refimprove date December 2007 Wiktionary plaintiff petitioner claimant complainant A plaintiff pi letter in legal shorthand , also known as a claimant or complainant , is the term used in some jurisdictions for the party who initiates a lawsuit also known as an action before a court . By doing so, the plaintiff seeks a legal remedy , and if successful, the court will issue Judgment law judgment in favor of the plaintiff and make the appropriate court order e.g., an order for damages . In some jurisdiction s the commencement of a lawsuit is done by filing a summons , claim form and or a complaint . These documents are known as pleading s, that set forth the alleged wrongs committed by the defendant or defendants with a demand for relief. In other jurisdictions the action is commenced by service of legal process by delivery of these documents on the defendant by a process server they are only ... called proceedings, in which the parties are termed petitioner instead of plaintiff, and respondent ... has replaced Plaintiff after the Civil Procedure Rules 1998 came into force on 26 April 1999. ref ... law , a plaintiff is referred to as a pursuer and a defendant as a defender. In Hong Kong and the United States , the legal term plaintiff is still in use. Americans traditionally limit the application ... court case under judicial supervision , and become a plaintiff. The word plaintiff can be traced to the year ... century. ref cite web title Etymology Online url http www.etymonline.com index.php?term plaintiff publisher etymonline.com accessdate 2008 04 24 ref A plaintiff identified by name in a class action is called a named plaintiff . The party to whom the complaint is against is the defendant or in the case of a petition, a respondent. Case names are usually given with the plaintiff first, as in Plaintiff ... loses, the plaintiff does not have to pay any of the money funded back. Legal financing is different ... lt Ie kovas ms Plaintif nl Eiser ja pl Pow d pt Autor direito ru simple Plaintiff sk alobca ... more details
In a class action lawsuit , a lead plaintiff also called class representative , named plaintiff , or representative plaintiff is the named party. The court officially appoints this individual when it certifies the lawsuit as a class action. The lead plaintiff must be able to represent the interests of all the members of the class. He or she is responsible to hire the attorney, file the lawsuit, consult on the case, and agree to any settlement. References http law.freeadvice.com litigation class actions class action lead plantiff.htm What s In It For the Lead Class Action Plaintiff? law.freeadvice.com Category Civil law common law law stub ... more details
Infobox Court Case name Plaintiff S157 2002 v Commonwealth court High Court of Australia image Australia coa.png date decided 4 February 2003 full name Plaintiff S157 2002 v Commonwealth of Australia citations http www.austlii.edu.au cgi bin sinodisp au cases cth HCA 2003 2.html 2003 HCA 2 211 CLR 476 195 ALR 24 77 ALJR 454 judges Murray Gleeson Gleeson CJ, Mary Gaudron Gaudron , Michael McHugh McHugh , William Gummow Gummow , Michael Kirby judge Kirby , Kenneth Hayne Hayne and Ian Callinan Callinan JJ prior actions none subsequent actions none opinions 7 0 Appeal largely upheld small Impugned clauses valid, but not applicable to the action the plaintiff wished to bring per Gaudron, McHugh, Gummow, Kirby and Hayne, Gleeson CJ and Callinan J concurring small Background The plaintiff wished to challenge a decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal denying him a protection visa. Two sections of the Migration Act 1958 Cth purported to deny him the right to appeal the decision. The plaintiff applied to the High Court, arguing that the relevant sections did not apply to applications for relief under s75 v of the Constitution. s474 purported to make certain decisions privative clause decisions unreviewable, while s486A placed time limits on applications to the High Court in respect of these decisions. The plaintiff argued that s474 was directly inconsistent with s75 v and therefore invalid. Decision The Hickman principle was, the majority held, simply a rule of construction allowing apparently incompatible statutory provisions to be reconciled. Two rules of construction relating to privative clauses were held to exist if there is an opposition between the Constitution and any such provision, it should be resolved by adopting an interpretation consistent with the Constitution if that is fairly open. per Hickman and Privative clauses are construed strictly. Applying these principles led to the conclusion that although the two sections were valid, they did not apply to the plaintiff ... more details
Nuisance lawsuit may refer to a suit of the tort of nuisance , i.e. the plaintiff claims the defendant is causing a nuisance to the plaintiff a frivolous lawsuit , i.e. by bringing the suit, the plaintiff is causing a nuisance to the defendant Disambig ... more details
Unreferenced date June 2007 A direct action lawsuit is brought directly against an insurance company for a wrong done by the insured. In a lawsuit that is not direct action, a plaintiff brings the Cause of action claim against the insured, who actually wronged the plaintiff. Once Legal judgment judgment has been rendered against the defendant , there are a number of ways that the insurance company assuming the defendant is insured might later be made to pay the victorious plaintiff. If the plaintiff wants to avoid the extra time and process required to eventually be paid by the insurance company, the action can be brought directly against the insurance company. The plaintiff must still prove all of the same facts that would be the plaintiff s burden, had the action been brought against the insured. In addition, the plaintiff must prove that the insured was covered by the insurance company, and that the insurance policy covered the kind of wrong for which the plaintiff is seeking remedy. The insured is then treated as a third party to the litigation, and the insurance company itself is the defendant. This name can also be given to any lawsuit that is brought as a kind of direct action activism. One example can be a customer suing a company to repeal an action deemed an infringement on the rights of the customer as a citizen and thus a subject to federal or state law. Allegedly, the largest direct action lawsuit was the subject matter of the motion picture Erin Brockovich film Erin Brockovich . Category Lawsuits Category Tort law Category Insurance law term stub ... more details
A status conference is a court ordered meeting with a judge or under some circumstances an authorized counsel where they decide the date of the trial . If a party does not attend the status conference, that party s requests for scheduling changes will be ignored. If the plaintiff and or a representative of plaintiff does not attend the status conference, the action may be dismissed. law stub Category Civil procedure ... more details
Unreferenced auto yes date December 2009 Tort law Cleanup date May 2010 The last clear chance is a doctrine in the law of torts that is employed in contributory negligence jurisdictions. Under this doctrine, a negligent plaintiff can nonetheless recover if he is able to show that the defendant had the last opportunity to avoid the accident. Though the stated rationale has differed depending on the court adopting the doctrine, the underlying idea is to mitigate the harshness of the contributory negligence rule. The defendant can also use this doctrine as a defense. If the plaintiff has the last clear chance to avoid the accident, the defendant will not be liable. The Restatement Second of Torts explains the doctrine in detail as follows 479. LAST CLEAR CHANCE HELPLESS PLAINTIFF A plaintiff who has negligently subjected himself to a risk of harm from the defendant s subsequent negligence may recover for harm caused thereby if, immediately preceding the harm, a the plaintiff is unable to avoid it by the exercise of reasonable vigilance and care, and b the defendant is negligent in failing to utilize with reasonable care and competence his then existing opportunity to avoid the harm, when he i knows of the plaintiff s situation and realizes or has reason to realize the peril involved in it or ii would discover the situation and thus have reason to realize the peril, if he were to exercise the vigilance which it is then his duty to the plaintiff to exercise. 480. LAST CLEAR CHANCE INATTENTIVE PLAINTIFF A plaintiff who, by the exercise of reasonable vigilance, could discover the danger created by the defendant s negligence in time to avoid the harm to him, can recover if, but only if, the defendant a knows of the plaintiff s situation, and b realizes or has reason to realize that the plaintiff is inattentive and therefore unlikely to discover his peril in time to avoid the harm, and c thereafter is negligent in failing to utilize with reasonable care and competence his th ... more details
Unreferenced stub auto yes date December 2009 Civil procedure United States Wiktionary About the legal term the language use Reply The reply is a response by plaintiff to defendant s answer . A reply occurs only when defendant has asserted a counterclaim or the court has ordered a reply. It is important to keep in mind that plaintiff in this context may also refer to an implead ed party. So, if a defendant impleads a party, this new party is the third party defendant and the original defendant is the third party plaintiff. The third party plaintiff must file a complaint on the third party defendant, who then must answer. The court may order a reply to this third party defendant s answer. DEFAULTSORT Reply Legal Term Category Legal terms Law term stub it Replica ... more details
A prejudgment writ of attachment may be ordered in a legal action where a plaintiff has demonstrated meritorious allegations, fraud in the underlying action, or that defendant may attempt to dispose of or hide assets from the court. In this context, a prejudgment writ of attachment functions much like a temporary restraining order TRO , which preserves the status quo pending a final resolution of the dispute. However, unlike a TRO, a prejudgment writ of attachment provides a source of financial recovery for a plaintiff. Usually, a plaintiff seeking a prejudgment writ of attachment must post a surety bond of up to two times the amount of the damages claimed by the plaintiff. See Attachment law for more on attachment. DEFAULTSORT Prejudgment Writ Of Attachment Category Judicial remedies Category Legal terms ... more details
Unreferenced auto yes date December 2009 Judicial remedies In the law of civil procedure , election of remedies is the situation in which a winning party in a lawsuit must choose the means by which its injury will be remedied. For example, if a court finds that the plaintiff s painting was stolen by the defendant , then the plaintiff has two possible routes to restore the loss. The plaintiff can elect to either receive monetary damages equal to the entire value of the painting, or the plaintiff can ask the court to order the return of the stolen property plus some minor amount of compensation for the suffering caused by its deprivation . However, the plaintiff cannot have both, and must therefore make an election of one or the other. Under the old common law of England , a party had to make an election of remedies at the time that the complaint was filed. Most jurisdictions have since abandoned that requirement. Plaintiffs generally may now file initial pleadings that seek alternative means of relief, and need not make the election of remedies until a judgment is rendered as to the liability of the defendant. DEFAULTSORT Election Of Remedies Category Civil procedure Category Judicial remedies Law term stub ... more details
unreferenced date August 2010 Unreferenced stub auto yes date December 2009 Security for costs is a common law legal concept of application only in law of costs costs jurisdictions, and is an order sought from a court in litigation . The general rule in costs jurisdiction is that costs follow the event . In other words, the loser in litigation legal proceedings must pay the legal costs of the successful party. Where a defendant has a reasonable apprehension that its legal costs will not be paid for by the plaintiff if the defendant is successful, the defendant can apply to the court for an order that the plaintiff provide security for costs. Furthermore, the amount that is ordered by the Judge is in direct correlation to the strength or weakness of the plaintiff s case brought herewith.The weaker the probability of the plaintiff prevailing, the higher the security order. Typically a claimant will be outside the jurisdiction of the court the law of security for costs recognises that orders of the court relating to payment of a party s legal costs can be very difficult to enforce in non common law jurisdictions, and so will order security to be provided. Security can also be ordered where a plaintiff is insolvent, or prone to vexatious litigation. Security is usually provided in the form of a bank cheque paid into the court, or held in a escrow trust account operated jointly by both the plaintiff s and defendant s lawyers. If the defendant is successful, the money can be applied against the costs order. If the claimant is successful, the security is returned to the claimant. DEFAULTSORT Security For Costs Category Common law Category Legal costs Law stub ... more details
Dyer s case 1414 2 Hen. V, fol. 5, pl. 26 is an old English contract law case concerning restraint of trade and the doctrine of Consideration in English law consideration . Facts Mr John Dyer had given a promise to not exercise his trade in the same town as the plaintiff for six months but the plaintiff had promised nothing in return. The plaintiff had not bothered to attend court for the hearing. Judgment On hearing the plaintiff s attempt to enforce this restraint, Hull J exclaimed, Cquote In my opinion, you might have demurred upon him that the obligation is void, inasmuch as the condition is against the common law and by God , if the plaintiff were here, he should go to prison until he had paid a fine to the King. ref The old French, as spoken in English courts at the time was reported as, A ma intent vous purres avec demurre sur ley que l obligation est voide ce que le condition est encounter common ley et per Dieu se le plaintiff fuit icy il irra al prison tanque il ust fait fine au Roy. ref See also Consideration in English law Privity in English law Notes reflist 2 Category English consideration cases Category 1414 in law ... more details
Rowland v. Christian , case citation 69 Cal. 2d 108 1968 , was a legal case case decided by the Supreme Court of California that eliminated the categories of invitee , licensee , and trespasser when determining the duty of care owed by a possessor of land to the people on the land, replacing the classifications with a general duty of care. Factual background The plaintiff was a guest in the apartment of the defendant. The plaintiff requested to use the bathroom, and in the bathroom injured his hand on a broken water faucet handle. The defendant had complained to the landlord about the broken handle but did not warn the plaintiff. The trial judge granted summary judgment on behalf of the defendant, and the plaintiff appealed. Decision Common law distinctions between an invitee, licensee, and trespasser can determine the duty of care owed by a land possessor to the plaintiff. A duty of care to warn about the dangerous condition of area is owed to invitees and licensees under these distinctions, but not to trespassers. The California Supreme Court considered these classifications to be an unhelpful shortcut when determining negligence, and that a general duty of care should be owed to all visitors to land. The summary judgment for the defendant was reversed because the defendant should have warned the plaintiff of the broken handle. ref Henderson et al. The Torts Process, Seventh Edition. Aspen Publishers, New York, NY 2007. p. 223 227 ref References reflist Category Tort law Category 1968 in United States case law Category California state case law ... more details
Unreferenced date August 2009 Fictitious defendants are real persons a plaintiff believes it has a cause of action against in a lawsuit who, for one reason or another, cannot be identified by the plaintiff before a lawsuit is commenced. As the statute of limitations for many torts such as medical malpractice is generally very short, plaintiffs under pressure to issue an originating process such as a statement of claim often use contrived names in the title of proceedings most commonly John Doe or Jane Doe and identify the person s role in the lawsuit in the body of the pleading. Generally, this tactic preserves the limitation period and, with leave of the court, the plaintiff can later substitute the real name of the defendant once it is learned during the Discovery law discovery process. For example, in a medical malpractice case, the plaintiff may have been treated by physician doctors and nurses he or she may have seen, but did not know the names of at the time. This is particularly true of plaintiffs who may have been unconscious during long periods of their treatment. At the beginning of the lawsuit, it may be impossible to determine which medical professional was negligent , so all persons who treated the plaintiff must be sued. However, the hospital records available to the plaintiff may be limited or unintelligible, and the hospital that does have the records may refuse to release them unless litigation is pending. Typically, the plaintiff will plead as follows In the case ..., and at all relevant times was the plaintiff s treating physician. The identity of the treating physician is unknown to the plaintiff despite the plaintiff s best efforts to identify the doctor. Once the originating pleading is issued, the plaintiff is usually required to work with all deliberate ... of. If the plaintiff delays too long, the court generally will not allow amendment of the claim ... become Statute of limitations statute barred . However, the plaintiff may not, through the action ... more details
Multiple issues intromissing March 2009 notable March 2009 unreferenced March 2009 orphan October 2009 Facts The plaintiff owned a Race track racing track which charged admissions to people who placed bets on the races. Taylor the Defendant was a neighbour of Victoria Park . Taylor built a platform on his land to view the races and odds being given at the track. Taylor broadcast this information to people participating in off track betting . The Plaintiff argued that ticket sales were lower as a result of Taylor s broadcasts as people who had previously come to the track were now listening on the radio instead and Taylor was profiting at the expense of the plaintiff. Judgement The plaintiff argued for an injunction against Taylor on 2 major grounds 1 Spectacle The plaintiff argued that spectacle is property. He reasoned that the value of an object to the creator should be a factor in determining whether or not a thing should be recognized as property. The minority judgement was one of support based upon the existence of underlying legal principles. The majority of the court disagreed, however, stating that there existed no precedent for this argument and as such, spectacle should not be considered property. 2 Nuisance The plaintiff argued that Taylor was acting as a nuisance , resulting in an unreasonable and significant interference with the plaintiff s use and enjoyment of property. The majority disagreed, stating there to have been no nuisance as the act of looking over a fence does not interfere with the proceedings of a racecourse . The Court decided not to expand the categories of nuisance. The plaintiff also suggested privacy and non natural use of property as possible foundations for injunction. These arguments were dismissed. Lasting Ramifications of This Case The test for Nuisance is established Nuisance is the unreasonable and significant interference with the use and enjoyment of the property the act of looking over and broadcasting events taking place w ... more details
Northern Territory v Mengel 1995 185 CLR 307 is an Australian law case dealing with the conceptual framework of tort law . It holds that there is can be no cause of action if the defendant did not owe the plaintiff a duty of care and did not specifically intend to cause harm to the plaintiff. It overruled the decision in Beaudesert . External links http www.austlii.edu.au au cases cth HCA 1995 65.html Category Australian tort case law Category 1995 in case law Category 1995 in Australia case law stub ... more details
