result in sanctions against the offender. Spite.

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.

Frivolous is something that has no serious purpose or value. Not serious in content, attitude or behavior.

Malicious Prosecution - False Arrest - False Accusation - Slander - Rumors - Small Talk - Assumptions - Invalid Argument - Copyright Trolls - Sewer Service - Bad Judges - Bullying

Paper Terrorism the use of false liens, frivolous lawsuits, bogus letters of credit, and other legal documents lacking sound factual basis as a method of harassment.

Temporary Restraining Order or TRO is a type of short-term injunction issued to prevent a party from taking a certain action until the court is able to issue a more enduring order, such as a preliminary injunction. TROs are a type of equitable remedy. Injunction is a judicial remedy issued in order to prohibit a party from doing or continuing to do a certain activity.

Jonathan Lee Riches is a convicted fraudster known for the many lawsuits he has filed in various United States district courts. Since January 8, 2006, he has filed over 2,600 lawsuits in federal district courts across the country, some of which have received considerable press attention. In May 2009, Riches filed for an injunction against the Guinness Book of World Records, seeking to stop them from listing him as "the most litigious individual in history". Guinness spokeswoman Sara Wilcox told The Huffington Post that there was no such listing, and no plan to create one. "'Most litigious man' is not something Guinness World Records has ever monitored as a record category," she said. The action—like the vast majority of Riches's filings—was dismissed. A number of Riches's lawsuits have been dismissed as being "frivolous, malicious" or for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted.

Barratry is the crime of a judge whose judgment is influenced by bribery. A breach of trust. Barratry in law is the offense of vexatiously persisting in inciting lawsuits and quarrels. Vexatious means to cause irritation or annoyance. Corrupt Lawyers.

Insurance Fraud is any act committed with the intent to obtain a fraudulent outcome from an insurance process. This may occur when a claimant attempts to obtain some benefit or advantage to which they are not otherwise entitled, or when an insurer knowingly denies some benefit that is due. According to the United States Federal Bureau of Investigation the most common schemes include: Premium Diversion, Fee Churning, Asset Diversion, and Workers Compensation Fraud. The perpetrators in these schemes can be both insurance company employees and claimants. False insurance claims are insurance claims filed with the intent to defraud an insurance provider.

Lying Under Oath - Perjury - Invalid Argument - Accused - Alleged

Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation or SLAPP Suite is a lawsuit that is intended to censor, intimidate, and silence critics by burdening them with the cost of a legal defense until they abandon their criticism or opposition. Such lawsuits have been made illegal in many jurisdictions on the grounds that they impede freedom of speech.

Chilling Effect is the inhibition or discouragement of the legitimate exercise of natural and legal rights by the threat of legal sanction. The right that is most often described as being suppressed by a chilling effect is the US constitutional right to free speech. A chilling effect may be caused by legal actions such as the passing of a law, the decision of a court, or the threat of a lawsuit; any legal action that would cause people to hesitate to exercise a legitimate right (freedom of speech or otherwise) for fear of legal repercussions. When that fear is brought about by the threat of a libel lawsuit, it is called libel chill.

Legal Threat is a statement by a party that it intends to take legal action on another party, generally accompanied by a demand that the other party take an action demanded by the first party or refrain from taking or continuing actions objected to by the demanding party.

Bullying - Harassment Abuse - Threatening Violence - Police Aggression - Fear Mongering

Tortious Interference is a common law tort allowing a claim for damages against a defendant who wrongfully interferes with the plaintiff's contractual or business relationships. It is intentional interference with contractual relations, in the common law of torts, occurs when one person intentionally damages someone else's contractual or business relationships with a third party, causing economic harm. As an example, someone could use blackmail to induce a contractor into breaking a contract; they could threaten a supplier to prevent them from supplying goods or services to another party; or they could obstruct someone's ability to honor a contract with a client by deliberately refusing to deliver necessary goods. A tort of negligent interference occurs when one party's negligence damages the contractual or business relationship between others, causing economic harm, such as, by blocking a waterway or causing a blackout that prevents the utility company from being able to uphold its existing contracts with consumers.

Delay Tactics - Construction Delays - Procrastination

Motion is a procedural device to bring a limited, contested issue before a court for decision. It is a request to the judge (or judges) to make a decision about the case. Motions may be made at any point in administrative, criminal or civil proceedings, although that right is regulated by court rules which vary from place to place. The party requesting the motion may be called the moving party, or may simply be the movant. The party opposing the motion is the nonmoving party or nonmovant. Injunction.

Continuance is the postponement of a hearing, trial, or other scheduled court proceeding at the request of either or both parties in the dispute, or by the judge sua sponte. In response to delays in bringing cases to trial, some states have adopted "fast-track" rules that sharply limit the ability of judges to grant continuances. However, a motion for continuance may be granted when necessitated by unforeseeable events, or for other reasonable cause articulated by the movant (the person seeking the continuance), especially when the court deems it necessary and prudent in the "interest of justice."

Default Judgment is a binding judgment in favor of either party based on some failure to take action by the other party. Most often, it is a judgment in favor of a plaintiff when the defendant has not responded to a summons or has failed to appear before a court of law. The failure to take action is the default. The default judgment is the relief requested in the party's original petition. Default can be compared to a forfeit victory in sports. In a civil trial involving damages, a default judgment will enter the amount of damages pleaded in the original complaint. If proof of damages is required, the court may schedule another hearing on that issue. A party can have a default judgment vacated, or set aside, by filing a motion, after the judgment is entered, by showing of a proper excuse. Bill Collectors (sewer service).

Countersue is when someone is suing you and you turn around and sue them.

Counterclaim is in response to the claims of another. When a plaintiff initiates a lawsuit, a defendant can respond to the lawsuit with claims of his or her own against the plaintiff, the defendant’s claims are “counterclaims.” Examples of counterclaims include: After a bank has sued a customer for an unpaid debt, the customer counterclaims (sues back) against the bank for fraud in procuring the debt. The court will sort out the different claims in one lawsuit (unless the claims are severed). Two cars collide. After one person sues for damage to her car and personal injuries, the defendant counterclaims for similar property damage and personal injury claims. Counterclaims can arise on various occasions, including an attempt by the defendant to offset or reduce the amount/implications of the plaintiff's claim; a different claim by the defendant against the plaintiff; a claim by an impleaded third-party defendant against the original defendant acting as a third-party plaintiff; a claim by any party against another party who has made a crossclaim against them. Pre-emptive.

Crossclaim is filed against someone who is a co-defendant or co-plaintiff to the party who originates the crossclaim. In common law, a crossclaim is a demand made in a pleading that is filed against a party which is on the "same side" of the lawsuit.

Standing is the term for the ability of a party to demonstrate to the court sufficient connection to and harm from the law or action challenged to support that party's participation in the case. Standing exists from one of three causes: The party is directly subject to an adverse effect by the statute or action in question, and the harm suffered will continue unless the court grants relief in the form of damages or a finding that the law either does not apply to the party or that the law is void or can be nullified. This is called the "something to lose" doctrine, in which the party has standing because they will be directly harmed by the conditions for which they are asking the court for relief. The party is not directly harmed by the conditions by which they are petitioning the court for relief but asks for it because the harm involved has some reasonable relation to their situation, and the continued existence of the harm may affect others who might not be able to ask a court for relief. In the United States, this is the grounds for asking for a law to be struck down as violating the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, because while the plaintiff might not be directly affected, the law might so adversely affect others that one might never know what was not done or created by those who fear they would become subject to the law – the so-called "chilling effects" doctrine. The party is granted automatic standing by act of law. Under some environmental laws in the United States, a party may sue someone causing pollution to certain waterways without a federal permit, even if the party suing is not harmed by the pollution being generated. The law allows them to receive attorney's fees if they substantially prevail in the action. In some U.S. states, a person who believes a book, film or other work of art is obscene may sue in their own name to have the work banned directly without having to ask a District Attorney to do so. In the United States, the current doctrine is that a person cannot bring a suit challenging the constitutionality of a law unless the plaintiff can demonstrate that he/it is or will "imminently" be harmed by the law. Otherwise, the court will rule that the plaintiff "lacks standing" to bring the suit, and will dismiss the case without considering the merits of the claim of unconstitutionality. To have a court declare a law unconstitutional, there must be a valid reason for the lawsuit. The party suing must have something to lose in order to sue unless it has automatic standing by action of law.

Investor-State Dispute Settlement is an instrument of public international law that grants an investor the right to use dispute settlement proceedings against a country's government. Chart (image) - Chart (image).

Abuse of Process is a cause of action in tort arising from one party making a malicious and deliberate misuse or perversion of regularly issued court process (civil or criminal) not justified by the underlying legal action. It is a common law intentional tort. It is to be distinguished from malicious prosecution, another type of tort that involves misuse of the public right of access to the courts. Loopholes (skirting the law) - Sewer Service.

Legal Abuse refers to abuses associated with both civil and criminal legal action. Abuse can originate from nearly any part of the legal system, including frivolous and vexatious litigants, abuses by law enforcement, incompetent, careless or corrupt attorneys and misconduct from the judiciary itself. Legal abuse is responsible not only for Injustice, but also harm to physical, psychological and societal health. Bad Judges - Bad Lawyers.

Malicious Prosecution is a common law intentional tort, while like the tort of abuse of process, its elements include (1) intentionally (and maliciously) instituting and pursuing (or causing to be instituted or pursued) a legal action (civil or criminal) that is (2) brought without probable cause and (3) dismissed in favor of the victim of the malicious prosecution. In some jurisdictions, the term "malicious prosecution" denotes the wrongful initiation of criminal proceedings, while the term "malicious use of process" denotes the wrongful initiation of civil proceedings. Injustice - False Evidence.

Legal Overreach is exploiting a situation through Fraud or Unconscionable conduct. Conduct that exceeds established limits (as of authority or due process). The gaining of an unconscionable advantage over another especially by unfair or deceptive means.

Overreaching refers to a situation where a person's equitable property right is dissolved, detached from a piece of property, and reattached to money that is given by a third party for the property.

Lawsuit Abuse - Debt Collectors

Consent Decree is an agreement or settlement that resolves a dispute between two parties without admission of guilt (in a criminal case) or liability (in a civil case), and most often refers to such a type of settlement in the United States. The plaintiff and the defendant ask the court to enter into their agreement, and the court maintains supervision over the implementation of
the decree in monetary exchanges or restructured interactions between parties. It is similar to and sometimes referred to as an antitrust decree, stipulated judgment, settlement agreements, or consent judgment. Consent decrees are frequently used by federal courts to ensure that businesses and industries adhere to regulatory laws in areas such as antitrust law, employment discrimination, and environmental regulation. Police Brutality.

ABC15 Arizona: "Cash for Compliance" | 2018 duPont-Columbia Award Winner (youtube) - An audacious group of litigators who exploited the Americans with Disabilities Act for profit. David Biscobing, Investigative Reporter.

I'm wondering when someone will sue the U.S. Government for Criminal NegligenceFederal Tort Claims Act (Suing the Government, and since they are a Corporation, it's legal and lawful).

Judges - Judging

Adjudicate is to make a formal judgment or decision about a problem or disputed matter.

Adjudication is the legal process by which an arbiter or judge reviews evidence and argumentation, including legal reasoning set forth by opposing parties or litigants to come to a decision which determines rights and obligations between the parties involved.

Mediate - Hearings - Trials - Guilty - Bad judges

Arbiter is someone chosen to judge and decide a disputed issue. Someone with the power to settle matters at will.

Judiciary are persons or a system of law courts who administer justice and constitute the judicial branch of government. Judiciary is the system of courts that interprets and applies law in legal cases.

Judge presides over court proceedings, either alone or as a part of a panel of judges. The powers, functions, method of appointment, discipline, and training of judges vary widely across different jurisdictions. The judge is supposed to conduct the trial impartially land in an open court. The judge hears all the witnesses and any other evidence presented by the barristers of the case, assesses the credibility and arguments of the parties, and then issues a ruling on the matter at hand, which is sometimes based on his or her interpretation of the law and his or her own personal judgment. In some jurisdictions, the judge's powers may be shared with a Jury. In inquisitorial systems of criminal investigation, a judge might also be an examining magistrate. Judgment.

Federal Judges are judges who serve in a federal court. The term refers both to the Article III federal judges and to Article I federal judges, who serve as magistrate and bankruptcy judges and in other Article I tribunals. Senior Judges are retired judges who, if they and their colleagues wish, may continue to hear cases and earn their full salary. There are additional federal judges who were not appointed under Article III. These judges serve in Article I tribunals and they do not have the same protections as Article III judges: They do not have life tenure. Their salaries may be reduced by Congress. Law School.

Special Master is generally a subordinate official appointed by a judge to ensure judicial orders are followed, or in the alternative, to hear evidence on behalf of the judge and make recommendations to the judge as to the disposition of a matter. Master is a judge of limited jurisdiction in the superior courts of England and Wales and in numerous other jurisdictions based on the common law tradition.

Totality of the Situation in law or the totality of the circumstances test, refers to a method of analysis where decisions are based on all available information rather than bright-line rules. Under the totality of the circumstances test, courts focus "on all the circumstances of a particular case, rather than any one factor". Seeing the Whole Picture.

Justices are appointed by the president and are subject to confirmation by the Senate. They serve a life term. There are currently eight Associate Justices on the Supreme Court and one Chief Justice of the United States.

About Federal Judges - Confirmations - Screening - Bad Judges

Chief Justice of the United States is appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate. The Chief Justice may be “promoted” from the status of Associate Justice, or may be a new appointment to the Court. He or she serves a life term just like the other Justices of the Supreme Court. The Chief Justice also serves as the head of the judicial branch of the federal government, and acts as the judge in impeachment cases involving the president and vice president. Supreme Court Procedures.

Here come the judge, here come the judge (youtube)

Magistrate is a judicial officer who hears cases in a lower court, and typically deals with more minor or preliminary matters. In other jurisdictions (e.g., England and Wales), magistrates may be volunteers without formal legal training who perform a judicial role with regard to minor matters. Refers to a civilian officer who administers the law. A magistrate is responsible for administration over a particular geographic area. Mediate.

