Refimprove date January 2009 Civil procedure United States This article is in US English A demurrer is a pleading ... demur means to object a demurrer is the document that makes the objection. Lawyers informally define a demurrer as a defendant saying, So what? to the pleading. Typically, the defendant in a case will demur to the complaint , but it is also possible for plaintiff to demur to an answer . The demurrer ... cause of action or possibly the entire complaint can be thrown out with a demurrer. A demurrer is typically ... answering the complaint. At common law , a demurrer was the pleading through which a defendant ... California and Virginia Circuit Court The demurrer Virginia , retain it . In criminal cases, a demurrer ... any of the facts alleged. An important distinction about a demurrer is that the party filing the demurrer is not allowed to challenge the facts alleged in the complaint, nor can a demurrer contest ... a red traffic light, the demurring party cannot attach evidence to the demurrer e.g., a photograph showing the traffic signal was green. This no evidence on a demurrer rule is manifested in the law. Specifically, when ruling on a demurrer a judge is required to assume as true or proved all material ... if the complaint was timely filed. Then the judge can sustain a demurrer on the basis that the complaint ... of the complaint. Overview Civil cases A demurrer is commonly filed by a defendant in response to a complaint filed by the plaintiff . A demurrer to a complaint can terminate a lawsuit ... defense s, a demurrer to an answer is less common because it may be a poor strategic move. A demurrer ... and needs to preemptively attack some of the defendant s affirmative defenses. Technically, a demurrer is not a motion a party does not file a motion for demurrer nor move the court to demur. Rather, a demurrer is a particular type of pleading and demurring is the act where a party formally requests ... sustains a demurrer is saying that the law does not recognize a legal claim for the facts stated by the complaining ... more details
A speaking demurrer is an attempt to use a demurrer to challenge the factual claims of a complaint . Doing so is improper, because a demurrer assumes that all of the complaint s factual claims are true. References http legal dictionary.thefreedictionary.com Speaking demurrer http books.google.com books?id h3M8AAAAIAAJ&lpg PA505&ots EHcxVztLL0&dq 22ground 20dehors 22&pg PA506 v onepage&q 22speaking 20demurrer 22&f false Category Civil procedure ... more details
In jurisprudence , surplusage is a useless statement completely Relevance irrelevant to the cause. Surplusages may be included in any declaration , plea , or Cause of action claim . According to LectLaw ref lectlaw cquote if a man in his declaration, plea, etc., make mention of a thing which need, not be stated, but the matter set forth is grammatically right, and perfectly sensible, no advantage can be taken on demurrer. When, by an unnecessary allegation the plaintiff shows he has no cause of action, the defendant may demur. When the surplusage is not grammatically set right, or it is unintelligible and, no sense at all can be given it, or it be contradictory or repugnant to what is before alleged, the adversary may take advantage of it on special demurrer. blockquote References note lectlaw http www.lectlaw.com def2 s209.htm Lectlaw External links http www.lectlaw.com def2 s209.htm Surplusage at LectLaw.com law term stub Category Legal terms ... more details
or fact pleading system traditionally followed by Field Code states, and uses the demurrer ... of the demurrer. Links http www.leginfo.ca.gov calaw.html searchable data base of California Codes ... more details
Jacob of London was the first known Presbyter Judaeorum of the Jews of England appointed to that position by King John of England King John in 1199, who also gave him a safe conduct . He appears to have died in 1217, when Josce of London is mentioned as his successor. He is possibly identical with the rabbi Jacob of London who translated the whole Haggadah into the vernacular so that women and children could understand it Isserles , Darke Mosheh, to Tur Orah hayyim, 473 . Resources http www.jewishencyclopedia.com view.jsp?artid 72&letter J&search Jacob 20of 20London Jacobs, Joseph. Jacob of London. Jewish Encyclopedia . Funk and Wagnalls, 1901 1906, which gives the following bibliography Prynne, Short Demurrer, ii. 3 5 H. Adler, in Papers of the Anglo Jewish Historical Exhibition, pp. 262 263. References JewishEncyclopedia rabbi stub Category 12th century births Category 1217 deaths Category English Medieval rabbis Category Court Jews Category 12th century rabbis Category 13th century rabbis Category English Jews of the Medieval and Tudor period Category Orthodox Jews in London ... more details
