Reasoning of the Court
法律案件的结果的英文(3篇)
第1篇Case Overview:The landmark legal case of Smith vs. Johnson, which has been the subject of extensive media coverage and public interest, has finally reached its conclusion after a lengthy and complex trial. The case centered around a dispute over land ownership rights, with both parties presenting compelling arguments and evidence.Facts of the Case:The case began when Mr. James Smith, a local farmer, and Mr. Robert Johnson, a real estate developer, both laid claim to a 50-acre plot of land situated on the outskirts of the city. The land in question had been unused for years and was believed to have significant potential for both agricultural and residential development. Both parties had legal documents and historical records supporting their claims, leading to a protracted legal battle.The Arguments:The trial saw both parties presenting their respective cases. Mr. Smith argued that his great-grandfather had purchased the land in the 19th century, and the deed had been passed down through generations. He further claimed that the land had been used for farming purposes continuously since then, providing a strong case for adverse possession. On the other hand, Mr. Johnson presented evidence that the land had been part of his family's estate for over a century and that the deeds had been registered with the appropriate authorities.The Evidence:The court heard testimonies from a variety of witnesses, including historians, real estate experts, and legal scholars. Mr. Smith's witnesses spoke about the historical use of the land for farming, while Mr. Johnson's witnesses highlighted the family's long-standing ownership and the legal registration of the deeds. Additionally, both partiessubmitted a plethora of documents, including property tax records, surveys, and legal correspondence.The Court's Decision:After a thorough examination of the evidence and testimonies, the court delivered its verdict. The presiding judge, Honorable Eliza Thompson, announced the following decision:Verdict:The court finds that Mr. James Smith is the rightful owner of the 50-acre plot of land in question. The evidence presented by Mr. Smith, particularly the historical use of the land for farming purposes, supports the claim of adverse possession. Furthermore, the court notes that Mr. Johnson's evidence, while compelling, does not conclusively prove continuous and exclusive ownership of the land. Therefore, the court rules in favor of Mr. Smith.Reasoning:The court's decision was based on several key factors. Firstly, the court recognized the principle of adverse possession, which allows for the acquisition of property rights through continuous and uninterrupted use over a certain period. The evidence presented by Mr. Smith demonstrated that the land had been used for farming purposes without interruption for a significant portion of the 19th century and into the 20th century.Secondly, the court took into consideration the lack of evidence regarding Mr. Johnson's family's continuous and exclusive use of the land. While the deeds were registered, the court noted that the land had been unused for a considerable time and that there was no clear evidence of Mr. Johnson's family utilizing the land for any purpose during that period.Impact of the Verdict:The verdict in the Smith vs. Johnson case has significant implications for land ownership laws and practices. It reinforces the principle ofadverse possession and highlights the importance of continuous and uninterrupted use of land for property rights acquisition. The case also serves as a reminder to property owners to maintain clear and accurate records of their land ownership and to actively utilize their land to prevent potential disputes.Public Reaction:The public has reacted to the verdict with mixed emotions. Many local farmers and landowners have expressed relief and support for the decision, viewing it as a victory for the principle of adverse possession. Conversely, some developers and real estate professionals have criticized the verdict, arguing that it could discourage investment and development in the area.Conclusion:In conclusion, the Smith vs. Johnson land dispute case has provided a clear and definitive answer to the question of land ownership rights. The court's decision has set a precedent for future cases and willlikely influence land ownership laws and practices in the region. While the outcome has been met with varying degrees of satisfaction, the case has undoubtedly sparked important discussions about property rights and the use of land.第2篇In the bustling city of New York, a landmark legal battle recently concluded with a verdict that has sparked widespread debate and attention. The case, titled "Smith v. Johnson," involved a contentious land dispute that had been dragging on for years. This article aims to provide a comprehensive analysis of the case's outcome, highlighting the key arguments, legal precedents, and the implications of the verdict.I. Background of the CaseThe dispute began when two neighboring families, the Smiths and the Johnsons, both claimed ownership of a piece of land situated at the heart of a bustling urban area. The land had been in the Smith familyfor generations, while the Johnsons claimed that they had legally purchased the property from a third party.The conflict escalated when both families attempted to develop the land, leading to a series of legal battles. The case eventually reached the Supreme Court of New York, where it was heard by a panel of judges.II. Key ArgumentsThe Smiths argued that they had clear and uninterrupted possession ofthe land for many years, which should entitle them to ownership. They cited historical documents and witnesses who supported their claim.On the other hand, the Johnsons presented evidence of their legal purchase of the property. They argued that the Smiths' claim was basedon an outdated and fraudulent document.III. Legal PrecedentsThe court carefully examined relevant legal precedents to guide their decision. One of the key precedents was the "Adverse Possession" doctrine, which states that if a person possesses land openly, exclusively, and continuously for a certain period, they can acquire ownership by prescription.The court also considered the "Statute of Frauds" and "Equitable Estoppel" principles, which require written agreements and prohibit parties from being unfairly prejudiced by their own actions.IV. The VerdictAfter a lengthy and thorough examination of the evidence and legal precedents, the Supreme Court of New York ruled in favor of the Johnsons. The court found that the Johnsons had legally purchased the property and had established adverse possession, thereby acquiring ownership rights.The court held that the Smiths' claim was based on a fraudulent document and that they had not demonstrated continuous and exclusive possessionof the land for the required period.V. Implications of the VerdictThe verdict in the Smith v. Johnson case has significant implicationsfor property law in New York and beyond. Here are some of the key takeaways:1. The decision reinforces the importance of legal documentation in property transactions. Parties must ensure that their agreements are properly documented and comply with the Statute of Frauds.2. The court's emphasis on adverse possession highlights the need for clear and uninterrupted possession of land to establish ownership rights.3. The verdict serves as a warning against fraudulent activities in property transactions. Parties must exercise due diligence and verify the authenticity of documents before entering into agreements.4. The case has sparked a debate on the fairness of property laws and the rights of long-standing residents versus new owners. Critics argue that the decision may disadvantage individuals who have lived on landfor generations.VI. ConclusionThe verdict in the Smith v. Johnson case has sent ripples through the legal community and the public at large. While the Johnsons have been declared the rightful owners of the disputed land, the case has raised important questions about property rights, legal documentation, and the fairness of property laws.As the debate continues, it is crucial for all parties involved to understand the implications of the verdict and the legal precedents that guided the court's decision. Only through a thorough examination of these issues can we hope to ensure a fair and just property system for all.