How to Become a Judge (wikihow) - Federal Judgeships

Grand Jury is a legal body that is empowered to conduct official proceedings to investigate potential criminal conduct and to determine whether criminal charges should be brought. A grand jury may compel the production of documents and may compel the sworn testimony of witnesses to appear before it. A grand jury is separate from the courts, which do not preside over its functioning. Grand Juries in the U.S. (wiki)

Sentence in law refers to punishment that was actually ordered or could be ordered by a trial court in a criminal procedure. A sentence forms the final explicit act of a judge-ruled process as well as the symbolic principal act connected to their function. The sentence can generally involve a decree of imprisonment, a fine, and/or punishments against a defendant convicted of a crime. Those imprisoned for multiple crimes usually serve a concurrent sentence in which the period of imprisonment equals the length of the longest sentence where the sentences are all served together at the same time, while others serve a consecutive sentence in which the period of imprisonment equals the sum of all the sentences served sequentially, or one after the other. Additional sentences include intermediate, which allows an inmate to be free for about 8 hours a day for work purposes; determinate, which is fixed on a number of days, months, or years; and indeterminate or bifurcated, which mandates the minimum period be served in an institutional setting such as a prison followed by street time period of parole, supervised release or probation until the total sentence is completed. If a sentence is reduced to a less harsh punishment, then the sentence is said to have been mitigated or commuted. Rarely depending on circumstances, murder charges are mitigated and reduced to manslaughter charges. However, in certain legal systems, a defendant may be punished beyond the terms of the sentence social stigma, loss of governmental benefits, or collectively, the collateral consequences of criminal charges.

Sentencing General Principles - Seven Sentencing Principles - Principles of Sentencing - Evidence Based Practices Sentencing Criminal Offenders.

Mandatory Sentencing requires that offenders serve a predefined term for certain crimes, commonly serious and violent offenses. Judges are bound by law; these sentences are produced through the legislature, not the judicial system. They are instituted to expedite the sentencing process and limit the possibility of irregularity of outcomes due to judicial discretion. Mandatory sentences are typically given to people who are convicted of certain serious and/or violent crimes, and require a prison sentence. Mandatory sentencing laws vary across nations; they are more prevalent in common law jurisdictions because civil law jurisdictions usually prescribe minimum and maximum sentences for every type of crime in explicit laws.

Sentencing Hearing is where the court orders the actual penalty for a defendant. It is one of the most important steps in the criminal justice process. Sometimes, the sentence will be the result of a pre-negotiated plea deal. Other times, the sentencing will rest solely in the hands of the judge.

Prisons - Punishment - Drug War (3 Strikes)

Judicial Panel is a set of judges who sit together to hear a cause of action, most frequently an appeal from a ruling of a trial court judge. Panels are used in contrast to single-judge appeals, and en banc hearings, which involves all of the judges of that court. Most national supreme courts sit as panels. Rulings.

En banc is a session in which a case is heard before all the judges of a court (before the entire bench) rather than by a panel of judges selected from them. The equivalent terms in banc, in banco or in bank are also sometimes seen. En banc review is often used for unusually complex cases or cases considered to be of greater importance.

Discretionary Review is the authority appellate courts have to decide which appeals they will consider from among the cases submitted to them. This offers the judiciary a filter on what types of cases are appealed, because judges have to consider in advance which cases will be accepted. The appeals court will then be able to decide substantive cases with the lowest opportunity cost. The opposite of discretionary review is mandatory review, in which appellate courts must consider all appeals submitted.

Tribunal is an assembly that includes one or more judges to conduct judicial business.

The rules lead to fair treatment when decisions are being made, and an honest explanation for how decisions are made. The rules and procedures are not always fair consistently for all people and for all situations, I need the real reasons.

Precedent - Past Courtroom Case Decisions and Rulings

Case Citation is a system used by legal professionals to identify past court case decisions, either in series of books called reporters or law reports, or in a neutral style that identifies a decision regardless of where it is reported. Case citations are formatted differently in different jurisdictions, but generally contain the same key information. A legal citation is a "reference to a legal precedent or authority, such as a case, statute, or treatise, that either substantiates or contradicts a given position. Where cases are published on paper, the citation usually contains the following information: Court that issued the decision. Report title. Volume number, Page, section, or paragraph number. Publication year. Court Records.

Refer is to make reference. To make something relevant. To seek information from another source. To have as a meaning. Use a name to designate something. To think of something in regard something or classify something under a subsuming principle or with a general group or in relation to another. Refer can also mean to send someone or direct someone for treatment, information, or a decision.

Looking back at old court cases as an example on how to rule on a different case, is only accurate when the information that a person is referring to, is accurate and relevant to the current situation. Correlations can become a False Positive. And if the precedent itself is inaccurate and a bad decision was made then, then someone else will make another bad decision, like history repeating itself where the same mistake is made again.

Analogies - Teaching by Example - Being a Good Example - Reasoning - Context - Relevance - Hearsay - Cherry Picking Data - Invalid Argument - Vague - Scam - Whataboutism

Legal Reasoning is a method of thought and argument used by lawyers and judges when applying legal rules to specific interactions among legal persons. Legal reasoning in the case of a court's ruling is found in the 'Discussion or Analysis' section of the judicial ruling.

Repeals - Legal Challenge - Bad Judges

Legal Precedent is a legal case that establishes a principle or rule. This principle or rule is then used by the court or other judicial bodies use when deciding later cases with similar issues or facts.

Popularity is not an accurate measurement of reality.

Precedent is a principle or rule established in a previous legal case that is either binding on or persuasive for a court or other tribunal when deciding subsequent cases with similar issues or facts. Common law legal systems place great value on deciding cases according to consistent principled rules so that similar facts will yield similar and predictable outcomes, and observance of precedent is the mechanism by which that goal is attained. The principle by which judges are bound to precedents is known as Stare Decisis. Super Precedent or Super Stare Decisis is a term used for important precedent that is resistant or immune from being overturned, without regard to whether correctly decided in the first place. It may be viewed as one extreme in a range of precedential power, or alternatively, to express a belief, or a critique of that belief, that some decisions should not be overturned. Black's Law Dictionary defines "precedent" as a "rule of law established for the first time by a court for a particular type of case and thereafter referred to in deciding similar cases". Common law precedent is a third kind of law, on equal footing with statutory law (statutes and codes enacted by legislative bodies), and delegated legislation (in U.K. parlance) or regulatory law (in U.S. parlance) (regulations promulgated by executive branch agencies). Precedent is an example that is used to justify similar occurrences at a later time. Precedent in civil law is a law established by following earlier judicial decisions. A system of jurisprudence based on judicial precedents rather than statutory laws. A subject mentioned earlier, preceding in time or significance. Precedence is a status established in order of importance or urgency. The act of preceding in time, order or rank. Constitution.

Case in Point is an instance or example that illustrates what is being discussed.

Real Life Examples - Reasoning

Case-Based Reasoning is the process of solving new problems based on the solutions of similar past problems.

Cause Célèbre is an issue or incident arousing widespread controversy, outside campaigning, and heated public debate. It is sometimes used positively for celebrated legal cases for their precedent value (each locus classicus or "case-in-point") and more often negatively for infamous ones, whether for scale, outrage, scandal, or conspiracy theories.

Casuistry is a process of reasoning that seeks to resolve moral problems by extracting or extending theoretical rules from a particular case, and reapplying those rules to new instances. This method occurs in applied ethics and jurisprudence. The term is also commonly used as a pejorative to criticize the use of clever but unsound reasoning, especially in relation to moral questions (as in sophistry). The word casuistry derives from the Latin noun casus ("case" or "occurrence"). Casuistry is a moral philosophy based on the application of general ethical principles to resolve moral dilemmas. Casuistry can also mean an argumentation that is specious or excessively subtle and intended to be misleading.

Collateral Estoppel is known in modern terminology as issue preclusion, a common law estoppel doctrine that prevents a person from relitigating an issue. One summary is that, "once a court has decided an issue of fact or law necessary to its judgment, that decision ... preclude[s] relitigation of the issue in a suit on a different cause of action involving a party to the first case". The rationale behind issue preclusion is the prevention of legal harassment and the prevention of overuse or abuse of judicial resources. The issues in the second suit are the same as in the first suit. The issues in the first suit must have been litigated. The issues in the first suit must have been decided. The issues must have been necessary to the court's judgment.

Settlement - Plea Deal

Legal Opinion in certain jurisdictions is a written explanation by a judge or group of judges that accompanies an order or ruling in a case, laying out the rationale and legal principles for the ruling. Opinions are in those jurisdictions usually published at the direction of the court, and to the extent they contain pronouncements about what the law is and how it should be interpreted, they reinforce, change, establish, or overturn legal precedent. If court decides that an opinion should be published, the opinion may be included in a volume from a series of books called law reports (or reporters in the United States). Published opinions of courts are also collectively referred to as case law, and constitute in the common law legal systems one of the major sources of law. Memorandum Opinion is usually unpublished and cannot be cited as precedent.  Expert Witness - Thought Leader.

Draft Opinion or opinion letter is a formal expression of a judgment or advice based on an expert's special knowledge. The term is commonly used to refer to a document containing a lawyer's understanding of the law that applies to a particular case. Opinion letters are usually drafted at a client's request. Initial drafts often change dramatically before they are final and, sometimes, justices even change their vote as opinions are being drafted. The opinion is a draft and the court's votes are not final until the formal opinions are officially released.

Majority Opinion is the opinion of more than half of the judges deciding a case. This opinion becomes precedent for future cases as it represents the views of the majority of the court.

Concurring opinion
: the opinion of a single judge or judges that agrees with the final outcome of the majority opinion but disagrees in whole or in part with the reasoning.

Plurality Opinion are the opinions of different judges of the court when a majority judgment is not obtained. It is the opinion from one or more judges or justices of an appellate court which provides the rationale for the disposition of an appeal when no single opinion received the support of a majority of the court. If the plurality opinion did not receive the support of more than half the justices, but still received more support than any other opinion, excluding those justices dissenting from the holding of the court. An example of a plurality opinion is a court of three judges each rendering a different concurring decision, agreeing on a final outcome but disagreeing on the reasons justifying that final outcome.

Dissenting Opinion is the opinion of a single judge or judges that rejects the conclusions of the majority decision in whole or in part, and explains the reasons for rejecting the majority decision.

Fairness Opinion is a professional evaluation by an investment bank or other third party as to whether the terms of a merger, acquisition, buyback, spin-off, or privatization are fair. It is rendered for a fee.

Law Report are a series of books that contain judicial opinions from a selection of case law decided by courts. When a particular judicial opinion is referenced, the law report series in which the opinion is printed will determine the case citation format.

Lists of Case Law (wiki) - White-Collar Crimes - Not every Crime is Reported. Injustice.

Reporter of Decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States is the official charged with editing and publishing the opinions of the Supreme Court of the United States, both when announced and when they are published in permanent bound volumes of the United States Reports. The Reporter of Decisions is responsible for only the contents of the United States Reports issued by the Government Printing Office, first in preliminary prints and later in the final bound volumes. The Reporter is not responsible for the editorial content of unofficial reports of the Court's decisions, such as the privately published Supreme Court Reporter or Lawyers' Edition.

Case Law is a set of past rulings by tribunals that meet their respective jurisdictions' rules to be cited as precedent. These interpretations are distinguished from statutory law, which are the statutes and codes enacted by legislative bodies, and regulatory law, which are regulations established by executive agencies based on statutes. The term "case law" is applied to any set of previous rulings by an adjudicatory tribunal that guides future rulings; for example, patent office case law.

Ruling is an authoritative decision or pronouncement or judgment, especially one made by a judge. 

Pronouncement is an authoritative declaration. Declaration is a statement that is emphatic and explicit spoken or written. An unsworn statement that can be admitted in evidence in a legal transaction.

Black Letter Law are the well-established legal rules that are certain and no longer disputable, or they are the well-established legal rules that are no longer subject to reasonable dispute. Blackletter law is free from doubt and generally well-known. It also means well-established case law and refers to the basic key components of a subject in the law.

Court Order is an official proclamation by a judge or panel of judges that defines the legal relationships between the parties to a hearing, a trial, an appeal or other court proceedings. Such ruling requires or authorizes the carrying out of certain steps by one or more parties to a case. A court order must be signed by a judge; some jurisdictions may require it to be notarized. The content and provisions of a court order depend on the type of proceeding, the phase of the proceedings in which they are issued, and the procedural and evidentiary rules that govern the proceedings.

Shadow Docket is a term used by legal observers to describe the use of emergency orders and summary decisions by the Supreme Court of the United States without the opportunity of oral argument. Shadow docket decisions are made when the Court believes an applicant will suffer "irreparable harm" if the request is not immediately granted. These decisions are generally terse (often only a few sentences), unsigned, and are preceded by little to no oral arguments. Historically, the shadow docket was used only rarely for rulings of serious legal or political significance, but since 2017 it has been increasingly utilized for consequential rulings, especially for requests by the Department of Justice for emergency stays of lower-court rulings. The shadow docket is a break from ordinary procedure. Whereas cases on the ordinary docket (officially the "merits docket") typically involve months of oral argument and result in a lengthy opinion from the majority, shadow docket cases receive only very limited briefings, rarely feature oral arguments, are typically decided about a week after an application is filed, and generally result in a very brief unsigned ruling that does not include the legal reasoning of the majority. While shadow docket decisions can have major policy implications, because they are almost always released without the legal reasoning of the majority they have less impact on legal doctrine than ordinary decisions.

Infinite Regress is an infinite series of entities governed by a recursive principle that determines how each entity in the series depends its predecessor on or is produced by its predecessor. In the epistemic regress, for example, a belief is justified because it is based on another belief that is justified. But this other belief is itself in need of one more justified belief for itself to be justified and so on. An infinite regress argument is an argument against a theory based on the fact that this theory leads to an infinite regress. For such an argument to be successful, it has to demonstrate not just that the theory in question entails an infinite regress but also that this regress is vicious. There are different ways how a regress can be vicious. The most serious form of viciousness involves a contradiction in the form of metaphysical impossibility. Other forms occur when the infinite regress is responsible for the theory in question being implausible or for its failure to solve the problem it was formulated to solve. Traditionally, it was often assumed without much argument that each infinite regress is vicious but this assumption has been put into question in contemporary philosophy. While some philosophers have explicitly defended theories with infinite regresses, the more common strategy has been to reformulate the theory in question in a way that avoids the regress. One such strategy is foundationalism, which posits that there is a first element in the series from which all the other elements arise but which is not itself explained this way. Another way is coherentism, which is based on a holistic explanation that usually sees the entities in question not as a linear series but as an interconnected network. Infinite regress arguments have been made in various areas of philosophy. An infinite regress is an infinite series of entities governed by a recursive principle that determines how each entity in the series depends on or is produced by its predecessor.

Regress is a type of reasoning when you assume the conclusion is true and reason backward to the evidence. Is to go back to bad behavior or get worse or to fall back to a previous condition. A return to an earlier state.

Digress is to lose clarity or turn aside especially from the main subject of attention or course of argument in writing, thinking, or speaking. Wander from a direct or straight course.

