366:
that suggests the definitions, requirements and dimensions of court or other governmental proceedings sufficient in any given context to permit citizens to be deprived of their rights were never intended to be fixed forever. (A single indisputable decision is never the outcome using any other jurisprudence. This is an argument against making any decision at all. The judge must merely make his best effort to decide in a manner which is consistent with the intent of the framers or authors of legislation, so far as they can ascertain it.)
355:– i.e., agreed upon – a single original intent of the text, or whether their purposes in drafting the Constitution were predicated on personal self-interest. (There is no meaning from an originalist perspective without intent. That is, it is impossible to interpret anything which has no intent, according to originalism. Lawmakers either have no intent, one intent, or multiple intents. But these multiple intents are always consistent, otherwise the law can have no meaning.)
1811:
533:, p. 144 ("If someone found a letter from George Washington to Martha telling her that what he meant by the power to lay taxes was not what other people meant, that would not change our reading of the Constitution in the slightest.... Law is a public act. Secret reservations or intentions count for nothing. All that counts is how the words used in the Constitution would have been understood at the time."); Scalia,
1825:
43:
321:
services were provided. The plaintiffs supported their allegation by referring to the
Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) policy statement that says that §2607(b) “prohibit any person from giving or accepting any unearned fees, i.e., charges or payments for real estate settlement services other than for goods or facilities provided or services performed.”
377:. Five hundred and thirty-six people are therefore potentially involved in this process, and not one of them needs to share the same intentions as any other of them in order to play their part in ratifying the bill. They need only vote; their vote will count the same if they share the same intent as their colleagues, if they do
537:("You will never hear me refer to original intent, because as I say I am first of all a textualist, and secondly an originalist. If you are a textualist, you don't care about the intent, and I don't care if the framers of the Constitution had some secret meaning in mind when they adopted its words.")
394:
a singular intent – no less dubious an assertion where statutes are concerned than where the
Constitution is – but the very diversity of these bodies may permit a judge to corrupt their inquiry by finding a floor statement or committee report which suggests an intent that the judge thinks would be a
324:
Justice Scalia delivered the opinion of the court that RESPA Section 2607(b) was not violated by referencing that RESPA included a directive that HUD make a report to
Congress regarding the need for further legislation in the area, so the original intent was to pass new legislature if it was needed,
320:
One example of original intent is in
Freeman v. Quicken Loans Inc., . The plaintiffs took out mortgage loans from Quicken Loans. In 2008 they sued Quicken Loans arguing that that respondent had violated Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (RESPA) Section 2607(b) by charging them fees for which no
365:
Many of the clauses of the
Constitution are relative, and thus specifically defy any claim that it is possible to divine a single, indisputable outcome to any specific problem or dispute. Key passages in the Constitution were originally cast as flexible evaluations, such as "due process", a phrase
502:
p. 257 ("in construing an Act of
Parliament where the intention of the legislature is declared by the preamble, we are to give effect to that preamble to this extent, namely, that it shows us what the legislature are intending; and if the words of enactment have a meaning which does not go
503:
beyond that preamble, or which may come up to the preamble, in either case we prefer that meaning to one showing an intention of the legislature which would not answer the purposes of the preamble, or which would go beyond them. To that extent only is the preamble material. –
350:
was composed of over fifty men, who spent an entire summer compromising and arguing over provisions that were interpreted very differently the moment the
Constitution's text became public. It is far from clear, therefore, that those fifty-plus men
413:
of the legislature in passing a text. If one adopts originalism as an "error-correcting lens which fits over textualism to account for the passage of time", one cannot adopt an originalist theory which is incoherent with the underlying
385:
no particular intention, and are voting solely because their party whip handed them a note saying "be on the Senate floor at 9:36 pm and say 'Aye'." Their vote will count even if they are falling-down drunk or if they have not even
507:(1883), 8 App. Cas. 386, at pp 388, 389; 52 L. J. Q. B. 650, Lord Blackburn" see also "You cannot resort to the preamble to ascertain the intention of an Act, unless there is an ambiguity in the enacting part." –
338:
Despite the potential confusion of terms between the original intent and originalism, other schools of originalist thought have been as critical of original intent as non-originalists.
281:; while original intent is one theory in the originalist family, it has some salient differences which has led originalists from more predominant schools of thought such as
245:
522:
p. 166 ("It is for the courts to construe words and it is the court's duty in so doing to give effect to the intention of
Parliament in using those words").
