41

Repeating a defamatory statement is itself defamatory This is known as the repetition rule and is illustrated in Brown v Bower & Another [2017] EWHC 2637 (QB). In essence, the "local news site" is responsible for the reputational damage suffered by their publication and you are responsible for the damage caused by your amplification of that ...


38

Litigation Costs v. Liability Insurance Cost It is worth noting that what the Institute for Legal Reform, a tort reform lobbying group, is stating, is not that the U.S. has "higher litigation cost" than other countries. They are financed mostly by businesses that have to pay liability insurance expenses and are motivated in their analysis to come ...


33

Just like every other contested assertion They hear the testimony (evidence-in-chief, cross-examination, redirect), look at whatever physical evidence and submissions on the law that the party wishes to make. The other party will do the same. They weigh the evidence including such vital considerations as to whether they think one party or the other or both ...


11

If the article on the "local news site" was false, or cannot be proved true and if it harmed, or was likely to harm, the reputation of the alleged scammer, it was probably defamatory. Repeating a defamatory statement can itself be defamation. Whether it is in fact defamation depends on whether the repetition was done in a way likely to be seen as ...


8

Jurisdiction: england-and-wales I'm posting this to add to the other answers, so I won't go into details on the defence of truth other than to say that in England and Wales this can be found in section 2 of the Defamation Act 2013. However, that is not the only defence. There are also the honest opinion and public interest defences. Either of those could be ...


7

It is not unusual for there to be expert witnesses (potentially on both sides with opposite conclusions) on the subject of handwriting analysis testifying on matters like this. They will go over known samples of the person's handwriting, and compare small bits of the writing to what is present in the document in question.


7

It is a joke to illustrate the advice that just because the judge is rude to you you should never be rude back, and definitely not with a subtle rudeness couched in polite terms. In British English if you ask someone for an explanation of something and their reply does not really provide any enlightenment at all, and certainly no real explanation, you might ...


6

In the context, I believe Justice Scalia is said that it is better not to make a sarcastic comment or retort to a judge in the case that you are working on. The comment doesn't contain profanity or sexual but it is not polite -- he is insinuating that the judge is 'uninformed' which could make the judge angry.


6

Can a court order a large asset to be sold if the defendent lost the case on a relatively small amount? Say a defendent owns land worth $200,000. The defendant lost the case and has to pay $9,000. He does not have any money to pay. Could courts order the land to be sold? In most U.S. law jurisdictions, yes, a high value assets can be ordered sold to satisfy ...


5

If you had an agreement that amounts to a contract, it is binding even if it was informal. However, if your agreement was not in writing, it might be hard to prove. You can easily prove that you transferred money to the other party. But can you prove that it was a loan an not a gift? And even if it is agreed to be a loan, if no repayment time was specified, ...


4

Given the following: We know the name of the plaintiff, The name is likely to be unique so that there won't be too many cases involving a different party with the same name, and The plaintiff is a company so it is not likely to have been involved in an overwhelming number of cases (as opposed to e.g. the IRS); The approach I would use would be to search a ...


4

Falsification of evidence, forgery of documents, destruction of evidence (which is called "spoliation"), giving false testimony under oath or otherwise, and all manner of other similar conduct can make it hard to impose civil liability in the court system (or to prevent its imposition when it isn't called for), and does happen from time to time. ...


4

There are answers between black and white. One might honestly believe to be owed €360, and demand that money in a lawyers' letter, and be prepared to write that demand off if the other party does not comply. Going to court has an uncertain outcome even if one is objectively right, and it will take effort and money. As you describe the events, it looks like ...


4

The standard practice is to send the opposing party -- or better yet, its attorney -- a preservation letter, also known as a litigation hold. The letter notifies the receiving party that the sender is contemplating litigation, which triggers the recipient's duty to retain relevant records. Google for "sample presevation letter" or "sample ...