Hein Online is the World’s Largest Image-Based Legal Research Database. A premier online database containing more than 160 million pages and 200,000 titles of historical and government documents in a fully searchable, image-based format. HeinOnline bridges an important research gap by providing comprehensive coverage from inception of more than 2,600 law-related periodicals. In addition to its vast collection of academic journals, HeinOnline contains the entire Congressional Record, Federal Register, and Code of Federal Regulations, complete coverage of the U.S. Reports back to 1754, and entire databases dedicated to treaties, constitutions, case law, world trials, classic treatises, international trade, foreign relations, U.S. Presidents, and much more. With comprehensive coverage of government documents and more than 2,400 journals from inception on hundreds of subjects such as political science, criminal justice, and human rights, Hein Online is an affordable option for colleges and universities. Documents have the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database.

Revival is requesting a court to reinstate the force of a dormant judgment—i.e. a judgment that was issued and has since lapsed or expired. Also referred to as renewal of judgment in some jurisdictions. Many state statutes lay out how an individual can go about reviving a dormant judgment. Revival Statute is a type of law that allows old legal actions, wills, and documents to be renewed and given legal effect again. It's like giving something a second chance to be valid.

Corrupt Judges - Judicial Misconduct

Judicial Misconduct occurs when a judge acts in ways that are considered unethical or otherwise violate the judge's obligations of impartial conduct. Judicial corruption refers to the corruption-related misconduct of judges, through the receiving or giving of bribes, the improper sentencing of convicted criminals, bias in the hearing and judgment of arguments and other forms of misconduct.

Unconstitutional - Injustice - Equal Justice - Frivolous - Bribes - Rackets - Prisons for Profit - Bad Lawyers

Disrepute is the lack of a good reputation or respect which can be reasonably regarded as reducing the public's confidence in that member who may not be able fulfill their role.

Judicial Misconduct and Public Confidence in the Rule of Law. Judicial misconduct breaks down the very fiber of what is necessary for a functional judiciary. The judiciary cannot exist without the trust and confidence of the people. Citizens who must believe their judges are fair and impartial. Judges must, therefore, must be accountable to legal and ethical standards. In holding them accountable for their behavior, judicial conduct review must be performed without invading the independence of judicial decision-making.

Judicial Commission is an independent state agency responsible for investigating complaints of judicial misconduct and judicial incapacity and for disciplining state judges. The Judicial Standards Commission is the state agency with the responsibility to investigate complaints about judicial misconduct. Code of Conduct for United States Judges.

Judicial Standards Commission is an independent state agency charged with investigating allegations of judicial misconduct against New Mexico state and municipal judges.

Committee on Judicial Review addresses statutory and case law concerning court review of administrative actions. It also may examine those aspects of administrative procedure that affect the effectiveness or availability of judicial review. Administrative Conference of the United States

Critically monitoring the activities of governments, industry, courts or other organizations and alerting the public or taking legal action when the activities appear to go against the public interest. Watchdog work is generally performed either by nonprofit organizations that monitor specific government or industry actions, or by special government officials known as “inspectors general” who are tasked with ensuring that the government operates in compliance with customary laws and policies and without waste, fraud, or theft of taxpayer money.

Judges who harass their clerks. Some 30,000 employees who work for the federal courts are not covered by civil rights protections most other workers enjoy.

Judges can be corrupted. So how do you guarantee fairness? You can't, at least not for now. So be aware of this fact, the justice system can be corrupt. Why are judges more cruel and unfair when they're hungry? Why do Judges hand out harsher sentences before lunch than after lunch? If hunger can effect the decision making process of a judge, then a judge has no control over their own mind and the minds ability to reason. If duty and responsibility can be diminished just because a judge is hungry, then all judges should have healthy food always at hand. If you're aware of the flaws and vulnerabilities of humans, then you need to protect yourself. It's a judges job to protect others, but how are you going to protect others if you can't even protect yourself? So judges can be influenced by food, and not just by money or bias. Most of the time the Justice system usually works the way it should. But laws that are used to protect people can also be used to attack people. When the justice system is corrupted, laws can be manipulated by a judges and lawyers. And if you are not prepared for this corruption, you will become a victim of the justice system. When you have corrupted and ignorant people in positions of authority, there are no human rights, and there are no rights granted by U.S. constitution. You only have ignorant scumbags who believe that they are above the law. When you hear people say that a Judge is hard on certain people, that means that the Judge is biased and prejudice. Judges should only be objective and judge only on the facts. Judges are not supposed to takes sides, but they do, so be aware. The courts are not just attacking minorities and people of color, they attack anyone they don't like, and they do it under the guise of law. These people are an insult and a disgrace to their profession and to society. A shame and a sham.

An investigation by The Wall Street Journal  found that between 2010 and 2018, 131 federal judges ruled in cases involving companies in which they or their families owned shares of stock. There were 2.5 million civil cases filed in the district courts during that same period. Ethics rules preclude a judge from presiding over cases in which he or she has a financial interest.

What happens when judges are appointed by a criminal or a rightwing extremist? Does this mean that these judges are biased, partisan and easily manipulated?

Juries can be Hand Picked - Judges Can be Picked - Gerrymandering - Peremptory Challenge

Dissent is the difference of one judge's opinion from that of the majority. Dissent is a non-agreement or opposition to a prevailing idea.

Requesting a Different Judge is started by filing a petition with the court. There needs to be substantial reasoning why a judge should be removed and recused. If your reasoning is sound enough, a judge may disqualify themselves from standing on the case.

Petition is a formal request seeking a specific court order, made by a person, group or organization to the court, typically at the start of a lawsuit. A petition asks the court to provide a court order, while a complaint is filed to seek damages or to get the defendant to start or stop doing something.

Judge Vacates Conviction means that the wrongly accused is released from all penalties and disabilities resulting from the offense. The conviction can't be included in your criminal history in determining your sentence in any later case.

Judge Overturns Ruling means that a different judge disagrees with a decision made earlier by a lower court judge. An appeals court can overturn the decision made by the trial court. A court can reverse a decision so it will not be in effect.

Kids for Cash Scandal is when Judges get kickbacks for sending children to prison, money came from privately owned prisons. Judicial kickbacks to two judges at the Luzerne County Court of Common Pleas in Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania. In 2008, judges Michael Conahan and Mark Ciavarella were accused of accepting money in return for imposing harsh adjudications on juveniles to increase occupancy at for-profit detention centers. Ciavarella disposed thousands of children to extended stays in youth centers for offenses as trivial as mocking an assistant principal on Myspace or trespassing in a vacant building. After a judge rejected an initial plea agreement in 2009, a federal grand jury returned a 48-count indictment. In 2010, Conahan pleaded guilty to one count of racketeering conspiracy and was sentenced to 17.5 years in federal prison. Ciavarella opted to go to trial the following year. He was convicted on 12 of 39 counts and sentenced to 28 years in federal prison. In the wake of the scandal, the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania overturned hundreds of adjudications of delinquency in Luzerne County. The Juvenile Law Center filed a class action lawsuit against the judges and numerous other parties, and the Pennsylvania state legislature created a commission to investigate juvenile justice problems in the county.

Divided - Reasoning - Subjective - Past Judgments

Acquitted Conduct. A jury convicted Dayonta McClinton of robbing a CVS pharmacy but acquitted him of murder. A judge gave McClinton an extra 13 years in prison for the killing anyway. In courtrooms across America, defendants get additional prison time for crimes that juries found they didn't commit. The Supreme Court is being asked, again, to put an end to the practice. Sentencing a defendant for what's called “acquitted conduct” has gone on for years, based on a Supreme Court decision from the late 1990s. And the justices have turned down numerous appeals asking them to declare that the Constitution forbids it. Allowing judges to rely on acquitted or uncharged conduct to impose higher sentences than they otherwise would impose seems a dubious infringement of the rights to due process and to a jury trial. A growing number of federal judges have questioned the fairness and constitutionality of allowing courts to factor acquitted conduct into sentencing calculations, especially when conduct has not been proved by a preponderance of the evidence. Unless this Court resolves this issue, tens of thousands of criminal defendants will continue to be sentenced using sentencing practices that are impossible to square with the Constitution. Seventeen former federal judges also signed on to a brief in support of McClinton.

West Virginia House Panel Votes To Impeach Entire Supreme Court for maladministration, corruption, incompetency, neglect of duty, certain high crimes, misdemeanors, fraud, witness tampering and lying to federal investigators and overspending.

John Oliver: Elected Judges (HBO) (youtube) - The vast majority of US judges are elected, forcing many judges to pander to the electorate and accept campaign money in order to keep their jobs. This seems slightly troubling.

Black Children Were Jailed for a Crime That Doesn’t Exist. Almost Nothing Happened to the Adults in Charge. Judge Donna Scott Davenport oversees a juvenile justice system in Rutherford County, Tennessee, with a staggering history of jailing children. She said kids must face consequences, which rarely seem to apply to her or the other adults in charge.

Judicial Activism refers to judicial rulings that are suspected of being based on personal opinion, rather than on existing law. It is sometimes used as an antonym of judicial restraint.

Judicial Restraint encourages judges to limit the exercise of their own power. It asserts that judges should hesitate to strike down laws unless they are obviously unconstitutional.

Abuse of Judicial Discretion.

A judge must impose a sentence that is sufficient, but not greater than necessary, to: reflect the seriousness of the offense; promote respect for the law; provide just punishment for the offense; adequately deter criminal conduct; protect the public from further crimes by the defendant; and provide the defendant with needed educational or vocational training, or medical care. 

Complaint Form Judicial Review Council (PDF)


Corporate Lawyers Who Become Judges are Less Likely To Side With Workers, Study Says. Corruption.

Motion to Set Aside Judgment is an application to overturn or set aside a court's judgment, verdict or other final ruling in a case. Such a motion is proposed by a party who is dissatisfied with the end result of a case. Motions may be made at any time after entry of judgment, and in some circumstances years after the case has been closed by the courts. Generally the motion cannot be based on grounds which were previously considered when deciding a motion for new trial or on an appeal of the judgment, thus the motion can only be granted in unusual circumstances, such as when the judgment was procured by fraud which could not have been discovered at the time of the trial, or if the court entering the judgment lacked the jurisdiction to do so.

Judgment Declared VOID: A void judgment is a judgment, decree, or order entered by a court which lacks jurisdiction of the parties or of the subject matter, or which lacks the inherent power to make or enter the particular order involved.

Void in Law means of no legal effect. An action, document or transaction which is void is of no legal effect whatsoever: an absolute nullity — the law treats it as if it had never existed or happened. The term void ab initio, which means "to be treated as invalid from the outset," comes from adding the Latin phrase ab initio (from the beginning) as a qualifier. For example, in many jurisdictions where a person signs a contract under duress, that contract is treated as being void ab initio. Void. Null; ineffectual; nugatory; having no legal force or binding effect; unable, in law, to support the purpose for which it was intended.

Judicial Disqualification and Recusal is the act of abstaining from participation in an official action such as a legal proceeding due to a conflict of interest of the presiding court official or administrative officer. Applicable statutes or canons of ethics may provide standards for recusal in a given proceeding or matter. Providing that the judge or presiding officer must be free from disabling conflicts of interest makes the fairness of the proceedings less likely to be questioned. Recusal is to declare that the judge shall not try the case or is disqualified to act.

Thousands of U.S. judges who broke laws or oaths remained on the bench.

Lochner era is a period in American legal history from 1897 to 1937 in which the Supreme Court of the United States is said to have made it a common practice "to strike down economic regulations adopted by a State based on the Court’s own notions of the most appropriate means for the State to implement its considered policies," by using its interpretation of substantive due process to strike down laws held to be infringing on economic liberty or private contract rights. The era takes its name from a 1905 case, Lochner v. New York. The beginning of the era is usually marked earlier, with the Court's decision in Allgeyer v. Louisiana (1897), and its end marked forty years later in the case of West Coast Hotel Co. v. Parrish (1937), which overturned an earlier Lochner-era decision.

Motion in United States Law is a procedural device for decision. It is a request to the judge (or judges) to make a decision about the case. A "motion to dismiss" asks the court to decide that a claim, even if true as stated, is not one for which the law offers a legal remedy.

What the Judge ate for Breakfast” Judges show less empathy when they are hungry. (The body affects the mind, especially a mind that's undereducated). Empathy, Justice, and Moral Behavior.

The Code of Conduct for United States Judges includes the ethical canons that apply to federal judges and provides guidance on their performance of official duties and engagement in a variety of outside activities. Canon 1: A Judge Should Uphold the Integrity and Independence of the Judiciary. Canon 2: A Judge Should Avoid Impropriety and the Appearance of Impropriety in All Activities. Canon 3: A Judge Should Perform the Duties of the Office Fairly, Impartially and Diligently. Canon 4: A Judge May Engage in Extrajudicial Activities That are Consistent With the Obligations of Judicial Office. Canon 5: A Judge Should Refrain From Political Activity. Compliance with the Code of Conduct. Applicable Date of Compliance.

Judicial Watch is a conservative, non-partisan educational foundation, which promotes transparency, accountability and integrity in government, politics and the law. Through its educational endeavors, Judicial Watch advocates high standards of ethics and morality in our nation’s public life and seeks to ensure that political and judicial officials do not abuse the powers entrusted to them by the American people. Judicial Watch fulfills its educational mission through litigation, investigations, and public outreach.

Supreme Court Justices can be removed in one of three ways: (1) impeachment by Congress, (2) voluntary retirement, or (3) death. Under Article III of the U.S. Constitution, life appointments of Justices to the U.S. Supreme Court is not specifically granted, nor is there anything that prevents Justices from being rotated to lower courts. Instead, the language of Article III §1 merely clarifies that “[t]he judges both of the supreme and inferior courts, shall hold office during good behavior. Supreme Court Justices were commonly authorized to take on roles in lower courts, effectively called “riding circuit.” Thus, Supreme Court Justices were assigned to hear cases on the lower circuit courts alongside a designated district court judge. Outcries over the travel requirement eventually led to the displacement of Supreme Court Justices in these roles, ceding to circuit court judges via the Judiciary Act of 1869, though the practice was not fully abolished until 1911. The movement of Supreme Court Justices to lower courts would be possible provided legislative authorization from Congress. First, a Justice could not likely be “rotated out” of the Supreme Court without a formal impeachment proceeding or voluntary withdrawal. Either would be necessary to make room for a new Justice, unless the number of Justices, currently capped at nine per the Judiciary Act of 1869, is also up for consideration. Impeachment of a Supreme Court Justice requires a majority vote of the House and two-thirds majority of the Senate via Art. II §4 of the Constitution. This is unlikely to occur absent egregious behavior. Second, a new Justice “rotated in” would need to be properly nominated and appointed. Under the Appointment and Removal Power designated in Article II, §2 of the Constitution, the executive branch has the sole responsibility for nominating Judges to the Supreme Court. While Congress can certainly remove a Justice via the impeachment process without Presidential approval, it has no designated power to unilaterally place Judges on the Supreme Court without first receiving this nomination from the President. Any attempt by Congress to wield this sort of authority would constitute a separation of powers violation. Congress must instead rely on traditional nomination and hearing processes for an appointment of a Supreme Court Justice to be considered constitutionally valid. Therefore, Congress would remain bound to appoint Justices via the standard, time-consuming nomination process. Even if Justices were allowed to be moved to lower courts under a new Judiciary Act, the lower court Judges must still be nominated and appointed if they hope to serve on the Supreme Court.

