Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
In law, subjective standard and objective standards are legal standards for knowledge or beliefs of a plaintiff or defendant. [1] [2]: 554–559 [3]An objective standard of reasonableness ascertains the knowledge of a person by viewing a situation from the standpoint of a hypothetical reasonable person, without considering the particular physical and psychological characteristics of the defendant.
People must have good moral character determined as a fact of law in predominately two contexts – (1) state-issued licensure that allows one to work and practice a regulated profession [11] and (2) federal government-issued U.S. citizenship certificates whereby an immigrant undergoes naturalization to become a citizen. Many laws create a ...
While there is a loose consensus on its meaning in black letter law, there is no accepted technical definition, and the "reasonable person" is an emergent concept of common law. The reasonable person is not an average person or a typical person, leading to difficulties in applying the concept in some criminal cases, especially in regard to the ...
A person is recognized by law as such, not because they are human, but because rights and duties are ascribed to them. The person is the legal subject or substance of which the rights and duties are attributes. An individual human being considered to be having such attributes is what lawyers call a "natural person". [26]
Massachusetts, 383 U.S. 413 (1966), was the United States Supreme Court decision that attempted to clarify a holding regarding obscenity made a decade earlier in Roth v. United States (1957). The Roth ruling established that for a work of literature to be considered obscene, it had to be proven by censors to: 1) appeal to prurient interest, 2 ...
The opposite of a genuine "nice guy" is commonly described as a "jerk", a term for a mean, selfish and uncaring person. A man is labeled a "jerk" on how he treats his partner, seen as the extreme case where he would not have a sensitive or kind side and is seen as a "macho man" and insensitive type. [4]
The two duties are equally relevant to both Québec's civil law and the other provinces' and territories' common law approaches to contract law, representing an attempt by the Supreme Court of Canada to extend the duties of good faith embedded in Québecois law to the jurisprudence of the country's common law jurisdictions. Additionally, in the ...
Chappel, [10] the court came to the reluctant conclusion that Whiteley could not be convicted of impersonating "any person entitled to vote" at an election, because the person he impersonated was dead. Using a literal construction of the relevant statutory provision, the deceased was not "a person entitled to vote".