Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
An abuse of process is the unjustified or unreasonable use of legal proceedings or process to further a cause of action by an applicant or plaintiff in an action. It is a claim made by the respondent or defendant that the other party is misusing or perverting regularly issued court process (civil or criminal) not justified by the underlying legal action.
In a court of law, a party's claim is a counterclaim if one party asserts claims in response to the claims of another. In other words, if a plaintiff initiates a lawsuit and a defendant responds to the lawsuit with claims of their own against the plaintiff, the defendant's claims are "counterclaims." Examples of counterclaims include:
Malicious prosecution is a common law intentional tort.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.
As the initial neighborhood lawsuit made its way through the courts, BK&M filed counterclaim alleging "abuse of process," arguing that the plaintiffs were using the legal system as a way to ...
In Queensland, the process for having someone declared a vexatious litigant is governed by the Vexatious Proceedings Act 2005, which supplanted an earlier Act. [5] The Act defines a vexatious proceeding to include a proceeding brought without merit or any prospect of success, with the consequence that it is not necessary to prove the existence of any improper motive in order to obtain relief ...
The abuser is liable for the harm caused by their actions. Some examples of this are abuse of power, barratry, frivolous or vexatious litigation, a spite fence or house, forum shopping, abuse of process, malicious prosecution, tax avoidance (vs. anti-avoidance rules, step transaction doctrine, economic substance), etc.
A statement which is "technically true" but which gives a misleading impression is deemed an "untrue statement". [ 32 ] [ 33 ] If a misstatement is made and later the representor finds that it is false, it becomes fraudulent unless the representer updates the other party. [ 34 ]
The acronym was coined in the 1980s by University of Denver professors Penelope Canan and George W. Pring. [13] The term was originally defined as "a lawsuit involving communications made to influence a governmental action or outcome, which resulted in a civil complaint or counterclaim filed against nongovernment individuals or organizations on a substantive issue of some public interest or ...