Too many judges are puppets and pawns for special interests. There are basically owned by wealthy extremists who control their decision making. Even when judges claim to be independent and unbiased, they can still serve outdated ideologies that are disconnected from reality, as well as, being disconnected from the constitutional principles and the democratic citizens that they are supposed to serve. These judges are basically traitors who commit treason and betray moral decency and common sense. These two faced hypocrites kiss the ass of ignorant criminal scumbags who own them. They never have any logical explanations or reasons for the way they decide, this is why they lie about their decision making process.

Contempt of Court is the crime of being disobedient to or disrespectful toward a court of law and its officers in the form of behavior that opposes or defies the authority, justice, and dignity of the court. Contempt proceedings are especially used to enforce equitable remedies, such as injunctions. A finding of being in contempt of court may result from a failure to obey a lawful order of a court, showing disrespect for the judge, disruption of the proceedings through poor behavior, or publication of material or non-disclosure of material, which in doing so is deemed likely to jeopardize a fair trial. A judge may impose sanctions such as a fine, jail or social service for someone found guilty of contempt of court, which makes contempt of court a process crime. Judges in common law systems usually have more extensive power to declare someone in contempt than judges in civil law systems. Civil contempt is when a person is jailed or fined until they comply with the court’s order – it is said that they “hold the keys to their own jail cell. Criminal contempt is when a person is punished a single time for their actions – they could be fined or jailed, although if they are jailed for a significant period of time they are entitled to a jury trial before they can be sentenced. Public defenders and other criminal defense lawyers who are held in contempt for doing their jobs effectively are usually held in criminal contempt.

Corrupt Lawyers

Malicious Prosecution is intentionally and maliciously instituting and pursuing, or causing to be instituted or pursued, a legal action whether civil or criminal, that is brought without probable cause, and dismissed in favor of the victim of the malicious prosecution. In some jurisdictions, the term "malicious prosecution" denotes the wrongful initiation of criminal proceedings, while the term "malicious use of process" denotes the wrongful initiation of civil proceedings. Malicious prosecution is a common law intentional tort. Like the tort of abuse of process. Sham Trial. Frivolous.

Malfeasance - False Arrest - False Evidence - False Confession - Missing Evidence - Prejudice - Unjustified - False Flags

Selective Prosecution is a procedural defense in which defendants argue that they should not be held criminally liable for breaking the law, as the criminal justice system discriminated against them by choosing to prosecute.

Selective Enforcement occurs when government officials (such as police officers, prosecutors, or regulators) exercise discretion, which is the power to choose whether or how to punish a person who has violated the law. Ticket fixing is a practice in which a public official destroys or dismisses a pending traffic ticket as a favor to a friend or family member.

Retaliatory Arrest or retaliatory prosecution is an arrest or prosecution undertaken in retaliation for a person's exercise of their civil rights. It is a form of prosecutorial misconduct.

Vexatious Litigation - Frivolous Lawsuit - Legal Abuses - Corrupt Judges - Jury Tampering - Plea Bargains - Peremptory Challenge

Prosecutorial Misconduct refers to the misuse of public office and resources by individuals in positions of power at the local level for personal gain or the benefit of select groups. It involves the abuse of entrusted authority, bribery, embezzlement, fraud, nepotism, and other forms of illicit activities that undermine the integrity and effectiveness of local governance. Failure to disclose exculpatory evidence. False confession. Falsified evidence. Malicious prosecution. Prosecutorial corruption. Retaliatory prosecution. Selective prosecution. Subornation of perjury.

Legal Abuse refers to abuses associated with both civil and criminal legal action. Abuse can originate from nearly any part of the legal system, including frivolous and vexatious litigants, abuses by law enforcement, incompetent, careless or corrupt attorneys and misconduct from the judiciary itself.

Abuse of Process is a cause of action in tort arising from one party making misusing or perversion of regularly issued court process (civil or criminal) not justified by the underlying legal action. It is a common law intentional tort. It is to be distinguished from malicious prosecution, another type of tort that involves misuse of the public right of access to the courts. The elements of a valid cause of action for abuse of process in most common law jurisdictions are as follows: (1) the existence of an ulterior purpose or motive underlying the use of process, and (2) some act in the use of the legal process not proper in the regular prosecution of the proceedings. Abuse of process can be distinguished from malicious prosecution, in that abuse of process typically does not require proof of malice, lack of probable cause in procuring issuance of the process, or a termination favorable to the plaintiff, all of which are essential to a claim of malicious prosecution. "Process," as used in this context, includes not only the "service of process," i.e. an official summons or other notice issued from a court, but means any method used to acquire jurisdiction over a person or specific property that is issued under the official seal of a court. Typically, the person who abuses process is interested only in accomplishing some improper purpose that is collateral to the proper object of the process and that offends justice, such as an unjustified arrest or an unfounded criminal prosecution. Subpoenas to testify, attachments of property, executions on property, garnishments, and other provisional remedies are among the types of "process" considered to be capable of abuse.

Malice - Prejudice - Legal Advice

100 prosecutors across Ohio repeatedly violated legal standards to sway juries at trials and to win convictions. They violated standards meant to preserve a defendant's civil rights in criminal trials.

Ineffective Assistance of Counsel is a claim raised by a convicted criminal defendant where the innocent defendant's legal counsel performed so ineffectively that it deprived the defendant of the constitutional right guaranteed by the Assistance of Counsel Clause of the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution. Having the benefit of counsel or assistance of counsel means that the criminal defendant has had a competent attorney representing them. Competence is defined as reasonable professional assistance and is defined in part by prevailing professional norms and standards. To prove they received ineffective assistance, a criminal defendant must show two things: Deficient performance by counsel. Resulting prejudice, in that but for the deficient performance, the result of the proceeding would have differed.

Attorney Misconduct is unethical or illegal conduct by an attorney. Attorney Misconduct may include: conflict of interest, over billing, refusing to represent a client for political or professional motives, false or misleading statements, hiding evidence, abandoning a client, failing to disclose all relevant facts, arguing a position while neglecting to disclose prior law which might counter the argument, and in some instances having sex with a client.

Sexual misconduct by lawyers isn't uncommon. But punishment is. A broad spectrum of sexual misconduct and harassing behaviors—from criminal to civilly actionable to simply unconscionable—continues to plague all walks of the legal profession. Half of respondents who reported being assaulted or harassed said that there were no consequences to the harasser even after they reported the incidents. Some 30,000 people are working in the federal judiciary without civil rights protections, leaving those employees vulnerable to abuse, harassment and discrimination from even federal judges.

Malpractice is a lawyer's failure to render professional services with the skill, prudence, and diligence that an ordinary and reasonable lawyer would use under similar circumstances.

Adequate Representation does not mean Perfect Representation.

Legal Malpractice is the term for negligence, breach of fiduciary duty, or breach of contract by an attorney that causes harm to his or her client. In order to rise to an actionable level of negligence (an actual breach of a legal duty of care), the injured party must show that the attorney's acts were not merely the result of poor strategy, but that they were the result of errors that no reasonably prudent attorney would make. Four elements of legal malpractice are (i) an attorney-client relationship, (ii) negligence, (iii) causation, and (iv) financial loss. To satisfy the third element, legal malpractice requires proof of what would have happened had the attorney not been negligent; that is, "but for" the attorney's negligence ("but for" causation). If the same result would have occurred without negligence by the attorney, no cause of action will be permitted. "But for" or actual causation can be difficult to prove. If the malpractice alleged occurred in litigation, the legal malpractice case may result in a "trial-within-a-trial" which delves into the facts of the case for which the client originally retained the attorney.

Disbar is to expel a lawyer from the Bar, so that they no longer have the right to practice law.

Disbarment is the removal of a lawyer from a bar association or the practice of law, thus revoking his or her law license or admission to practice law. Disbarment is usually a punishment for unethical or criminal conduct. Procedures vary depending on the law society. Conduct indicating that an attorney is not fit to practice law, willfully disregarding the interests of a client, or engaging in fraud which impedes the administration of justice. In addition, any lawyer who is convicted of a felony is automatically disbarred in most jurisdictions, a policy that, although opposed by the American Bar Association, has been described as a convicted felon's just deserts. Their law license revoked or rescinded, usually for unethical or criminal conduct. Disbarment is quite rare. Instead, lawyers are usually sanctioned by their own clients through civil malpractice proceedings, or via fine, censure, suspension, or other punishments from the disciplinary boards. To be disbarred is considered a great embarrassment and shame, even if one no longer wishes to pursue a career in the law.

28 U.S. Code § 176 - Removal from Office.

Methods of Judicial Selection Removal of Judges.

Complaint Center -  DCP  Ct Bar - Frivolous

Superior Court Operations - External Affairs Division.

Watchdogs - Accountability - Injustice

Michael Dean Cohen submitted bogus artificial intelligence-generated legal case citations. These court rulings that do not exist, were cited in a motion submitted on Cohen's behalf. Cohen then blamed his lawyer for failing to check the legal citations that he himself gave him. In an unrelated case, two lawyers were fined $5,000 for citing bogus cases that were invented by ChatGPT, the AI-powered chatbot.

Ambulance Chaser is a lawyer soliciting for clients at a disaster site or badgering vulnerable people in their time of need. A lawyer who specializes in bringing cases seeking damages for personal injury. Ambulance chasing is prohibited in the United States by state rules that follow Rule 7.3 of the American Bar Association Model Rules of Professional Conduct.

Pettifogger is an inferior legal practitioner, especially one who deals with petty cases or employs dubious practices. A sneaky and underhanded lawyer. A lawyer who quibbles over trivia, and raises petty, annoying objections and sophistry. Bottom Feeder.

Recuse is to disqualify oneself (as a judge) in a particular case.

Don't rely on government agencies that pretend to fight corruption and crimes that are being committed by people with authority. These agencies are mostly used to discourage investigations, which makes people believe that they can't do anything about criminals in power. But there are other methods to fight corruption and criminal activity that are unknown to most people. It's doing several things simultaneously, and doing some things in the correct sequence. It's a multistep process, that if done right, can create changes, encourage actions, remove criminals in power, and start a process towards improvements.

FBI misused intelligence database in 278,000 searches including Capitol riots, George Floyd death. A U.S. court found that the FBI improperly searched for information in a U.S. database of foreign intelligence 278,000 times over several years, including on Americans suspected of crimes, according to a ruling released on Friday. FBI misused NSA database to spy on demonstrators. FBI Broke Own Rules in Scouring Foreign Intelligence Database.

Bullying in the Legal Profession - Bullying - Intimidation - Discrimination - Police Abuse

Interrogation is interviewing as commonly employed by law enforcement officers, military personnel, and intelligence agencies with the goal of eliciting useful information. Interrogation may involve a diverse array of techniques, ranging from developing a rapport with the subject, to outright torture.

Plea Bargains - Prisoner Interrogation - Trick Questions - Witness

Coercion is the practice of forcing another party to act in an involuntary manner by use of intimidation or threats or some other form of pressure or force. Scapegoat.

False Confession is an admission of guilt for a crime which the individual did not commit. Although such confessions seem counterintuitive, they can be made voluntarily, perhaps to protect a third party, or induced through coercive interrogation techniques. False Evidence.

Confession is when the speaker is providing information that he believes the other party is not already aware of, and is frequently associated with an admission of a moral or legal wrong.

Trick Questions - Remain Silent - Testimony

Prosecutors: Last Week Tonight with John Oliver (HBO) (youtube) - Prosecutors in some cases misuse their power within our criminal justice system. Threaten and mislead people to plead guilty. 95% of defendants are forced to plead guilty, even when some are innocent.

Ambush Defense is one in which defense evidence - notably from expert witnesses - has not been adduced in advance to the prosecuting authorities, leading to their inability to rebut it. 2,500 DA Offices in the US. Prosecutors will decide if charges are institutes legal proceedings against someone.

Misconduct of Judges - Malicious Prosecution

The Right to Evidence Disclosure: Rule 2.550(a) states that unless confidential or sealed by law, all court records are presumed open. PLEASE NOTE: The information set forth below only relates to inspection and copying of documents filed with the court or court records in a particular case, such as pleadings, orders and judgments. Accountability.

Discovery is a pre-trial procedure in a lawsuit in which each party, through the law of civil procedure, can obtain evidence from the other party or parties by means of discovery devices such as a request for answers to interrogatories, request for production of documents, request for admissions and depositions. Discovery can be obtained from non-parties using subpoenas. When a discovery request is objected to, the requesting party may seek the assistance of the court by filing a motion to compel discovery. Withheld Evidence.

Filing is the act of submitting a document to the clerk of a court for the court's immediate consideration and for storage in the court's files. Courts will not consider motions unless an appropriate memorandum or brief is filed before the appropriate deadline. Usually a filing fee is paid which is part of court costs.

Questioning - Observation Flaws

Causation is the causal relationship between conduct and result. That is to say that causation provides a means of connecting conduct with a resulting effect, typically an injury. In criminal law, it is defined as the actus reus (an action) from which the specific injury or other effect arose and is combined with mens rea (a state of mind) to comprise the elements of guilt. Causation is only applicable where a result has been achieved and therefore is immaterial with regard to inchoate offenses.

Sine qua non is an indispensable and essential action, condition, or ingredient. In legal matters, "but-for", "sine qua non", causa sine qua non, or "cause-in-fact" causation, or conditio sine qua non, is a circumstance in which a certain act is a material cause of a certain injury or wrongdoing, without which the injury would not have occurred. It is established by the "but-for" test: but for the act having occurred, the injury would not have happened. The defendant's negligent conduct is the actual cause of the plaintiff's injury if the harm would not have occurred to the plaintiff "but for" the negligent conduct of the defendant. (Perkins).

Mistake in criminal law states that while a person has committed the physical element of an offence, because they were labouring under a mistake of fact, they never formed the required mens rea, and so will escape liability for offences that require mens rea. This is unlike a mistake of law, which is not usually a defense; law enforcement may or may not take for granted that individuals know what the law is. Withheld Evidence.

Mens rea is the intention or knowledge of wrongdoing that constitutes part of a crime, as opposed to the action or conduct of the accused. Premeditated. Mens rea is the mental element of a person's intention to commit a crime; or knowledge that one's action or lack of action would cause a crime to be committed. It is a necessary element of many crimes. Mens rea is the mental element of a crime. It is a necessary element of many crimes. "the act is not culpable unless the mind is guilty".

