surplusage (s[schwa]r-pl[schwa]s-ij). 1. Redundant words in a statute or legal instrument; language that does not add meaning (the court must give effect to every word, reading nothing as mere surplusage). [Cases: Statutes 202, 206. C.J.S. Statutes § 327.] 2. Extraneous matter in a pleading (allegations that are irrelevant to the case will be treated as […]
attractive-nuisance doctrine. Torts. The rule that a person who owns property on which there is a dangerous thing or condition that will foreseeably lure children to trespass has a duty to protect those children from the danger ( the attractive-nuisance doctrine imposed a duty on the school to protect the children from the shallow, polluted
attractive nuisance doctrine Read More »
action in equity 衡平法上的诉讼 原告为寻求衡平法上的救济(如禁制令、特定履行〔specific performance〕)而提起的诉讼，区别于为寻求损害赔偿而提起的普通法上的诉讼。现在此种诉讼方式已不复存在，如美国《联邦民事诉讼规则》〔Fed.Rules of Civil Procedure〕(Rule 2)规定只有一种诉讼形式——民事诉讼，包括原普通法上的诉讼和衡平法上的诉讼。
A litigant who repeatedly files frivolous lawsuits. • Many jurisdictions have statutes or local rules requiring a vexatious litigant to obtain the court’s permission to file any further lawsuits or pleadings.
vexatious litigant Read More »
prior testimony 〈美〉先前的证言 即在以往审判中提供的证言。如果当初提供证言的证人在当前案件的开庭审理时已死亡或失去作证能力或不能出庭作证，可以作为传闻规则〔hearsay rule〕的例外，采纳其先前的证词作为证据；但应满足某些条件，如属同一当事人与争议事项，对方曾有机会在以往的审判中对证人进行交叉询问〔cross examination〕，提供的先前的证言的副本经过认证是真实的等。
Any of several deviations from the hearsay rule, allowing the admission of otherwise inadmissible statements because the circumstances surrounding the statements provide a basis for considering the statements reliable.
Criminal law. An affirmative defense alleging that a mental disorder caused the accused to commit the crime. See 18 USCA § 17; Fed. R. Crim. P. 12.2. • Unlike other defenses, a successful insanity defense may not result in in acquittal but instead in a special verdict (“not guilty by reason of insanity”) that usu.
hypotheca (hI-p[schwa]-thee-k[schwa] or hip-[schwa]-), n. [Latin fr. Greek] Roman law. A mortgage of property in which the debtor was allowed to keep, but not alienate, the property. “Yet another mode of creating a security is possible, by which not merely the ownership of a thing but its possession also remains with the debtor. This is
preponderance of the evidence. The greater weight of the evidence, not necessarily established by the greater number of witnesses testifying to a fact but by evidence that has the most convincing force; superior evidentiary weight that, though not sufficient to free the mind wholly from all reasonable doubt, is still sufficient to incline a fair
preponderance of the evidence Read More »