court ref s.51 Magistrates Court Act 1980 ref and may be either written or oral. A demurrer is a pleading filed by a defendant which objects to the legal sufficiency of a complaint. At common law, the demurrer ..., and which was capable of immediately disposing of a case, with the inevitable result that demurrer ..., and replaced the demurrer with the motion to dismiss for failure to state a cause of action ... to provide such detail could lead to dismissal of the case if the defendant successfully Demurrer ... more details
District of Wyoming, in which the suit was brought, overruled the demurrer, and granted the injunction prayed for. The defendants adhered the their demurrer and appealed to the supreme court of the territory ..., the demurrer admits to be true , the complainant did pay to the city all the taxes which ... more details
The Presbyter Judaeorum or Presbyter Jud orum was the chief official of the Jews of England prior to the Edict of Expulsion . The office appears to have been for life, though in two or three instances the incumbent either resigned or was dismissed. Prynne, in his Demurrer ii. 62 , argues that the Presbyter Judaeorum was merely a secular officer in the Exchequer of the Jews to keep the rolls of control, whereas Tovey Anglia Judaica, pp. 53 63 argues that the use of sacerdos and pontifex as synonymous of the office shows its ecclesiastic al character. There were only six of them between 1199 and 1290, the first known being Jacob of London , appointed in 1199 the next were Josce of London 1217 1237 , Aaron of York 1237 , Elias le Evesque 1237 , Hagin fil Mosse 1257 , and Hagin fil Deulacres 1281 appointed by the favor of Eleanor of Provence Rymer Toedera, i. 591 . In the grant of Elias le Evesque the justices of the Jews were ordered not to issue any summons without the confirmation of the said Elias, from which it appears that the presbyter acted somewhat as a baron of the Jewish Exchequer and it was distinctly stated that Hagin fil Mosse had been sworn into the Jewish Exchequer to look after the administration of justice on behalf of the king and to explain the king s laws. It is thus probable that the presbyter was a successor of the Jewish justices, of whom two are mentioned toward the end of the twelfth century. Resources http www.jewishencyclopedia.com view.jsp?artid 514&letter P&search Josce 20of 20London Jacobs, Joseph. Presbyter Jud orum. Jewish Encyclopedia . Funk and Wagnalls, 1901 1906, which contains the following bibliography Papers of the Anglo Jewish Association, pp. 178 179, 193, 262 271. Category English Jews of the Medieval and Tudor period Category 13th century in England Category Jewish British history ... more details
Other uses Answer disambiguation Wikipedia Answers Civil procedure United States Generally, an answer is a reply to a question or is a solution, a retaliation, or a response that is relevant to the said question. In law, an answer was originally a solemn assertion in opposition to some one or something, and thus generally any counter statement or defense legal defense , a reply to a question or response, or objection , or a correct solution of a problem. ref name autogenerated1 harvnb Anonymous 1911 ref In the common law , an answer is the first pleading by a defendant , usually filed and served upon the plaintiff within a certain strict time limit after a civil complaint or criminal information or indictment has been served upon the defendant. It may have been preceded by an optional pre answer motion to dismiss or demurrer if such a motion is unsuccessful, the defendant must file an answer to the complaint or risk an adverse default judgment . The answer establishes which allegations cause of action in civil matters set forth by the complaining party will be contested by the defendant, and states all the defendant s Defense legal defenses , thus establishing the nature and parameters of the controversy to be decided by the court . In a criminal case, there is usually an arraignment or some other kind of appearance