I have received a letter from my solicitor setting out answers from my employers solicitor to whom I am sueing for an accident at work.\n\nThe answers they gave are very brief and at the end of every answer it states Quoad Ultra Denied.\n\ncan anyone explain to me what QUOAD ULTRA means in law.\n\nBest Regards\n\nHughie.
203364
See below. It is a term in Scottish Law\n\nQuoad ultra\n3.70\nGenerally translated to ‘everything else’, this Latin tag should only be used in conjunction with the word ‘denied’. The phrase ‘Quoad ultra denied’ is the appropriate catch all to ensure that no pleadings of the other side are left unanswered. ‘Quoad ultra not known and not admitted’ and ‘Quoad ultra admitted’ should be avoided. Use in this context runs the risk that as the pleadings are adjusted the general admission is used against the pleader at a later stage
457673
I was an HR Director for about 10 years, although in California and Texas, not Washington. Anyhow, it's been a while, but here goes... Technically you were insubordinate and it is likely that the unemployment officer who officiates over the phone hearing will not believe that you meant anything else by saying d*ck in an e-mail (about someone who I presume is your boss). That said, I am wondering if they actually have your signature on anything that says that you are aware that "they" (your employer) have the right to read and monitor electronic mailings sent by you. Unless they (or you since you were the office manager) are very organized they may have trouble coming up with this paperwork. They need this in order to read your electronic communications and I would bring this up to the officer unless you know for sure that they have it and can easily access it. Also, I am wondering if there is any defense you might have with regards to why you said it or the context in which it was said. Additionally, has there ever been a time that you are aware of when "they" may have set a different precedent by not firing/terming someone based on this sort of insubordination? In other words, where someone else called  a manager a name of sorts, but were either not disciplined or disciplined without termination. I also have to wonder why your employer was able to read this e-mail (did someone show it to him or did you leave your computer on) and why he bothered to log on to your computer if that's what he did? Typically, I wouldn't do this unless I had it in for the person and usually that would mean a series of write ups (I'm a GM/PM now so I still have a number of reports and remember my HR days well). Unfortunately, most companies have a policy saying that they can terminate with no notice based on certain acts, one of which is insubordination. Still, I agree with you that he sounds like a jerk if this is all he had. He would have done better to call you in and find out why you felt like that, thereby trying to find a fix for the situation and gaining your loyalty if he succeeded. Good luck!
397956
Hi Jacq,\n\nI have not heard of this, but if that is the case then you do have extenuating circumstances and that would be given full consideration.\n\nI suggest you contact the Guildford School of Law. They will have all the info you need.\n\nGood luck.
135696
i feel so bad for you, i am sorry. these things should not happen. i`am facing a case now about to call the lawyer and say settle, but i feel i`am getting screwed even before anything starts. car accident messed up back or tho claims arthritis my Dr. says nerve damage yet the or tho gives me nerve blocker medicine. well if i settle and arthritis is the issue i will gain very little monetarily. plus live with nerve damage the rest of life. but we need the money from settlement to help us out since i`am out of work.yes you can reopen a case if not by a different argument .
544903
Please contact me. I would like to talk to you about an excellent service/benefit that will get you a FREE Will and access to a TOP Law Firm in your State. I know that it will cover the U.S. side, not sure on the U.K. side, but I will check on it. If you want more information, please contact me.\n\nSincerely,\n\nJon
235259
Everyone is talking about sex discrimination in the work place and I see you say one of the focuses is on rape.\n\nWhat about when a woman cries rape and the defending attorney questions what she was wearing, what she might have said to the guy to "lead him on", and her sexual past. And yet the man's sexual past (unless he has a criminal history) does not get revealed or discussed in open court?