Mistake of Law refers to one or more errors that were made by a person in understanding how the applicable law applied to their past activity that is under analysis by a court. In jurisdictions that use the term, it is differentiated from mistake of fact. When a party enters into a contract, without the knowledge of the law in the country, the contract is affected by such mistakes but it is not void. The reason here is that ignorance of law is not an excuse. However if a party is induced to enter into a contract by the mistake of law then such a contract is not valid.


Court is a tribunal, often as a government institution, with the authority to adjudicate legal disputes between parties and carry out the administration of justice in civil, criminal, and administrative matters in accordance with the rule of law. In both common law and civil law legal systems, courts, judges and juries are the central means for dispute resolution, and it is generally understood that all persons have an ability to bring their claims before a court. Similarly, the rights of those accused of a crime include the right to present a defense before a court. State courts try defendants charged with state crimes and the federal system deals with those charged with federal crimes.

United States Federal Courts - Court Role and Structure.

Precedent (past rulings) - Hearings - Trials - Transcripts (court reporting)

Supreme Court is the highest court in the federal judiciary of the United States of America, established pursuant to Article III of the U.S. Constitution in 1789. Supreme Court is a court of higher powers and extensive jurisdiction; Each state has a supreme court and the United States has a Supreme Court that has ultimate (and largely discretionary) appellate jurisdiction over all federal courts and over state court cases involving issues of federal law, plus original jurisdiction over a small range of cases. The Court normally consists of the Chief Justice of the United States and eight associate justices who are nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate. Once appointed, justices have life tenure unless they resign, retire, or are removed after impeachment (though no justice has ever been removed). SCOTUS.

Supreme Court Cases (wiki) - Oral Arguments - The Court holds Oral Argument in about 70-80 cases each year. According to the Supreme Court Database, since 2000, a unanimous decision has been more likely than any other result — averaging 36 percent of all decisions. Even when the court did not reach a unanimous judgment, the justices often secured overwhelming majorities, with 7-to-2 or 8-to-1 judgments making up about 15 percent of decisions. The 5-to-4 decisions, by comparison, occurred in 19 percent of cases. Supremacy.

Supreme Court Case Selections Act is an act of Congress that eliminated appeals as of right from state court decisions to the Supreme Court of the United States. After the Act took effect, in most cases, the only avenue by which a litigant could obtain review of most lower court decisions was through the writ of certiorari, which was granted at the discretion of the Supreme Court, rather than available to the litigant as a matter of right.

Procedures of the Supreme Court of the United States are governed by the U.S. Constitution, various federal statutes, and the Court's own internal rules. Since 1869, the Court has consisted of one chief justice and eight associate justices. Justices are nominated by the president, and with the advice and consent (confirmation) of the U.S. Senate, appointed to the Court by the president. Once appointed, justices have lifetime tenure unless they resign, retire, or are removed from office.  Resolving Disputes - Conflict Resolution.

State Supreme Court is the highest court in the state judiciary of a U.S. state. On matters of state law, the judgment of a state supreme court is considered final and binding in both state and federal courts. Generally, a state supreme court, like most appellate tribunals, is exclusively for hearing appeals of legal issues. Although state supreme court rulings on matters of state law are final, rulings on matters of federal law can be appealed to the Supreme Court of the United States. Each state supreme court consists of a panel of judges selected by methods outlined in the state constitution. Among the most common methods for selection are gubernatorial appointment, non-partisan election, and partisan election, but the different states follow a variety of procedures. State supreme court judges are selected in a variety of ways, with the method of selection often depending on the circumstances in which the seat is filled. Under one common method, the Missouri Plan, the governor fills judicial vacancies by choosing from a list compiled by a non-partisan commission. These judges serve an interim term until they stand in a retention election, in which they win a full term if a majority of voters vote for retention. Many other states elect judges through non-partisan elections in which multiple candidates appear on the ballot without their partisan affiliation listed. Most of the remaining states base their judicial selection system on gubernatorial appointments or partisan elections, although several states use a mix of different methods. South Carolina and Virginia use a system of legislative appointment, while in Vermont, the governor makes the initial appointment of judges, but the legislature has the power to re-appoint judges to new terms. Traditionally, state supreme courts are headquartered in the capital cities of their respective states. The number of justices on each court varies between five and nine from state to state. Courts. Court, Number of justices.

Judiciary Act of 1925 is also known as the Judge's Bill or Certiorari Act, which was an act of the United States Congress that sought to reduce the workload of the Supreme Court of the United States. Reduce the workload for 9 people is ok, but when you have thousands of cases, you need to hire more people. Multiple supreme courts. Limiting the number of cases for review is reckless and corrupt.

Adversary System resolves disputes by presenting conflicting views of fact and law to an impartial and relatively passive arbiter, who decides which side wins what. Adversarial system or adversary system is a legal system used in the common law countries where two advocates represent their parties' case or position before an impartial person or group of people, usually a judge or jury, who attempt to determine the truth and pass judgment accordingly. It is in contrast to the inquisitorial system used in some civil law systems. Missing Evidence.

Inquisitorial System is a legal system in which the court, or a part of the court, is actively involved in investigating the facts of the case. This is distinct from an adversarial system, in which the role of the court is primarily that of an impartial referee between the prosecution and the defense. In an inquisitorial system, the trial judges (mostly plural in serious crimes) are inquisitors who actively participate in fact-finding public inquiry by questioning defense lawyers, prosecutors, and witnesses. They could even order certain pieces of evidence to be examined if they find presentation by the defense or prosecution to be inadequate. Prior to the case getting to trial, magistrate judges (juges d'instruction in France) participate in the investigation of a case, often assessing material by police and consulting with the prosecutor.

Sanhedrin was an assembly of either twenty-three or seventy-one elders appointed to sit as a tribunal in every city in the ancient Land of Israel. There were two classes of Rabbinite Jewish courts which were called Sanhedrin, the Great Sanhedrin and the Lesser Sanhedrin. A lesser Sanhedrin of 23 judges was appointed to sit as a tribunal in each city, but there was only supposed to be one Great Sanhedrin of 71 judges, which among other roles acted as the Supreme Court, taking appeals from cases which were decided by lesser courts. In general usage, the Sanhedrin without qualifier normally refers to the Great Sanhedrin, which was presided over by the Nasi, who functioned as its head or representing president, and was a member of the court; the Av Beit Din or the chief of the court, who was second to the nasi; and sixty-nine general members (Mufla). ('sitting together,' hence 'assembly' or 'council').

US Courts - Small Claims Court - Court of Claims - Courtroom Terminology - Objection Sustained

Courts of Appeals or Circuit Courts are the intermediate appellate courts of the United States federal judiciary. The courts are divided into 13 circuits, and each hears appeals from the district courts within its borders, or in some instances from other designated federal courts and administrative agencies. Appeals from the circuit courts are taken to the Supreme Court of the United States. The district, appellate, and Supreme courts are all authorized under Article Three of the United States Constitution. The United States courts of appeals are considered the most powerful and influential courts in the United States after the Supreme Court. Because of their ability to set legal precedent in regions that cover millions of Americans, the United States courts of appeals have strong policy influence on U.S. law. Moreover, because the Supreme Court chooses to review fewer than 3% of the 7,000 to 8,000 cases filed with it annually, the U.S. courts of appeals serve as the final arbiter on most federal cases. There are currently 179 judgeships on the U.S. courts of appeals authorized by Congress in 28 U.S.C. § 43 pursuant to Article III of the U.S. Constitution. Like other federal judges, they are nominated by the President of the United States and confirmed by the United States Senate. They have lifetime tenure, earning (as of 2019) an annual salary of $223,700. The actual number of judges in service varies, both because of vacancies and because senior judges who continue to hear cases are not counted against the number of authorized judgeships. The 11 numbered circuits and the D.C. Circuit are geographically defined by the boundaries of their assigned U.S. district courts. The Tenth Circuit is unique in that it contains a small portion of Idaho and Montana, both in the Ninth Circuit, due to the U.S. District Court for the District of Wyoming extending out of state to cover all of Yellowstone National Park. The 13th court of appeals is the Federal Circuit, which has nationwide jurisdiction over certain appeals based on specialized subject matter. All of the courts of appeals also hear appeals from some administrative agency decisions and rulemaking, with by far the largest share of these cases heard by the D.C. Circuit. The Federal Circuit hears appeals from specialized trial courts, primarily the United States Court of International Trade and the United States Court of Federal Claims, as well as appeals from the district courts in patent cases and certain other specialized matters. Decisions of the U.S. courts of appeals have been published by the private company West Publishing in the Federal Reporter series since the courts were established. Only decisions that the courts designate for publication are included. The "unpublished" opinions (of all but the Fifth and Eleventh Circuits) are published separately in West's Federal Appendix, and they are also available in on-line databases like LexisNexis or Westlaw. More recently, court decisions have also been made available electronically on official court websites. However, there are also a few federal court decisions that are classified for national security reasons. The circuit with the smallest number of appellate judges is the First Circuit, and the one with the largest number of appellate judges is the geographically large and populous Ninth Circuit in the Far West. The number of judges that the U.S. Congress has authorized for each circuit is set forth by law in 28 U.S.C. § 44, while the places where those judges must regularly sit to hear appeals are prescribed in 28 U.S.C. § 48. Although the courts of appeals are frequently called "circuit courts", they should not be confused with the former United States circuit courts, which were active from 1789 to 1911, during the time when long-distance transportation was much less available, and which were primarily first-level federal trial courts that moved periodically from place to place in "circuits" in order to serve the dispersed population in towns and the smaller cities that existed then. The current "courts of appeals" system was established in the Judiciary Act of 1891, also known as the Evarts Act.

Repeal - Intimidation - Bad Judges - Remedy

Consolidated Appeals Process is an advocacy tool for humanitarian financing, in which projects managed by the United Nations, NGOs and other stakeholders come together to approach the donor community funding international development activities.

Certiorari is a formal written order seeking judicial review. It is issued by a superior court, directing an inferior court, tribunal, or other public authority to send the record of a proceeding for review.

Equity in law refers to the body of law which was developed in the English Court of Chancery and which is now administered concurrently with the common law. Equal Justice.

Jurisdiction is the practical authority granted to a legal body to administer justice within a defined area of responsibility.

Appellate Court or appeals court or court of appeals, is any court of law that is empowered to hear an appeal of a trial court or other lower tribunal. In most jurisdictions, the court system is divided into at least three levels: the trial court, which initially hears cases and reviews evidence and testimony to determine the facts of the case; at least one intermediate appellate court; and a supreme court (or court of last resort) which primarily reviews the decisions of the intermediate courts. A jurisdiction's supreme court is that jurisdiction's highest appellate court. Appellate courts nationwide can operate by varying rules. The authority of appellate courts to review the decisions of lower courts varies widely from one jurisdiction to another. In some areas, the appellate court has limited powers of review. Generally, an appellate court's judgment provides the final directive of the appeals courts as to the matter appealed, setting out with specificity the court's determination that the action appealed from should be affirmed, reversed, remanded or modified. An appellate court, commonly called a court of appeal(s), appeal court, court of second instance or second instance court. Appellate Court Ct.

Lower Court is a court from which an appeal may be taken. In relation to an appeal from one court to another, the lower court is the court whose decision is being reviewed, which may be the original trial court or appellate court lower in rank than the superior court which is hearing the appeal. In an absolute sense, a lower court is always the trial court; where an appellate court is describing the actions under review from the lower court, it is referring to the court that examined the evidence and testimony directly and made rulings upon it, rather than any intermediate appellate courts. However, a court that functions as a trial court in some instances may still be above another court. Relative to other trial courts, a lower court is a court of limited jurisdiction, especially one that is limited to hearing minor offenses, or civil actions involving a limited amount, as distinct from a superior court.

Superior Court is a court of general competence which typically has unlimited jurisdiction with regard to civil and criminal legal cases. A superior court is "superior" relative to a court with limited jurisdiction (see lower court), which is restricted to civil cases involving monetary amounts with a specific limit, or criminal cases involving offenses of a less serious nature. A superior court may hear appeals from lower courts. Superior Court is where most felony cases are heard concerning violation of state statutes. Superior Court is a court of general competence which typically has unlimited jurisdiction with regard to civil and criminal legal cases. Superior Court sees only 1% of all cases submitted. That means we need more Courts....Each year, the Court receives approximately 9,000–10,000 petitions for Certiorari, of which less than 1% (approximately 80–100), are granted plenary review with oral arguments, and an additional 50 to 60 are disposed of without plenary review.

Circuit Court were the original intermediate level courts of the United States federal court system. They were established by the Judiciary Act of 1789. They had trial court jurisdiction over civil suits of diversity jurisdiction and major federal crimes. They also had appellate jurisdiction over the United States district courts. The Judiciary Act of 1891 (26 Stat. 826, also known as the Evarts Act) transferred their appellate jurisdiction to the newly created United States circuit courts of appeals, which are now known as the United States courts of appeals. On January 1, 1912, the effective date of the Judicial Code of 1911, the circuit courts were abolished, with their remaining trial court jurisdiction transferred to the U.S. district courts. During the 100 years that the Justices of the Supreme Court "rode circuit", many justices complained about the effort required. Riding circuit took a great deal of time (about half of the year) and was both physically demanding and dangerous. However, "members of Congress held firm to the belief that circuit riding benefited the justices and the populace, and they turned a deaf ear to the corps of justices that desired to abolish the practice". The Judiciary Act of 1869 established a separate circuit court (and allowed the hiring of judges specifically to handle the cases) but the act required that Supreme Court justices had to ride circuit once every two years. However, this came to a final end in 1891 when the Circuit Courts of Appeals Act (Evarts Act) was passed. The net result of riding circuit was that, in many cases which ended up before the Supreme Court, a member of the Supreme Court had already heard the case and issued a ruling. In a real sense, the Supreme Court was, in such cases, acting as an en banc panel; i.e. hearing a case upon which one of their members had already passed judgment. Riding Circuit, or being a circuit rider, is a term in the United States for a professional who travels a regular circuit of locations to provide services.

District Court are the trial courts of the U.S. federal judiciary. There is a United States bankruptcy court associated with each U.S. district court. Each federal judicial district has at least one courthouse, and many districts have more than one. Most decisions of district courts may be appealed to the respective court of appeals of their circuit, with a small number instead being appealable to the Federal Circuit, or directly to the Supreme Court. District courts are courts of law, equity, and admiralty, and can hear both civil and criminal cases. But unlike U.S. state courts, federal district courts are courts of limited jurisdiction, and can only hear cases that involve disputes between residents of different states, questions of federal law, or federal crimes. In contrast to the Supreme Court, which was established by Article III of the Constitution, the district courts were established by Congress[note 1] under the Judiciary Act of 1789. There is no constitutional requirement that district courts exist at all. Indeed, after the ratification of the Constitution, some opponents of a strong federal judiciary urged that, outside jurisdictions under direct federal control, like Washington, D.C., and the territories, the federal court system be limited to the Supreme Court, which would hear appeals from state courts. This view did not prevail, however, and the first Congress created the district court system that is still in place today. When the Act was first passed, there were thirteen districts created among the eleven states which had ratified the constitution by that point. When North Carolina and Rhode Island voted to ratify, a district was created for each of them bringing the number of districts to fifteen. There are 89 districts in the 50 states, with a total of 94 districts including territories. There is at least one judicial district for each state, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico. The territories (insular areas) of Guam, the Northern Mariana Islands, and the United States Virgin Islands each have one territorial court; these courts are called "district courts" and exercise the same jurisdiction as district courts, but differ from district courts in that territorial courts are Article IV courts, with judges who serve ten-year terms rather than the lifetime tenure of judges of Article III courts, such as the district court judges. American Samoa does not have a district court or a federal territorial court, and so federal matters there are sent to either the District of Columbia or Hawaii. District Courts are known as the work horses because they deal with most of the court cases.

