5

No The term "sword and shield" is allegorical rather than legal and may be called up in any number of contexts. Such as ... Waiver of privilege In the particular instance, Anthem was claiming that the reports were privileged and hence protected from discovery, presumably because they were prepared in contemplation of litigation - this litigation, one ...


4

In most states or localities "loitering " has a specific statutory meaning. For example in Prince Georges County. MD Section 14-139.03 provides: (a) In this Section, "loiter" means for a person to: (1) Remain on a public street, sidewalk, or pathway, including one privately-owned but used by the public in general, so as to obstruct the free passage ...


4

As user6726 notes in an answer, the page you link to derives from 26 USC 7701. However, it does not reproduce the text accurately. There, "United States person" is defined at section 7701(a)(30), and it notably lacks anything corresponding to "any other person that is not a foreign person." It's possible that that language is motivated by some court ...


3

There is such a thing as a "sword and shield" doctrine in U.S. law, and indeed there are several of them, but each of them is restricted to very particular kinds of situation. It is not a general doctrine that applies in circumstances as broad as you describe. For example, there are a number of defenses to an action to quiet title (e.g. unclean hands on the ...


3

The helpful information provided by the IRS is an attempt to translate the definitions under the law, so if you think you are in some third category that isn't classified as either, you consult 26 USC 7701. For example, The term “person” shall be construed to mean and include an individual, a trust, estate,partnership, association, company or ...


3

The best definition I can find is that a question of fact is about "what happened", while a question of law is about "applying subsequent legal principles to those facts"... Those are good, working definitions. ...but that definition doesn't make it clear to me how to determine whether a specific example is a question of fact or law. Because you (...


3

The legal definition you are probably looking for is machinegun rather than automatic weapon. It can be found in 26 U.S. Code § 5845, which in relevant part says: The term “machinegun” means any weapon which shoots, is designed to shoot, or can be readily restored to shoot, automatically more than one shot, without manual reloading, by a single function ...


3

Thus being a fundamental question of constitutional law, this translates into asking how SCOTUS would likely rule given a certain situation where e.g. there was no confession and the two-witness requirement is not satisfied. In the case of Cramer v. US, 325 U.S. 1, the direct testimony of two or more witnesses established that "Cramer met Thiel and Kerling ...


3

Most of your examples don't seem to be so much self-contradictory, as limited to a subset of the obvious meaning for purposes of a particular law. When a term has a specific meaning within a particular field or context, it is often called a "term of art". For example "Fair use" is a term of art in US Copyright law, and "Under color of law" is a term of art ...


2

Let me give you a simple, even if rather silly example: You take me to a civil court. You tell the judge "gnasher regularly parks his blue car in front of my home, and the color blue violates my sense of beauty. Judge, make him stop it. " A question of fact would be: Is my car actually blue? Not green, or red? And do I actually park my car in front of your ...


2

I asked this exact question to my criminal law lecturer. Rape indeed does require penetration of the mouth, anus, or vagina, with a penis. This is indeed a double standard, as this doesn't recognise many forms of female on male sexual assault as rape. (Though aggravated sexual assault may be a suitable charge in those circumstances, many people argue that ...


1

So Defimation and Moral Injury are similar crimes, in that they are crimes where the victim is injured due to the statements of another person. The difference between the two is whether the statement is true. Defamatory statements are fictional statements that cause damage, though there is a special class of Defamatory Statements called Per se Defamation. ...


1

The crime specifically entitled "rape" under the Sexual Offences Act 2003 is defines as the case where a person A (a) he intentionally penetrates the vagina, anus or mouth of another person (B) with his penis, (b) B does not consent to the penetration, and (c) A does not reasonably believe that B consents. There is a separate crime called "...


1

Well you don't specify a jurisdiction, but here's a recent, example decision that's illuminating and that contains some relatively universal U.S. legal principles: As a threshold matter, we must address the scope of our jurisdiction over Soriano Nunez’s appeal. To the extent Soriano Nunez seeks review of the order denying her motion to dismiss the ...


1

It is, practically speaking, impossible for a layman to know whether a given situation constitutes a significant behavioral, emotional, or mental disorder. Instead, a technical expert would make that determination. So most of the question isn't legal, it's psyychiatric. There is a book that spells this out (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental ...


1

The Virginia penal system seems to have rules against loafing and loitering, in Powhatan correctional center: No loafing, loitering, or crowding around the Dispensary, Medical areas... There will be no loafing or loitering in the weight room and the Northern Correctional facility of West Virginia NO loafing WILL BE permitted in any corridor ...


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