Law School podcast

13:46

The primary objectives of criminal law include deterrence (general and specific), incapacitation, retribution, rehabilitation, and defining societal norms. Unlike civil law, which aims to compensate a wronged party, criminal law operates on behalf of the state to prosecute and punish wrongful acts in the communal interest. Felonies are typically punishable by death or imprisonment for more than one year, while misdemeanors are lesser offenses usually punishable by a fine or incarceration for less than one year. Murder is an example of a malum in se crime because it violates fundamental moral standards, whereas a traffic violation is an example of a malum prohibitum crime because its illegality stems from statute. General intent crimes require the intent to perform the physical act itself, such as intentionally striking someone in battery. Specific intent crimes require an additional subjective intent to bring about a specific result, such as in theft, where the defendant must intend to permanently deprive another of their property. A state generally has jurisdiction to prosecute crimes that either occur within its borders or produce harmful effects within its territory. Concurrent jurisdiction arises when more than one sovereign has the legal authority to prosecute the same conduct. The doctrine of dual sovereignty under the Double Jeopardy Clause allows both federal and state governments to prosecute the same individual for the same conduct without violating double jeopardy protections, as they are separate sovereigns. Actus reus refers to the physical component of a crime, which is a voluntary act or a qualifying omission. An omission can constitute actus reus when there is a legal duty to act, the person is physically capable of acting, and they fail to do so, such as a parent deliberately withholding food from their child. Recklessness is a subjective mental state involving the conscious disregard of a substantial and unjustifiable risk; the defendant must be aware of the risk. Negligence is an objective standard that applies when a person fails to perceive a substantial and unjustifiable risk that a reasonable person would have recognized, regardless of actual awareness. Strict liability crimes are offenses where no mental state is required; the mere commission of the act is sufficient for liability. These types of crimes are most commonly found in regulatory and public welfare areas such as food safety or statutory rape. For example, a vendor selling contaminated food may be held strictly liable regardless of intent. The principle of concurrence requires that the actus reus (the physical act) and the mens rea (the mental state) coincide in time. This is generally required because criminal liability is predicated on the idea that the wrongful conduct was accompanied by a culpable state of mind. Factual cause, or "but-for" causation, means that the harm would not have occurred but for the defendant's act. Legal cause, or proximate cause, addresses whether the result is closely enough connected to the act to hold the defendant criminally responsible, considering factors like foreseeability. An intervening cause might break the chain of legal causation if it is unforeseeable and superseding, meaning it was not a natural or probable consequence of the defendant's actions. A principal is the primary actor who commits the criminal act, while an accomplice is someone who aids, encourages, or assists the principal with the intent that the crime be committed. Accomplice liability requires both an act of assistance and the specific intent that the underlying crime be committed by the principal.…

Law School

1
Criminal Law – Lecture One: General Principles and Elements of Crime (Part 1 of 3) (Part 2) 13:28

1 day ago13:28

13:28

This lecture note from a criminal law course introduces fundamental concepts necessary for understanding criminal liability. It explores the purposes of criminal law, including deterrence and retribution, and classifies crimes based on severity and inherent wrongfulness. The note further details the essential elements of a crime, specifically the physical act (actus reus) and the mental state (mens rea), along with principles of causation and concurrence. Finally, it outlines different forms of criminal responsibility, such as accomplice liability and corporate liability, providing a foundational overview for further study of specific offenses.…