State Court has jurisdiction over disputes with some connection to a U.S. state. State courts handle the vast majority of civil and criminal cases in the United States; the United States federal courts are far smaller in terms of both personnel and caseload, and handle different types of cases. Each state is free to organize its courts as it sees fit, and consequently, no two states have identical court structures. Generally, state courts are common law courts, and apply their respective state laws and procedures to decide cases. They are organized pursuant to and apply the law in accordance with their state's constitution, state statutes, and binding decisions of courts in their state court hierarchy. Where applicable, they also apply federal law. Generally, a single judicial officer, usually called a judge, exercises original jurisdiction by presiding over contested criminal or civil actions which culminate in trials, although most matters stop short of reaching trial. The decisions of lower courts may be reviewed by a panel of a state court of appeals. Generally, there is also a highest court for appeals, a state supreme court, that oversees the court system. In matters that involve issues of federal law, the final decision of the state's highest court (including refusals to hear final appeals) may be appealed to the United States Supreme Court (which also has the discretion to refuse to hear them).

Trial Court or court of first instance is a court having original jurisdiction, in which trials take place. A trial court of general jurisdiction is authorized to hear some type of civil or criminal case that is not committed exclusively to another court. In the United States, the United States district courts are the trial courts of general jurisdiction of the federal judiciary; each state has a system establishing trial courts of general jurisdiction, such as the Florida Circuit Courts in Florida, the Superior Courts of California in California, and the New York Supreme Court in New York state. Not all cases are heard in trial courts of general jurisdiction. A trial court of limited jurisdiction is authorized to hear only specified types of cases. Trial courts of limited jurisdiction may be limited in subject-matter jurisdiction (such as juvenile, probate, and family courts in many U.S. states, or the United States Tax Court in the federal judiciary) or by other means, such as small claims courts in many states for civil cases with a low amount in controversy. Other trials do not take place in courts at all, but in quasi-judicial bodies or in administrative agencies with adjudicatory power created by statute to make binding determinations with simplified procedural practices, such as arbitration. Because different U.S. states apply different names to their courts, it is often not evident whether a court has general or limited jurisdiction. For instance, the Maine District Court is a court of limited jurisdiction, but the Nevada District Courts are courts of general jurisdiction. In the trial court, evidence and testimony are admitted under the rules of evidence established by applicable procedural law and determinations called findings of fact are made based on the evidence. The court, presided over by one or more judges, makes findings of law based upon the applicable law. In most common law jurisdictions, the trial court often sits with a jury and one judge; in such jury trials, the jury acting as trier of fact. In some cases, the judge or judges act as triers of both fact and law, by either statute, custom, or agreement of the parties; this is referred to as a bench trial. In the case of most judges hearing cases through the bench trial process, they would prefer that all parties are given an opportunity to offer a vigorous and robust case presentation, such that, errors in testimony, procedures, statutes, etc., do not grow "crab legs" -- meaning compounded errors -- and are remanded or returned to their court on appeal. Appeals from the decisions of trial courts are usually made by higher courts with the power of appellate review (appellate courts). Most trial courts are courts of record, where the record of the presentation of evidence is created and must be maintained or transmitted to the appellate court. The record of the trial court is certified by the clerk of the trial court and transmitted to the appellate body. Most appellate courts do not have the authority to hear testimony or take evidence, but instead rule solely on matters of law.

Bankruptcy Court functions as units of the district courts and have subject-matter jurisdiction over bankruptcy cases. The federal district courts have original and exclusive jurisdiction over all cases arising under the bankruptcy code, (see 28 U.S.C. § 1334(a)), and bankruptcy cases cannot be filed in state court. Each of the 94 federal judicial districts handles bankruptcy matters. United States bankruptcy courts are courts created under Article I of the United States Constitution. The current system of bankruptcy courts was created by the United States Congress in 1978, effective April 1, 1984.

Constitutional Court is a high court that deals primarily with constitutional law. Its main authority is to rule on whether laws that are challenged are in fact unconstitutional, i.e. whether they conflict with constitutionally established rules, rights, and freedoms, among other things.

Special Courts are those courts with a limited jurisdiction – such as traffic court, misdemeanor courts, domestic violence court, or small claims court, to name a few. Special courts are also courts serving a particular population, such as tribal courts. Vaccine Courts.

World Courts of Women are public hearings that give a forum to those who are traditionally excluded from formal political and legal proceedings. Organized around particular topics relevant to the hosting country, these unofficial public enquiries highlight the injustices that women face. They include testimonies of personal experience, analyses by scholars and activists, and skill-sharing and strategizing. Through these, the World Courts aim to educate and raise awareness, record injustice and human rights violations, give voice to marginalized women, and develop alternative visions and strategies for the future.

Public Inquiry or a tribunal of inquiry is an official review of events or actions ordered by a government body. In many common law countries, such as the United Kingdom, Ireland, Australia and Canada, such a public inquiry differs from a Royal Commission in that a public inquiry accepts evidence and conducts its hearings in a more public forum and focuses on a more specific occurrence. Interested members of the public and organisations may not only make (written) evidential submissions as is the case with most inquiries, but also listen to oral evidence given by other parties.

Tribunal is any person or institution with authority to judge, adjudicate on, or determine claims or disputes—whether or not it is called a tribunal in its title. For example, an advocate who appears before a court with a single judge could describe that judge as "their tribunal." Many governmental bodies that are titled as "tribunals" are described so in order to emphasize that they are not courts of normal jurisdiction. For example, the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda was a body specially constituted under international law; in Great Britain, employment tribunals are bodies set up to hear specific employment disputes. In many (but not all) cases, the word tribunal implies a judicial (or quasi-judicial) body with a lesser degree of formality than a court, in which the normal rules of evidence and procedure may not apply, and whose presiding officers are frequently neither judges, nor magistrates. Private judicial bodies are also often styled "tribunals." The word tribunal, however, is not conclusive of a body's function—for example, in Great Britain, the Employment Appeal Tribunal is a superior court of record. The term is derived from the tribunes, magistrates of the Classical Roman Republic. "Tribunal" originally referred to the office of the tribunes, and the term is still sometimes used in this sense in historical writings. The tribunal was the platform upon which the presiding authority sat; having a raised position physically as symbolic of his higher position in regard to the adjudication of the law.

Federal Tribunals in the United States are those tribunals established by the federal government of the United States for the purpose of resolving disputes involving or arising under federal laws, including questions about the constitutionality of such laws. Such tribunals include both Article III tribunals (federal courts) as well as adjudicative entities which are classified as Article I or Article IV tribunals. Some of the latter entities are also formally denominated as courts, but they do not enjoy certain protections afforded to Article III courts. These tribunals are described in reference to the article of the United States Constitution from which the tribunal's authority stems. The use of the term "tribunal" in this context as a blanket term to encompass both courts and other adjudicative entities comes from section 8 of Article I of the Constitution, which expressly grants Congress the power to constitute tribunals inferior to the Supreme Court of the United States.

Article I Tribunal is a federal court organized under Article One of the United States Constitution. They can be Article I Courts (also called legislative courts) set up by Congress to review agency decisions, ancillary courts with judges appointed by Article III appeals court judges, or administrative agencies.

United States Tax Court has jurisdiction over disputes that involve the federal income tax. The court is authorized to have 19 federally appointed judges. A judge's term is 15 years in length, not a lifetime appointment. The court was created on December 30, 1969, by the Tax Reform Act of 1969.

Adjudication is the legal process by which an arbiter or judge reviews evidence and argumentation, including legal reasoning set forth by opposing parties or litigants to come to a decision which determines rights and obligations between the parties involved. Three types of disputes are resolved through adjudication: Disputes between private parties, such as individuals or corporations. Disputes between private parties and public officials. Disputes between public officials or public bodies.

is a disagreement or argument about something important.

Sue - Anger Management

Arbitration is the resolution of disputes outside the courts. Plea Bargain.

Quasi-Judicial Body is an entity such as an arbitrator or tribunal board, generally of a public administrative agency, which has powers and procedures resembling those of a court of law or judge, and which is obliged to objectively determine facts and draw conclusions from them so as to provide the basis of an official action. Such actions are able to remedy a situation or impose legal penalties, and may affect the legal rights, duties or privileges of specific parties.

United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces has jurisdiction over all United States military appeals worldwide. The court is authorized to have 5 federally appointed judges. A judge's term is 15 years in length. The court was created on May 31, 1951. The court was originally called the United States Court of Military Appeals and was changed to its current name in 1994.

Admiralty Court are courts exercising jurisdiction over all maritime contracts, torts, injuries, and offenses.

Court-Martial is a Military Court or a trial conducted in such a court. A court-martial is empowered to determine the guilt of members of the armed forces subject to military law, and, if the defendant is found guilty, to decide upon punishment. In addition, courts-martial may be used to try prisoners of war for war crimes. The Geneva Convention requires that POWs who are on trial for war crimes be subject to the same procedures as would be the holding military's own forces. Finally, courts-martial can be convened for other purposes, such as dealing with violations of martial law, and can involve civilian defendants. Military Justice is the body of laws and procedures governing members of the armed forces. Law of War refers to the component of international law that regulates the conditions for war (jus ad bellum) and the conduct of warring parties (jus in bello). Laws of war define sovereignty and nationhood, states and territories, occupation, and other critical terms of international law.

Probate Court is a court that has competence in a jurisdiction to deal with matters of probate and the administration of estates. In some jurisdictions, such courts may be referred to as Orphans' Courts, or courts of ordinary. In some jurisdictions probate court functions are performed by a chancery court or another court of equity, or as a part or division of another court.

Federal Judiciary of the United States is one of the three co-equal branches of the federal government of the United States organized under the United States Constitution and laws of the federal government. Article III of the Constitution requires the establishment of a Supreme Court and permits the Congress to create other federal courts, and place limitations on their jurisdiction. Article III federal judges are appointed by the President with the consent of the Senate to serve until they resign, are impeached and convicted, retire, or die. The federal courts are composed of three levels of courts. The Supreme Court of the United States is the court of last resort. It is generally an appellate court that operates under discretionary review, which means that the Court can choose which cases to hear, by granting of writs of certiorari. There is generally no right of appeal to the Supreme Court. In a few situations (like lawsuits between state governments or some cases between the federal government and a state) it sits as a court of original jurisdiction. The United States courts of appeals are the intermediate federal appellate courts. They operate under a system of mandatory review which means they must hear all appeals of right from the lower courts. In some cases, Congress has diverted appellate jurisdiction to specialized courts, such as the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review.

Court Costs are the costs of handling a case, which, depending on legal rules, may or may not include the costs of the various parties in a lawsuit in addition to the costs of the court itself. In the United States, "court costs" (such as filing fees, copying and postage) are differentiated from attorney's fees, which are the hourly rates paid to attorneys for their work in a case. Court costs can reach very high amounts, often far beyond the actual monetary worth of a case. Cases are known in which one party won the case, but lost more than the monetary worth in court costs. Court costs may be 'awarded' to one or both parties in a lawsuit, or they may be waived.

Mediation is a dynamic, structured, interactive process where a neutral third party assists disputing parties in resolving conflict through the use of specialized communication and negotiation techniques. All participants in mediation are encouraged to actively participate in the process. Mediation is a "party-centered" process in that it is focused primarily upon the needs, rights, and interests of the parties. The mediator uses a wide variety of techniques to guide the process in a constructive direction and to help the parties find their optimal solution. A mediator is facilitative in that s/he manages the interaction between parties and facilitates open communication. Mediation is also evaluative in that the mediator analyzes issues and relevant norms ("reality-testing), while refraining from providing prescriptive advice to the parties (e.g., "You should do... ."). Mediation, as used in law, is a form of alternative dispute resolution (ADR), a way of resolving disputes between two or more parties with concrete effects. Typically, a third party, the mediator, assists the parties to negotiate a settlement. Disputants may mediate disputes in a variety of domains, such as commercial, legal, diplomatic, workplace, community and family matters. The term "mediation" broadly refers to any instance in which a third party helps others reach agreement. More specifically, mediation has a structure, timetable and dynamics that "ordinary" negotiation lacks. The process is private and confidential, possibly enforced by law. Participation is typically voluntary. The mediator acts as a neutral third party and facilitates rather than directs the process. Mediation is becoming a more peaceful and internationally accepted solution in order to end conflict. Mediation can be used to resolve disputes of any magnitude. Mediators use various techniques to open, or improve, dialogue and empathy between disputants, aiming to help the parties reach an agreement. Much depends on the mediator's skill and training. As the practice gained popularity, training programs, certifications and licensing followed, producing trained, professional mediators committed to the discipline. Impartial

Mediator is a person who engages in mediation. Representative.

Mediate is to act between parties with a view to reconciling differences. Occupy an intermediate or middle position or form a connecting link or stage between two others. Acting through or dependent on an intervening agency. Lawsuits.

Intermediate is a negotiator who acts as a link between parties. Act between parties with a view to reconciling differences. Intermediary is a negotiator who acts as a link between parties. Wills.

Mitigate in law is to lessen or to try to lessen the seriousness or extent of a situation. Make something less severe or harsh.

Settler - Executor - Diplomat - Public Speaking - Moderator - Friend of the Court

Mediator Pattern in software engineering, defines an object that encapsulates how a set of objects interact. This pattern is considered to be a behavioral pattern due to the way it can alter the program's running behavior.

Diplomacy is skillful handling of a situation. Communication Types.

Alternative Dispute Resolution includes dispute resolution processes and techniques that act as a means for disagreeing parties to come to an agreement short of litigation. It is a collective term for the ways that parties can settle disputes, with (or without) the help of a third party.

Liaison Officer is a person who liaises between two organizations to communicate and coordinate their activities. Generally, liaison officers are used to achieve the best utilization of resources or employment of services of one organization by another. Liaison officers often provide technical or subject matter expertise of their parent organization. Usually an organization embeds a liaison officer into another organization to provide face-to-face coordination.