before the defendant comes to court. The pleading in the criminal case, which is entered on the record in open court, is usually either guilt y or not guilty. Generally speaking in private, civil cases there is no plea entered of guilt or innocence. There is only a judgment that grants money damages or some other kind of equitable remedy such as restitution or a permanent injunction . Criminal cases may lead to Fine penalty fine s or other punishment , such as imprisonment . Citation needed date May 2008 The famous Latin Responsa Prudentium answers of the learned ones were the accumulated views of many successive generations of Roman lawyer s, a body of ... more details
to the action. Upon the hearing of the demurrer, the judges of the circuit court were divided in opinion, and the presiding judge being of opinion that the demurrer should be overruled, it was overruled accordingly, and the plaintiff electing to stand by its demurrer, judgment was entered against ..., 22 La.Ann. 523. We base the conclusion that the demurrer to the defendant s answer should have been ... more details
Infobox SCOTUS case Litigants McClanahan v. Arizonza State Tax Comm n ArgueDate December 12 ArgueYear 1972 DecideDate March 27 DecideYear 1973 FullName McClanahan v. Arizonza State Tax Commission USVol 411 USPage 164 Citation 93 S. Ct. 1257 36 L. Ed. 2d 129 Prior cite court litigants McClanahan v. State Tax Commission vol 484 reporter P.2d opinion 221 court Ariz. App. Div. 1 year 1971 Subsequent Holding Held that Arizona has no jurisdiction to impose a tax on the income of Navajo Indians residing on the Navajo Reservation and whose income is wholly derived from reservation sources. SCOTUS 1972 1975 Majority J. Marshall JoinMajority Concurrence JoinConcurrence Concurrence2 JoinConcurrence2 Concurrence Dissent JoinConcurrence Dissent Dissent JoinDissent Dissent2 JoinDissent2 LawsApplied Treaty with the Navajo Indians, usstat 15 667 Buck Act, usc 4 104 et seq. Ariz. Rev. Stat. Ann. 43 102 a McClanahan v. Arizona State Tax Comm n , Case citation 411 U.S. 164 1973 , was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States holding that Arizona has no jurisdiction to impose a tax on the income of Navajo Indians residing on the Navajo Reservation and whose income is wholly derived from reservation sources. ref name SCOTUS McClanahan v. Arizonza State Tax Comm n , ussc 411 164 1973 ref Background Ruth McClanahan was an enrolled member of the Navajo Nation in Arizona . In 1967, all of her income came from work on the Navajo Reservation, and for which 16.20 was withheld from her wages. She requested a refund of the entire amount and protested the collection of state taxes. When the state declined her claim, she filed an action in the Arizona Superior Court . The court dismissed her case for Demurrer failure to state a claim and McClanahan appealed. The Arizona Court of Appeals affirmed. The Arizona Supreme Court declined to hear the case, and the Supreme Court of the United States United States Supreme Court granted certiorari to hear the case. ref name SCOTUS Opinion of the ... more details
cgi bin legp504.exe?000 cod 18.2 11 18.2 11 . ref Ziherl filed a demurrer in response to Martin ... s demurrer was sustained, resulting in the dismissal of Martin s suit. She subsequently appealed ... more details
that Weems was arraigned, that he issued a plea to the complaint upon his demurrer being overruled ... argued are as follows First, the Philippine court was in error when it overruled Weems demurrer. This point ... more details
. The defendants demurred to the petition. In support of their demurrer they assigned and argued ... the demurrer, and rendered a judgment for the defendants, to reverse which the plaintiff brings this writ .... It follows from the views we have expressed that the circuit court erred in sustaining the demurrer ... more details
were undoubtedly demurrable, but that was not of much importance. Demurrer s were abolished, and instead ... law costs . Many of the most important questions of law had been decided on demurrer both in common law and chancery. Lord Davey considered that demurrer was a useful and satisfactory mode of trying questions in chancery on bill and demurrer , and it was frequently adopted in preference to a special ... dependent on the consent of both parties or an order of the court, is a poor substitute for a demurrer ... required in practitioners. Formerly the pleader had the fear of a demurrer before him. Nowadays ... more details
Infobox SCOTUS case Litigants Kilbourn v. Thompson ArgueDate ArgueYear DecideDate February 28 DecideYear 1881 FullName Hallet Kilbourn v. John G. Thompson, et al. USVol 103 USPage 168 Citation Prior Subsequent Holding The plea set up by those of the defendants who were members of the House is a good defence, and the judgment of the court overruling the demurrer to it and giving judgment for those defendants will be affirmed. As to Thompson, the judgment reversed and the case remanded for further proceedings. SCOTUS 1881 Majority Miller JoinMajority unanimous Concurrence JoinConcurrence Concurrence2 JoinConcurrence2 Concurrence Dissent JoinConcurrence Dissent Dissent JoinDissent Dissent2 JoinDissent2 LawsApplied Kilbourn v. Thompson , ussc 103 168 1880 was a Supreme Court of the United States United States Supreme Court case that dealt with the question whether or not the United States House of Representatives may compel testimony . Hallet Kilbourn was subpoenaed to testify before a Special Committee established by the House of Representatives to investigate the bankruptcy of Jay Cooke & Company. Though he appeared, he refused to answer any questions and did not tender requested documents. John G. Thompson, Sergeant at Arms of the United States House of Representatives Sergeant At Arms for the House , took Kilbourn into custody. Kilbourn continued to refuse to testify and provided no explanation for his refusal. The House resolved that Kilbourn was in contempt and should be held in custody until he agreed to testify and produce the requested documents. The Court found that the House had not the power to punish for contempt. However, House members could not be sued for false imprisonment as they were exercising their official duties. In addition the Supreme Court established several limits in the scope of investigations, called the Kilbourn Test . The Kilbourn Test 1 Inquiries must not invade areas constitutionally reserved to the courts or the executive 2 Inquiries m ... more details
Bob Yari born May 30, 1961, in Iran is an Iranian American ref cite web url http www.stljewishlight.com Nation 286446386199413.php title Having found success in U.S., Iranian Jews turn to show biz publisher JewishLight accessdate 2007 01 15 ref film producer. He grew up in New York City , and studied cinematography at the University of California, Santa Barbara . Yari s film Crash 2004 film Crash won the Best Picture at the 78th Academy Awards . Although Yari received screen credit as a producer of Crash , the Producers Guild of America refused to designate him as a producer to the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences for the purpose of nominating producers of the film for the Best Picture Oscar. Yari sued both the Academy and the Guild in the Los Angeles Superior Court and lost at the demurrer stage. The trial court s decision was affirmed by the California Courts of Appeal California Court of Appeal for the Second Appellate District on March 25, 2008. ref Yari v. Producers Guild of Am. , http online.ceb.com calcases CA4 161CA4t172.htm 161 Cal. App. 4th 172 2008 . ref Template Primary source inline date October 2011 Film credits What Doesn t Kill You Producer 2008 The Hoax Producer 2006 The Painted Veil 2006 film The Painted Veil Producer 2006 The Illusionist 2006 film The Illusionist Producer 2006 Even Money film Even Money Executive Producer 2006 Find Me Guilty Executive Producer 2006 Sue o Executive Producer 2005 Prime film Prime Executive Producer 2005 Dave Chappelle s Block Party documentary Producer 2005 Winter Passing Executive Producer 2005 The L.A. Riot Spectacular Executive Producer 2005 Hostage film Hostage Producer 2005 The Chumscrubber Executive Producer 2005 Thumbsucker film Thumbsucker Executive Producer 2005 The Matador Executive Producer 2005 Around the Bend Executive Producer 2004 Haven film Haven Producer 2004 Crash 2004 film Crash Producer 2004 A Love Song for Bobby Long Producer 2004 House of D Producer 2004 Laws of Attraction Executive ... more details