Law School

1
Federal Civil Procedure: Review and Summary 30:28

2 days ago30:28

30:28

The purpose of personal jurisdiction is to ensure that a court has the authority to compel a defendant to appear and litigate in a particular forum. This authority is constitutionally grounded in the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, which requires that a defendant have sufficient connections with the forum state. General personal jurisdiction exists when a defendant's contacts with the forum state are so systematic and continuous that they can be sued there for almost any matter, even if the underlying events occurred elsewhere (e.g., a corporation's principal place of business is in the state). Specific personal jurisdiction arises when the lawsuit stems directly from the defendant's contacts with the forum state (e.g., a contract signed and performed within the state). The two primary bases for federal subject matter jurisdiction are federal question jurisdiction and diversity jurisdiction. Federal question jurisdiction allows federal courts to hear cases arising under the Constitution, federal laws, or treaties, while diversity jurisdiction permits federal courts to hear cases between citizens of different states or between a state citizen and a foreign national, provided the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000. The well-pleaded complaint rule dictates that for a case to fall under federal question jurisdiction, the federal issue must be presented on the face of the plaintiff's properly pleaded complaint. It is not sufficient for a federal question to arise only as a defense or a counterclaim. Venue rules determine the specific district within a court system where a case should be heard, focusing on the convenience of the parties and witnesses, and the location of evidence or the events at issue. Factors determining proper venue often include the defendant's residence, where a substantial part of the events occurred, or where property involved in the lawsuit is located. Following Twombly and Iqbal, a complaint must contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face. This requires more than conclusory statements or a recitation of the elements of a cause of action; the factual allegations must allow the court to draw the reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged. When responding to a complaint, a defendant can file an answer, admitting or denying the plaintiff's allegations and asserting any affirmative defenses, or file a pre-answer motion under Rule 12(b) to raise defenses like lack of jurisdiction or failure to state a claim. Asserting affirmative defenses in the answer is crucial because failure to do so can result in their waiver. Under Rule 15, a party may amend its pleading once as a matter of course within 21 days after serving the original pleading, or if the pleading is one to which a responsive pleading is required, 21 days after service of a responsive pleading or 21 days after service of a motion under Rule 12(b), (e), or (f), whichever is earlier. The "minimum contacts" test, established in International Shoe Co. v. Washington, states that for a court to exercise personal jurisdiction over a non-resident defendant, that defendant must have sufficient contacts with the forum state such that the exercise of jurisdiction does not offend traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice. These contacts must be purposeful and related to the claim. The "amount in controversy" requirement for diversity jurisdiction currently stands at more than $75,000, exclusive of interest and costs. This threshold is important because it ensures that federal courts, when exercising jurisdiction based solely on the diverse citizenship of the parties, are addressing cases of sufficient financial significance.…

Law School

1
Civil Procedure — Lecture Three: Trial, Post-Trial Motions, and Appellate Review (Part 3 of 3) (Part 2) 24:18

3 days ago24:18

24:18

The Seventh Amendment guarantees the right to a jury trial in federal civil cases for legal claims, primarily those seeking monetary damages (e.g., torts, contract breaches), as opposed to equitable remedies like injunctions or specific performance. Voir dire is the process of questioning potential jurors to ensure an impartial jury. Challenges for cause allow dismissal for demonstrated bias, while peremptory challenges permit a limited number of removals without stating a reason, though they cannot be discriminatory. A typical civil trial proceeds with opening statements, the plaintiff's case-in-chief (presenting evidence to meet the preponderance of the evidence standard), the defendant's case-in-chief, rebuttal, surrebuttal (if any), closing arguments, and jury instructions before deliberation and verdict. A motion for judgment as a matter of law (Rule 50(a)) argues that the opposing party has not presented sufficient evidence to support a verdict in their favor and can be made after that party has been fully heard. The court considers the evidence in the light most favorable to the non-moving party. A motion for a new trial (Rule 59) seeks to restart the trial due to errors or issues that prejudiced the outcome, such as evidentiary errors, misconduct, a verdict against the weight of the evidence, or newly discovered evidence. It differs from Rule 50 in that it doesn't necessarily argue the existing verdict is legally impossible. The entry of judgment formally concludes the trial court proceedings and triggers deadlines for post-judgment remedies and appeals. One ground for relief from judgment under Rule 60 is excusable neglect, generally with a one-year time limit from the entry of judgment. United States Courts of Appeals have jurisdiction over final decisions of district courts under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. The general deadline for filing a notice of appeal is within 30 days of the entry of the final judgment. The de novo standard of review means the appellate court reviews legal questions anew without deference to the trial court's ruling. The clear error standard applies to factual findings, which the appellate court will only overturn if a definite and firm mistake is found. Claim preclusion (res judicata) prevents relitigating a claim already decided by a final judgment on the merits. The elements are a final judgment on the merits, identity of the parties (or privity), and the same claim or cause of action. Issue preclusion (collateral estoppel) prevents relitigating specific factual or legal issues already decided in a prior case. A key requirement is that the issue must have been actually litigated and determined, and essential to the prior judgment.…

Law School

1
Civil Procedure — Lecture Three: Trial, Post-Trial Motions, and Appellate Review (Part 3 of 3) 20:07

4 days ago20:07

20:07

This lecture provides a thorough overview of the concluding phases of federal civil litigation, starting with the fundamental right to a jury trial and the selection process. It then details the structured progression of a trial, including opening statements, presentation of evidence, closing arguments, and jury instructions. The lecture further explains post-trial motions, such as judgments as a matter of law and requests for a new trial, which serve as critical checks on trial outcomes. Finally, it examines the appellate process, covering jurisdictional aspects, filing procedures, standards of review, and the preclusive effects of judgments.…

Law School

1
Civil Procedure — Lecture Two: Discovery, Pretrial Motions, and Summary Judgment (Part 2 of 3) (Part 2) 15:20

5 days ago15:20

15:20

The primary purpose of discovery is for parties to exchange information and evidence before trial, ensuring fairness and preventing "trial by ambush" by requiring both sides to have access to relevant facts and witnesses. The three key elements are relevance to a party's claim or defense, non-privileged matter, and proportionality to the needs of the case; proportionality involves balancing factors like the importance of issues, the amount in controversy, access to facts, and the burden of discovery. Discoverable information is any non-privileged matter relevant and proportional to the case, while admissible evidence is information that meets the rules of evidence for presentation at trial; for example, hearsay might be discoverable if it could lead to admissible evidence. Attorney-client privilege protects confidential communications between a lawyer and client made for the purpose of legal advice, while the work product doctrine safeguards materials prepared in anticipation of litigation; these protect the attorney-client relationship and the lawyer's preparation from adversarial scrutiny. Two primary functions are to help each party prepare for discovery by providing a roadmap of key information and to set the stage for potential settlement negotiations by outlining case strengths and weaknesses; an example of required disclosure is the names and contact information of individuals likely to have discoverable information. Expert witness disclosures must include the identity and qualifications of the expert, a summary of their opinions and their factual basis, and any prior testimony; failure to adequately disclose can lead to the exclusion of the expert's testimony at trial. A deposition is a pretrial examination conducted under oath to ask detailed questions of witnesses or parties, while a request for production of documents compels the opposing party to produce relevant documents, electronic files, or tangible items; depositions primarily seek testimonial evidence, while requests for production seek documentary or physical evidence. A party might file a motion to compel if the opposing party fails to respond to discovery requests or provides incomplete or evasive answers; a potential sanction under Rule 37(b) includes ordering that certain facts be taken as established against the non-complying party. The purpose of a protective order is to limit or prohibit the production of information that is overly burdensome, duplicative, or infringing on privacy rights; a court might issue a protective order to limit the scope of a deposition to prevent harassment. Summary judgment is granted if there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law; the moving party must demonstrate the absence of a genuine dispute of material fact, and the non-moving party must then come forward with specific evidence showing a triable issue exists.…

Law School

1
Civil Procedure — Lecture Two: Discovery, Pretrial Motions, and Summary Judgment (Part 2 of 3) 19:14

6 days ago19:14

19:14

This lecture provides an overview of key pretrial procedures in civil litigation, focusing on discovery, case management, and summary judgment. Discovery is explained as the formal process for exchanging information and evidence between parties to prevent trial surprises. The lecture details various discovery tools, such as depositions and interrogatories, and emphasizes the importance of proportionality and mandatory disclosures. Subsequently, it covers case management and pretrial conferences, highlighting how courts use scheduling orders and meetings to streamline litigation and narrow issues. Finally, the lecture examines summary judgment as a mechanism to resolve cases or specific issues without trial if no genuine factual disputes exist.…