3

You have asked two quite different questions there. I’ll address the second part first (where Rob argues for the decision in Bob’s favour to be overturned in his response to Bob's appeal), because it’s easier. For both parties to partially succeed at trial, and both parties to contend on appeal that they should have been wholly successful, is not that ...


3

it would be a lot of work to formulate a bullet-proof response. Wouldn't that defeat the whole purpose of motion for protective order? No. The purpose of objections --and of motions for protective order-- is not to avoid doing "a lot of work", but to protect information the party considers unreasonable or which ought to be protected from discovery....


2

In a word: Discovery. Discovery rules in the US allow for very broad requests for production from the opposing party and generally seek to require production of all relevant documents to a case. Many other countries, such as the UK tend to limit disclosure "to that which is necessary to deal with the case justly" CPR 31.5(7). You'd think just ...


2

Strictly speaking, one has to define "forced". But with companies like these, in countries like these the answer is "Yes," by a couple of mechanisms. American branches: Nintendo (and Sony) are Japanese companies, but they have American branches (e.g. Nintendo USA), that can be directly compelled. American assets: Nintendo (and Sony) ...


2

Jurisdiction: england-and-wales Section 2(1) of the Defamation Act 2013 provides: It is a defence to an action for defamation for the defendant to show that the imputation conveyed by the statement complained of is substantially true. If a newspaper prints that a person has been accused of a crime and that person has in fact been accused of a crime, then ...


2

Jurisdiction: australia No Land can only be seized to pay a judgement debt if the amount is more than $10,000. Personal property - jewellery, furniture, cars, boats etc. can be seized.


2

The exchange quoted by Justice Scalia is most often attributed to F. E. Smith - although he was the kind of person, like Winston Churchill or Oscar Wilde, who tends to have things attributed to him. It's not clear that he actually said this, but it's certainly the kind of thing that people like to imagine he said. His general reputation and image is an ...


1

Pragmatism Litigation is expensive in both time and money, a negotiated settlement brings matters to a close. When the case went back for trial Mr Stevenson was no longer the defendant - the Estate of Mr Stevenson was because Mr Stevenson was dead. The executor and beneficiaries of that estate may not have been as personally invested in "the family’s ...


1

When you need information like this, you generally just need to start searching court websites. If the case is in a court's online database, just having one party's name will almost always be enough to find the case. Unfortunately, our court systems are so balkanized that proving the negative -- that Hamilton never sued anyone over "Pulsar" -- ...


1

You email it to them However, if you want to take them to court, you need to issue a Statement of Claim, not a Letter of Demand. A letter of demand is not a court document and has no legal consequences other than, perhaps, being used as evidence in a subsequent action. A Statement of Claim must be served in accordance with the court rules. Different rules ...


1

Keep in mind that prior to trial, documents will be the subject of written interrogatories, requests to admit, depositions, summary judgment and motions in limine. If it is alleged that a document which purportedly was signed by me in Denver on January 1, and it is undisputed that I was in Shanghai on that date, a motion in limine to prevent the document ...


1

Are exhibits listed in the order they appear or in order of importance? There is no "formal" rule on that, but it is common for exhibits to be labeled/listed in the order they are referenced in the pleadings and briefs. I'm following the sample format on my county's "self-help center" for pro se litigants In general, beware that sample ...


1

is it okay to refer to "exhibit 1" and mention that it will be provided in person? No. Attach them all in the pleadings/motions/briefs/etc. you file in court. You might want to elaborate why you think that would be impractical. If by "provided in person" you mean "at the hearing", it will not work because other parties are ...


1

What if the corporation were to one day decide that hospitals are no longer eligible, would the corporation be breaking the law? Probably not. Section 19 of the law authorizes ("may") the foundation to provide funding to eligible recipients but it does not require it ("must" or "shall"). It is a restrictive provision that does ...


1

The corporation referred to in the OP is the Canada Foundation for Innovation (CFI) established to: help build and sustain a research landscape in Canada that will attract and retain the world's top talent, train the next generation of researchers, support private-sector innovation and create high-quality jobs that strengthen Canada's position in today's ...


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