Should torts be used in court rooms?
70312
Your question doesn't make any sense.
866061
u should file a public petetion in highcourt
935489
call up the court I guarantee they got your case log they can tell ya right off the bat. they don't want to have to clog up the court room.
364950
I doubt the state could be sued for negligence.  We live in a country that you are innocent till proven guilty.  For the innocent that are charged this is good.  For the innocent no charged the guilty that are free to walk this sucks.
976678
Have you ever seen the prisoner section of a mental hospital or the hospital section of a prison?  Neither is a nice place.  And how much rehabilitation can someone have if they are out of contact with the world and/or themselves.\n\nFor concepts of justice, yes, there should be an insanity defense.  For making criminal prosecution easier, perhaps not.  \n\nIt might be an eye opening encounter if you see how few people get out of criminal charges through an insanity plea..  Get in touch with your local criminal prosecutor`s office.
869620
If the male were to sue the female for damages, that is a civil action.  The defense of temporary insanity is used in criminal proceedings.  It generally would not apply to a civil proceeding.  However, the defense of temporary insanity is (contrary to what you see on television and the movies) extremely rare.  Some states do not allow it at all.  Others, just like the "permanent" insanity defense, restrict it considerably.  \n\nMental anguish is a tort.  I think it unlikely under the circumstances that a jury would give her much for a mental anguish claim.  The fact that its a marriage that is obviously in trouble, and he would be able to produce his own evidence, would problably not make the case a viable case, IMHO.\n\nThe laws governing the above vary greatly from state to state.  For the most accurate information, you should consult an attorney who is licensed in your state.  If you need a referral, contact your local or state bar association.
28217
I think it is usually acceptable to break the law if, by not breaking it, someone would suffer bodily harm or death. Also, if the law is fundamentally designed to discriminate, I think that at the very least some people need to break it in order to be able to argue against it in the Supreme Court, for example when Rosa Parks refused to give up her seat.
255993
It's not a question of whether or not it's legal, it's a matter of whether or not it's REASONABLE.  If your employer were to be sued for wrongful termination, the magistrate would have to consider whether or not they acted reasonably in firing somebody for having to use the toilet.\n\nPersonally, I would LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOVE to have that case.  Cha-Ching!!!\n\nI find it impossible to imagine that a magistrate, let alone a JURY, would consider that to be a reasonable practice.
645203
Its a double edged sword.  On one hand, its hurt things and we pay higher insurance premiums as a result.  On the other hand, things are safer.  Then again, do we really need to award big judgments to people just because they are stupid?  Take the lady who spilled McDonald's coffee on herself and sued them because it burned her and was awarded $80M.  There does need to be reasonable limits on judgments.  Incidentally, McDonald's still has their coffee too hot.
184420
Typically they are using their best knowledge of how to use the law to defend a case that their client brings them.  If you are on the wrong side of that case it can suck.  If you are on the right side of the case you love that lawyer.  Especially if you've been screwed so many times without using one.
247389
Anybody can sue, but the question is if there's a cause that is actionable by the court.  A person can not benefit from an illegal action.  In this case breaking in is the illegal action and thus prevents the homeowner from having responsibility.
324762
The law should apply to everyone equally. \n\nThe press can have a hay day with high profile cases though.
1160406
You would be the laughing stock of the court room! That is if they even decided to let you go that far. \n\nYou would be better off buying a dictionary.
436659
Yes I think its grounds for a law suit..lol
787429
a person can sue for almost anything, but.....it shouldn't go far in the court system if the things you said were true..I am not a lawyer but I think if you put something in writing and it could cause someone to loose their job it is libel..but if ithe things you claim are found to be true then they shouldn't have a leg to stand on.
503221
some states have this law. Basicly what it sums down to is that the violator entered onto a property to strike fear in the defendent.
316738
Given my understanding of this question, the basic answer to this question is no, in either civil or common law systems.\n\nObviously, a statute or code cannot cover all sorts of conduct, including future conduct that are not anticipated by a statute or code (i.e. internet regulation).  Here, a court may be used to interpret conduct that is not regulated by some statute or code and give an opinion on the issue at hand.  That opinion, under either common law or civil law, is given "force of law," or precedential value, in which lower courts are under an obligation to follow.