Law School

1
Civil Procedure — Lecture One: Jurisdiction, Venue, Pleadings, and Early Motions (Part 1 of 3) (Part 2) 26:03

7 days ago26:03

26:03

Short-Answer Quiz What is the fundamental purpose of personal jurisdiction, and what constitutional provision provides its basis? Personal jurisdiction ensures a court has the authority to compel a defendant to appear and litigate in the forum. Its constitutional basis lies in the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, preventing individuals from being unfairly haled into court in distant or unconnected locations. Explain the difference between general and specific personal jurisdiction, providing a brief example of how each might arise. General jurisdiction exists when a defendant's contacts with the forum state are so continuous and systematic that they can be sued there for any claim, even if unrelated to those contacts (e.g., a corporation with its headquarters in a state). Specific jurisdiction arises when the lawsuit directly relates to the defendant's specific contacts with the forum state (e.g., a contract dispute stemming from a sale made in the state). What are the two primary bases for subject matter jurisdiction in federal courts, and what is a key requirement for each? The two primary bases are federal question jurisdiction and diversity jurisdiction. For federal question jurisdiction, the plaintiff's claim must arise under federal law and be evident in the well-pleaded complaint. For diversity jurisdiction, the case must be between citizens of different states (or a state and a foreign national) with an amount in controversy exceeding $75,000, and there must be complete diversity of citizenship. How does venue differ from jurisdiction, and what is the primary goal of venue rules? Jurisdiction concerns a court's power to hear a case (either over the person or the subject matter), while venue dictates the specific geographic district where the case should be heard. The primary goal of venue rules is to ensure a convenient and appropriate location for the litigation, considering factors like the parties' residences and where the events occurred. Describe the key elements that must be included in a complaint under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8. A complaint must contain a short and plain statement of the grounds for the court's jurisdiction, a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief, and a demand for the relief sought by the pleader. How have the Twombly and Iqbal Supreme Court decisions impacted the federal pleading standard? These decisions raised the pleading standard beyond mere notice pleading, requiring complaints to contain sufficient factual allegations to state a claim that is plausible on its face. This means the factual narrative must be more detailed and suggest a likelihood of liability, rather than just reciting the elements of a cause of action. What are the two main ways a defendant can respond to a complaint after being served? Briefly explain each. A defendant can file an answer, which requires them to admit or deny each of the plaintiff's allegations and assert any affirmative defenses they may have. Alternatively, a defendant can file a pre-answer motion under Rule 12(b), which raises legal objections to the complaint, such as lack of jurisdiction, improper venue, or failure to state a claim. List three examples of affirmative defenses a defendant might assert in their answer. Examples of affirmative defenses include the statute of limitations (the lawsuit was filed after the legal deadline), res judicata (the issue has already been decided by a court), and estoppel (the plaintiff is prevented from asserting a claim due to their prior conduct or statements). Under what circumstances can a party amend their pleading "as a matter of course"? A party can amend their pleading once as a matter of course within 21 days after serving the original pleading, or if the pleading is one to which a responsive pleading is required, within 21 days after service of a responsive pleading or a motion under Rule 12(b), (e), or (f), whichever is earlier.…

Law School

1
Civil Procedure — Lecture One: Jurisdiction, Venue, Pleadings, and Early Motions (Part 1 of 3) 16:37

8 days ago16:37

16:37

This lecture on federal civil procedure outlines the initial stages of litigation. It begins by explaining jurisdiction, focusing on the court's power over parties (personal jurisdiction) and the types of cases it can hear (subject matter jurisdiction). The discussion then moves to venue, detailing where a case should be properly filed for trial. The lecture further examines pleadings, covering the initial complaint and the defendant's response, including motions and answers. Finally, it addresses the process of amending pleadings, which allows for changes as a case progresses. The goal is to provide a foundational understanding of these crucial procedural elements.…