第3篇Introduction:In the realm of law, the outcome of a legal case is often a subject of great interest and debate. This essay aims to provide a detailedanalysis of a particular legal case, focusing on the key issues, arguments, and the final judgment rendered by the court. The case in question involves a complex set of facts and legal principles, making it a compelling example of the judicial process.Background:The legal case revolves around a dispute between two parties, Party Aand Party B. Party A, a corporation, accused Party B, an individual, of breaching a contract. The contract in question pertained to the supplyof goods and services, and the parties had entered into it with the intention of establishing a business relationship.Facts of the Case:The facts of the case revealed that Party B had failed to deliver the goods and services as stipulated in the contract. Furthermore, Party B had failed to provide any explanation or justification for the breach.As a result, Party A suffered significant financial losses and sought damages from Party B.Arguments and Issues:The case presented several key issues and arguments, which were crucial in shaping the final judgment. These included:1. Contractual Interpretation:The court had to determine the meaning and scope of the contract between the parties. This involved examining the language used in the contract and considering the context in which the agreement was made.2. Breach of Contract:The court had to establish whether Party B had indeed breached the contract. This required analyzing the evidence presented by both parties, including emails, letters, and other documentary evidence.3. Damages:The court had to determine the appropriate amount of damages that Party A should be awarded. This involved assessing the extent of the losses suffered by Party A and considering any contributory factors that may have mitigated the damages.Judgment and Outcome:After considering the arguments and evidence presented by both parties, the court rendered its judgment. The following key points were highlighted in the judgment:1. Contractual Interpretation:The court held that the contract between the parties was clear and unambiguous. The language used in the contract was straightforward, and there was no room for interpretation. Therefore, the court concludedthat Party B had indeed breached the contract by failing to deliver the goods and services.2. Breach of Contract:The court found that Party B had breached the contract by failing to deliver the goods and services as agreed. The evidence presented by Party A, including emails and letters, supported the claim that Party B had failed to fulfill its obligations under the contract.3. Damages:The court awarded damages to Party A in the amount of $500,000. This amount was calculated based on the evidence presented by Party A, which demonstrated the extent of the financial losses suffered. The court also took into account any contributory factors that may have mitigated the damages.Reasoning:The court's reasoning in reaching its decision was based on thefollowing key principles:1. Contract Law:The court applied the principles of contract law to determine the obligations and rights of the parties. The court emphasized the importance of fulfilling contractual obligations and the consequences of breaching a contract.2. Precedent:The court referred to relevant legal precedents to support its decision. These precedents provided guidance on how similar cases had been decided in the past, ensuring consistency and fairness in the judicial process.3. Equity:The court considered the principle of equity, which allows the court to take into account any mitigating factors that may affect the outcome of the case. In this case, the court determined that Party A's losses were significant and justified the award of damages.Conclusion:The outcome of this legal case serves as a compelling example of the judicial process and the application of legal principles. The court's thorough analysis of the facts, arguments, and evidence led to a fair and just decision. The case highlights the importance of fulfilling contractual obligations and the consequences of breaching a contract. It also demonstrates the role of the court in ensuring equity and fairness in legal disputes.。
Steps in Briefing a Case 【案例简报的流程】
Steps in Briefing a Case 【案例简报的流程】1.Heading【标题】2.Statement of Facts【陈述案情】3.Procedural History【既往程序】4.Legal Issues【法律问题】5.Arguments of the Parties【双方主张】6.Rule of Law or Legal Principle Applied 【法律规范，即适用的法律】7.Holding【判决】8.Reasoning of the Court【判决理由】9.Separate Opinions【审判庭内部异议】10.Additional Comments/Personal Impressions 【后记/感想】1.Heading【标题】Case Name (parties)【案件名称暨当事人】Citation【引用的判例集】2.Statement of Facts【陈述案情】Identify the legally important facts【重要实体事实】•Those facts that tend to prove o r disprove an issue before the court.【正面或反面论证某法律问题的诉讼外事实】•What happened before the parties entered the judicial system.【司法程序启动前发生的事实】Identify the procedurally important facts 【重要程序事实】1.the cause of action (plaintiff’s claim)【案由】2.relief the plaintiff requested,【诉请的救济】3.defenses, if any, the defendant raised.【抗辩】3.Procedural History【既往程序】How did this case get to this particular court?【如何诉至本院】What happened in the lower court(s)?【下级法院的诉讼】The decision(s) of the lower court(s). 【下级法院的裁判】Could be judge or jury deciding.The damages/relief awarded.【救济】Who appealed. 【上诉人】4.Legal Issues【法律问题】question(s) the court being asked to decide【诉至法院，有待处理】Court will usually clearly state the issue(s).【法院通常将其指明】You should state the issues in a way that they can be answered with a yes or a no.【在brief中应该以一般疑问句形式陈述】eg· Did defendant’s conduct create an implied contract?【例如：被告的行为是否以默示形式订立合同？】eg· Did trial court judge improperly exclude evidence?【例如：初审法院排除证据是否不当？】Substantive Issue【实体问题】The point of law in disputeProcedural Issue 【程序问题】What did lower court do wrong, according to appellant?【上诉人所主张的下级法院错误之处】5.Arguments of the Parties【双方主张】What are the positions or arguments of both parties?【双方立场、论点】Why does each party think they should win the case?【双方如何论证】6.Rule of Law or Legal Principle Applied 【法律规范，即适用的法律】The Rule of Law is the legal principle that controls the issue before the Court.【即调整争议问题的法】The Court will apply the Rule to the facts of the case to determine the correct outcome of the issue it is being asked to decide.【法院据以对照事实，认定诉请处理的法律问题】can be:【可能是】1.a constitutional provision;【宪法条款】2.a statutory provision;【制定法条款】3.an administrative rule or regulation;【行政命令】4.a rule developed through prior controlling case law; or a rule created by thecourt in the present case. 【判例法】7.Holding【判决】The disposition of the case.【对案件的处理】Who did the court rule in favor of【谁胜诉】What remedy was granted.【救济】If Appellate Court, is the ruling of the lower court【上诉法院中，判决对象是下级法院的裁判】Affirmed【维持原判】Reversed【撤销原判】Remanded for further proceedings【还押候审】Affirmed in part and Reversed in part 【部分维持，部分撤销】8.Reasoning of the Court【判决理由】The most important section of a case brief.【brief的最重要之点】This section will be fairly lengthy and should show step by step how the court reached its decision.【该部分应逐步展示法院论证其结论的过程，篇幅较长】Describe the analysis the court follows in reaching its decision 【法院的分析】The chain of argument which led the judges to rule as they did. 【论点间的逻辑链条】How the court applies the rule(s) of law to the particular facts andcircumstances of the case.【法律规范与个案事实的关联性】9.Separate Opinions【审判庭内部异议】Explain why these judges disagreed with the majority.【阐释这些少数派法官的观点】Concurrence 【理由不同】a separate opinion in which one or more of the judges agrees (concurs) with the resultreached by the majority of the court but has different reasoning for reaching that result.【结论上赞同多数意见，但理由不同】Dissent 【反对结论】10.Additional Comments/Personal Impressions 【后记/感想】What was the impact (legal/social) of the decision?【法律、社会影响】What do you think of the judges’ decision?【评价该判决】What would happen if the case had been decided in China?【该案型在中国的处理】Anything else of interest about the case or the law involved.【其他感兴趣之处】。
法律案例评析英文(3篇)
第1篇Introduction:Legal cases are an integral part of the legal system, providing precedents and shaping the interpretation of laws. This essay aims to analyze a hypothetical legal case, Smith v. Johnson, and discuss the key issues, arguments, and outcomes. The case revolves around the interpretation of a contract and the principles of contract law.Background:Smith and Johnson entered into a contract for the sale of a property. The contract was drafted and signed by both parties, specifying the terms and conditions of the sale. However, disputes arose between Smith and Johnson regarding the interpretation of certain clauses in the contract. Smith filed a lawsuit against Johnson, seeking specific performance and damages.Facts of the Case:1. Smith and Johnson entered into a contract for the sale of a property.2. The contract was drafted and signed by both parties.3. The contract contained certain clauses that were subject to dispute.4. Smith filed a lawsuit against Johnson, seeking specific performance and damages.Issues in the Case:1. Interpretation of Contract Clauses: The primary issue in the case revolves around the interpretation of certain clauses in the contract. Both parties presented different interpretations of the clauses, leading to a dispute.2. Breach of Contract: Johnson argued that he had not breached the contract, as he believed that the interpretation of the clauses was in his favor. On the other hand, Smith contended that Johnson had breached the contract by not adhering to the agreed-upon terms.3. Specific Performance: Smith sought specific performance, which would require Johnson to fulfill his obligations under the contract. Johnson opposed this, arguing that it would be unjust and unenforceable.4. Damages: Smith also claimed damages for the breach of contract. Johnson denied the claim, asserting that the breach was minor and did not cause significant harm.Arguments and Rationale:1. Interpretation of Contract Clauses: The court would analyze the language used in the contract to determine the parties' intentions. The court would consider the plain meaning of the clauses, the overall context of the contract, and any relevant extrinsic evidence, such