What does foundation is waived mean in a court case?
408094
it means that the party introducing the evidence does not have to prove that it is "real" for the court to admit it into evidence. For instance if you have a letter that is hand written, you have to ask someone a series of questions to prove that the letter is authentic, written by the person who it is supposed to be written by etc.. this is proven by asking someone who knows the handwriting of the person and can attest that it is that persons writing. This is the foundation for admitting the written letter - if this is waived - there is no need to ask the questions - it is accepted as real. This is simplified and only one example - there is a foundation for just about everything.
607002
It was basically about due process.\n\nSomeone was receiving welfare, but then the state decided that he was no longer eligible and told him that the payments would stop.  He said, wait a minute, if you let me explain the circumstances, you'd see that I'm still eligible (it is called a "hearing" when someone is allowed to come in and tell their side of the story).  The state said, fine, you can come tell us about the situation (we'll give you a "hearing"), but first we are going to terminate the payments.  If, after hearing your side of the story, we think you are still eligible, then we will start making the payments again. SO THE STATE OFFERED HIM A POST-TERMINATION HEARING.\n\nThe guy thought that he should get a PRE-TERMINATION hearing, and that the welfare payments shouldn't be stopped BEFORE he was able to explain his side of the story.  So he sued the state.\n\nThe state argued that it would be too expensive and time consuming to give all welfare recipients a pre-termination hearing.\n\nThe case went all the way to the Supreme Court.  The Supreme Court decided that it was unfair to terminate the payments without first hearing the guy's explanation of why he was still eligible.  The court said WELFARE RECIPIENTS MUST BE ALLOWED A PRE-TERMINATION "HEARING" BEFORE THEIR PAYMENTS ARE CUT OFF.\n\nWhy?  In the words of the court: "The interest of the eligible recipient in the uninterrupted receipt of public assistance, which provides him with essential food, clothing, housing, and medical care, coupled with the State's interest that his payments not be erroneously terminated, clearly outweighs the State's competing concern to prevent any increase in its fiscal and administrative burdens."\n\nWhat "vocab" don't you understand?
1170701
You need to go to a library where they have the stuff annotated.  Just knowing the cases is not enough you have to know what the court said they mean and this is in the annotated statutes for your state of federal government.  If you have a large county library may have a law book section, if not find out where you can access annotated law statutes at a library.  The books on this are very expensive and so are the internet subscriptions.
35181
It means the case has been closed, settled, decided.
253677
Such case is decided under a "strict scrutiny" level: the distinction/discrimination/etc must be necessary for a compelling government interest. The means must be narrowly tailored,  the gov must show that no least restrictive means are available and the gov has the burden of proof.
317412
If a judge decides a case for which there is no applicable law, their decision becomes law.  Another person with a similar case will cite the prior case, and this will influence the judge in his case.  These case decisions have the same force as law, since they are enforcable in court.  Thus, they are law.
990067
It refers to notice that an action is going to be taken in court.
338430
A non-suit means that a judgment can be entered against that defendant (that is, the plaintiff is granted the divorce) because that person didn't respond (file an answer) in the proscribed period (21 days). \n\nDismissed without prejudice, I believe means that prior action didn't have any decisions against the defendant that would need to be taken into account in future actions. Future actions would probably have to do with distribution of marital assets or debts, property, any custody relations for children, etc. If the defendant is not involved in these issues, they'll be decided in favor of the plaintiff.\n\nThis is information found by searching public sites. If you need more specific advice, check out the referenced documents. For legal advice and representation, contact your local bar association or legal aid agency for a referral.
271324
Is this helpful?\n\n"A cause of action 'accrues' when a suit may be maintained thereon, and the law in this regard differs from state-to-state and by nature of action (e.g., type of breach of contract, tort, etc.).  The point in time at which a cause of action 'accrues' is important for the purposes of running of statute of limitations."
450792
Dismisal for furtherince of justice.  Meaning the case has been dismissed.
780265
The real answer is that if a jury trial is not asked for within a specified time limit, it is waived.  They ask before they know if they want one or not to preserve their client's right to one.