Consent Decree is an agreement or settlement that resolves a dispute between two parties without admission of guilt in a criminal case, or liability in a civil case, and most often refers to such a type of settlement in the United States. The plaintiff and the defendant ask the court to enter into their agreement, and the court maintains supervision over the implementation of the decree in monetary exchanges or restructured interactions between parties. It is similar to and sometimes referred to as an antitrust decree, stipulated judgment, settlement agreements, or consent judgment. Consent decrees are frequently used by federal courts to ensure that businesses and industries adhere to regulatory laws in areas such as antitrust law, employment discrimination, and environmental regulation.

Litigation or Judicial Proceeding is a legal proceeding in a court; a judicial contest to determine and enforce legal rights.

Pretrial Motions is an application to the court made by the prosecutor or defense attorney, requesting that the court make a decision on a certain issue before the trial begins. The motion can affect the trial, courtroom, defendants, evidence, or testimony. Only judges decide the outcome of motions.

Parliamentary Procedure is the body of rules, ethics, governing meetings and other operations of legislative bodies, deliberative assemblies, organizations.

Hearings - Trials

Hearing can determine temporary, agreed, or some procedural matters. A Hearing is any court session in which legal argument and/or evidence is presented to determine some issue of law or fact or both issues of law and fact. Hearing is a proceeding before a court or other decision-making body or officer, such as a government agency or a Parliamentary committee. A hearing is a meeting or session of a Senate, House, joint, or special committee of Congress, usually open to the public, to obtain information and opinions on proposed legislation, conduct an investigation, or evaluate/oversee the activities of a government department or the implementation of a Federal law. Confirmation.

Committal Hearing is a preliminary hearing, before a magistrate, to see whether a more serious charge should go to a higher court. After the preliminary hearing process, the person would be re-arraigned and they have the right to have a jury trial within 60 calendar days of the date they were arraigned, so that would be the soonest they could have the trial.

Preliminary Hearing is best described as a "trial before the trial" at which the judge decides, not whether the defendant is "guilty" or "not guilty," but whether there is enough evidence to force the defendant to stand trial. In contrast, an arraignment is where the defendant may file their pleas.

is a sequence of steps by which legal judgments are invoked. Judges - Courts.

Procedural in law relates to court practice and procedure as opposed to the principles of law.

Legal Argument is stating the legal reasons for the suit based on statutes, regulations, case precedents, legal texts, and reasoning applied to facts in the particular situation. A legal argument is usually in a format prescribed by the courts.

Trial is a coming together of parties to a dispute, to present information in the form of evidence in a tribunal, a formal setting with the authority to adjudicate claims or disputes. One form of tribunal is a court. The tribunal, which may occur before a judge, jury, or other designated trier of fact, aims to achieve a resolution to their dispute. A Trial is a court session in which primarily evidence is presented to the court so the court can determine some ultimate issue in the case. The trial is where you give evidence and arguments for the judge to use in making a final decision. Trials can also mean trouble.

Bench Trial is a trial by a judge, as opposed to a trial by jury. Bench trial refers to the type of trial that does not involve a jury but is conducted by the judge alone, in which the judge both decides the facts of the case and applies the law. The word bench in the law is in reference to the judge, so a bench trial is a trial conducted by a judge, as opposed to a jury trial.

Jury Trial is a lawful proceeding in which a jury makes a decision or findings of fact. It is distinguished from a bench trial in which a judge or panel of judges makes all decisions.

Summary Jury Trial is an alternative dispute resolution technique, increasingly being used in civil disputes in the United States. In essence, a mock trial is held: a jury is selected and, in some cases, presented with the evidence that would be used at a real trial. The parties are required to attend the proceeding and hear the verdict that the jury brings in. After the verdict, the parties are required to once again attempt a settlement before going to a real trial.

Mistrial occurs when a trial is cancelled before a verdict has been returned. Jury.

Trial in Absentia is a criminal proceeding in a court of law in which the person who is subject to it is not physically present at those proceedings. In absentia is Latin for "in the absence". Its meaning varies by jurisdiction and legal system.

Right to a Fair Trial - Court’s Procedural Fairness Practices - Procedural Justice Assessments.

Quorum is a gathering of the minimal number of members of an organization to conduct business.

Legal Process are the proceedings in any civil lawsuit or criminal prosecution and, particularly, describes the formal notice or writ used by a court to exercise jurisdiction over a person or property. Such process is usually "served" upon a party, to compel that party to come to court, and may take the form of a summons, mandate, subpoena, warrant, or other written demand issued by a court. Transcripts (court reporting).

Judicial Review is the doctrine under which legislative and executive actions are subject to review by the judiciary.

Judiciary is the system of courts that interprets and applies the law in the name of the state. Judiciary is also known as the judicial system or court system.

Plea Bargain

Plea Bargain is any agreement in a criminal case between the prosecutor and defendant whereby the defendant agrees to plead guilty to a particular charge in return for some concession from the prosecutor. This may mean that the defendant will plead guilty to a less serious charge, or to one of several charges, in return for the dismissal of other charges; or it may mean that the defendant will plead guilty to the original criminal charge in return for a more lenient sentence. A plea bargain allows both parties to avoid a lengthy criminal trial and may allow criminal defendants to avoid the risk of conviction at trial on a more serious charge. For example, in the U.S. legal system, a criminal defendant charged with a felony theft charge, the conviction of which would require imprisonment in state prison, may be offered the opportunity to plead guilty to a misdemeanor theft charge, which may not carry a custodial sentence. Plea Bargain is also know as plea agreement, plea deal, copping a plea, or plea in mitigation. "not always a bargain". Remedy.

97 Percent of Cases are resolved through plea deals and just 2% of criminal defendants went to trial in 2018. Over the last 50 years, defendants chose trial in less than three percent of state and federal criminal cases—compared to 30 years ago when 20 percent of those arrested chose trial.

Charge Bargaining is when defendants plead guilty to a less serious crime than the original charge. In count bargaining, they plead guilty to a subset of multiple original charges. In sentence bargaining, they plead guilty agreeing in advance what sentence will be given; however, this sentence can still be denied by the judge. In fact bargaining, defendants plead guilty but the prosecutor agrees to stipulate (i.e., to affirm or concede) certain facts that will affect how the defendant is punished under the sentencing guidelines. Interrogate.

Fact Bargaining is a type of plea bargaining that occurs when prosecutors and defendants bargain over what version of events should be stipulated to by the parties and presented to the court as what happened. Some statutes or sentencing guidelines specify that certain increases or decreases in the sentencing range must occur if certain facts are proven. For example, a drug offense may carry a mandatory minimum sentence if the offender had a prior drug felony, possessed a certain amount of drugs or played a supervisory role in a drug conspiracy. The prosecutor may agree to stipulate that there was no such prior drug felony, that the offense less than the threshold amount of drugs, or that the offender played no such supervisory role in exchange for a guilty plea. Fact bargaining can also involve the defendant stipulating to certain facts in exchange for certain concessions so the prosecutor does not need to prove those facts. Nancy King has argued that fact bargaining defeats the intention of the sentencing guidelines to have judges find facts. Judges rarely overturn stipulations reached by fact bargaining. In some cases, "creative" plea bargains are reached in which the defendant pleads guilty to a totally different lesser crime. An example would be a robbery suspect pleading guilty to copyright violation.

Shadow Docket or non-merits docket refers to motions and orders in the Supreme Court of the United States in cases which have not yet reached final judgment, decision on appeal, and oral argument. This especially refers to stays and injunctions (preliminary relief), but also includes summary decisions and grant, vacate, remand (GVR) orders. The phrase "shadow docket" was first used in this context in 2015 by University of Chicago Law professor William Baude. The shadow docket is a break from ordinary procedure. Such cases receive very limited briefings and are typically decided a week or less after an application is filed. The process generally results in short, unsigned rulings. On the other hand, merits cases take months, include oral argument, and result in lengthy opinions detailing the reasoning of the majority and concurring and dissenting justices, if any. It is used when the Court believes an applicant will suffer "irreparable harm" if its request is not immediately granted. Historically, the shadow docket was rarely used for rulings of serious legal or political significance. However, since 2017, it has been increasingly utilized for consequential rulings, especially for requests by the Department of Justice for emergency stays of lower-court rulings. The practice has been criticized for various reasons, including for bias, lack of transparency, and lack of accountability.

Above the Law

Pretrial Diversion programs divert certain offenders from traditional criminal justice processing into alternative systems of supervision and services. PTD programs provide prosecutors with another tool – in addition to the traditional criminal justice process – to ensure accountability for criminal conduct, protect the public by reducing rates of recidivism, conserve prosecutive and judicial resources, and provide opportunities for treatment, rehabilitation, and community correction. PTD programs vary by district and may involve U.S. Probation and Pretrial Services, the district court, the federal public defender’s office, treatment or service providers, and other participant organizations. Individuals who successfully complete a PTD program may qualify for a range of case outcomes, including the declination of charges, dismissal or reduction of charges, or a more favorable recommendation at sentencing. Unsuccessful participants may be charged or, for participants who have already been charged, may be returned to or remain in the traditional criminal justice process. The major objectives of pretrial diversion are: To prevent future criminal activity and promote rehabilitation among certain offenders by diverting them from traditional processing into community supervision and services, including, as appropriate, mental health and substance abuse treatment. To conserve prosecutive and judicial resources. To provide, where appropriate, a vehicle for restitution to affected communities and victims of crime.

Settlement is a resolution between disputing parties about a legal case, reached either before or after court action begins. A collective settlement is a settlement of multiple similar legal cases. The term also has other meanings in the context of law. Structured settlements provide for future periodic payments, instead of a one time cash payment.

Settle is to agree and to approve or to bring to an end and to come to a final conclusion. To arrange, to ascertain, to liquidate, or to reach an agreement. To resolve a lawsuit without a final court judgment by negotiation between the parties, usually with the assistance of attorneys and/or insurance adjusters, and sometimes prodding by a judge. Most legal disputes are settled prior to trial.

Settled Law or controlling law, which essentially corresponds to binding precedent, is a fundamentally distinct concept that is neither synonymous with nor a subset of settled law. We draw on seminal jurisprudential theories to build a taxonomy of five frameworks that capture how legal actors can invoke settled law, both rhetorically and doctrinally. We demonstrate how a clearer understanding of settled law can make doctrine more coherent and administrable. Situating certain doctrines within the appropriate frameworks, and not conflating controlling law and settled law, would resolve myriad doctrinal anomalies. Moreover, greater conceptual precision can improve political rhetoric during the confirmation process by promoting clearer dialogue and discouraging legal actors from talking past one another.

Deferred Prosecution is a voluntary alternative to adjudication in which a prosecutor agrees to grant amnesty in exchange for the defendant agreeing to fulfill certain requirements. A case of corporate fraud, for instance, might be settled by means of a deferred-prosecution agreement in which the defendant agrees to pay fines, implement corporate reforms, and fully cooperate with the investigation. Fulfillment of the specified requirements will then result in dismissal of the charges.

Diversion Program in the criminal justice system is a form of sentence in which the criminal offender joins a rehabilitation program, which will help remedy the behavior leading to the original arrest, and avoid conviction and a criminal record. The programs are often run by a police department, court, a district attorney's office, or outside agency. Problem-solving courts typically include a diversion component as part of their program. The purposes of diversion are generally thought to include relief to the courts, police department and probation office, better outcomes compared to direct involvement of the court system, and an opportunity for the offender to avoid prosecution by completing various requirements for the program. These requirements may include: Education aimed at preventing future offenses by the offender. Restitution to victims of the offense, Completion of community service hours. Avoiding situations for a specified period in the future that may lead to committing another such offense (such as contact with certain people).

Problem-Solving Courts address the underlying problems that contribute to criminal behavior and are a current trend in the legal system of the United States. In 1989, a judge in Miami began to take a hands-on approach to drug addicts, ordering them into treatment, rather than perpetuating the revolving door of court and prison. The result was creation of drug court, a diversion program. That same concept began to be applied to difficult situations where legal, social and human problems mesh. There were over 2,800 problem-solving courts in 2008, intended to provide a method of resolving the problem in order to reduce recidivism.

Nolo Contendere "I do not wish to contend." It is also referred to as a plea of no contest. In criminal trials in certain U.S. jurisdictions, it is a plea where the defendant neither admits nor disputes a charge, serving as an alternative to a pleading of guilty or not guilty. A no-contest plea, while not technically a guilty plea, has the same immediate effect as a guilty plea, and is often offered as a part of a plea bargain. In many jurisdictions a plea of nolo contendere is not a right, and carries various restrictions on its use.

Admonition occurs when an offender who has been found guilty or who has pleaded guilty, is not given a fine, but instead receives a lesser penalty in the form of a verbal warning due to a minor infringement of the law. The conviction is still recorded. It is usually the result of either the strict application of law where no real wrong has been caused or where other circumstances (e.g. being detained, attending court) make further punishment unjust in the circumstances specific to the case involved. Admonished is a strong warning or harsh criticism and disapproval.

To get off with just a warning is when you don't receive a ticket or a fine for a minor violation, which means that you are free and clear from any legal charges.


Judgment is a decision of a court regarding the rights and liabilities of parties in a legal action or proceeding. Judgments also generally provide the court's explanation of why it has chosen to make a particular court order. The phrase "reasons for judgment" is often used interchangeably with "judgment," although the former refers to the court's justification of its judgment while the latter refers to the final court order regarding the rights and liabilities of the parties. As the main legal systems of the world recognize either a common law, statutory, or constitutional duty to provide reasons for a judgment, drawing a distinction between "judgment" and "reasons for judgment" may be unnecessary in most circumstances. When a court renders a judgment, it may state that the successful party has a right to recover money or property. However, the court will not collect the money or property on behalf of the successful party without further action. In common law legal systems, judgment enforcement is regulated by administrative divisions such as a province, territory, or federated state, while in civil law legal systems judgment enforcement is regulated through the national Code of Civil Procedure. Judgment enforcement, on a conceptual level, is conducted in a similar way across different legal systems. Legal Opinions.

Standard judgment on the merits of a case include the following.

Consent Judgment or agreed judgment is a settlement agreed upon by the parties and authorized by a judge. Consent judgments are often used in the regulatory context, particularly in antitrust and environmental cases.

Declaratory Judgment is a judgment that determines the rights and liabilities of the parties without enforcing a judgment or otherwise requiring the parties to do anything. A declaratory judgment may be useful where the parties have differing views about their rights and duties or are wishing to clarify them without seeking any other remedy. It has been suggested, at least in the United States, that a declaratory judgment is a "milder" form of an injunction order because it clarifies the parties' rights without actually directing the parties to do anything. Though a declaratory judgment is not binding, it is expected that the parties will act in accordance with what the court determines in its judgment.

Default Judgment is a judgment rendered in favour of one party based on the other party's failure to take action. Default judgments are commonly used where the defendant fails to appear before the court or submit a defence after being summoned. A default judgment grants the relief requested by the appearing party and does not require extensive factual or legal analysis from the court.