358:
Even if the convention did have a single, unified intent, it is unclear how it could reliably be determined from two centuries' distance. (That may be, but what
395:
good result. (The intent can be ascertained so far as the authors of the legislation or other less authoritative contemporary sources said what it was)
1792:
362:
often be determined is that an interpretation being considered is inconsistent with the original intent even though the exact intent is not known.)
409:. Most of those who are originalists in Constitutional matters are also textualists in statutory matters, and textualism rejects the value of the
370:
402:
theories of law, which explicitly decline interest in how a law is made, an inquiry which is obviously at the core of an original intent inquiry.
586:
238:
431:, under which interpretations can evolve along with the society, to deal with new conditions that were different or did not exist when the
390:
the bill under consideration. All of which is to say that giving effect to the intent of the legislature not only presumes that there
597:, stating "We don't read most of the bills. Do you really know what that would entail if we were to read every bill that we passed?"
1218:
776:
675:
1332:
1201:
231:
1787:
1134:
1035:
53:
31:
1294:
928:
582:
374:
647:
214:
204:
1454:
933:
552:
1449:
1865:
1424:
923:
159:
1507:
611:
This is precisely why textualists reject the use of legislative history in determining the meaning of a statute.
1302:
1284:
109:
953:
1677:
1464:
938:
347:
104:
90:
1732:
1717:
432:
189:
1836:
1429:
1107:
918:
546:
301:
should determine what the authors of the text were trying to achieve, and to give effect to what they
1557:
903:
428:
155:
65:
1712:
852:
769:
314:
183:
151:
1870:
1527:
1186:
1040:
1025:
1003:
747:
727:
680:
670:
199:
179:
125:
1512:
1434:
1272:
1015:
1010:
963:
888:
882:
722:
640:
444:
135:
534:
1517:
1484:
983:
847:
842:
807:
282:
168:
346:
a single, unified intent behind a text. In the case of the United States
Constitution, the
1766:
1739:
1727:
1707:
1641:
1636:
1619:
1599:
1594:
1574:
1439:
1419:
1414:
1317:
1277:
988:
913:
837:
822:
742:
574:
399:
219:
1843:
1651:
1569:
1158:
1124:
1075:
1060:
832:
737:
717:
707:
464:
1859:
1697:
1656:
1542:
1522:
1494:
1444:
1409:
1383:
1378:
1371:
1322:
1262:
1102:
1092:
1050:
973:
968:
898:
857:
781:
286:
209:
130:
1829:
1579:
1547:
1502:
1240:
1235:
1206:
1119:
1097:
1065:
998:
978:
872:
812:
802:
754:
712:
690:
633:
589:
responds incredulously to the filmmaker's inquiry as to whether anyone in
Congress
578:
266:
334:
Originalist criticisms of original intent proponents (and some proposed rebuttals)
1810:
1751:
1692:
1682:
1479:
1474:
1312:
1213:
1129:
1088:
1055:
1020:
943:
867:
817:
732:
594:
310:
278:
164:
1815:
1744:
1624:
1562:
1307:
1228:
1223:
1181:
1163:
1151:
1112:
958:
948:
908:
893:
877:
827:
764:
759:
602:
598:
406:
194:
17:
1722:
1687:
1629:
1604:
1469:
1366:
1354:
1339:
1327:
1255:
1173:
1146:
1030:
64:
by adding information on neglected viewpoints, or discuss the issue on the
373:, law is made by majority vote in two chambers, and is then signed by the
1771:
1756:
1459:
1344:
1141:
685:
1661:
1609:
1589:
1537:
1349:
1267:
1083:
1045:
993:
274:
270:
511:(1876), 4 Ch. D. 395, at p. 404, Jessel, M. R. on the same page).
1761:
1614:
1359:
1250:
1245:
1191:
862:
424:
427:, the predominant school of thought for legal interpretation is the
564:
An Economic Interpretation of the Constitution of the United States
1702:
1646:
1552:
1393:
1196:
695:
298:
1584:
1532:
1388:
786:
702:
629:
656:
262:
36:
465:"Freeman, et al. v. Quicken Loans, Inc., 566 U.S. 624 (2012)"
381:
share the intent of their colleagues, and indeed, if they
491:
See, e.g., Black's Law Dictionary, 6th. ed., p. 1133
297:
Original intent maintains that in interpreting a text, a
61:
625:
325:
so the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the defendant.