may file a demurrer , a motion to dismiss , an objection to venue law venue , a motion ... party may also seek to enter the case by filing an Intervention law intervention . The demurrer A demurrer challenges the sufficiency of a claim for affirmative relief, and can address misjoined ... not be raised in a demurrer, so if the demurrer relates to a term in a contract which was not annexed ... craving oyer, and may file the demurrer once that annexation has occurred. A demurrer may be filed ... of the court. If the demurrer is sustained, it is usually done so without prejudice and giving the plaintiff ... before any demurrer or special plea has been fully argued, and before any motion to strike evidence ... more details
Benjamin Valentine died 1652? , was an English parliamentarian. Valentine was probably a native of Cheshire. He was elected on 3 March 1627 1628 to represent the borough of St. Germans UK Parliament constituency St. Germans in the parliament of 1628 9. He was in the House of Commons on 2 March 1628 9 when Speaker Finch would have obeyed Charles I of England King Charles I s direction for adjournment. Valentine, with Denzil Holles , held the speaker down in his seat while Sir John Eliot read out resolutions questioning the king s proceedings respecting religion and taxation. On 5 March, with Selden and Coryton, he was under examination at the council board, and was committed to the Tower of London . On 17 March he was examined before a committee of the council, when he refused to answer any questions respecting acts done in parliament. On 6 May he, with Selden, Holles, Strode, Hobart, and Long, considering themselves legally entitled to bail, applied to the court of king s bench for a writ of habeas corpus . Such stringent conditions were, however, imposed that Valentine absolutely declined to comply with them, and refused to accept bail 3 October 1629 . On 7 May an information was filed against him and others by the attorney general in the Star chamber , but the prisoners were proceeded against in the court of king s bench. Valentine s plea and demurrer to the information of Attorney general Heath, prepared by his counsel, Robert Mason Disambiguation needed date June 2011 and Henry Calthorpe , was issued on 22 May, and was followed by a further plea on 1 June in answer to the altered information of 29 May. With Selden he should have appeared before the judges of the king s bench on 24 June, had not the king reversed the order for fear that bail should be granted. On 13 October Heath brought in his information against Eliot, Holles, and Valentine in the court of king s bench. On 29 October the three prisoners were transferred from the Tower to the Marshalsea. They ap ... more details
Infobox Court Case name Bettini v Gye court Queen s Bench image New Covent Garden Theatre Microcosm edited.jpg caption date decided full name citations 1876 1 QBD 183 judges Blackburn J, Quain J and Archibald J prior actions subsequent actions opinions transcripts keywords Termination, condition, construction Bettini v Gye 1876 1 QBD 183 is an English contract law case, concerning the right to terminate performance of a contract. Facts Mr Bettini agreed with Frederick Gye that he would not sing anywhere within fifty miles of London except at the Royal Italian Opera , Covent Garden now the Royal Opera House , from 1 January to 1 December, and would perform for him from 30 March to 13 July 1875 for 150 per month. Bettini was supposed to perform concerts or operas. Importantly, Bettini was meant to be in London without fail 6 days before rehearsals, but did not arrive until 28 March, at which point he was ready to perform. However, Gye rejected Bettini s performance. Judgment Blackburn J held the provision for arriving 6 days before was not a condition, and therefore breach of it did not give rise to the right to terminate. If clear words had stipulated that in the event Mr Bettini did not show up Gye could terminate, or that Bettini would forfeit twice his salary, that would provide the answer. Here Bettini had already performed his covenant to not sing in the UK in the months running up to 30 March, and not showing for rehearsals could only affect theatrical performances and singing in duets during the first week or fortnight. So the breach did not go to the root of the contract, and Gye was not entitled to terminate. Cquote The question raised by the demurrer is, not whether the plaintiff has any excuse for failing to fulfil this part of his contract, which may prevent his being liable in damages for not doing so, but whether his failure to do so justified the defendant in refusing to proceed with the engagement, and fulfil his, the defendant s part. And the answer ... more details
Encyclopedia
top
