|
Illegal Per Se
In US law, the term illegal ''per se'' means that the act is inherently illegal. Thus, an act is illegal without extrinsic proof of any surrounding circumstances such as lack of ''scienter'' (knowledge) or other defenses. Acts are made illegal ''per se'' by statute, constitution or case law. Drunk driving Many drunk driving laws make driving with a blood alcohol content over a certain limit (such as 0.05% or 0.08%) an act which is illegal ''per se''. Antitrust In the United States, illegal ''wikt:per se, per se'' often refers to categories of Anti-competitive practices, anti-competitive behavior in antitrust law conclusively presumed to be an "unreasonable restraint on trade" and thus anti competitive. The United States Supreme Court has, in the past, determined activities such as price fixing, geographic market division, and group boycott to be illegal ''per se'' regardless of the reasonableness of such actions. Traditionally, illegal ''per se'' anti-trust acts describe horizon ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
US Law
The law of the United States comprises many levels of Codification (law), codified and uncodified forms of law, of which the supreme law is the nation's Constitution of the United States, Constitution, which prescribes the foundation of the federal government of the United States, federal government of the United States, as well as various civil liberties. The Constitution sets out the boundaries of federal law, which consists of Act of Congress, Acts of Congress, treaty, treaties ratified by the United States Senate, Senate, regulations promulgated by the executive branch, and case law originating from the United States federal courts, federal judiciary. The United States Code is the official compilation and Codification (law), codification of general and permanent federal statutory law. The Constitution provides that it, as well as federal laws and treaties that are made pursuant to it, preempt conflicting state and territorial laws in the 50 U.S. states and in the territor ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Competition (economics)
In economics, competition is a scenario where different Economic agent, economic firmsThis article follows the general economic convention of referring to all actors as firms; examples in include individuals and brands or divisions within the same (legal) firm. are in contention to obtain goods that are limited by varying the elements of the Marketing mix for product software, marketing mix: price, product, promotion and place. In classical economic thought, competition causes commercial firms to develop new products, services and technologies, which would give consumers greater selection and better products. The greater the selection of a good is in the market, the lower prices for the products typically are, compared to what the price would be if there was no competition (monopoly) or little competition (oligopoly). The level of competition that exists within the market is dependent on a variety of factors both on the firm/ seller side; the number of firms, barriers to entry, ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Strict Liability (criminal)
In criminal law, strict liability is liability for which ( Law Latin for "guilty mind") does not have to be proven in relation to one or more elements comprising the ("guilty act") although intention, recklessness or knowledge may be required in relation to other elements of the offense ( Preterintentionally /ultraintentional /versari in re illicita). The liability is said to be strict because defendants could be convicted even though they were genuinely ignorant of one or more factors that made their acts or omissions criminal. The defendants may therefore not be culpable in any real way, i.e. there is not even criminal negligence, the least blameworthy level of . Strict liability laws were created in Britain in the 19th century to improve working and safety standards in factories. Needing to prove on the part of the factory owners was very difficult and resulted in very few prosecutions. The creation of strict liability offenses meant that convictions were increased. Com ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Rule Of Reason
The rule of reason is a legal doctrine used to interpret the Sherman Antitrust Act, one of the cornerstones of United States antitrust law. While some actions like price-fixing are considered illegal ''per se'''', ''other actions, such as possession of a monopoly, must be analyzed under the rule of reason and are only considered illegal when their effect is to unreasonably'' '' restrain trade. William Howard Taft, then Chief Judge of the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals, first developed the doctrine in a ruling on '' Addyston Pipe and Steel Co. v. United States, ''which was affirmed in 1899 by the Supreme Court. The doctrine also played a major role in the 1911 Supreme Court case '' Standard Oil Company of New Jersey v. United States.'' History Upon its development some critics of ''Standard Oil'', including the lone dissenter Justice John Marshall Harlan, argued that ''Standard Oil'' and its rule of reason were a departure from previous Sherman Act case law, which purport ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Presumption
In law, a presumption is an "inference of a particular fact". There are two types of presumptions: rebuttable presumptions and irrebuttable (or conclusive) presumptions. A rebuttable presumption will either shift the burden of production (requiring the disadvantaged party to produce some Evidence (law), evidence to the contrary) or the burden of proof (law), burden of proof (requiring the disadvantaged party to show the presumption is wrong); in short, a Trier of fact, fact finder can reject a rebuttable presumption based on other evidence. Conversely, a conclusive/irrebuttable presumption cannot be challenged by contradictory facts or evidence. Sometimes, a presumption must be triggered by a predicate fact—that is, the fact must be found before the presumption applies. History The ancient Jewish law code, the Talmud, included reasoning from presumptions (''hazakah''), propositions taken to be true unless there was reason to believe otherwise, such as "One does not ordinarily ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Negligence Per Se