30:"Intentionalism" redirects here. For other uses, see
1780:
1670:
1493:
1402:
1293:
1172:
1074:
795:
663:
641:
405:Original intent cannot be reconciled against
239:
8:
273:interpretation. It is frequently used as a
648:
634:
626:
309:of the legislation notwithstanding. As in
285:to distinguish original intent as much as
246:
232:
86:
603:Fahrenheit 9/11 trailer, 1:00 minute mark
599:John Conyers on Reading Bills in Congress
1793:History of the American legal profession
456:
143:
117:
96:
89:
500:Cardinal Rules of Legal Interpretation
305:the statute to accomplish, the actual
7:
342:Original intent presumes that there
398:Original intent may fall afoul of
144:General theories of interpretation
25:
777:Restitution and unjust enrichment
1824:
1823:
1809:
41:
1788:History of the legal profession
509:Taylor v. Corporation of Oldham
118:General rules of interpretation
32:Intentionalism (disambiguation)
535:Speech at CUA, 14 October 1996
1:
505:Overseers of West Ham v. Iles
205:Common good constitutionalism
105:Constitutional interpretation
553:The Complete Anti-Federalist
1887:
1455:International legal theory
934:International slavery laws
929:International human rights
924:International criminal law
620:A Matter of Interpretation
29:
1803:
1508:Administration of justice
562:See Charles Beard's 1913
56:toward certain viewpoints
1285:Basic structure doctrine
1135:Natural and legal rights
1016:Public international law
419:Other schools of thought
110:Statutory interpretation
1465:Principle of typicality
939:International trade law
531:The Tempting of America
348:Philadelphia Convention
91:Judicial interpretation
190:Strict constructionism
1460:Principle of legality
1219:Delegated legislation
919:Intellectual property
547:The Federalist Papers
1678:Barristers' chambers
1620:Legal representation
1558:Justice of the peace
904:Financial regulation
429:living tree doctrine
1713:Election commission
1425:Expressive function
954:Landlord–tenant law
853:Consumer protection
618:See, e.g., Scalia,
573:In the documentary
315:legislative history
184:legislative history
152:Living Constitution
62:improve the article
1671:Legal institutions
1538:Lawsuit/Litigation
1528:Dispute resolution
1333:Catholic canon law
1041:State of emergency
1004:Will and testament
728:Law of obligations
681:Constitutional law
671:Administrative law
520:Law-Making Process
200:Purposive approach
180:legislative intent
126:Plain meaning rule
1866:Philosophy of law
1853:
1852:
1513:Constitutionalism
1435:Law and economics
1273:Act of parliament
1011:Product liability
964:Legal archaeology
889:Environmental law
883:Entertainment law
723:International law
529:See, e.g., Bork,
445:Judicial activism
256:
255:
160:Living instrument
83:
82:
16:(Redirected from
1878:
1828:
1827:
1826:
1814:
1813:
1637:Question of fact
1518:Criminal justice
848:Construction law
843:Conflict of laws
808:Agricultural law
650:
643:
636:
627:
617:
610:
572:
561:
543:
528:
517:
497:
490:
480:
479:
477:
475:
461:
317:are often used.
313:, tools such as
283:original meaning
248:
241:
234:
169:original meaning
87:
78:
75:
69:
45:
44:
37:
21:
1886:
1885:
1881:
1880:
1879:
1877:
1876:
1875:
1856:
1855:
1854:
1849:
1822:
1808:
1799:
1776:
1767:Political party
1740:Legal education
1728:Law enforcement
1708:Court of equity
1666:
1642:Question of law
1595:Practice of law
1575:Judicial review
1489:
1440:Legal formalism
1420:Comparative law
1415:Contract theory
1398:
1318:Legal pluralism
1289:
1278:Act of Congress
1202:Executive order
1168:
1070:
989:Nationality law
914:Immigration law
838:Competition law
