Ad
related to: forcible entry vs unlawful detainer
Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Forcible entry training using a Halligan bar. Forcible entry is "the unlawful taking of possession of real property by force or threats of force or unlawful entry into or onto another's property, especially when accompanied by force". [1] The term is also sometimes used for entry by military, police, or emergency personnel, also called breaching.
Depending on the laws of the jurisdiction, eviction may also be known as unlawful detainer, summary possession, summary dispossess, summary process, forcible detainer, ejectment, and repossession, among other terms. Nevertheless, the term eviction is the most commonly used in communications between the landlord and tenant.
Attempted forcible entry into a property is also classified as burglary, in the FBI's Uniform Crime Reports (UCR) definition. As of 1999, there were 1.4 million residential burglaries reported in the United States, which was a record low number, not seen since 1966. [5] Though, up to 50% of burglaries are not reported to the police. [5]
In all civil actions that involve the title to, or possession of, real property, or any interest therein, where the assessed value exceeds ₱400,000, except for forcible entry into and unlawful detainer of lands or buildings, original jurisdiction over which is conferred upon the Metropolitan Trial Courts, and Municipal Trial Courts in Cities ...
The term "unlawful combatant" came into public awareness during and after the War in Afghanistan (2001–present), as the U.S. detained members of the Taliban and al-Qaeda captured in that war, and determined them to be unlawful combatants. This had generated considerable debate around the globe. [13]
A U.S. judge on Thursday rejected a bid by Texas to block federal immigration authorities from destroying razor wire fencing that the state placed along the border with Mexico to deter illegal ...
IV, XIV; Illinois Forcible Entry and Detainer Act Cook County , 506 U.S. 56 (1992), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that a seizure of property like that which occurs during an eviction, even absent a search or an arrest, implicates the Fourth Amendment .
It also authorised any justice of the peace, who had received a complaint that such a forcible entry had been committed, to take the power of the county to arrest any person found committing forcible detainer after that forcible entry. The whole Chapter was repealed [3] for England and Wales [4] on 1 December 1977. [5]