Negligence ''per se'' is a doctrine in US law whereby an act is considered negligent because it violates a statute (or regulation). The doctrine is effectively a form of strict liability. Negligence ''per se'' means greater liability than contributory negligence. Elements In order to prove negligence ''per se'', the plaintiff usually must show that: # the defendant violated a common law duty of care or a duty of care under statute, # the act caused harm or all harm the statute was designed to prevent, and # the plaintiff was the victim suffering harm due to the breach of the duty of care generally and as a member of the statute's protected class. The Common Law will not be abrogated by statute but may be adopted by statute. The Common Law will always remain our tradition and the basis of principles that inform the appropriate development of statutory laws and codes. New arrivals to the discussion may not like the word "owe" in the formulation of the discussion involving duties o ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Malum In Se
(plural ) is a Latin phrase meaning or . The phrase is used to refer to conduct assessed as sinful, contradictory to natural law or inherently wrong by nature, independent of regulations governing the conduct. It is distinguished from , which refers to acts that are wrong only because they are prohibited by law. For example, most human beings believe that murder, rape, and theft are wrong, regardless of whether a law governs such conduct or where the conduct occurs, and is thus recognizably . In contrast, crimes are criminal not because they are inherently bad, but because the act is prohibited by the law of the state. For example, most United States jurisdictions require drivers to drive on the right side of the road. This is not because driving on the left side of a road is considered immoral, but because consistent rules promote safety and order on the roads. The question between inherently wrong versus prohibited most likely originated in Plato's Socratic dialogue, Eu ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
FTC V
FTC may refer to: Commerce * Fair Trade Commission (other) * Federal Trade Commission, an American antitrust and consumer protection agency * FTC Kaplan, or Financial Training Company, a former name of Kaplan Financial Ltd, a financial training institution in the United Kingdom Entertainment * Fashion Television Channel, a Canadian television channel Science, mathematics, and technology * Emtricitabine, an antiretroviral drug used to treat HIV, coded FTC in medical journals * Fault-tolerant computer system * FIRST Tech Challenge, a robotics competition for students * Follicular thyroid cancer, a type of cancer * Fundamental theorem of calculus, a mathematical theorem * Fusion Technology Center, a research organisation in South Korea Other uses * Fairfield Transportation Center * Federal Transfer Center, Oklahoma City, part of the United States Federal Bureau of Prisons * Ferencvárosi TC Ferencvárosi Torna Club, commonly known as Ferencváros (), Fr ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Northwest Wholesale Stationers, Inc
The points of the compass are a set of horizontal, radially arrayed compass directions (or azimuths) used in navigation and cartography. A ''compass rose'' is primarily composed of four cardinal directions—north, east, south, and west—each separated by 90 degrees, and secondarily divided by four ordinal (intercardinal) directions—northeast, southeast, southwest, and northwest—each located halfway between two cardinal directions. Some disciplines such as meteorology and navigation further divide the compass with additional azimuths. Within European tradition, a fully defined compass has 32 "points" (and any finer subdivisions are described in fractions of points). Compass points or compass directions are valuable in that they allow a user to refer to a specific azimuth in a colloquial fashion, without having to compute or remember degrees. Designations The names of the compass point directions follow these rules: 8-wind compass rose * The four cardinal directio ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Broadcast Music, Inc
Broadcast Music, Inc. (BMI) is a performance rights organization in the United States. It collects blanket license fees from businesses that use music, entitling those businesses to play or sync any songs from BMI's repertoire of over 22.4 million musical works. On a quarterly basis, BMI distributes the money to songwriters, composers, and music publishers as royalties to those members whose works have been performed. In FY 2022, BMI collected $1.573 billion in revenues and distributed $1.471 billion in royalties. BMI's repertoire includes over 1.4 million songwriters and 22.4 million compositions. BMI is the biggest performing rights organization in the United States and is one of the largest such organizations in the world. BMI songwriters create music in virtually every genre. BMI represents artists such as Patti LaBelle, Selena, Miley Cyrus, Lil Wayne, Lil Nas X, Birdman, Lady Gaga, Taylor Swift, Eminem, Rihanna, Shakira, Doja Cat, Megan Thee Stallion, Ed Sheeran, Karol G ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Presumption
In law, a presumption is an "inference of a particular fact". There are two types of presumptions: rebuttable presumptions and irrebuttable (or conclusive) presumptions. A rebuttable presumption will either shift the burden of production (requiring the disadvantaged party to produce some Evidence (law), evidence to the contrary) or the burden of proof (law), burden of proof (requiring the disadvantaged party to show the presumption is wrong); in short, a Trier of fact, fact finder can reject a rebuttable presumption based on other evidence. Conversely, a conclusive/irrebuttable presumption cannot be challenged by contradictory facts or evidence. Sometimes, a presumption must be triggered by a predicate fact—that is, the fact must be found before the presumption applies. History The ancient Jewish law code, the Talmud, included reasoning from presumptions (''hazakah''), propositions taken to be true unless there was reason to believe otherwise, such as "One does not ordinarily ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