as correspondence between the parties.2. Breach of Contract: The court would determine whether Johnson's actions or omissions constituted a breach of contract. The court would consider the parties' obligations under the contract and whether Johnson's conduct failed to meet those obligations.3. Specific Performance: The court would weigh the factors relevant to granting specific performance. These factors include the nature of the contract, the availability of alternative remedies, and the potential hardship on the non-breaching party. The court would also consider whether granting specific performance would be equitable.4. Damages: The court would assess the damages claimed by Smith. The court would consider the extent of the breach, the foreseeability of the damages, and the mitigation efforts of both parties.Outcome:Based on the analysis of the arguments and the applicable legal principles, the court ruled in favor of Smith. The court held that the interpretation of the contract clauses favored Smith's position. The court found that Johnson had breached the contract by not fulfilling his obligations. The court granted specific performance, ordering Johnson to fulfill his obligations under the contract. Additionally, the courtawarded damages to Smith, considering the extent of the breach and the harm caused to him.Conclusion:The case of Smith v. Johnson highlights the complexities involved in contract law and the interpretation of contracts. The court's decision emphasizes the importance of clear and unambiguous language in contracts, as well as the need for parties to adhere to their obligations. Thiscase serves as a precedent for future contract disputes, guiding courts in interpreting contracts and determining the appropriate remedies for breaches. It underscores the significance of legal analysis and the role of the judiciary in ensuring justice and upholding the rule of law.第2篇IntroductionLegal cases play a crucial role in shaping the law and providing guidance for future disputes. The case of Smith v. Johnson is a notable example that highlights the complexities and nuances of property law, particularly concerning the ownership of real estate. This analysis aims to dissect the key issues presented in the case, evaluate the reasoning of the court, and discuss the broader implications of the decision.Facts of the CaseThe case of Smith v. Johnson revolves around a dispute over the ownership of a piece of land situated in a bustling city. The plaintiff, Smith, claimed that he had purchased the land from the defendant, Johnson, several years prior. Johnson, however, alleged that the sale was void and that he retained ownership of the property.The dispute arose when Smith began developing the land, only to behalted by Johnson, who demanded that he cease all activities. Smith, claiming that he had been in possession of the property for an extended period, sought a declaratory judgment confirming his ownership.Issues in the CaseThe primary issue in the case was whether the sale of the land between Smith and Johnson was valid. The court had to consider several factors, including the existence of a valid contract, the transfer of ownership, and the intention of the parties involved.1. Validity of the Contract: The court had to determine whether the agreement between Smith and Johnson was legally binding. This involved examining the terms of the contract, the intention of the parties, and whether any fraud or misrepresentation had occurred.2. Transfer of Ownership: The court needed to establish whether ownership of the land had been successfully transferred from Johnson to Smith. This required a review of the conveyance process, including the execution of deeds and the recording of the transaction.3. Intention of the Parties: The court had to ascertain whether both Smith and Johnson intended to enter into a binding agreement. This was crucial in determining the validity of the sale and the parties' respective rights.Reasoning of the CourtThe court, after a thorough examination of the evidence, concluded that the sale of the land between Smith and Johnson was valid. The court's reasoning can be summarized as follows:1. Valid Contract: The court found that the agreement between Smith and Johnson was indeed a valid contract. The terms were clear, the intention of the parties was unambiguous, and there was no evidence of fraud or misrepresentation.2. Transfer of Ownership: The court confirmed that ownership of the land had been successfully transferred from Johnson to Smith. The conveyance process was completed correctly, and the deed was properly recorded.3. Intention of the Parties: The court ruled that both Smith and Johnson intended to enter into a binding agreement. There was no evidence to suggest that either party had any intention of reneging on the deal.Implications of the DecisionThe decision in Smith v. Johnson has several significant implications:1. Clarification of Property Law: The case provides clear guidance onthe requirements for a valid sale of real estate. It emphasizes the importance of a valid contract, proper conveyance, and the intention of the parties.2. Protection of Buyer's Rights: The decision reinforces the principle that buyers of real estate have the right to ownership once the sale has been completed. This protects buyers from claims by sellers who seek to void the transaction.3. Precedent for Future Cases: The case sets a precedent for similar disputes over property ownership. Other courts can refer to Smith v. Johnson when dealing with similar issues, ensuring consistency in the application of property law.ConclusionThe case of Smith v. Johnson serves as a valuable lesson in property law, illustrating the complexities involved in disputes over real estate ownership. The court's reasoning provides clear guidance on the requirements for a valid sale and the rights of buyers. This decisionnot only clarifies property law but also protects buyers from fraudulent sellers and sets a precedent for future cases.第3篇Introduction:Defamation law has been a significant area of legal debate, particularly in relation to public figures. This case analysis focuses on a landmark Supreme Court decision that addresses the issue of defamation and its application to public figures. The case involves a well-known public figure who sued a media outlet for defamation. This analysis will delve into the facts of the case, the legal principles involved, and the implications of the Supreme Court's decision.I. Case BackgroundA. Plaintiff's Background:The plaintiff, John Doe, is a well-known public figure and television personality. He has been involved in numerous controversies and has faced significant public scrutiny over the years.B. Defendant's Background:The defendant, ABC Media, is a major news organization that has been reporting on various public figures and events for many years.C. The Incident:In an article published by ABC Media, Doe was accused of engaging in illegal activities and was portrayed in a negative light. Doe filed a lawsuit against ABC Media, claiming defamation.II. Legal Principles InvolvedA. Defamation:Defamation is the communication of a false statement that harms the reputation of an individual. It can be libel (written) or slander (spoken). To prove defamation, the plaintiff must establish that the defendant made a false statement of fact, the statement was communicated to a third party, and the statement caused harm to the plaintiff's reputation.B. Public Figures:Public figures are individuals who are involved in public life and have gained widespread recognition. They are subject to a higher standard of proof in defamation cases, known as the "actual malice" standard.III. Supreme Court DecisionA. The Supreme Court's Rationale:The Supreme Court, in a unanimous decision, ruled in favor of ABC Media. The Court held that Doe, as a public figure, was required to prove that ABC Media acted with "actual malice" when publishing the defamatory statement.B. Actual Malice Standard:The Court emphasized that public figures must prove that the defendant knew the statement was false or acted with reckless disregard for the truth. This standard is designed to protect the First Amendment rights of the media and ensure that public figures do not silence criticism through defamation lawsuits.C. Implications of the Decision:The Supreme Court's decision has significant implications for defamation law and the rights of public figures. It establishes a higher burden of proof for public figures, making it more difficult for them to win defamation lawsuits against media outlets.IV. AnalysisA. The Importance of the Actual Malice Standard:The actual malice standard is crucial in balancing the rights of public figures and the media. It ensures that public figures do not suppress free speech and that the media can report on public matters without fear of being burdened with costly defamation lawsuits.B. The Role of Public Figures:Public figures play a critical role in our society, often serving asrole models or representatives of various interests. It is importantthat they are held to a higher standard of proof in defamation cases to prevent them from using the legal system to silence criticism.C. The Impact on Media Freedom:The Supreme Court's decision upholds the principle of media freedom and the importance of a free press. By requiring a higher burden of prooffor public figures, the Court encourages the media to report on public matters without fear of being sued for defamation.V. ConclusionThe Supreme Court's decision in this defamation case is a significant legal precedent that impacts the rights of public figures and the media. By establishing the actual malice standard, the Court ensures thatpublic figures cannot silence criticism and that the media can continue to report on public matters without fear of defamation lawsuits. This decision highlights the importance of a free press and the need for a balanced approach to defamation law.。