Law School

1
Privacy Torts — Intrusion, Appropriation, and False Light (Part 2 of 2) 24:25

9 days ago24:25

24:25

The two core elements for intrusion upon seclusion are: (1) the defendant intentionally intruded, physically or otherwise, upon the solitude or seclusion of another or his private affairs or concerns; and (2) the intrusion would be highly offensive to a reasonable person. Physical intrusion involves a tangible invasion of a private space, such as breaking into someone's home. Nonphysical intrusion involves less tangible but still invasive conduct, like wiretapping a phone line or using a drone to peer into someone's backyard. A reasonable expectation of privacy means that the plaintiff actually expects a certain degree of privacy in a particular place or situation, and that this expectation is one that society is prepared to recognize as legitimate. A person typically has a reasonable expectation of privacy in their own home. "Use...for the defendant's benefit" in appropriation means the defendant gains some advantage from using the plaintiff's identity, which is often commercial but can also include benefits like increased fundraising for a charity using a celebrity's endorsement without permission. The "newsworthiness exception" in appropriation generally protects the use of a person's identity in news reporting or matters of legitimate public interest, arguing that the public's right to know outweighs the individual's right to control their identity in such contexts. False light primarily addresses the emotional and dignitary harm caused by the public dissemination of false or misleading information that places an individual in an offensive light. This differs from defamation, which focuses on harm to an individual's reputation. A statement could be technically true but create a false light if it is presented in a misleading context. For example, using an old photograph of someone at a protest to illustrate a news story about a completely unrelated and controversial current event could falsely imply the person's involvement or stance on the current issue. The "actual malice" standard in false light cases requires the plaintiff to prove that the defendant knew the information was false or acted with reckless disregard for its truth or falsity. This higher standard of fault typically applies when the plaintiff is a public figure or the matter involves public interest, balancing free speech concerns with privacy rights. A key difference is that false light requires a "public disclosure," meaning the information must be widely disseminated. Intrusion upon seclusion, however, does not require any disclosure; the tort occurs at the moment of the invasive act itself. The tort of appropriation of name or likeness, particularly for celebrities and public figures, can evolve into the "right of publicity," which recognizes the commercial value of an individual's identity as a property right that they can control and profit from.…

Law School

1
Privacy Torts — Intrusion, Appropriation, and False Light (Part 1 of 2) 14:32

10 days ago14:32

14:32

PRIVACY TORTS — INTRUSION, APPROPRIATION, AND FALSE LIGHT American tort law recognizes a set of privacy torts designed to protect individuals from unjustified invasions into their personal lives. These include intrusion upon seclusion, appropriation of name or likeness, and false light, each addressing different forms of harm. Intrusion upon Seclusion focuses on protecting a person’s right to be left alone. The tort is established when a defendant intentionally invades a plaintiff’s private affairs in a way that would be highly offensive to a reasonable person. No publication is required. Typical examples include unauthorized surveillance, wiretapping, or entering private spaces. A key requirement is that the plaintiff must have a reasonable expectation of privacy. Appropriation of Name or Likeness protects individuals from unauthorized commercial use of their identity. This includes using someone’s name, photograph, voice, or likeness in advertising or other promotions without their consent. The use must confer a benefit on the defendant and be offensive to the plaintiff. Celebrities often invoke this tort under the broader “right of publicity.” Key defenses include consent, newsworthiness, and First Amendment protections for expressive works. False Light addresses public portrayals that inaccurately or misleadingly place someone in a false and offensive position in the eyes of the public. It requires public disclosure of information that creates a false impression, where that portrayal would be highly offensive to a reasonable person. Often overlapping with defamation, false light differs by focusing on emotional and dignitary harms rather than damage to reputation. Public figure plaintiffs must prove actual malice. Each of these torts is limited by important defenses, including consent, newsworthiness, and constitutional protections for speech and the press. Their recognition and scope may vary by jurisdiction, but together, they reflect the law’s effort to safeguard personal dignity, autonomy, and control over one’s identity.…