. One variant allows plaintiffs to recover only if the plaintiff s negligence is not greater than the defendant s viz., the plaintiff s negligence must not be more than 50 of the combined negligence of both parties . The other variant allows plaintiffs to recover only if the plaintiff s negligence is not as great as the defendant s viz., the plaintiff s negligence must be less than 50 of the combined ... degrees of fault are much less willing to award damages to a plaintiff who is equally at fault than ... by a plaintiff. For practical reasons, a plaintiff who faces the defense of comparative negligence may wish to join all potentially culpable defendants in his action because the plaintiff s negligence ... though the plaintiff may not be able actually to get compensation from some of them for example where an insolvent individual and a major corporation were both negligent in causing plaintiff s harm. See ... more details
Karaduman is a Turkish language Turkish surname and may refer to Burak Karaduman , Turkish footballer Mahmut Karaduman , Turkish national and the plaintiff in a famous libel case surname Category Turkish language surnames de Karaduman tr Karaduman ... more details
Merge from Prayer legal term date November 2010 Unreferenced auto yes date December 2009 Civil procedure United States A prayer for relief , in the law of civil procedure , is a portion of a complaint law complaint in which the plaintiff describes the remedies that the plaintiff seeks from the court. For example, the plaintiff may ask for an award of compensatory damages , punitive damages , attorney s fees , an injunction to make the defendant stop a certain activity, or all of these. The request for a specific amount of money may be referred to as an ad quod damnum ad damnum clause . See also Prayer legal term DEFAULTSORT Prayer For Relief Category Legal terms Law term stub ... more details
Orphan date January 2011 A plea in equity , in the common law , is a statement of facts raised by a defendant which operates as a defense to an equitable claim raised by the plaintiff. Traditionally, the plea is required to state new facts, additional to those set forth in the plaintiff s bill in equity , and these facts must support a dispositive defense to the claim such as the passage of a statute of limitations , plaintiff s prior waiver or Settlement law settlement of the claim, or res judicata . In the United States , the legal and equitable jurisdiction of most courts has been merged, and the plea in equity has been abolished. However, it remains a valid plea in certain states. In Virginia , a plea in equity may still be filed, and such a filing entitles either party to request a jury trial to decide the facts alleged in the plea. Category Common law law term stub ... more details
by the City of Houston, TX Houston that prevented the plaintiff from operating his muffin restaurant .... The Suit notes that the exact employees of the City of Houston who stopped the plaintiff from operating the plaintiff s muffin restaurant were members of the plaintiff s local home owners association. The home owners association had visited the plaintiffs restaurant with a contract to force the plaintiff ... stated at that meeting that if the plaintiff didn t do what the home owners association wanted they knew ... of Houston to allow the plaintiff to operate the muffin restaurant. Despite advice of the city s counsel the workers continued to stop the plaintiff from operating plaintiff s restaurant. The employees ... bakery closed that they had chosen to not enforce on dozens of other businesses. The plaintiff ... marketing campaign that may have influenced the home owners association. The plaintiff ... 2010 20100928.pdf city of houston minutes to meeting 9 28 2010 ref The plaintiff claims he suffered ... and in general requests a disincentivizer levied against the city. It is possible that if the plaintiff were to prevail in jury trial that the plaintiff could win damages measured in the millions. Legal Basis and Constitutional Questions The plaintiff seeks to have the question found at trial as to if the plaintiff was violating a parking ordinance or not. The plaintiff then seeks to have the question found that even if the plaintiff were to have been found in violation of the ordinance, did the city have the ability to enforce the penal ordinance on the plaintiff while also choosing to not enforce ... given that they were working on one day meeting the requirements of the law. The plaintiff ... was so arbitrary or capricious that it is invalid. The plaintiff also questions if the Ninth Amendment ... more details
Cquote R. Scarlett, for the plaintiff, having opened the pleadings Sir J. Scarlett, as the plaintiff s leading counsel, contended, that the plaintiff had the right to begin, the affirmative of the issue being upon his client and he argued, that, as the issue was, whether the plaintiff had performed ... upon the plaintiff to give evidence of his skill. Lord Tenterden, C. J. That he occupied too ..., that gives the plaintiff a right to begin, to shew the extent of the injury he has received ... and arms was not a general issue, and did not throw any necessity of proof upon the plaintiff ... ought to begin and where there are several issues, and the proof of one of them lies upon the plaintiff ... at the plaintiff. Pleas without the general issue , that the plaintiff was a mariner on board a ship, of which the defendant was commander, and that the plaintiff was engaged in a mutiny, to suppress which the defendant committed the trespasses. Replication, de injuria . Vaughan, Serjt., for the plaintiff ... thought that the onus of proving damages gave the plaintiff a right to begin but his Lordship said ... of