如何阅读英美判例
一、阅读判决书的意义：英美法的精华部分深藏于法官的判决意见里，通过阅读和分析法院判决书了解他们的法律推理和解释方法，提高我们的法律思维水平和解决法律问题的能力。
判决书在英语里用不同的词语表达，如opinion, decision, judgement等，我们翻译为“法官意见” 、“判决意见” 、“判决”等。
由于英美法院的判决书以说理充分、分析透彻的特点见长，所以在篇幅上都比较冗长，因此我们在阅读时，一要有耐心，二要抓要点。
那么怎么抓要点呢，这就需要我们对判决书的文体结构特点有一个概括地了解。
二、判决书的文体结构：（以美国为例）（一）抬头部分（Heading）1案件名称：主要表明当事方，但是有别于我国通常在案件名称内标明案由。
（如：“唐某杀人案” [刑事]，或“星星公司诉月亮公司担保合同纠纷案”[民事]）2 索引信息：例如该案件出自哪本案例集或判例汇编，第几卷，第几页等。
3 审理法院：在美国，因各州、审级不同而各有不同。
4 判决日期下面我们以“布什诉戈尔” 案Bush v. Gore, 531 U.S. 98 (2000) 为例作一说明：Bush v. Gore, 531 U.S. 98 (2000)（原告）诉（被告）（审理法院）（判决日所属年份）注意：① U.S. 指美国联邦最高法院(The Supreme Court of United States)。
② Plaintiff的位置也可能是appelant(上诉人), defendent的位置也可能appellee（被上诉人）。
初审案件：原告plaintiff, 被告：defendant中级上诉法院：原告appellant,被告appellee最高上诉法院：上诉方：petitioner,被上诉方：respondent（二）事实部分1．案件法律程序简介（procedual history）在事实部分之前，初审案件通常要简要交代案件当事人（parties）、案由（Cause of action）、起诉以及受理情况；上诉案件通常介绍一审案件的判决结果、当事人上诉及二审法院受理情况、二审法院判决结果。
震撼世界的审判中英互译
The Trial That Rocked the WorldJohn Scopes1、A buzz ran through the crowd as I took my place in the packed court on that sweltering July day in 1925. The counsel for my defence was the famous criminal lawyer Clarence Darrow. Leading counsel for the prosecution was William Jennings Bryan, the silver-tongued orator , three times Democratic nominee for President of the United States, and leader of the fundamentalist movement that had brought about my trial.2、A few weeks before I had been an unknown school-teacher in Dayton,a little town in the mountains of Tennessee. Now I was involved in a trial reported the world over. Seated in court, ready to testify on my behalf, were a dozen distinguished professors and scientists, led by Professor Kirtley Mather of Harvard University. More than 100 reporters were on hand, and even radio announcers, who for the first time in history were to broadcast a jury trial. "Don't worry, son, we'll show them a few tricks," Darrow had whispered, throwing a reassuring arm round my shoulder as we were waiting for the court to open.3、The case had erupted round my head not long after I arrived in Dayton as science master and football coach at the secondary school. For a number of years a clash had been building up between the fundamentalists and the modernists. The fundamentalists adhered to a literal interpretation of the Old Testament. The modernists, on the otherhand, accepted the theory advanced by Charles Darwin -- that all animal life, including monkeys and men, had evolved from a common ancestor.4、Fundamentalism was strong in Tennessee, and the state legislature had recently passed a law prohibiting the teaching of "any theory that denies the story of creation as taught in the Bible." The new law was aimed squarely at Darwin's theory of evolution. An engineer, George Rappelyea, used to argue with the local people against the law. During one such argument, Rappelyea said that nobody could teach biology without teaching evolution. Since I had been teaching biology, I was sent for.5、"Rappelyea is right," I told them.6、"Then you have been violating the law," one of them Said.7、"So has every other teacher," I replied. "Evolution is explained in Hunter's Civic Biology, and that's our textbook."8、Rappelyea then made a suggestion. "Let's take this thing to court," he said, "and test the legalityof it."9、When I was indicted on May 7, no one, least of all I, anticipated that my case would snowball into one of the most famous trials in U. S. history. The American Civil Liberties Union announced that it would take my case to the U. S Supreme Court if necessary to “establish that a teacher may tell the truth without being sent to jail." Then Bryan volunteered to assist the state in prosecuting me. Immediately therenownedlawyer Clarence Darrow offered his services to defend me. Ironically, I had not known Darrow before my trial but I had met Bryan when he had given a talk at my university. I admired him, although I did not agree with his views.10、By the time the trial began on July 10, our town of 1,500 people had taken on a circusatmosphere. The buildings along the main street were festoonedwith banners. The streets around the three-storey red brick law court sproutedwith rickety stands selling hot dogs, religious books and watermelons. Evangelists set up tents to exhortthe passersby. People from the surrounding hills, mostly fundamentalists, arrived to cheer Bryan against the " infidel outsiders." Among them was John Butler, who had drawn up the anti-evolution law. Butler was a 49-year-old farmer who before his election had never been out of his native county.11、The presiding judge was John Raulston, a florid-faced man who announced: "I'm just a reg’lar mountaineer jedge." Bryan, ageing and paunchy , was assisted in his prosecution by his son, also a lawyer, and Tennessee's brilliant young attorney-general, Tom Stewart. Besides the shrewd 68-year-old Darrow, my counsel included the handsome and magnetic Dudley Field Malone, 43, and Arthur Garfield Hays, quiet, scholarly and steeped in the law. In a trial in which religion played a key role, Darrow was an agnostic, Malone a Catholic and Hays a Jew. My father had come from Kentucky to be with me for the trial.12、The judge called for a local minister to open the session with prayer, and the trial got under way. Of the 12 jurors, three had never read any book except the Bible. One couldn't read. As my father growled, "That's one hell of a jury!"13、After the preliminary sparring over legalities, Darrow got up to make his opening statement. "My friend the attorney-general says that John Scopes knows what he is here for," Darrow drawled. "I know what he is here for, too. He is here because ignorance and bigotryare rampant, and it is a mighty strong combination."14、Darrow walked slowly round the baking court. "Today it is the teachers, "he continued, "and tomorrow the magazines, the books, the newspapers. After a while, it is the setting of man against man and creed against creed until we are marching backwards to the glorious age of the sixteenth century when bigots lighted faggots to burn the men who dared to bring any intelligence and enlightenment and Culture to the human mind. "15、"That damned infidel," a woman whispered loudly as he finished his address.16、The following day the prosecution began calling witnesses against me. Two of my pupils testified, grinning shyly at me, that I had taught them evolution, but added that they had not been contaminated by theexperience. Howard Morgan, a bright lad of 14, testified that I had taught that man was a mammal like cows, horses, dogs and cats.17、"He didn't say a cat was the same as a man?" Darrow asked.18、"No, sir," the youngster said. "He said man had reasoning power."19、"There is some doubt about that," Darrow snorted.20、After the evidence was completed, Bryan rose to address the jury. The issue was simple, he declared "The Christian believes that man came from above. The evolutionist believes that he must have come from below." The spectators chuckled and Bryan warmed to his work. In one hand he brandished a biology text as he denounced the scientists who had come to Dayton to testify for the defence.21、"The Bible," he thundered in his sonorous organ tones, " is not going to be driven out of this court by experts who come hundreds of miles to testify that they can reconcile evolution, with its ancestors in the jungle, with man made by God in His image and put here for His purpose as par t of a divine plan."22、As he finished, jaw out-thrust, eyes flashing, the audience burst into applauseand shouts of "Amen". Yet something was lacking. Gone was the fierce fervor of the days when Bryan had swept the political arena like a prairie fire. The crowd seemed to feel that their champion had not scorched the infidels with the hot breath of his oratory as he should have.23、Dudley Field Malone popped up to reply. "Mr. Bryan is not the only one who has the right to speak for the Bible,”he observed. "There are other people in this country who have given up their whole lives to God and religion. Mr. Bryan, with passionate spirit and enthusiasm, has given most of his life to politics." Bryan sipped from a jug of water as Malone's voice grew in volume. He appealed for intellectual freedom, and accused Bryan of calling for a duel to the death between science and religion. 24、"There is never a duel with the truth," he roared. "The truth always wins -- and we are not afraid of it. The truth does not need Mr. Bryan. The truth is eternal, immortal and needs no human agency to support it! "25、When Malone finished there was a momentary hush. Then the court broke into a storm of applause that surpassed that for Bryan. But although Malone had won the oratorical duel with Bryan, the judge ruled against permitting the scientists to testify for the defence.26、When the court adjourned, we found Dayton's streets swarming with strangers. Hawkerscried their wares on every corner. One shop announced: DARWIN IS RIGHT –INSIDE. (This was J. R. Darwin's Everything to Wear Store.) One entrepreneur rented a shop window to display an ape. Spectators paid to gaze at it and ponderwhether they might be related.27、"The poor brute cowered in a corner with his hands over his eyes, ”a reporter noted, "afraid it might be true. "28、H. L. Mencken wrote sulphurous dispatches sitting in his pants with a fan blowing on him, and there was talk of running him out of town for referring to the local citizenry as yokels . Twenty-two telegraphists were sending out 165,000 words a day on the trial.29、Because of the heat and a fear that the old court's floor might collapse, under the weight of the throng, the trial was resumed outside under the maples. More than 2,000 spectators sat on wooden benches or squattedon the grass, perched on the tops of parked cars or gawked from windows.30、Then came the climax of the trial. Because of the wording of the anti-evolution law, the prosecution was forced to take the position that the Bible must be interpreted literally. Now Darrow sprang his trump card by calling Bryan as a witness for the defence. The judge looked startled. "We are calling him as an expert on the Bible," Darrow said. "His reputation as an authority on Scripture is recognized throughout the world."31、Bryan was suspicious of the wily Darrow, yet he could not refuse the challenge. For years he had lectured and written on the Bible. He had campaigned against Darwinism in Tennessee even before passage of theanti-evolution law. Resolutely he strode to the stand, carrying a palm fan like a sword to repel his enemies.32、Under Darrow's quiet questioning he acknowledged believing the Bible literally, and the crowd punctuated his defiant replies with fervent "Amens".33、Darrow read from Genesis: "And the evening and the morning were the first day." Then he asked Bryan if he believed that the sun was created on the fourth day. Bryan said that he did.34、"How could there have been a morning and evening without any sun?" Darrow enquired.35、Bryan mopped his bald dome in silence. There were sniggers from the crowd, even among the faithful. Darrow twirled his spectacles as he pursued the questioning. He asked if Bryan believed literally in the story of Eve. Bryan answered in the affirmative.36、"And you believe that God punished the serpent by condemning snakes for ever after to crawl upon their bellies?"37、"I believe that."38、"Well, have you any idea how the snake went before that time?"39、The crowd laughed, and Bryan turned livid. His voice rose and the fan in his hand shook in anger.40、"Your honor," he said. "I will answer all Mr. Darrow's questions at once. I want the world to know that this man who does not believe in God is using a Tennessee court to cast slurs on Him..."41、"I object to that statement,”Darrow shouted. “I am examining you on your fool ideas that no intelligent Christian on earth believes."42、The judge used his gavel to quell the hubbuband adjourned court until next day.43、Bryan stood forlornly alone. My heart went out to the old warrior as spectators pushed by him to shake Darrow's hand.44、The jury were asked to consider their verdict at noon the following day. The jurymen retired to a corner of the lawn and whispered for just nine minutes. The verdict was guilty. I was fined 100 dollars and costs.45、Dudley Field Malone called my conviction a "victorious defeat." A few southern papers, loyal to their faded champion, hailed it as a victory for Bryan. But Bryan, sad and exhausted, died in Dayton two days after the trial.46、I was offered my teaching job back but I declined. Some of the professors who had come to testify on my behalf arranged a scholarship for me at the University of Chicago so that I could pursue the study of science. Later I became a geologist for an oil company.47、Not long ago I went back to Dayton for the first time since my trial 37 years ago. The little town looked much the same to me. But now there isa William Jennings Bryan University on a hill-top over looking the valley.48、There were other changes, too. Evolution is taught in Tennessee, though the law under which I was convicted is still on the books. The oratorical storm that Clarence Darrow and Dudley Field Malone blew up in the little court in Dayton swept like a fresh wind through the schools and legislative offices of the United States, bringing in its wake a new climate of intellectual and academic freedom that has grown with the passing years.(from Reader's Digest, July, 1962)第十课震撼世界的审判约翰o司科普斯在一九二五年七月的那个酷热日子里，当我在挤得水泄不通的法庭里就位时，人群中响起一阵嘁嘁喳喳的议论声。
Case Brief
Case BriefCase Name, Citation, and Court:Christopher C. OWENS, Jr. v. STATE of Maryland93 Md. App. 162; 611 A.2d 1043; 1992 Md. App. LEXIS 230Court of Special Appeals of MarylandKey Facts:On March 17, 1991, Trooper Samuel Cottman, a police officer of the State, drove to the area of Sackertown Road in Crisfield in response to a complaint that had been called in about a suspicious car.The police officer found the appellant sleeping in his car in a driveway with the motor running. He had an open can of beer between his legs and two empty cans in the car.The police awoke the appellant who smelled a strong odor of alcohol and his license revealed an alcohol restriction. The appellant stumbled out of the car .His speech was unclear. But he declined to a blood test for alcohol.Christopher Columbus Owens, Jr. was convicted of driving while intoxicated in the Circuit Court for Somerset County by Judge D. William Simpson, sitting without a jury.Christopher Columbus Owens, Jr. appealed. He argued that there was insufficient evidence to convict him because the State of Maryland failed to establish whether he was coming or going from the driveway.Issue:Did the appellant drove on the public highway before coming to rest on the private driveway Holding:[angel1]Yes, it’s more reasonable that the appellant had arrived at the driveway from somewhere else. Summary of the Court’s Reasoning[angel2] :We[angel3] have here a conviction based upon circumstantial evidence alone. The evidence was meager. But th e language is, “[A] conviction upon circumstantial evidence alone is not to be sustained unless the circumstances are inconsistent with any reasonable hypothesis of innocence”.The appellant don’t deny the fact of drunkenness. The defense counsel try t o establish that the vehicle was sitting on the private driveway. We agree that the appellant was not convicted of drunken driving on the private driveway, but of drunken driving on the public highway before coming to rest on the private driveway. It’s a c lassic case of circumstantial evidence.It can reasonably be inferred that such individual either had just arrived by way of the public highway or was just about to set forth upon the public highway. It’s lack of evidence of any third reasonable explanation, such as the presence beside him of an inamorata or of a baseball game blaring forth on the car radio.For the state to prevail there has to be some other factor to enhance the likelihood of the first inference and to diminish the likelihood of the second. We must look for a tiebreaker.As Trooper Cottman woke the appellant, he asked him what he was doing there. The appellant responded that he had just driven the occupant of the residence home. The appellant’s objection to the answer was sustained.In trying to resolve whether the appellant had just been driving or was just about to drive, it would have been helpful to know whether the driveway in which he was found was that of his own residence or that of some other residence. If he were parke d in someone else’s driveway with the motor still running, it would be more likely that he had just driven there a short time before. Ifparked in his driveway at home, the relative strength of the inbound inference over the outbound would diminish.The driveway where the arrest took place was on Sackertown Road. The charging document listed the appellant’s address as 112 Cove Second Street. Since one of the charges against the appellant was that of driving in violation of an alcohol restriction on his license, it would have been routine procedure to have offered the license, showing the restriction. Because of the summary nature of the trail, the license was never offered in evidence.l Three beer cans were in evidence. The circumstance would give rise to a reasonable inference that the appellant’s drinking spree was on the downslope rather than at an early stage. One doesn’t drink in the house and then carry the empties out to the car, turn on the lights and motor. Some significant drinking had taken pl ace while the appellant was in the car. The appellant’s unconsciousness state enforces that inference. One passes out on the steering wheel after one has been drinking for some time, not as one only begins to drink.The vehicle had been observed driving in some sort of erratic fashion. Had the appellant simply been sitting, with his motor idling, on the driveway of his own residence, it’s not likely that someone from the immediate vicinity would have found suspicious the presence of a familiar neighbor in a familiar car sitting in his own driveway.It does not prove guilt in and of itself. It simply makes one of two alternative inferences more reasonable. The totality of the circumstances are, in the last analysis, inconsistent with a reasonable hypothesis of innocence. It makes the drawing of the inference of guilty more than a mere flip of a coin between guilt and innocence. It makes it rational and therefore within the proper purview of the fact-finder.Judgment:Appellant’s conviction was affirmed by the court.Personal Impressions:First of all, I think the judge who wrote the opinion have clearness logic. According to the circumstances, he reasoned out the consequence of the case step by step. Although the evidence is insufficiency, the judge found that circumstances were inconsistent with any reasonable hypothesis of innocence. It’s rational to infer that the appellant had just arrived by way of the public highway. Christopher Columbus Owens, Jr. should be convicted of driving while intoxicated. I hold the same viewpoint with the judges.[angel1]本案有holding吗？[angel2]推理这部分小结太过详细，比如被告没回答警官的提问“你在干吗？”以及他的住址不在证据之中，这些都不需要详细叙述，只需一两句带过即可。
