6

This is called double recovery, double compensation or over-recovery, and it is usually prohibited. The rule against double recovery is also known as the one-satisfaction rule. Courts may give effect to the rule by: refusing to enforce a judgment under the relevant civil procedure rules to the extent that it has already been recovered from a co-defendant, ...


5

Nope. Say I sue you successfully, and the court delivers a judgement that awards $1000 in damages. It is not the responsibility of the small claims court to ensure that the judgement is fulfilled. In fact, the debtor (person who lost) can outright refuse to pay the creditor (or the person who won). They are not in violation of any law at this point. ...


4

Failing to comply with a court order is contempt; other answers have dealt with this. If the order creates a debt then the beneficiary of that order can take various methods to have the debt satisfied including getting orders to: seize and sell physical property obtain a lien over real property garnishee bank accounts garnishee wages or other income wind ...


4

In the United States (and probably any common law country) a judge may find a person in criminal or civil contempt of court. One is in contempt of court if they refuse to follow the orders of the court. If one thinks the orders are wrong or improper the proper remedy is to ask for a stay of the order or file an emergency appeal and hope for a stay there. If ...


4

The Liability Insurance Crisis There was absolutely an increase in liability insurance premiums in the 1980s, although the cause of the liability insurance crisis in the 1980s remains disputed. During the period from 1984 to 1987, premiums for general liability increased from about $6.5 billion to approximately $19.5 billion.2 In addition to ...


4

client must provide me a suite in his hotel that costs $10K for a night based on a contract we held in the past (the contract has expired as of 31-Dec-18 but he never rendered the service because I didn't ask for it. The contract mentioning $10K has expired and is no longer relevant. You had a chance for a $10K suite before 31 Dec 2018 but you did not ...


4

Yes Deciding a case on a basis the parties have not raised is a denial of natural justice (or procedural fairness) and invalid. The reason is very simple, the parties have not had the opportunity to produce evidence or make submissions about C or D that might have changed the judge’s mind about them. Notwithstanding, to successfully appeal, the aggrieved ...


3

Insurance doesn't work the way you think it does Insurance indemnifies Bob from any liability he has towards Mary up to the value of the insurance. So, if a court finds that Bob must pay Mary $200k then Bob must pay Mary $200k. Bob can then turn to his insurer to indemnify him and, under the terms of the policy, they will pay out $100k for personal ...


3

Declaratory judgments clarifying the meaning of a written instrument such as condominium governing documents are possible, but only when there is a bona fide dispute between parties who have personal economic interests in having the issue resolved. For example, if an owner is seeking reimbursement for expenses incurred from the board, and the board cannot ...


3

There is no legal requirement that a jury be composed of people demographically like the defendant (or the plaintiff), there is simply a requirement that the selection process give all kinds of people an equal chance at being empaneled. So being a different race or gender from one of the parties is not prima facie evidence of a biased jury. The statement ...


3

Here's what would likely happen in general: the plaintiff would seek a prejudgment attachment before they even get to trial (here's an example of Civil Procedure Rules outlining prejudgment attachment). Note: there must be a state statute existent in your jurisdiction to even seek this remedy. Generally, prejudgment attachments start in the form of a writ ...


2

In addition to the other two answers (which are certainly correct), you should probably check the civil code for possible sanctions specific to this failure. For example, if a party fails to comply with an order to give particulars of a pleading, it is common that the opponent can apply to have that pleading struck out (and presumably judgment entered ...


2

You can only appeal on matters of law - an appellate court cannot consider matters of fact. Its hard to see what's going on here through the wall of text but I'll try to do my best. I don't know what a "possession claim" is: do you have something in your possession that the Local Authority wants to take (or vice-versa)? Or have you been convicted of ...


1

You need to look at rule 52 of the Civil Procedure Rules. This says that appeals from a County Court lie to the High Court (probably the Chancery Division in this case), and that permission to appeal can be granted either in the County Court or the High Court. It also says (52.1(4)) that permission to appeal is usually decided without a hearing (on paper), ...


1

In a word, no. One path that you could try is to employ a mediator who will suggest a solution, and maybe you can get a supermajority to actually modify the agreement based on that. The mediator's opinion is not binding, so you could just waste money and not get a definitive change. You could seek binding arbitration, but unless there is a binding ...


1

What I am questioning is; if the language in the settlement agreement is relevant to the IRS, since my sole claims arise from personal/physical injury? I want to make sure there are no loopholes as to what language is needed in the agreement to be considered tax free. Could there be tax implications if I sign the agreement acknowledging the ...


1

In both cases, the estate takes over. If A dies, then B owes the money to A's estate. If B dies, then B's estate owes the money to A. If B's estate is empty, then the debt is retired, because a debt cannot be inherited.


1

I did some more research on this question. The archetypal study was Edward Levi's article in 1948 in the Chicago Law Review on emerging product liability. Levi argued that the change was due to emerging deep societal beliefs that government was responsible for people's safety, and that safety was no longer an individual responsibility. Subsequent researchers ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible