Search Results for: NOT LAW

namium vetitum

namium vetitum (nay-mee-[schwa]m vet-[schwa]-t[schwa]m), n. [Law Latin “taking prohibited”] Hist. A refused or prohibited taking or redelivery. • This term is most often associated with the circumstance in which a lord’s bailiff distrained animals or goods, and was ordered by the lord to take them to an unknown place or otherwise not to redeliver them […]

namium vetitum Read More »

garnishment

garnishment, n. 1. A judicial proceeding in which a creditor (or potential creditor) asks the court to order a third party who is indebted to or is bailee for the debtor to turn over to the creditor any of the debtor’s property (such as wages or bank accounts) held by that third party. • A

garnishment Read More »

actus

actus (ak-t[schwa]s), n. [Latin] 1. An act or action; a thing done. 2. Hist. An act of Parliament; esp., one passed by both houses but not yet approved by the monarch. Cf. STATUTUM(1). 3. Roman law. A servitude for driving cattle or a carriage across another’s land. Cf. ITER(1). — Also termed (in sense 3)

actus Read More »

swap

swap, n. Commercial law. 1. An exchange of one security for another. 2. A financial transaction between two parties, usu. involving an intermediary or dealer, in which payments or rates are exchanged over a specified period and according to specified conditions. currency swap. An agreement to swap specified payment obligations denominated in one currency for

swap Read More »

fuero

fuero (foo-wer-oh).Spanish law. 1. A forum; court. 2. The territory in which a court has the power to act. 3. A privilege enjoyed by some but not others. 4. A custom having the force of law. 5. Hist. A collection of local, usu. customary, laws. Fuero Juzgo (hooz-goh). Hist. A 7th-century Visigothic code that was

fuero Read More »

hot potato rule

hot-potato rule. The principle that a lawyer may not unreasonably withdraw from representing a client. • The term comes from the rule’s classic formulation: “a firm may not drop a client like a ‘hot potato,’ especially if it is in order to keep happy a far more lucrative client.” Picker Int’l, Inc. v. Varian Assocs.,

hot potato rule Read More »

Scroll to Top