Interlocutory Judgment is an intermediate or interim judgment providing a temporary decision on an issue that requires timely action. Interlocutory orders are not final and may either not be subject to appeal or may follow a different appeal procedure than other kinds of judgments.

Reserved Judgment is a judgment that is not given immediately after the conclusion of the hearing or trial. A reserved judgment may be released days, weeks, or even months after the hearing. In the United States, a reserved judgment is sometimes annotated in law reports by the Latin phrase "Cur. adv. vult." or "c.a.v." (Curia advisari vult, "the court wishes to be advised").

Summary Judgment is an accelerated judgment that does not require a trial and in which the court's interpretation of the pleadings forms the basis of the judgment. For a summary judgment, the court will consider "the contents of the pleadings, the motions, and additional evidence adduced by the parties to determine whether there is a genuine issue of material fact rather than one of law."

Directed Verdict is a ruling entered by a trial judge after determining that there is no legally sufficient evidentiary basis for a reasonable jury to reach a different conclusion. The trial court may grant a directed verdict either sua sponte or upon a motion by either party.

Vacated Judgment is a judgment of an appellate court whereby the judgment under review is set aside and a new trial is ordered. A vacated judgment is rendered where the original judgment failed to make an order in accordance with the law and a new trial is ordered to ensure a just outcome. The process of vacating a judgment is sometimes referred to as vacatur. The result of a vacated judgment is a trial de novo.

What's on My Record

Disposed or Nolle still remains on your Record, so it is better to have your case Dismissed and have everything on your record be erased and expunged. You might have to make a motion to the court to order the destruction of your fingerprints and booking photographs that were collected at your arrest and are in the possession of the police department. Exoneration.

Profiles leads to unwarranted prejudice and discrimination. Repeal.

Disposed is a generic legal term meaning the case or proceeding is completed. Disposition is used in reference to the way in which the case was resolved. Some examples of the disposition of a case are: conviction, acquittal, dismissal, etc., not to be confused with verdict, which is a finding of guilty or not guilty, etc.. Divorce.

Nolle Prosequi is legal term of art and a Latin legal phrase meaning "be unwilling to pursue", a phrase amounting to "do not prosecute". It is a phrase used in many common law criminal prosecution contexts to describe a prosecutor's decision to voluntarily discontinue criminal charges either before trial or before a verdict is rendered. It contrasts with an involuntary dismissal.

Acquittal formally certifies that the accused is free from the charge of an offense, as far as the criminal law is concerned.

Involuntary Dismissal is the termination of a court case despite the plaintiff's objection. Forgiveness.

Dismissal in Civil Proceedings is to promote the speedy and efficient administration of justice by removing from the consideration of a court any matters that have been unnecessarily delayed to the disadvantage of the defendant.

Dismissal in Criminal Prosecutions in a criminal prosecution is a decision of a court, which has exercised its discretion prior to trial or before a verdict is reached, that terminates the proceedings against the defendant. The procedure by which dismissals in state and federal criminal actions are obtained are governed, respectively, by the state and federal rules of Criminal Procedure. In criminal prosecutions, delay often prejudices the defendant's rights because of the greater likelihood that evidence would be lost or memories or events would not be recalled easily. The possibility of dismissal ensures the prompt government prosecution of individuals accused of criminal activity. The legal effect of a dismissal in a criminal prosecution is dependent upon the type that is granted by the court.

Expunge is to remove by erasing or crossing out or as if by drawing a line. To erase or remove something unwanted or unpleasant. Innocent.

Expungement is a type of lawsuit in which a first time offender of a prior criminal conviction seeks that the records of that earlier process be sealed, making the records unavailable through the state or Federal repositories. If successful, the records are said to be "expunged". Expungement of record" as the "Process by which record of criminal conviction is destroyed or sealed from the state or Federal repository." While expungement deals with an underlying criminal record, it is a civil action in which the subject is the petitioner or plaintiff asking a court to declare that the records be expunged.

Clear Your Name is to exonerate oneself or to prove that you are innocent and that you did not do something wrong or illegal. To clear your name is to disprove and reverse a criminal charge or an allegation of wrongdoing that was unjustifiably placed against you. To petition against an assumption or a slanderous attack that you were victimized from. To say, "hey asshole, you are totally fucking wrong". That makes you the scumbag.

Record Sealing is the practice of sealing or, in some cases, destroying court records that would otherwise be publicly accessible as public records.

Dismissal with Prejudice is a judgment rendered in a lawsuit on its merits that prevents the plaintiff from bringing the same lawsuit against the same defendant in the future. Dismissal with Prejudice bars the government from prosecuting the accused on the same charge at a later date. The defendant cannot subsequently be reindicted because of the constitutional guarantee against Double Jeopardy. A dismissal with prejudice is made in response to a motion to the court by the defendant or by the court sua sponte. Dismissal without Prejudice permits the reindictment or retrial of a defendant on the same charge at a subsequent date may be granted by a court acting sua sponte or after the prosecuting attorney has made a motion to do so. Only nonconstitutional grounds that do not adversely affect the rights of the defendant, such as the crowding of court calendars, might be sufficient to warrant the dismissal of a criminal action without prejudice. Delete.

Dismissal without Prejudice is when a plaintiff is not subsequently barred from suing the same defendant on the same cause of action when a court grants a dismissal Without Prejudice of his or her case. Such a dismissal operates to terminate the case. It is not, however, an ultimate disposition of the controversy on the merits, but rather it is usually based upon procedural errors that do not substantially harm the defendant's rights. It effectively treats the matter as if the lawsuit had never been commenced, but it does not relieve a plaintiff of the duty of complying with the Statute of Limitations, the time limit within which his or her action must be commenced. A dismissal without prejudice is granted in response to a notice of dismissal, stipulations, or a court order.

Motion by a Defendant is when a defendant may make a motion to a court to dismiss the Cause of Action if the plaintiff has failed to appear to prosecute his or her case. A plaintiff is obligated to prosecute the action with due diligence within a reasonable time of commencing the action. If the passage of time hurts the defendant in the preparation of his or her case or if it substantially affects the defendant's rights, then the defendant may seek a dismissal with prejudice. A dismissal will not be granted if the failure to prosecute resulted from unavoidable circumstances, such as the death of the plaintiff, and there is a delay in the appointment of a Personal Representative to continue the action. When the parties attempt to negotiate a settlement of the controversy, consequent delays in reaching an agreement will not provide a basis for dismissal with prejudice. If, however, a plaintiff delays prosecution based on the mere possibility of a settlement without demonstrating concrete efforts to achieve an agreement, a court may grant a dismissal upon the defendant's motion. Motion by a Defendant may make a motion to the court to have the charges against him or her—whether embodied in an indictment, information, or complaint—dismissed with prejudice because the delay has violated the individual's constitutional right to a Speedy Trial or there is no sufficient evidence to support the charges. In deciding whether a delay is unreasonable, the court evaluates the extent of the delay, the reasons for it, the prejudice to the defendant, and the defendant's contribution to the delay.

Sua sponte power of court has inherent power to dismiss an action with prejudice if it is vexatious, brought in bad faith, or when there has been a failure to prosecute it within a reasonable time. If a plaintiff who has commenced an action fails to comply with discovery devices, a court, which has issued the order of compliance, may sua sponte dismiss the case with prejudice.
Sua Sponte Power of Court with jurisdiction to decide criminal matters can sua sponte dismiss a criminal prosecution with prejudice if the facts of the case clearly established that an accused has been deprived of his or her constitutional right to a speedy trial.

Notice of Dismissal is when a plaintiff may serve a notice of dismissal upon a defendant only if the defendant has not yet submitted an answer in response to the plaintiff's complaint. A notice of dismissal preserves the right of the plaintiff to commence a lawsuit at a later date. While not commonly employed, such a notice is useful when exigent circumstances—such as the sudden unavailability of witnesses—warrant the termination of the action. The clerk of the court in which the lawsuit was commenced must receive a copy of the notice of dismissal served upon the defendant to adjust the record of the action accordingly.

Stipulation happens once a defendant has served an answer to the plaintiff's complaint, the plaintiff may obtain a dismissal without prejudice by entering a formal agreement, a stipulation, with the defendant. The parties agree to the terms of the dismissal, which must be filed with the court clerk and put into effect by the action of the clerk. A dismissal agreement is a court order that enforces the stipulation of the parties. A dismissal by stipulation is a dismissal without prejudice unless the parties otherwise agree and record their agreement in the text of the stipulation.

Court Order is when a plaintiff may make a motion to dismiss his or her action without prejudice if the plaintiff cannot serve a notice of dismissal or obtain a stipulation. A dismissal will not be granted to a plaintiff, however, if it would prejudice the rights of any other individual who has a legal interest in the subject matter of a lawsuit. If a joint tenant fails to agree with his or her cotenant to dismiss an action against a landlord for breach of the Warranty of habitability without prejudice, then there will not be a dismissal. Appeals - Court of Appeals.

Bonds - Bail Money

Bond is an incentive to fulfill an obligation; it also provides reassurance that compensation is available if the duty is not fulfilled. A surety usually is involved, and the bond makes the surety responsible for the consequences of the obligated person's behaviour.

Extortion - Ransom Kidnapping - Bounty Hunter - ICE - Unconstitutional

Bail is some form of property deposited or pledged to a court to persuade it to release a suspect from jail, on the understanding that the suspect will return for trial or forfeit the bail (and possibly be brought up on charges of the crime of failure to appear). In some cases, bail money may be returned at the end of the trial, if all court appearances are made, regardless of whether the person is found guilty or not guilty of the crime accused. If a bondsman is used and a surety bond has been obtained, the fee for that bond is the fee for the insurance policy purchased and is not refundable.

Current bail practices are unconstitutional because they violate the rights to due process and equal protection under the Fourteenth Amendment, the prohibition against excessive bail found in the Eighth Amendment, and the right to a speedy trial guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment. Bail practices are unfair and unjust to poor people and people of color, who are disproportionately arrested, detained, and charged fees and fines. People remaining in jail prior to trial are more likely to receive harsher and longer sentences. Much evidence outlines the harmful effects of jails and pretrial detention.

Bail Bondsman is any person, agency or corporation that will act as a surety and pledge money or property as bail for the appearance of persons accused in court.

Court Bonds also known as judicial bonds or court surety bonds, are often required in court proceedings to ensure protection from a possible loss. Here are our most common court bonds: Cost bonds guarantee the payment of costs associated with appealing a lower court's decision.

Plaintiff Bond ensures damages suffered will be paid if the court rules in favor of the defendant. There are multiple sub-types of plaintiff bonds, so the specific type you require may vary. Common types of plaintiff bonds include Attachment bonds, Claim and Delivery bonds, Indemnity to Sheriff bonds, Injunction bonds, and Replevin bonds.

Replevin Bond are usually required if the plaintiff wants to secure property the defendant currently owns. The bond protects the defendant in case the property is damaged or sold, and is a type of plaintiff bond. This is commonly required in civil cases, particularly divorce cases when property ownership is being determined.

Cost Bonds are used to guarantee the payment of court costs when making an appeal concerning a lower court's decision.

Attachment Bond protects the defendant against wrongfully attached property during court proceedings. The bond protects in case judgment falls against the individual, and usually covers the cost plus the interest.

Indemnity to Sheriff Bond are used to protect law enforcement officers against lawsuits in the event that they have to seize someone's personal property. If your case requires law enforcement to investigate another's home and property, you will likely need one of these bonds.

Bond Hearing: During a bond hearing, the defendant will appear in a courtroom. The person who was arrested is informed of the charges against them by a Judge and it is determined if they are eligible for bond. This type of hearing is also called a first appearance hearing or a bail bond hearing. A judge takes many factors into account when deciding if a person qualifies for bond. One of the largest facts is whether the person is a danger to the community or a flight risk. Previous arrests, financial situation and drug use are also factors that are considered. If a person is released, it can be with conditions such as limited travel and mental evaluations. To determine what is necessary to ensure a defendant's appearance at trial, a judge or magistrate examines the nature and circumstances of the charges, with particular attention to whether the offense involves violence or narcotic drugs. The court may inquire into the nature and value of any property that might be offered as collateral. The court also examines the weight of the evidence against the defendant, whether the person was on parole or probation at the time of the present arrest, the nature and seriousness of danger to others in the community, and evidence of the defendant's character.

History and Character of the Individual: When examining the history and character of a person, the court may look at: Physical and mental condition. Financial resources. Family ties. History relating to drug and alcohol abuse. Criminal history. Record concerning appearance at court proceedings. Length of residence in the community.

Risk to the Community: Where a defendant poses a threat to the safety of the community, he or she may be held without bail. In other situations, federal law typically requires that a defendant in a federal criminal case be released on personal recognizance or upon execution of an unsecured appearance bond. Released defendants must not commit any crimes during the period of release. However, if a court determines that personal recognizance or an unsecured appearance bond will not reasonably assure the defendant's appearance, or determines that the safety of a person or the community is endangered, a defendant may be released upon conditions. Federal law delineates a number of conditions that may be imposed.

Defendants may be required to: Limit travel. Maintain or seek employment. Undergo drug and alcohol testing. Undergo medical, psychiatric, or psychological treatment. Maintain or commence an educational program. Comply with a curfew. Refrain from excessive use of alcohol or any use of narcotic drugs. Remain in the custody of a designated person. Comply with periodic check-ins with authorities. Refrain from possession of a firearm. Refrain from contact with crime victim or others designated by the court. Execute a bond agreement with the court or a solvent surety in an amount as is reasonably necessary to ensure the defendant's appearance. Agree to other reasonable conditions the court may impose to ensure a defendant's appearance.

Both the defendant and the government may appeal an adverse bail decision. The scope of review is limited, however. The only question for an appellate court is whether the trial court abused its discretion. In other words, an appellate court will uphold a bail decision unless it was clearly unreasonable, erroneous, or arbitrary and not supported by the facts or law in the case. This leaves untouched a broad range of bail decisions, so long as they are based in some part on a reasonable review of the facts of the case.

Bail issues are just the first set of hurdles a person accused of a crime will face. Having a qualified attorney assist in your defense will mean that you have access to information about the relevant laws in your jurisdiction and can analyze the facts of your case. Contact a qualified local attorney today for a free legal evaluation to start working on bail and other defense issues.

Money Bail System Costs U.S. Taxpayers $38 Million A Day, $14 billion annually. On any given day, more than 450,000 people are languishing in jails across the U.S. while they await trial. Many face low-level charges, and are stuck behind bars because they can’t afford to pay the bail that would secure their release. Prisons.

California Becomes First State To End Cash Bail After 40-Year Fight - California Money Bail Reform Act.

Previous Subject Up Top Page Next Subject

The Thinker Man