Law School

1
Contract Law Fundamentals – Formation, Enforceability, and Performance (Part 2 of 2) 20:26

11 days ago20:26

20:26

The objective theory of contracts states that a party's intention to enter into a contract is judged by outward, objective manifestations (words and conduct) as interpreted by a reasonable person in the offeree's position, rather than the party's secret, subjective intentions. This differs from a purely subjective approach, which would focus on what the parties actually thought, potentially leading to uncertainty and difficulty in enforcement. The common law mirror image rule requires that the acceptance must precisely match the terms of the offer; any deviation constitutes a counteroffer. U.C.C. Section 2-207 modifies this for the sale of goods, particularly between merchants, by allowing a definite expression of acceptance to create a contract even with additional or different terms, unless those terms materially alter the agreement, the offer expressly limits acceptance to its terms, or the offeror objects. Valid consideration is a bargained-for exchange of legal value, where each party gives up something of legal value (a right, a promise, or an act) in exchange for something of legal value from the other party. For example, if Sarah agrees to sell her used car to John for $5,000, Sarah's promise to transfer the car and John's promise to pay the money both constitute valid consideration. Promissory estoppel, or detrimental reliance, allows a court to enforce a promise even without traditional consideration if the promisor makes a clear and unambiguous promise, the promisee reasonably and foreseeably relies on that promise to their detriment, and injustice can only be avoided by enforcing the promise. This might occur if an employer promises an employee a bonus upon retirement, and the employee retires in reliance on that promise. The typical categories of contracts falling under the Statute of Frauds include contracts for the sale of land, contracts that cannot be performed within one year, contracts in consideration of marriage, contracts to answer for the debt of another, and contracts for the sale of goods priced at $500 or more. These contracts are generally required to be in writing to prevent fraudulent claims and provide more reliable evidence of the agreement's terms given their significance or duration. Substantial performance occurs when a party has performed the essential purpose of the contract in good faith, but with minor deviations. The non-breaching party must still perform but may be entitled to damages for the minor defects. Material breach, on the other hand, is a significant failure to perform that defeats the essential purpose of the contract, allowing the non-breaching party to suspend their own performance and sue for damages. The primary goal of compensatory damages is to compensate the non-breaching party for the loss suffered as a direct result of the breach, aiming to put them in the same economic position they would have been in had the contract been fully performed. The two main types are direct damages (loss of the bargain) and consequential damages (foreseeable losses resulting from the breach). A limitation on consequential damages is that they must have been reasonably foreseeable to the breaching party at the time the contract was formed. Specific performance is an equitable remedy where a court orders the breaching party to fulfill their contractual obligations. It is typically granted only when monetary damages are inadequate to compensate the non-breaching party, such as in contracts for the sale of unique goods (e.g., rare artwork) or real estate, where each piece of property is considered unique. An intended beneficiary is a third party whom the contracting parties intended to benefit directly from the contract and has the right to enforce the contract against the promisor. An incidental beneficiary, on the other hand, is a third party who may indirectly benefit from the contract but was not the intended recipient of that benefit and does not have the right to enforce the contract.…