1174763
In common civil procedure parlance, a "triable issue of material fact" means that some factual issue is in dispute, and how that factual issue is resolved will have an effect on the outcome of the case.\n\nFor example, let's make up a hypothetical. I alleged: "1. You hit me while driving your car. 2. As a result of being hit, my arm got broken. 3. At the time, you were speeding 10 miles above the limit and ran a red light. 4. Your car is blue. "\n\nYou answer that yes you hit me and broke my arm, and yes the light was red, but you were only going 5 miles above the speed limits, and your car is really turquoise.\n\nI move for summary judgment. Are there any questions of fact in dispute? Yes. You said +5 mph above the limit, I say +10. And we disagree with the color of your car.\n\nAre any of these 'material' issues? No. Because none of them affect the outcome of the case. What are the elements I am required to prove? That you hit me and caused damage, and that you were in violation of traffic laws at the time (See Negligence per Se). My motion for summary judgment would be granted because none of the questions left unresolved (or in dispute) matter to the outcome.\n\nBut let's say that you said "No, I didn't hit you. Somebody else did. I don't own a blue car. And I have no idea if/how you were injured."  Now we have different questions of fact in dispute. What car hit me. Who was driving. These are material questions of fact, and must be resolved at trial. So my motion for summary judgment would be denied.\n\nSummary judgment is a way to resolve matters without going to trial, when going to trial would not change the outcome. So, really, you must be defending yourself against some actual claim, and the opposing party filed a motion for summary judgment based on the evidence so far provided to the court.\n\nI'll second (or third) the advice above. Get a lawyer. Civil procedure can be a nasty technical battle, and requires understanding of lots of specific rules and terms.
1110768
In medieval times, there were two court systems.\n\nCourts of law granted primarily monetary damages. Courts of equity granted primarily injunctions (orders to do or not do something). \n\nThis distinction has pretty much been eliminated in the US, where most courts can now grant relief at law or in equity, as appropriate to the claim. \n\nThe phrase "common law" generally refers to the decisions handed down by the courts, starting with the Old English common law, and more recently referring generally just to legal precedent derived from past cases. Common law decisions in the US govern interpretations of the law, as well as issues related to remedies at law (damages) and in equity. So, again, the distinction in the US has largely been eliminated.
648154
In general yes, the authority to issue warrants for arrest are governed by individual state and federal laws. Although this question can be difficult without the specifics of a particular case so long as a prosecuting authority with jurisdiction over the case has not violated "Double Jeopardy" laws that might apply, they can in fact close a case prior to trial date in favor of refiling the charge (usually amended in some form) at a later time. In the instant cases where that happens, the request/use of a bench warrant is handled on a case by case bases and as such the dismissal of the first case would not have a bearing on the filing of the second. Please remain aware that this is a generalized answer and that due to the variance of laws from state to state this may be incorrect. Consultation with an criminal defense attorney within the jurisdiction in question would be the appropriate method to receive an accurate answer.
1149295
Alert the judge to this.  Just send a letter to the judge.  Say nothing else about your case, however.   If you had an agreement for the lawyer to handle your whole case and he is refusing, the judge will either make the lawyer stay on the case, refund the money or appoint counsel or fashion some other remedy.  If you do go in to plead guilty, be sure to tell the judge why you are doing it because if you try to change your plea later you will have a very hard time of it
413446
Well, it depends on why...\n\nThere are ways.\n\nIf someone files for child support or a change in child suport and then doesn't show up, the case is dismissed.\n\nIf someone files for child support or a change in child support and then doesn't provide evidence to support that petition, the case can be dismissed.\n\nI am sure there are other reasons as well, it just depends on why you are asking...
500654
Don't worry about the statute of limitations. You have already won the lawsuit and the statute of limitations to collect the judgment will be a long time.\nThe type of supplemental hearing is described in sec 2-1420 of the Illinois Code of Civil Procedure. It allows you to bring the person back to Court and ask them what they have and where they have it.\nThen you get a writ of attachment or a writ of garnishment to collect property from the places (like banks and employers) that you found have property belonging to the person.