We share risk with our clients, inform our clients of their legal fees and what they will receive from us in advance, and work towards goals set out in pre-approved budgets. We are one of the most technologically advanced companies in the world, which allows us to be transparent and cooperative with our customers. Anglo-French cross, literally to pose transversely, barrer, obstruct, from Old French, from late Latin transversare to the cross, from Latin transversus transverse for example, a plaintiff could take legal action to collect the money he claimed the defendant owed him. If the defendant responded to the plaintiff`s request that he had not failed to pay the money due at the time of his due date, this is a denial of a fact essential to the plaintiff`s case. It can be said that the defendant is reviewing the status of the plaintiff`s outstanding debt, and her plea itself could be called a crossing. It is a technical term that means turnover: it applies to a case that is dealt with on the basis of a misdemeanor charge and means nothing more than the transfer or postponement of the process to a subsequent meeting or meeting; It applied, perhaps more deceitfully, to the rejection or refusal of an indictment, without reference to the delay in the trial. This concept of French crossing means denying or refuting everything alleged in the statement, plea, replication or other procedural acts. There is no real distinction between crossings and denials, they are the same in substance, but a crossing, in the strict technical sense, and the more ordinary acceptance of the term, means a direct denial in formal words, “without this”, etc. Middle English, Anglo-French traverses, late Latin transversar, Latin transversus traverses can be divided into general farms and special farms. There is a third species called a common crossing.
Middle English traverse, from Anglo-French traverses (as in a traverse, across), from Latin transversum (as in transversely transversely), neutral transversus transversively lying down; Sense 5â9 is part of Traverse Entry 1 â plus at Transverse Entry 1 Our innovative approach is designed to ensure you get the cost-effective and intelligent legal advice you deserve. A crossing on a crossing is a crossing that develops from the same point or object that assumed in a previous crossing on the other side. It is a general rule that a well-written crossing on the one hand must be accepted on the other hand. And it follows as a general rule that there can be no crossing on a crossing if the first crossing is material. The meaning of the rule is that if one party has offered a material crossing, the other party cannot leave it and offer another of its own by stimulating the first crossing at the same point, but must participate in the first part offered; Otherwise, the parties could take turns for cancellations against each other in unlimited succession without creating a problem. The common law pleading system has been replaced in the United States by coded pleadings and rules based on the pleading system in federal civil proceedings, but lawyers still use the word traverse to dismiss. In some cases, it has taken on particular meanings for various purposes. For example, a step in criminal practice is a dismissal of the charges contained in an indictment, which usually results in the postponement of a trial on the indictment to a later court warrant.
A cross-jury is one that hears the plaintiff`s claims and the defendant`s denials – a trial jury or a small jury. A cross-hearing can be a pre-trial hearing to determine whether the court has the power to hear the case – as if the defendant denies having properly served the plaintiff`s subpoena and complaint. All problems are farms, although not all farms can be called problems, and the difference is as follows; Questions are when one or more facts are confirmed on the one hand and directly and simply denied on the other; But special transitions occur when the issue raised by a party is not directly and simply denied or questioned. by the other, but he asserts a new question or distinction that is incompatible with what has been said before, and then clearly excludes his opponent`s previous statement. The new material thus claimed is considered as an incentive to cross and as the exclusion of the previous declaration, the crossing itself. In the language of advocacy, a crossing means denial. Thus, if a defendant challenges a material factual assertion in the plaintiff`s statement, it should cross-check it. and the means itself is therefore often called a “crossing”. Chestnut.
In criminal practice. Postpone or delay the trial of an indictment until a later term. It is more correct to deny or accept an accusation. 4 Bl. Komm. 351. A term for the rejection of a substantial claim by the other party, usually during oral argument. When a defendant challenges a factual allegation that is crucial to the plaintiff`s case, he is said to be “crossing” it, and the plea itself can then be called a “crossing.” In the wording of the plea, a crossing indicates a denial. Therefore; When a defendant challenges a material factual claim in the plaintiff`s statement, it is said to be crossed, and the plea itself is therefore often referred to as “crossed.” Chestnut. In criminal practice. Postpone or postpone the trial of an indictment to a later period.
It is more correct to deny or question an accusation. 4 Bl. Komm. 351. Gemeinsame Traverse. A simple and direct denial of the material accusations of the opposite plea, conclusion to the country, and without incitement or absque soc-general crosses. One was preceded by a general inducement, which is usually denied to anything that is ultimately claimed on the other side, instead of following through on the terms of the claims it denies. Gould, PI.
VII. 5. Special crossing. A particular form of crossing or denial whose conception, as opposed to a common crossing, is to explain or qualify denial rather than bring it into the direct and absolute form. It consists of an affirmative part and a negative part, the first setting out the new affirmative question tending to explain or qualify the denial and technically called “incitement”, and the second being the direct denial itself and technically called “absque hoc”.