Search Results for: RULE TO SHOW CAUSE

pennsylvania rule

Pennsylvania rule. Torts. The principle that a tortfeasor who violates a statute in the process of causing an injury has the burden of showing that the violation did not cause the injury. The Pennsylvania, 86 U.S. (19 Wall.) 125, 136 (1874). [Cases: Collision 123; Shipping 86(2.3). C.J.S. Collision §§ 211–220.]

pennsylvania rule Read More »

good cause

A legally sufficient reason. • Good cause is often the burden placed on a litigant (usu. by court rule or order) to show why a request should be granted or an action excused. The term is often used in employ-ment-termination cases. — Also termed good cause shown; just cause; lawful cause; sufficient cause.

good cause Read More »

work product rule

work-product rule. The rule providing for qualified immunity of an attorney’s work product from discovery or other compelled disclosure. Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(3). • The exemption was primarily established to protect an attorney’s litigation strategy. Hickman v. Taylor, 329 U.S. 495, 67 S.Ct. 385 (1947). — Also termed work-product immunity; work-product privilege; work-product exemption;

work product rule Read More »

show cause order

An order directing a party to appear in court and explain why the party took (or failed to take) some action or why the court should or should not grant some relief. — Also termed order to show cause; rule to show cause; show-cause rule. [Cases: Motions 24. C.J.S. Motions and Orders §§ 20–23.]

show cause order Read More »

writ of revivor

writ of revivor 〈英〉恢复判决执行令 在由于判决执行期限已过或由于当事人的死亡等而致当事人的变更从而需要恢复判决的执行效力的情况下,主张有权请求执行判决的一方当事人可依法定形式申请签发恢复判决执行令,或者申请法庭许可在案卷中记明他看起来有权获得对该判决的执行令,法庭根据说明理由的命令〔rule to show cause〕或传票授予许可。

writ of revivor Read More »

failing company doctrine

failing-company doctrine. Antitrust. The rule that allows an otherwise proscribed merger or acquisition between competitors when one is bankrupt or near failure. 15 USCA §§ 12–27. — Also termed failing-firm defense. [Cases: Monopolies 20(1). C.J.S. Monopolies §§ 106–111, 115–116, 125.] “The 1992 guidelines provide a limited defense for failing firms and failing divisions of firms.

failing company doctrine Read More »

Scroll to Top