Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Instead, the findings of fact of the first venue are usually given great deference by appellate courts. [3] The philosopher Alfred Lessing argues that the difference between questions of law and questions of fact is ill-defined, with frequent disagreement over whether a given statement was the former or the latter.
A scientific theory differs from a scientific fact or scientific law in that a theory seeks to explain "how" or "why", whereas a fact is a simple, basic observation and a law is an empirical description of a relationship between facts and/or other laws.
The fact–value distinction is also closely related to the moralistic fallacy, an invalid inference of factual conclusions from purely evaluative premises. For example, an invalid inference "Because everybody ought to be equal, there are no innate genetic differences between people" is an instance of the moralistic fallacy.
A fact can be defined as something that is the case, in other words, a state of affairs. [14] [15] Facts may be understood as information, which makes a true sentence true: "A fact is, traditionally, the worldly correlate of a true proposition, a state of affairs whose obtaining makes that proposition true."
Firstly, to contradict the title, an attorney-in-fact doesn’t have to be an attorney at all. They don’t need to pass the bar, practice law or have a professional license (hence, they are often ...
Story at a glance Knowing the difference between fact and opinion seems simple, but respondents in a survey published earlier this month were largely unable to correctly identify either. Two ...
When made by administrative agencies, decisions concerning mixed questions of law and fact are subjected to arbitrary and capricious review. Additionally, in some areas of substantive law, such as when a court is reviewing a First Amendment issue, an appellate court will use a standard of review called "independent review."
Mistake of law is a legal principle referring 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. There is a principle of law that "ignorance of the law is no excuse."