skill or no skill, the proof of the affirmative is proof of the skill. The plaintiff ..., has put the plaintiff s skill in issue. Now, as the defendant has denied the skill of the plaintiff, it lies upon the plaintiff to prove it and the last case cited shews that Lord Chief Justice Best thought that the plaintiff should have begun, and would have so held, except that he felt himself bound ... was performed by the plaintiff without proper and sufficient skill, and that the operation ... was performed as aforesaid, you justify the publication. The third plea is, that the plaintiff ... by proving the plaintiff s skill. Now, upon that, do you wish to make any further observation? The defendant. I charge the plaintiff with unskilfulness, and come here prepared to prove it. Lord Tenterden ..., at least, of the cases cited, the plaintiff was seeking to recover unliquidated damages. I ... more details
caused the injuries to plaintiff s lip and eye, respectively, and both might have been discharged ... they did not do so with ordinary prudence , and that the plaintiff was not contributorily negligent .... The court ruled that Simonson did not however point out wherein the plaintiff s evidence was lacking ... of care i.e., they were both negligent and that the plaintiff s conduct did not contribute to his ... required that the burden of proving which of the defendants had caused either or both of plaintiff ... it would be impossible for the plaintiff to show which of the two negligent actors had caused his ... more details
for reimbursement for losses incurred in reliance on a contract knowingly put the plaintiff ... whatever he could prove the plaintiff would have lost if the contract had been fully performed ... whereby the plaintiff would cut timber under the defendant s timber sale, and the defendant would be responsible for hauling the timber away from the site of the timber sale. The plaintiff ... to make the plaintiff s operation, which was losing money, viable, and claimed not for loss of profits but for compensation for expenditures. The defendant argued that the plaintiff s operation lost money not because of a lack of trucks but because of the plaintiff s inefficiency, and, further, that even if the defendant had breached the contract the plaintiff should not be awarded damages because ... because the plaintiff was awarded only nominal damages, and Berger J. said, at p. 117 blockquote The law of contract compensates a plaintiff for damages resulting from the defendant s breach it does not compensate a plaintiff for damages resulting from his making a bad bargain. Where it can be seen that the plaintiff would have incurred a loss on the contract as a whole, the expenses he has incurred .... In these circumstances, the true consequence of the defendant s breach is that the plaintiff is released ... expectations of the world of commerce. The burden of risk would be shifted from the plaintiff to the defendant. The defendant would become the insurer of the plaintiff s enterprise. Moreover, the amount ... but in relation to the inefficiency with which the plaintiff carried out the contract. The greater ... by the plaintiff would entail the award of damages not to compensate the plaintiff but to punish ... where there is a breach of contract knowingly, as this would be the case, to put a plaintiff ... the defendant who is the plaintiff in the counterclaim, if he was right in his claim, would indeed be in a better ... more details
Unreferenced date June 2007 A contribution claim is a Cause of action claim brought by one or more defendant s to a lawsuit for money damages brought by a plaintiff . A contribution claim asserts the party usually a defendant is entitled to contribution from a third party for any money damages awarded to the plaintiff. For example, if a plaintiff sues a homeowner for damages caused by a garage door, the defendant homeowner could add a third party, the manufacturer of the garage door to contribute to any damages awarded to the plaintiff according to the proportionate share of responsibility, legal liability liability , or fault assigned to the homeowner and the manufacturer by the jury . In most cases, contribution claims are brought like the original lawsuit itself. The claim must be personally served on the new, third party defendant, by the third party plaintiff the defendant bringing the claim for contribution relief . In contrast, a counter claim asserts that the party usually a defendant is entitled to offset the damages awarded to plaintiff by the proportionate share of any responsibility, liability, or fault assigned to the plaintiff by the jury. Finally, a cross claim is the same as a counter claim or contribution claim, except that it is asserted by a defendant against other defendants. Counter claims and cross claims do not require personal service because no new parties are being added to the lawsuit. In some United States state court systems , a contribution claim must be opened as a new case, and thus the defendant must pay for a Court costs filing fee , Docket court docket number, or index number . In other states, however, no additional fee is required. See also Joint and several liability Tort law DEFAULTSORT Contribution Claim Legal Category Tort law Category Lawsuits law term stub ... more details
Encyclopedia
top