381317
I suppose that you are in the UK.\n\nI would disregard the answers here unless they identify themselves as knowledgable in British Common Law.\nI just took my contracts final today in American Law, and we have the Uniform Commercial Code which changed a few things found in Common Law.  For one, you don't need to have mutual assent to have a contract.  You can have unilateral contracts, you can have promisory estoppel, you can have quantum mertuit etc.  There is no mutuality here because the advertisement doesn't name a specific person.  If it had said, "I will sell these CDs to the first person who replies"  then the parties would be identifiable.  I can name several American cases that refer to this example, but that wouldn't help you.  I have an English Contracts case book from 1887, which belonged to my great great grandfather, but that won't help you either.\n\nThis question would best be handled on the American side with\nHARVEY V. FACEY\nThe court held here that there must be a definite offeror and offeree for there to be a contract.  This is applied to advertisements as well.  An advertisement is generally held to be an invitation for an offer rather than an offer because it is not definite enough.  If the ad had said, first person to call me gets it then it would be an offer because the offeree could be easily identified (LEFKOWITZ V. GREAT MINN. STORE)\n\nIn America, Gaz could sell his CDs to any of the ladies he chose, or he could reject their offers.  Each of the ladies gave an offer with different terms: 2000 and pick up in 2 weeks, 2000 immediate pick up, 1500.\n\nLike I wrote, however, this would be the American view.  I could go on and on about how the UCC would apply, but this would be wasting your time.\n\nIn a hypothetical, you must analyze each person's position, and then put in your own facts.  What if Gaz sold to one of the ladies, what could the others do?  Which offers were valid?  Look at the methods of acceptances, counter offers are rejections and an offer.\n\nBecause this is a sale of goods, you have to address the statute of frauds whether someone will be successful or not. (remember the acronym MY LEGS, it's the G part)\n\nI'm killing myself now because I just realized that an option contract is binding under the mail box rule upon receipt.  I got that one wrong arrrgh.\n\nOk I'm done with the law for at least a week, time to hit the pub and get smashed
424052
You don't say who made this request to the Coucil and in what circumstances.  It sounds as though the Council is being gently prodded to think things through and perhaps withdraw an action to recover what is owed on the grounds that the person is somewhat deranged or mentally handicapped.  Those hearing the case can't say such a thing outright, but they can drop loud hints to the effect that if a person isn't in a fit mental state to deal with his financial affairs, it is perhaps not a good thing to bring him to court, especially if he is arguing with deep conviction that he doesn't understand why he is being prosecuted and doesn't feel he owes anything.  Maybe now that we are not allowed to use Latin in court, "moral culpability" is the new "mens rea".
310277
I almost can't believe what I'm reading, but ok.  I'm not sure what a qick claim deed is, but I would talk to my lawyer, because just because his name isn't on the loan doesn't mean that he will not maybe have to help you pay for the house first off, secondly, what banker in his right mind would let your husband off the hook once he's got him?  maybe email me or post what a qick claim is plz, and I can be (maybe) more helpful
467303
If that is exactly what he said that is very unprofessional. I don't know if you can get any legal recompense but he should ddefinitely be penalised for saying that kind of thing.Maybe you could get in touch with a solicitor or something. Or Thomas Kenney's boss.
252954
Not enough information is given.  what is your stance?  IS ot a DBQ [Document Based Question]?  Or a FRQ [Free Response Question]?  What does the prompt specifically ask for?  Teh information given is WAY to broud.  Also, don't ask for a thesis and then use the exact one someone might give you.  Turnitin.com might catch you.  That would be bad.
374388
As i said before get a solicitor and he will look at all the information you have.Sounds to me the solicitor will sue them for negligance.I had a bad fall 7 years ago down a pot hole right outside the bus stop when i was getting off a bus.I had to have a operation to repair a main ligament which came off the lateral side off my ankle.In plaster cast for 6 wks,then physio for 2 mths.The council admitted lybility and i was offered £24,000 which i accepted.Also the council payed all expensies for the operation in a private hospital,physio treatment.You have a strong case here and sounds to me you will be awarded if won alot more then me as i have not goune through all what you have,also all the operations you have had to recieve,and off course your age.Good Luck
202983
It means the plaintiff won't show up, but they usually can't arbitrarily waive their appearance. You or your attorney if you have one would have to consent. If the plaintiff's attorney will be there, it really doesn't help you at all. It means you won't have anyone to cross-examine. I'd recommend asking for summary judgment in your favor. End of story.
504409
Yes you are on the right track and the correct term is non-disclosure. It is a very law embedded field and can be twisted and turned at every post. Such as matters of opinion can be withheld from you and other similar documents. The best way is really to have a legal representative who will not be railroaded by the other side. A solicitor will try and eat you up with legal jargon that will make your head spin.
26626
getting help. They have special tutors. I also heard when writing if you use a yellow legal pad it's easier to read. Something about the yellow.
531795
I'm doing NVQ level 4 in Community Justice, some of the stuff is quite similar.  When I started doing my NVQ units I was just tearing my hair out trying to work out what it all meant.  If you know anyone else who has recently done or is doing the same unit(s), ask them for advice, that's how I got started on mine.  There's kind of an art to working out how to present your evidence to best advantage, and how to cover all your pcs.   My best advice is to work through the unit description systematically (and calmly! try not to panic!) and see what you can already tick off from what you have.  Then identify your gaps and think about what you can do while you're at work to get evidence to plug those gaps - sometimes you might have to manufacture or request opportunities!\n\nI've had 3 units signed off now and I'm close to finishing a 4th (I have to do 12 in all).  I can honestly say that once I'd completed 1, it was quite plain sailing.  But I needed those friendly colleagues around to get the first one done.\n\nGood luck!!
541547
Hi Violet.\n\nWhat area of tort were you reading about? I don't have this particular book as it is too far out of date.\n\nThere must be some context in which importance was attached to what was said, perhaps a reference to some precident or case?