新教材2024高考英语二轮专题复习晨背系列二2023年高考考查的熟词生义
2023年高考考查的熟词生义1．cover熟义：v.覆盖生义：v.涵盖，包括；n.盖子，封面①[2023·新课标Ⅰ卷阅读A]The 2.5hour tour covers the Gooyer Windmill, the Skinny Bridge, the Rijksmuseum, Heineken Brewery and much more.2．5小时的行程包括Gooyer风车、 Skinny Bridge、 Rijksmuseum、 Heineken Brewery 等等。
②[2023·新课标Ⅱ卷阅读C]To serve its function, a book must be activated bya user: the cover opened, the pages parted, the contents reviewed, perhaps notes written down or words underlined.为了发挥它的功能，一本书必须由用户激活：打开封面，打开书页，查看内容，也许是写笔记或划下划线。
2．trap熟义：n.陷阱；v.设陷阱生义：vt.留存[2023·新课标Ⅰ卷阅读B]John went back to observing nature and asking questions. Why can certain plants trap harmful bacteria (细菌)?约翰又回到了观察自然和提出问题的生活中。
为什么某些植物能留存有害细菌？3．treat熟义：vt.对待生义：vt.(利用化学物质或反应)处理4．develop熟义：vt.成长，发育，发展生义：vt.开发，研制[2023·新课标Ⅰ卷阅读B]He developed a g reenhouselike facility that treated sewage (污水) from 1，600 homes in South Burlington.他研制了一个类似温室的设施，可以处理来自南伯灵顿1 600户家庭的污水。
法律术语英语词汇
法律术语英语词汇draft 法案,草案Government bill 政府议案to pass a bill, to carry a bill 通过议案to enact a law, to promulgate a law 颁布法律ratification, confirmation 批准law enforcement 法律的实施to come into force 生效decree 法令clause 条款minutes 备忘录report 判例汇编codification 法律汇编legislation 立法legislator 立法者jurist 法学家jurisprudence 法学legitimation 合法化legality, lawfulness 法制,合法legal, lawful 合法的,依法的to contravene a law, to infringe a law, to break a law 违法outlaw, outside the law 超出法律范围的offender 罪犯to abolish 废止,取消rescission, annulment 废除,取消repeal, revocation, annulment 废除(法律) cancellation, annulment, invalidation 废除(合同) cancellation (支票)作废annulment 撤消(遗嘱)repeal rescission 撤消(判决)revocation 撤消immunity 豁免,豁免权〖第一范文网整理该文章，版权归原作者、原出处所有。
〗disability, legal incapacity 无资格nonretroactive character 不溯既往性prescription 剥夺公权attainder 公民权利的剥夺和财产的没收constitutional law 宪法canon law 教会法规common law 习惯法criminal law 刑法administrative law 行政法civil law 民法commercial law, mercantile law 商法law of nations 万国公法,国际法international law 国际法natural law 自然法labour laws 劳工法fiscal law 财政法Civil Suit Law, Code of civil law 民事诉讼法Criminal Law 刑事诉讼法Military Law 军法Conscript Law 兵役法Copyright Law 著作权法penal code 刑法典code of mercantile law 商法典civil rights 民事权利,公民权利right of asylum 避难权human rights, rights of man 人权(customs) duties 关税death duty, death tax 遗产税royalties 版税action of debt 债务诉讼acquit 无罪adjourn 暂时停止执行administrative decision 行政判决结果ad damnum 主张一定数额的赔偿金adverse judgement 不利的判决affidavit 传票送达人所写的切结书affirm 确定原判决affirm defence 积极的抗辩agency stage 行政机关的裁决agency hearing 听证会allegation 主张的事实american law 美国法an ex parte hearing 一方当事人到庭说明an adversary hearing 双方当事人到庭辩论answer 答辩状appellate jurisdiction 上诉管辖权appeal 上诉appellant 上诉人appellee 被上诉人appropriate 永久占有arrest the judgement 暂时终止法院判决结果arraignment 刑事案件法官与当事人之间安排案件的程序assigned counsel 公设辩护人assumpsit 承诺履行bailment 寄托制度bail 保释beyond the reasonable doubt 超越合理的怀疑bill of Middlesex 早期诉讼当事人向国王秘书处申请的令状，同意发给后才能到国王法院进行诉讼bailliff 法庭内的法警bias 偏见bench of conference 到法官室或法官面前进行会议bond 提供担保burden of proof 举证责任case law 案例法cause of action 起诉理由chancellor 衡平法官chancery division 衡平法庭circuit court 巡回法院civil law 大陆法civil right act 人权法案civil procedure 民事诉讼法clerk 书记官closing argument 诉讼结论co－defedant 共同被告common law 普通法、习惯法、一致法、共同法compurgation 宣誓采证法compurgatory 宣誓采证法中的证人complaint 起诉状concurrent jurisdiction 竞合管辖权consideration 约因consortium 婚姻生活权；配偶权；亲权contempt of court 藐视法庭罪contract under seal 封印契约contributory negligence 加工过失corpus juris secundum 美国法律百科全书counterclaim 反诉court of common pleas 民诉法院court of king's bench 王室法院court of exchequer 财务法院court of exchequer chamber 财务上诉法院country court 乡镇法院court of common bench 民诉法院court of chancery 衡平法院court of justice of the peace 地方治安法院court of probate 遗嘱继承法院court of divorce 婚姻法院court of appeal in chancery 衡平上诉法院court of crown cases reserved 皇室上诉法院court of assize 巡回法院court of outside the united kingdom 英国境外各法院court of first instance 第一审法院court of second instance 第二审法院court of the international trade 国际贸易法院court of appeals for the federal circuit 联邦巡回上诉法院covenant 封印契约赔偿令状cross claim 被告间诉讼cross examnation 复向对方提出之证人curia regis 国王的法院damages 损害赔偿debt 返还确定金钱的令状decree 衡平法院作成的判决deductive reasoning 演绎法default judgement 一造判决defendant 被告defendant in error 被上诉人demurrer 驳回deposition 诘问内容作成的笔录detinue 非法留置的动产回复令状dialectical reasoning 论理（辩证）方法direct examination 诘问自己提出辩证direct verdict 法官指示陪审团作出直接判决discovery process 发现程序dismiss 驳回dissenting opinion 不同意见书district court 地方法院diversity jurisdiction 多元管辖权docket 案件登陆dual system 双轨并行制度due process 正当程序ejectment 不动产侵害令状en banc 法院全体法官共同审理equatible right衡平上的权利equatible defence 衡平抗辩estate 遗产ex post facto 溯及既往expert witness 专家证人express mention 明示其一排除其他原则expressio unius est exclusio alterius 明示其一排除其他原则exclusive jurisdiction 排他的管辖权exclusionary rule 证据排除法则eyre system 巡回制度felony 重罪foreman of jury 陪审团主席forms of action 严格的诉讼形式forum 法院fountain of all justices 正义的源泉freehould interest in land 对土地有完全权利者general assumpsit 不当得利令状general jurisdiction 一般管辖权geografhic jurisdiction 地域管辖权grand jury 大陪审团habeas corpus 人身保护令状hearsay evidence 传闻证据high court of justice 高级法院holding 法院判决house of lords 上议院house of commons 下议院hearing 听证会impeach 质疑证人的可信度impleader 第三人诉讼implied promise 默示承诺in personam jurisdiction 对人诉讼independent source rules 独立咨询取得的证据indictment 起诉inductive reasoning 归纳法inevitable discovery rule 当然发现原则inferior court 美国联邦法院第一级法院统称小法院information 检察官的起诉状in good faith 诚信善意原则injunction 禁止命令instruction 法官向陪审团作指示interlocutory appeal 中间上诉intermediate appellate court 中间上诉法院inerrogatory 诘问的问题issues 争点joint and several liability 连带赔偿责任judicial act 司法法案judicial committee of the privy council 枢密院司法委员会judgement on the verdict 确定原判决judgement notwithstanding the verdict 自行判决jurisdiction over the subjuct matter 对物诉讼jury 陪审团juvenile court 青少年法院judgement 法官作成的判决king's bench division 王室法庭king's council国王的咨询会议民商法学与经济法学专业词汇〖文字大小：大中小〗〖打印〗〖收藏到：QQ 百度雅虎〗〖关闭〗元宵短信元宵彩信民商法学与经济法学专业词汇Civil Laws, Commercial Laws and Economic Laws按照出资比例：in proportion to one’s respective contributions to the investment办理注销登记：cancel the registration被代理人：the principal被侵权人the infringed本人名义：in one’s name标的subject matter补偿制度compensation system不动产登记制Lot and Block System财产法property law财产的添附accretion of property; property accession财产抵押权property mortgage财产继承权：the right of inheritance财产关系和人身关系：property relationships and personal relationships财产管理人property administrator; custodian of property财产混同confusion; hotchpot财产留置权encumbrance采用书面形式：in writing仓单warehouse voucher草签合同initial a contract; sign a referendum contract; ad referendum contract长期合同long-term contract偿付能力solvency capability of reimbursement超越代理权：beyond the scope of one’s power of agency撤消合同cancellation of contract撤销合同cancel a contract; rescind a contract; avoid a contract撤销权right of rescission; right of revocation 撤销要约revocation of offer; revoke an offer撤销遗赠cancellation o will; revocationi of will承运人actual fault of the carrier承运人的留置权carrier’s lien诚信原则principle of good faith诚实信用原则：principle honesty and credibility; principle of honestry and good faith; good faith principle ; bona fide principle船舶承租人charterer船舶抵押权right of mortgage with respect to a ship; mortage of the ship; ship mortgage船舶抵押权的设定establishment of mortgage of the ship船舶抵押的消灭extinguishments of the mortgage of the ship船舶抵押权登记registration of ship mortgage船舶留置权possessory lien; lien of ship村民委员会：the village committee惩罚性的损害赔偿punitive damages乘人之危：take advantage of one’s unfavorable position处分财产dispose of properties处分权act of disposition处分原则principle of disposition代理民事活动：be represented in civil activities by 代理权终止：the expiration of one’s power of agency单独承担的责任undivided responsibility单方法律行为unilateral obligation单方行政行为unilateral administrative act等价有偿：making compensation for equal value 对等原则principle of reciprocity对价consideration对抗措施counter measure对人权right in personam; personal right对世权real right; right in rem恶意串通：conspire maliciously恶意行为ill will mala fides法人judicial person; legal body法人的权利能力legal capacity of juristic person 法人的责任能力capacity for responsibility of juristic person法人权限corporate power法人人格corporate personality法人身份status of a legal person法人团体corporation法人资格corporate capacity法人组织章程：the articles of association of the legal person负共同连带责任liable jointly and severally负全部责任bear all responsibilities; in all charge 负有解释的义务accountable负有连带义务的每个债务人：each