Law School

1
Contract Law Fundamentals – Formation, Enforceability, and Performance (Part 1 of 2) 11:58

12 days ago11:58

11:58

Contract Law Fundamentals – Formation, Enforceability, and Performance This lecture provides a comprehensive overview of contract law, a core subject in both law school and bar exam preparation. It examines how legally enforceable agreements are formed, what makes them valid or voidable, how obligations are performed or breached, and what remedies are available. Formation Contract formation requires: Offer: A clear and definite promise showing willingness to enter into an agreement. Acceptance: Unequivocal assent to the terms of the offer, typically governed by the mirror image rule in common law and more flexibly under the Uniform Commercial Code. Consideration: A bargained-for exchange of value between the parties. Mutual Assent: Both parties must agree to the same terms under the objective theory of contract. Capacity and Legality: Parties must have the legal ability to contract, and the subject matter must be lawful. Defenses to Formation Even where the above elements are present, certain defenses may render a contract unenforceable: Misrepresentation (fraudulent or innocent) Duress and Undue Influence Mistake (mutual or unilateral) Unconscionability Lack of genuine assent The Statute of Frauds requires certain contracts—like those involving real estate, suretyship, or long-term performance—to be in writing and signed. Performance and Breach Under common law, parties must substantially perform their obligations unless there is a material breach. Under the UCC, the perfect tender rule applies, allowing buyers to reject goods that do not conform exactly to the contract. Remedies When breach occurs, the law aims to protect the expectation interest: Compensatory damages to put the non-breaching party in the position they expected. Consequential damages for foreseeable losses stemming from the breach. Liquidated damages if contractually specified and reasonable. Specific performance as an equitable remedy when monetary damages are inadequate. Restitution to prevent unjust enrichment. Third-Party Rights Intended beneficiaries may enforce contracts made for their benefit. Assignments and delegations allow parties to transfer rights and duties, with some limitations. A novation can relieve the original party of liability if the obligee agrees to substitute a new obligor. Policy Considerations Contract law balances freedom of contract with fairness, predictability, and market efficiency. The law adapts through judicial doctrines, statutory frameworks like the UCC, and evolving commercial practices, especially in digital transactions and standard form contracts.…

Law School

1
Estoppel: Principles of Consistency and Reliance in Civil Law (Part 2 of 2) 17:13

13 days ago17:13

17:13

Estoppel is a legal principle that prevents a party from asserting a claim or fact that contradicts a previous statement or agreement. Its primary goal is to ensure fairness and consistency in legal proceedings by preventing parties from deceiving or harming others who have relied on their earlier representations. Estoppel originated in the early equitable jurisdiction of common law courts. Judges of equity developed it as a remedy to prevent injustices that would occur if strict adherence to common law rules was enforced in certain situations. The three main forms of estoppel discussed are equitable estoppel, promissory estoppel, and judicial estoppel. Equitable estoppel arises from misleading conduct causing detrimental reliance. Promissory estoppel prevents reneging on a promise that induced detrimental reliance, even without a contract. Judicial estoppel prevents taking inconsistent positions in different legal proceedings. The essential elements commonly found in estoppel claims are a representation (or conduct), reliance by the other party, and resulting detriment to the relying party. Reliance is significant because it demonstrates that the party acted based on the representation, and the potential for injustice arises if the original party can then contradict that representation. Equitable estoppel arises when one party's misleading conduct or representations induce another party to act to their detriment. For example, if a landlord verbally assures a tenant that they can sublet their apartment, and the tenant then incurs costs finding a sublessee, the landlord might be estopped from later denying the tenant's right to sublet. Promissory estoppel prevents a party from breaking a promise, even if there's no formal contract, if the promisee reasonably relied on that promise and suffered a loss as a result. It differs from a formal contract because it doesn't require consideration. It might be invoked when enforcing the promise is necessary to avoid injustice due to the promisee's detrimental reliance. The purpose of judicial estoppel is to protect the integrity of judicial proceedings by preventing parties from "playing fast and loose" with the courts. Key requirements include the party having taken a specific position in a prior legal proceeding, that position being accepted by the court, and the party subsequently trying to assert a contradictory position in a later proceeding. The main function of collateral estoppel, or issue preclusion, is to prevent the re-litigation of specific factual or legal issues that have already been conclusively decided in a prior legal proceeding involving the same parties. One policy consideration underlying estoppel is fairness and justice. The doctrine aims to prevent opportunistic behavior by holding parties accountable for their representations when others have reasonably relied on them, thus promoting reliability and predictability in legal interactions. One criticism of estoppel is that its rigid enforcement might sometimes lead to unjust results, particularly if the party making the initial representation did so under duress, without fully understanding the implications, or if subsequent circumstances have significantly changed.…

Law School

1
Estoppel: Principles of Consistency and Reliance in Civil Law (Part 1 of 2) 18:40

14 days ago18:40