791:
659:
654:
614:
607:
577:, for example,
575:Fahrenheit 9/11
569:
558:
540:
525:
514:
494:
487:
484:
483:
473:
471:
463:
462:
458:
453:
441:
421:
369:In the case of
336:
331:
295:
261:is a theory in
259:Original intent
252:
220:Legal formalism
177:
175:Original intent
79:
73:
70:
59:
46:
42:
35:
28:
23:
22:
15:
12:
11:
5:
1884:
1882:
1874:
1873:
1868:
1858:
1857:
1851:
1850:
1848:
1847:
1840:
1833:
1819:
1816:Law portal
1804:
1801:
1800:
1798:
1797:
1796:
1795:
1784:
1782:
1778:
1777:
1775:
1774:
1769:
1764:
1759:
1754:
1749:
1748:
1747:
1737:
1736:
1735:
1725:
1720:
1715:
1710:
1705:
1700:
1695:
1690:
1685:
1680:
1674:
1672:
1668:
1667:
1665:
1664:
1659:
1654:
1652:Trial advocacy
1649:
1644:
1639:
1634:
1633:
1632:
1627:
1622:
1617:
1612:
1607:
1602:
1592:
1587:
1582:
1577:
1572:
1567:
1566:
1565:
1560:
1550:
1545:
1540:
1535:
1530:
1525:
1520:
1515:
1510:
1505:
1499:
1497:
1491:
1490:
1488:
1487:
1482:
1477:
1472:
1467:
1462:
1457:
1452:
1447:
1442:
1437:
1432:
1427:
1422:
1417:
1412:
1406:
1404:
1400:
1399:
1397:
1396:
1391:
1386:
1381:
1376:
1375:
1374:
1364:
1363:
1362:
1357:
1352:
1347:
1342:
1337:
1336:
1335:
1320:
1315:
1310:
1305:
1299:
1297:
1291:
1290:
1288:
1287:
1282:
1281:
1280:
1275:
1270:
1260:
1259:
1258:
1248:
1243:
1238:
1233:
1232:
1231:
1226:
1221:
1211:
1210:
1209:
1204:
1199:
1189:
1184:
1182:Ballot measure
1178:
1176:
1170:
1169:
1167:
1166:
1161:
1159:Legal treatise
1156:
1155:
1154:
1149:
1139:
1138:
1137:
1127:
1125:Letters patent
1122:
1117:
1116:
1115:
1105:
1100:
1095:
1086:
1080:
1078:
1076:Sources of law
1072:
1071:
1069:
1068:
1063:
1061:Unenforced law
1058:
1053:
1048:
1043:
1038:
1033:
1028:
1023:
1018:
1013:
1008:
1007:
1006:
1001:
991:
986:
981:
976:
971:
966:
961:
956:
951:
946:
941:
936:
931:
926:
921:
916:
911:
906:
901:
896:
891:
886:
880:
875:
870:
865:
860:
855:
850:
845:
840:
835:
833:Commercial law
830:
825:
820:
815:
810:
805:
799:
797:
793:
792:
790:
789:
784:
779:
774:
773:
772:
762:
757:
752:
751:
750:
745:
735:
730:
725:
720:
715:
710:
705:
700:
699:
698:
688:
683:
678:
673:
667:
665:
661:
660:
655:
653:
652:
645:
638:
630:
624:
623:
612:
605:
585:member of the
567:
556:
538:
523:
512:
492:
482:
481:
455:
454:
452:
449:
448:
447:
440:
437:
420:
417:
416:
415:
403:
396:
371:US federal law
367:
363:
356:
335:
332:
330:
327:
294:
291:
287:legal realists
267:constitutional
254:
253:
251:
250:
243:
236:
228:
225:
224:
223:
222:
217:
212:
207:
202:
197:
192:
187:
172:
162:
146:
145:
141:
140:
139:
138:
133:
128:
120:
119:
115:
114:
113:
112:
107:
99:
98:
94:
93:
81:
80:
74:September 2010
49:
47:
40:
27:Legal doctrine
26:
24:
18:Intentionalist
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1883:
1872:
1869:
1867:
1864:
1863:
1861:
1846:
1845:
1841:
1839:
1838:
1834:
1832:
1831:
1820:
1818:
1817:
1812:
1806:
1805:
1802:
1794:
1791:
1790:
1789:
1786:
1785:
1783:
1779:
1773:
1770:
1768:
1765:
1763:
1760:
1758:
1755:
1753:
1750:
1746:
1743:
1742:
1741:
1738:
1734:
1731:
1730:
1729:
1726:
1724:
1721:
1719:
1716:
1714:
1711:
1709:
1706:
1704:
1701:
1699:
1698:Civil society
1696:
1694:
1691:
1689:
1686:
1684:
1681:
1679:
1676:
1675:
1673:
1669:
1663:
1660:
1658:
1657:Trier of fact
1655:
1653:
1650:
1648:
1645:
1643:
1640:
1638:
1635:
1631:
1628:
1626:
1623:
1621:
1618:
1616:
1613:
1611:
1608:
1606:
1603:
1601:
1598:
1597:
1596:
1593:
1591:
1588:
1586:
1583:
1581:
1578:
1576:
1573:
1571:
1568:
1564:
1561:
1559:
1556:
1555:
1554:
1551:
1549:
1546:
1544:
1543:Legal opinion
1541:
1539:
1536:
1534:
1531:
1529:
1526:
1524:
1523:Court-martial
1521:
1519:
1516:
1514:
1511:
1509:
1506:
1504:
1501:
1500:
1498:
1496:
1495:Jurisprudence
1492:
1486:
1483:
1481:
1478:
1476:
1473:
1471:
1468:
1466:
1463:
1461:
1458:
1456:
1453:
1451:
1448:
1446:
1443:
1441:
1438:
1436:
1433:
1431:
1428:
1426:
1423:
1421:
1418:
1416:
1413:
1411:
1408:
1407:
1405:
1401:
1395:
1392:
1390:
1387:
1385:
1384:Statutory law
1382:
1380:
1379:Socialist law
1377:
1373:
1372:Byzantine law
1370:
1369:
1368:
1365:
1361:
1358:
1356:
1353:
1351:
1348:
1346:
1343:
1341:
1338:
1334:
1331:
1330:
1329:
1326:
1325:
1324:
1323:Religious law
1321:
1319:
1316:
1314:
1311:
1309:
1306:
1304:
1301:
1300:
1298:
1296:
1295:Legal systems
1292:
1286:
1283:
1279:
1276:
1274:
1271:
1269:
1266:
1265:
1264:
1263:Statutory law
1261:
1257:
1254:
1253:
1252:
1249:
1247:
1244:
1242:
1239:
1237:
1234:
1230:
1227:
1225:
1222:
1220:
1217:
1216:
1215:
1212:
1208:
1205:
1203:
1200:
1198:
1195:
1194:
1193:
1190:
1188:
1185:
1183:
1180:
1179:
1177:
1175:
1171:
1165:
1162:
1160:
1157:
1153:
1150:
1148:
1145:
1144:
1143:
1140:
1136:
1133:
1132:
1131:
1128:
1126:
1123:
1121:
1118:
1114:
1111:
1110:
1109:
1106:
1104:
1101:
1099:
1096:
1094:
1093:Statutory law
1090:
1087:
1085:
1082:
1081:
1079:
1077:
1073:
1067:
1064:
1062:
1059:
1057:
1054:
1052:
1051:Transport law
1049:
1047:
1044:
1042:
1039:
1037:
1034:
1032:
1029:
1027:
1024:
1022:
1019:
1017:
1014:
1012:
1009:
1005:
1002:
1000:
997:
996:
995:
992:
990:
987:
985:
982:
980:
977:
975:
972:
970:
969:Legal fiction
967:
965:
962:
960:
957:
955:
952:
950:
947:
945:
942:
940:
937:
935:
932:
930:
927:
925:
922:
920:
917:
915:
912:
910:
907:
905:
902:
900:
899:Financial law
897:
895:
892:
890:
887:
884:
881:
879:
876:
874:
871:
869:
866:
864:
861:
859:
858:Corporate law
856:
854:
851:
849:
846:
844:
841:
839:
836:
834:
831:
829:
826:
824:
821:
819:
816:
814:
811:
809:
806:
804:
801:
800:
798:
794:
788:
785:
783:
782:Statutory law
780:
778:
775:
771:
768:
767:
766:
763:
761:
758:
756:
753:
749:
746:
744:
741:
740:
739:
736:
734:
731:
729:
726:
724:
721:
719:
716:
714:
711:
709:
706:
704:
701:
697:
694:
693:
692:
689:
687:
684:
682:
679:
677:
674:
672:
669:
668:
666:
664:Core subjects
662:
658:
651:
646:
644:
639:
637:
632:
631:
628:
621:
616:
613:
609:
606:
604:
600:
596:
592:
588:
584:
580:
576:
571:
568:
565:
560:
557:
555:
554:
549:
548:
542:
539:
536:
532:
527:
524:
521:
516:
513:
510:
506:
501:
496:
493:
489:
486:
485:
470:
466:
460:
457:
450:
446:
443:
442:
438:
436:
434:
430:
426:
418:
412:
408:
404:
401:
397:
393:
389:
384:
380:
376:
372:
368:
364:
361:
357:
354:
349:
345:
341:
340:
339:
333:
328:
326:
322:
318:
316:
312:
308:
304:
300:
292:
290:
288:
284:
280:
276:
272:
268:
264:
260:
249:
244:
242:
237:
235:
230:
229:
227:
226:
221:
218:
216:
215:Legal process
213:
211:
210:Legal realism
208:
206:
203:
201:
198:
196:
193:
191:
188:
185:
181:
176:
173:
170:
166:
163:
161:
157:
153:
150:
149:
148:
147:
142:
137:
134:
132:
131:Mischief rule
129:
127:
124:
123:
122:
121:
116:
111:
108:
106:
103:
102:
101:
100:
95:
92:
88:
85:
77:
67:
63:
57:
55:
50:This article
48:
39:
38:
33:
19:
1842:
1835:
1821:
1807:
1580:Jurisdiction
1548:Legal remedy
1503:Adjudication
1403:Legal theory
1241:Ratification
1236:Promulgation
1207:Proclamation
1187:Codification
1120:Human rights
1108:Divine right
1098:Constitution
1066:Women in law
984:Military law
979:Marriage law
974:Maritime law
873:Election law
813:Aviation law
803:Abortion law
755:Property law
691:Criminal law
619:
615:
608:
590:
579:John Conyers
570:
563:
559:
551:
545:
541:
530:
526:
519:
515:
508:
504:
499:
495:
488:
472:. Retrieved
468:
459:
435:was framed.