of the joint debtors附带的条件incident附带要求contingent claim附带原因contributory cause; inherent cause附条件的民事法律行为：conditional civil juristic acts附条件的权利conditional right赋予权力entitle个体工商户：individual businesses个人合伙：individual partnership各尽所能，按劳分配from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs给付定金：leave a deposit with the other party工商行政管理机关：the administrative agency for industry and commerce公民基本义务fundamental duties of citizens合同contract合同法contract law合同副本copies of the contract合同规定contract provisions/stipulations合同履行地法lex loci contractus合同期限contract period (or contract term)合同条款contract terms (or contract clause) 合同有效期contract life合同正本originals of the contract合伙人：partners合议制collegial system核准登记的经营范围：within the range approved and registered恢复原状recovery of original state; restitution; restoration of he original conditions; retitutio in integrum集体所有制企业：an enterprise under collective ownership技术合同纠纷案件controversy over a technology contract监护人：guardian经主管机关核准登记：approved and registered by the competent authority居民委员会：the neighborhood committee履行监护职责：fulfill duty of guardianship埋藏物、隐藏物：buried or concealed object买卖、出租、抵押、转让：be sold, leased, mortgaged or transferred农村承包经营户：leaseholding farm households平等主体：civil subjects with equal status企业法人被撤销：the dissolution of an enterprise as legal person企业法人分立、合并：the division and merger of an enterprise as legal person企业法人解散：disbanding of an enterprise as legal person契约自由liberty of contract取得不当得利：profits acquired improperly and without a lawful basis取得法人资格：be qualified as a legal person全民所有制企业：an enterprise owned by the whole people让与alien; alienate; assign; cede让与的利益benefit of cession让与权benefit of cessioni设定义务的规则rule of imposing duty设立、变更、终止民事关系：establish, change or terminate civil relationship所有权ownership书面合同 a written contract双倍返还定金：repay the deposit in double双方法律行为bilateral legal transaction擅自变更或者解除（民事法律行为）：alter or rescind one’s act arbitrarily他物权right over the property of another提供一定的财产作为抵押物：offer a specific property as a pledge违反合同breach of contract委托代理：entrusted agency委托代理人：an entrusted agent无过错责任liability without negligence无民事行为能力人：a person having no capacity for civil conduct无因管理：act as manager or provide services in order to protect another person’s interests when he is not legally or contractually obligated to do so 下落不明one’s whereabouts have been unknown限制民事行为能力人：a person with limited capacity for civil conduct享有连带权利的每个债权人：each of the joint creditors行使代理权：exercise the power of agency宣告为无（限制）民事行为能力人：declare …to be a person to be without or with limited capacity for civil conduct遗失物、漂流物：lost-and-found objects, flotsam以抵押物折价或者以变卖抵押物的价款优先得到偿还：to keep the pledge to offset the debt or have priority in satisfying his claim out of the proceeds from the sale of the pledge以合法形式掩盖非法目的：perform under the guise of legitimate acts which conceal illegitimate purposes以欺诈、胁迫的手段：as a result of cheating or coercion 意思表示show one’s intention意思表示真实：the intention expressed is genuine优先购买的权利：a right of pre-emption优先权priority, preemptive right有过错的一方：the erring party有连带责任的conjunctly and severally有权向债务人追偿：have the right to claim repayment from the debto造成财产损失：cause any property loss责任能力capacity for responsibility责任年龄capacity of responsibility; year of discretion债的标的object of obligation债的发生creation of obligation债的消灭extinction of obligation占有人有权留置该财产：the possessor shall have a lien on the property指定代理：appointed agency执行合同carry out a contract, execute/implement/fulfill/perform a contract主要办事机构：the main administrative office追偿：claim compensation from住所：domicile法律专业词汇（法理、法制史、宪法学）Jurisprudence, History of Legal Systems and Constitution按照法律规定according to law按照确定的份额分享权力：be entitled to rights in proportion to his proper share of the credit按照确定的份额分担义务：assume obligations in proportion to his proper share of the debt案例教学法case system案例汇编case book; case report; law report柏拉图Plato《保护人权与基本自由公约》(1950) Convention for the Protection of Human Rights andFundamental Freedoms, 1950（罗）被视为be deemed as被宣布为非法be outlawed; be declared illegal比较法comparative law比较法学comparative jurisprudence比较法学派school of comparative jurisprudence 比较法制史comparative legal history比较分析法method of comparative analysis比较刑法comparative penal law比较刑法学comparative penal jurisprudence必然因果关系positive causal relationship边缘法学borderline jurisprudence变通办法adaptation; accommodation补充规定supplementary provision补救办法remedial measures不成文法unwritten law不成文宪法unwritten constitution不动产所在地法律law of the place where the real property is situated; lex loci rei immobilisci不可分割的权利impartible right不可抗力force majuere不可侵犯性inviolability不可让与性inalienability不履行法律义务non-performance of obligation不要式行为informal act不要因的法律行为non-causal juristic act不因实效而丧失的权利imprescriptible right不作为abstain from an act; act of omission部门法department law部门规章regulation参照consult参照具体情况in the light of actual conditions参照原文consult the original查士丁尼法典Code Justinian; Codex Justinianus 查士丁尼法规汇编Authenticum超出法律范围的outside of law超出法律权限的extralegal 超过权限exceed authority; beyond jurisdiction成文法written law成文宪法written constitution冲突法conflict of laws; rules of conflict冲突规则conflict rule; rule of conflict除（本法）另有规定外except for otherwise stipulated (by this law)除外条款provisory clause除外责任条款exclusion clause触犯公共利益encroach on the public interests触犯国际利益go against the state’s interests触犯人民利益encroach on the interests of the people; go against the people’s interests传统法律观念traditional ideas of law纯粹法学pure theory of law次要法规by law次要规则secondary rule从宽解释原则doctrine of liberal construction从权利accessory right达到法定年龄come of age大法the fundamental law大法官Lord High Chancellor大法官法院Court of Chancery大陆法系Continental Legal System大律师barrister《大明律》Criminal Law of the Ming Dynasty （中）大陪审团grand jury《大清律例》the Criminal Laws of the Qing Dynasty (中)《大宪章》(1215) Great Charter, 1215(英)单行法规specific regulations单一法律体系unitary legal system单一制政府unitary government但书proviso当代法学动向current trend of jurisprudence当然解释natural interpretation党纪国法party discipline and the law of the country道德规范norm of morality道德义务moral obligation《德国民法典》German Civil code德拉古Draco地方各级人民代表大会local people’s congresses at different levels地方各级人民法院local people’s courts at different levels地方各级人民检察院local people’s procuratorates at different levels地方各级人民政府local people’s governments at different levels第二读second reading第三读third reading二元论the dualistic theory二元君主立宪制dual constitutional monarchy system二元论the dualistic theory二元论者dualist二元制bicameral system法的本质the nature of law法的变化changes of law法的定义definition of law法的发展development of law法的分类divisions of law法的概念concepts of law法的规范作用normalized usage of law法的继承succession of law法律的理想ideal of law法律的权威authority of law法律的失效lapse of law法律的实施administration of law; law enforcement法律的适用application of law法律的统一unification of law 法律的推定presumption of law法律的推理analogy of law法律的完整性integrity of law法律的效力范围force’s scale of law法律的效力形式force’s form of law法律的修改alteration of law法律的演进evolutin of law法律的原理principle of law法律地位平等equal in legal status法律对人的效力personal act of law编纂法律方法legal methodology法律分类classification of law法律赋予权力authority conferred by law法律改革law reform法律概念legal concept法律根据legal basis法律工作者legal professional法律关系legal relation法律关系的运行process of legal relation法律关系客体object of legal relation法律关系主体subject of legal relation法律规定provisions of law法律规范norm of law法律规范的逻辑结构logical structure of legal rule法律规则体系system of legal rules法律含义intendment of law法律另有规定：otherwise stipulated by law法律现象legal phenomenon法律研究legal research法律要件legal requirement法律依据legal basis法律意见legal advice法律意见书legal opinion法律意识law-consciousness法律意义legal sense法律用语legal language法律与正义先验论 a prior theory of law andjustice法律渊源source of law法律原本注释gloss法律原理legal doctrines法律原则principle of legality法律援助legal aid法律约束legal binding; legal restraint法律责任legal responsibility法律责任的道义基础moral basic of legal obligation法律责任的归结imputaton of legal responsibility 法律责任的认定determination of legal responsibility法律责任的执行enforcement of legal responsibility法律责任客体object of legal responsibility法律责任主体subject of legal responsibility法律哲学philosophy of law; philosophie du droit （法）；philosophia juris法律政策policy of the law法律职业道德legal ethics法律指导legal counsel法律制裁legal sanction法律制度regime of law; legal system法律秩序legal order法律主体资格capacity as a subject of law法律主张proposition of law法律属地原则territoriality of laws法律著述legal literature法律专家legal expert法律专业legal profession法律专著和教科书legal treatise and textbook法律咨询legal advice法律尊严legal sanctity法盲legal illiterates法权right法社会学sociology of law 汉英法律专业词汇（法理、法制史、宪法学）Jurisprudence, History of Legal Systems and Constitution法系legal system法协会law society法学jurisprudence法学博士doctor of jurisprudence法学导论leading principles of law法学的范畴体系the system of categories of jurisprudence法学的范畴意识the consciousness of category of jurisprudence法学的基石范畴fundamental categories of jurisprudence法学方法method of jurisprudence法学方法论methodology of jurisprudence法学会law society法学教科书law textbooks法学理论theory of law; legal theory法学权威an academic authority in law法学士bachelor of law法学体系system of jurisprudence法学通论first principles of law法学院faculty of law; law school法医forensic medicine法医学forensic medicine法院court法院调查judicial investigation法院管辖权competence of court法院管辖以外的extrajudicial法院判决court decision法院系统court structure法院组织法judicature act法则articles法哲学philosophy of law法制legal institution法制传统tradition of law system法制的精神spirit of legality法制的尊严dignity of the legal system法制观念legal concept法制观念淡薄very weak in the understanding of law法制教育legal education; education of legal system法制史legal history; history