An answer is a pleading by the defendant that challenges the plaintiff’s right to the relief requested in the complaint. In most cases, an answer contest most of the facts in a complaint. An answer is a pleading and as such follows the same general format as the complaint or petition in the case (Kerley, Hames, & Sukys, 2009). Answers are prepared using the three formats the general denial, the specific denial, or the qualified denial. Answers can contain affirmative defenses. General denial is usually one paragraph or allegation in which the defendant denies all of the allegations contained in a civil complaint. If the defendant denies every allegation in the complaint, the defendant must contest all of the allegations. If the defendant does not contest the allegations, they could face possible sanctions. Since the defendant is denying each and every allegation, there are rules that require the defendant to deny the allegations in good faith. Specific denial refers to the defendant responding to each disagreement and section of the complaint. For example, a specific denial is an answer in which the defendant specifically replies to each contention or paragraph alleged in the complaint. The defendant replies to the various contentions by admitting them, denying them, or denying them on …show more content…
When the defendant uses qualified denial, they start by admitting or denying certain allegations. Then they obviously deny all the other allegations. While working in the legal field I have come across many qualified denials. For example, in a recent case a bakery was being sued by a customer. The customer was claiming that the baker used rat poisoning on some of the pastries and most of the other pastries were expired. The baker responded with a qualified denial claiming that yes he admits some of the pastries may have been expired, but denies ever using rat
Reasonable doubt plays a significant role in this particular case, as it requires a standard of unsurpassable evidence in order to be able to convict the plaintiff in a criminal proceeding. This is required under the Due Process Section in the Fifth Amendment of the American Constitution, allowing a safeguard and circumvention
In 250 words or less, analyze whether CKK can establish an affirmative defense to the alleged harassment.
Villiers, M. d. (2008). Substantial Truth in Defamation Law. New South Wales: University of New South Wales.
There are three fundamentals of the exclusionary rule. Foremost, an illegal action by an officer of police or an agent of police. Subsequently, evidence of this action by the police and agents of police must be obtained. The last element stipulates that there must be a link between the evidence acquired and the unauthorized action. In case a link cannot be established between the evidence and the illegal action committed in the acquisition of the evidence, then by the doctrine of attenuation, the evidence falls outside the exclusionary rule.
Judge Williamson J., dismissed the petition for judicial review on the grounds that the Member made no error in interpreting and apply the bona fide and reasonable justification defense.
In the above scenario, the outcome should be that the suspect’s statement, “I killed her and threw the baseball bat over the fence”, would be allowed in court and used against Tom to convict him of the aggravated assault and/or attempted murder. Also, the baseball bat the officer collected will be admitted at trial as evidence to be used against Tom. The motion to suppress the statement Tom provided about his motive would be omitted from court, and could not be used against him for a conviction of his crime.
Procedural defenses do not focus on guilt or innocence, but on the procedures used to investigate the case. (Crim-law.info, 2014) Many important measures of this style of defense are making sure the search and seizure was acceptable, if there was probable cause, whether civil rights were violated or not. (Crim-law.info, 2014)
This essay focuses on intentional tort, which includes trespass to person consisting of battery, assault and false imprisonment, which is actionable per se. It also examines protection from harassment act. The essay commences with a brief description of assault, battery and false imprisonment. It goes further advising the concerned parties on the right to claim they have in tort law and the development of the law over the years, with the aid of case law, principles and statutes.
•Submission to or rejection of such conduct by an individual is used as a basis
(in an action for slander or libel) the explanation and elucidation of the words alleged to be defamatory.
Respondent, *{{______}}*, *[appeared in person and announced ready for trial.]**[appeared through attorney of record, [name]*{{[name]}}*, and announced ready for trial.]**[appeared in person and through attorney of record, [name]*{{[name]}}*, and announced ready for trial.]**[although duly and properly cited, did not appear and wholly made default.]**[waived issuance and service of citation by waiver duly filed and did not otherwise appear.]**[has made a general appearance and has agreed to the terms of this judgment to the extent permitted by law, as evidenced by the signatures of Respondent and attorney for Respondent appearing below.]**[has made a general appearance and was duly notified of trial but failed to appear and defaulted.]*
Another reason prosecutors may choose not to prosecute a criminal case is a complaint about with the wrong motive. An example for the wrong motive is a wife that lied on her husband because she caught him cheating. Instead, she charges him with abusing her. A prosecute may decide not to charge her husband with abuse. However, there a more sensitive case such as a child that been rape. The case can be dismissed if the victim refuses to testify. The prosecutor can decline the case due to the mental state of the child. Instead, the defendant is sent to a mental facility (Bohm & Haley, 2011)
Some individuals believe that some hearsay should be admissible and others should be excluded. In California v. Green, the Supreme Court rejected challenges to the use of statements by a witness who appeared forgetful and evasive at trail. This witness has also previously implicated the defendant while speaking with the police and in testimony at the defendants hearing. (Criminal Evidence: An Introduction, Pg. 287) The Reliability Theory comes into play with this case.
In civil proceedings a defendant’s character can be attacked with a view to undermine his credit, just like that of any other witness. There is no special regime for defendants in civil trials, as in in criminal proceedings. Thus, for example, a person with previous convictions can have them put to him