433:Constitution
422:
410:
391:
387:
382:
378:
359:
352:
343:
337:
323:
319:
306:
302:
296:
258:
257:
174:
84:
71:
51:
1752:Legislature
1683:Bureaucracy
1480:Rule of man
1475:Rule of law
1450:Libertarian
1313:Chinese law
1214:Legislation
1164:Regulations
1152:Law reports
1130:Natural law
1026:Reparations
1021:Refugee law
944:Jurimetrics
885:(Media law)
823:Banking law
818:Amnesty law
796:Disciplines
733:Private law
595:Patriot Act
474:11 February
414:textualism.
311:purposivism
279:originalism
265:concerning
165:Originalism
156:Living tree
136:Golden rule
1860:Categories
1745:Law school
1625:Prosecutor
1563:Magistrate
1350:Jewish law
1308:Common law
1229:Rulemaking
1224:Regulation
1174:Law making
1113:Divine law
1089:Legal code
1036:Sports law
959:Law of war
909:Health law
894:Family law
878:Energy law
828:Bankruptcy
765:Punishment
760:Public law
583:Democratic
469:Justia Law
411:intentions
407:textualism
195:Textualism
54:unbalanced
1871:Intention
1723:Judiciary
1718:Executive
1693:The bench
1630:Solicitor
1605:Barrister
1485:Sociology
1470:Pseudolaw
1410:Anarchist
1367:Roman law
1355:Parsi law
1340:Hindu law
1328:Canon law
1303:Civil law
1256:Concordat
1147:Precedent
1056:Trust law
1031:Space law
868:Drugs law
738:Procedure
676:Civil law
400:formalist
375:president
271:statutory
66:talk page
1830:Category
1772:Tribunal
1757:Military
1600:Attorney
1570:Judgment
1430:Feminist
1345:Jain law
1142:Case law
863:Cyberlaw
770:Corporal
748:Criminal
718:Evidence
708:Doctrine
686:Contract
518:Zander,
439:See also
329:Problems
303:intended
293:Approach
1844:Outline
1781:History
1688:The bar
1662:Verdict
1610:Counsel
1590:Justice
1445:History
1268:Statute
1084:Charter
1046:Tax law
994:Probate
275:synonym
60:Please
52:may be
1762:Police
1733:Agency
1615:Lawyer
1360:Sharia
1251:Treaty
1246:Repeal
1192:Decree
1103:Custom
999:Estate
949:Labour
713:Equity
498:Beal,
425:Canada
1837:Index
1703:Court
1647:Trial
1553:Judge
1394:Yassa
1197:Edict
743:Civil
696:Crime
587:House
451:Notes
299:court
97:Forms
1585:Jury
1533:Fiqh
1389:Xeer
787:Tort
703:Deed
593:the
591:read
550:and
544:Cf.
476:2021
388:read
383:have
307:text
289:do.
277:for
269:and
657:Law
423:In
379:not
360:can
353:had
263:law
1862::
1091:/
601:,
581:a
467:.
392:is
344:is
182:,
158:/
154:/
649:e
642:t
635:v
622:.
566:.
478:.
247:e
240:t
233:v
186:)
178:(
171:)
167:(
76:)
72:(
68:.
58:.
34:.
20:)
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.