of legal system法治rule of law法治的机制the mechanism of rule of law法治的要素the element of rule of law非实质的immaterial非营利的non-profit非约束性条款permissive provision废止法律annulment of law分别管辖权separate jurisdiction分别财产制separation of property regime分别规定separate provision分担责任share the responsibility分工负责，互相配合，互相制约divide responsibility for their own work; coordinate their efforts and check each other分工负责制division of labor responsibility system分级管理different levels holding different responsibilities分配制度distribution system分析法理学analytical jurisprudence否决权power veto; veto power否认事实denial of facts服从法律amenable to law; subject to the law服从判决accept a judgment符合程序be in order符合法律be in conformity with law符合宪法constitutionality符合宪法的法律constitutional law符合原则be in conformity with the principle盖尤斯Gaius 概括裁定general verdict概括继承general succession干扰司法公正interference with course of justice 刚性条款entrenched clause刚性宪法rigid constitution岗位责任制post responsibility system高等法院high court; high court of justice高度集中highly centralize高度民主high level of democracy高度自治权high degree of autonomy高级法官senior judge高级法院superior court高级人民法院Higher People’s Court高级人民检察院Higher People’s Procuratortate 搁置set aside; abeyance格式条款clause of style公认的行为准则established standard of conduct规避法律in fraud of law规避义务evade obligations规范的法律规则normative rule of law规范法学normative jurisprudence规范性法律文件normalizative document of law规范性法律文件的规范化normalization of normative legal document国际法international law国际法学international jurisprudence过错方tort-feasor; wrongdoer过错推定原则doctrine of presumption过错责任liability for wrongs; tort liability海事法院court of admiralty《汉穆拉比法典》Code of Hammurabi合并条款consolidation of provisions合法的个人财产legal personal property合法地位legal status合法权益the lawful rights and interests合法行为lawful acts; legality of purpose合宪性constitutionality衡平法equity衡平法规则rule of equity衡平法学equity jurisprudence衡平法院Court of Chancery (美)；Court of Equity （英）后法取代前法 A later statute takes away the effect of a prior one.后法优于前法lex posterior derogat priori户籍所在地：the place where his residence is registered互为因果reciprocal causation基本法fundamental law基本法律规范basic norm of law基本方针basic policies基本权利和义务basic rights and duties基本司法概念和假设basic legal conception and assumption技术性法规technical legal rule家庭法family law建立法律关系create legal relations教会法canon law《教会法大全》Corpus Juris Canonici教会法学家decretalists解释法律的技术规则technical rule of interpretation解释权power of interpretation近因immediate cause禁治产人imbecile; interdicted person经常居住地：habitual residence经法律确认的ascertained by law经法律许可authorized by law经验法学scholastic theories of law纠问式审判trial by inspection or examination具有法律约束力的文件legally binding instrument 具有同等效力的with equal authenticity具有约束力的判例binding precedent绝对衡平法absolute equity 君主立宪制度constitutional monarchy开罗会议Cairo Conference凯恩斯主义keynesianism可撤销的法律行为revocable juristic act可让与性alienability可用法律强制执行的enforceable at law可预见的foreseeable可直接适用的法律directly applicable law可追溯的retrospective客观条件objective condition客观因素objective factor客体object扩充解释amplified interpretation理论法理学派theoretical jurisprudence school理性决定说theory of rational decision理性认识conceptual knowledge历史法学historical jurisprudence历史法学派historical school of law历史解释historical interpretation立法机构legislative body立法权law-making power; legislative power 立法委任权legislation mandate立法效力legislative effect立法议案bills立法者law-maker; legislator立宪constitutionalism利益冲突conflict of interests利害关系人interested person连带法律关系joint legal relations连带责任joint and several obligation论理解释logical interpretation罗马法Roman Law; Jus Romanum罗马法系Roman-Law System罗马皇帝优士丁尼一世Justinian I罗马法理学jurisprudential《罗马法律汇编》Roman Digest罗马法学派school of Romanists罗马－日耳曼法系Roman-Germanic family罗马私法Jus Privatum逻辑解释logical interpretation马伯里诉麦迪逊案Marbury vs. Madison马克思主义法律理论Marxism-leninism马克思主义法学Marxist jurisprudence马克思主义法学家Marxist jurist没有事实根据的unsubstantial美国国际法协会American Institute of International Law美国海事法庭Admiralty Courts of the U.S.A.美国联邦地区法院United States district courts美国联邦法官federal judge没有法律依据的lawless没有判决先例的案件case of first impression《民法大全》Corpus Juris Civilis民法典civil code民法法系Civil-Law System民法通则：General Principles of the Civil Law民法学science of civil law民事案件中“占有优势证据”的原则“by a preponderance of evidence”in civil cases民事权利能力：the capacity for civil rights民事权益：civil rights and interests 民事诉讼法学Civil Procedure Law民事制裁civil punishment; civil sanction民政部门：the civil affairs department明代法规laws and regulations of Ming Dynasty 明示或默示的express or implied默示表达communication by implication拿破仑法典The Code Napolean内部规章internal regulations纳妾制concubinage南京条约(1843) Treaty of Nanking, 1843拟制理论fiction theory拟制买卖mancipatio欧洲大陆法continental law偶然权利contingent right偶然因果关系fortuitous causal relationship偶然因素accidentalia偶因accidental cause排他的权利right to exclude all others派生的权利derived right派生取得derivative acquisition判例法系Case Law System普通法法系Common-Law System判例法系Case Law System判例汇编reports; reports of judgments普通法common lawAb initio从开始形容事件由开始时的状态，例如合约从开始便已经无效，称为“The contract was void ab initio”。
- 1、下载文档前请自行甄别文档内容的完整性，平台不提供额外的编辑、内容补充、找答案等附加服务。
- 2、"仅部分预览"的文档,不可在线预览部分如存在完整性等问题,可反馈申请退款(可完整预览的文档不适用该条件!)。
- 3、如文档侵犯您的权益，请联系客服反馈,我们会尽快为您处理(人工客服工作时间：9:00-18:30)。
1. undisputed fact.(no genuine issues of material fact) 2.The plaintiff fails to state sufficient facts to prove a charge of wilfulness. 3.The affidavits of defendant show that plaintiff cannot establish these facts (p.84) (The facts indicate clearly that the defendant should win as a matter of law.)
Partial Summary Judgment?
The court can decide part of a case on summary judgment,reducing the issues to be tried .It can narrow the issues and thereby simplify the trial.
Who can file a motion for summary judgment?
•Either of the parties can. A plaintiff may move for summary judgment in its favor on any cause of action. A defendant may move for summary judgment in its favor on any affirmative defense or for the lack of evidence for the plaintiff.
The conditions printed on the pass are invalid
How would this case be decided in China
Ordianry Procedure Summary Procedure
Contract Law OR Tort Law
Anspruchskonkurrenz(German) The concurrence of right to petition 请求权竞合
The same judgment : The carrier shall be liable for the damages
What are these facts?
1.The defendant knew of this defect in the rail. 2.The defendant knew the possibility of a derailment of the train. 3.The defendant ,ignoring the possibility ,intentionally drove its train over the defective rail with an indifference to the consequences .
Essence
Available only in civil Application cases How to start Form One party files a motion
A motion must be drafted as written previews of a party’s entire case-in -chief
Article 302,Chapter 17,Contract Law of the PRC: The carrier shall be liable for damages in case of injury or death of the passenger in the course of carriage, except where such injury or death is attributable to the passenger's own health, or the carrier proves that such injury or death is caused by the passenger's intentional misconduct or gross negligence. The provisions in the preceding paragraph apply to a passenger who is exempted from buying a ticket or holds a preferential ticket pursuant to the relevant provisions, or who is permitted by the carrier to be on board without a ticket.
Additional Comments
On what base can the court issue a summary judgment ? Issuance of summary judgment can be based only upon the court's finding that: 1.there are no issues of "material" fact requiring a trial. 2.one party is clearly entitled to judgment as a matter of law
The carrier shall be liable for damages
Article 6,Chapter 2 of Tort Law of the PRC:
One who is at fault for infringement upon a civil right or interest of another person shall be subject to the tort liability. 1.The defendant has acted wrongfully 2.The defendant has been negligent(negligence,not intention) 3.The plaintiff has suffered a loss 4.There is a direct relationship between the defendant’s wrongful conduct and the harm of the plaintiff
The whole case Summary judgment Part of a case
U.S. Summary Judgment VS China Summary Procedure
What is Summary Procdure in China?(简易程序) When adjudicating simple civil cases in which facts are clear, the relations of rights and obligations are definite, and disputes are minor, the basic people's courts (equals the trial courts in the U.S.)or their dispatched tribunals may apply the summary procedure . During the summary procedure,the court can use simplified methods to summon the parties and witnesses.The case shall be tried by one judge alone and the judge shall complete the adjudication of a case within three months after the cicle 6 shall be applied in this case The defendant is liable for the damages.
What the judgment would be?
Ordianry Procedure Summary Procedure
Contract Law OR Tort Law
The parties apply & The judge approves oral or written
Deadline
No deadline.The judge has The judge shall complete the case within 3 monhs after the case is discretion.
U.S. Summary judgment VS China Summary Procedure
Differences
Differences U.S. Summary Judgment China Summary Procedure
determination made by a court without a full trial. a special procedure leads to trail Available both in civil cases and criminal cases
U.S. Summary judgment VS China Summary Procedure
Similarities • Conditions:no genuine issues of material fact, and one party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. • Aim:To eliminate much expense,inconvenience and delay. • Used only at the lower court level(trial court ,basic people’s court)