similar state court rules. Rule 12(b) states that derfenses should be presented in the Defendant’s response to the complaint. However‚ the rule allows some defenses to be asserted in a seperate motion to the court‚ including the defense that the Plaintiff does not state a claim. Allowing the Defendant to respond in a seperate motion allows the court to dismiss quickly civil claims without legal merit. N.C. Gen Stat. 1A-1Rule 12 Mere Vagueness or lack of details is not a ground for Motion to Dismiss
Premium Pleading Civil procedure Plaintiff
refusing a formal demand to honor its offer. The history of this case is; Pepsi Co ran a promotional campaign in which consumers were invited to acquire “Pepsi Points” by purchasing Pepsi products‚ and exchange them for “Pepsi Stuff”. Leonard the Plaintiff received a catalog for use in redeeming “Pepsi
Premium United States Civil procedure Plaintiff
THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE‚ 1908 (Act No. 5 of 1908) An Act to consolidate and amend the laws relating to the procedure of the Courts of Civil Judicature. WHEREAS it is expedient to consolidate and amend the laws relating to the procedure of the Courts of Civil Judicature; it is hereby enacted as follows:PRELIMINARY 1. Short title‚ commencement and extent- (1) This Act may be cited as the Code of Civil Procedure‚ 1908. (2) It shall come into force on the first day of January‚ 1909. [2][(3)
Premium Appeal Jurisdiction Trial court
Consider Briefly but Critically the Notion of Juridical Interest An interest may be defined as “the object of any human desire and the object of such desire must be distinguished from the thing in respect of which the desire is entertained” The notion of juridical interest links the substantive with the procedure in civil law‚ where the individual goes on with a civil action because he has a right and interest to institute the case and hopefully obtain a favourable result. Moreover‚ juridical
Premium Law Plaintiff Civil procedure
Procedural History: Plaintiff brought suit against defendant for fraud and breaches of warranty. Summary judgement granted in favor of defendant by the District Court. Plaintiff appealed claiming genuine issues of material facts exist. The Facts: Plaintiff bought a used car from Defendant‚ a used car dealer. Defendant offered no warranty‚ but told Plaintiff that the car had been inspected and was accident free. Plaintiff purchased a service plan through Defendant to be administered by a
Premium Automobile Law English-language films
The Plaintiffs in Loving v. Virginia were Richard and Mildred Loving‚ who were represented by the ACLU in the Supreme Court. The Plaintiff argued the prohibition of interracial marriage was unconstitutional and anti-miscegenation laws violated the Equal Protection Clause and Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The Fourteenth Amendment explains‚ “No State shall deprive any person of life‚ liberty‚ or property‚ without due process of the law.” As declared by the Constitution and Maynard
Premium United States Constitution Supreme Court of the United States United States
2003(1)UJ331‚ 2003(2)WLN706 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Decided On: 29.11.2002 Appellants: Vikas Deshpande Vs. Respondent: Bar Council of India and Ors. Hon’ble Judges/Coram: V.N. Khare and Ashok Bhan‚ JJ. Counsels: For Appellant/Petitioner/Plaintiff: Party in perso For Respondents/Defendant: V.B. Joshi‚ Adv. for Respondent No. 2 Subject: Civil Catch Words Mentioned IN Acts/Rules/Orders: Advocates Act‚ 1961 - Section 35‚ Advocates Act‚ 1961 - Section 35(3)‚ Advocates Act‚ 1961 - Section
Premium Capital punishment Bar association Legal terms
TRESPASS TO THE PERSON Aims of Lectures: * OVERVIEW OF THE TORTS COVERING TRESPASS TO THE PERSON * DEFENCES TO TRESPASS TO THE PERSON * ALTHOUGH NOT A PART OF TRESPASS TO THE PERSON WE WILL ALSO ASSESS THE RULE IN WILKINSON V DOWNTON 1. OVERVIEW The aim/s of these torts: Protection from personal interference / protects your bodily integrity and your liberty. The trespass torts are actionable per se (there is no need to prove damage). A trespass to the person may
Premium Tort Common law Tort law
Capital Public Radio‚ Inc. 88 Cal. App. 4th 33 (2001) CHARLES STARZYNSKI‚ PLAINTIFF AND APPELLANT‚ v. CAPITAL PUBLIC RADIO‚ INC.‚ DEFENDANT AND RESPONDENT ISSUE: 1. Whether Starzynski was wrongfully discharged from his position. 2. Whethe Starzynski ‘s discharge was constructive. RULE: 1. “judgment is properly granted when there is no triable issue of material fact and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 437c(c). A defendant or
Premium Employment Termination of employment Contract
Example of potential conflict or dilemma: A child wants to go outside and play‚ but it is raining and cold outside How to manage the risk I would insist they wear a coat‚ and shorten the length of time they are outside for. Where to get additional support and advice The EYFS framework states that children should have time outside every day. Example of potential conflict or dilemma: A child refuses to eat their lunch at the nursery. How to manage the risk Fruit is available all day and the
Premium Complaint Plaintiff Pleading