212:
138:, in which each judge reads his or her own opinion rather than a single judge writing an opinion on behalf of the entire court. Traditionally, judges read in order of reverse seniority, with the most junior judge speaking first. In the United States, this practice was discontinued in favour of majority opinions contra the British tradition of separate opinions.
182:
The term is also used when replying to a communication that contains a number of points, issues or questions to denote that the responses are in the same order in which they were raised in the original document: "To deal with your queries seriatim..."
261:
In 2009, Title III, Rule 15(a)(1) of the U.S. Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure regarding Amended and Supplemental Pleadings (part of pretrial procedure) was amended to allow three changes in the time previously allowed to make one change.
266:
This provision will force the pleader to consider carefully and promptly the wisdom of amending to meet the arguments in the motion... and will expedite determination of issues that otherwise might be raised
168:
Also sometimes seen in older deeds and contracts as a more traditional way of incorporating terms of reference. For example "the railway by-laws shall apply to the contract as if set out herein
157:
generally used to conclude with the phrase "save as expressly admitted herein, each allegation of the plaintiffs is denied as if set out in full and traversed herein
117:
287:. This implies calculation results are produced for each database record explicitly, i.e. without model compression (data grouping) and before summation.
251:
455:
146:
Most frequently used in modern times (when used at all) pleadings as a shorthand for "one by one in sequence". For example, in
30:
is addressing multiple issues in a certain order, such as the order in which the issues were originally presented to the court.
110:
283:
Actuarial calculations made in respect of a database (such as insurance policies or asset holdings) may be referred to as
186:
In
England, use of the word, and other Latin phrases, has become less frequent in legal discourse as a result of the
331:
103:
305:
255:
191:
355:
187:
162:
80:
75:
70:
60:
154:
65:
46:
258:, who, from 1805 through 1833, wrote nearly half of the Supreme Court's dissenting opinions.
404:
381:
55:
372:
Oliver
Schroeder, J. (1947). The Life and Judicial Work of Justice William Johnson, Jr.
247:
449:
226:
195:
41:
423:
147:
150:
275:
The right to make changes now ends 21 days after service of a motion.
396:
Morgan, D. (1944). Mr. Justice
William Johnson and the Constitution.
250:, 1801 to 1805, the practice of judicial opinions being delivered in
424:"United States Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Title III, Rule 15"
408:
385:
135:
27:
23:
306:"The Fall of Seriatim Opinions and the Rise of the Supreme Court"
205:
161:." This formulation is now superfluous under the English
190:
and, among other factors, efforts by groups such as the
175:It is sometimes found as part of the longer phrase
134:is an opinion delivered by a court with multiple
332:"The "Seriatim Practice" of the Supreme Court"
111:
8:
362:. Ministry of Justice UK. 10 September 2013.
360:Statements Of Case – Civil Procedure Rules
248:Supreme Court under Chief Justice Marshall
118:
104:
37:
418:
416:
211:
296:
40:
430:. Cornell University Law School. 2009
374:University of Pennsylvania Law Review
304:Rotunda, Ronald D. (9 October 2017).
7:
179:, meaning "briefly and in series".
26:for "in series") indicates that a
14:
356:"Content of defence 16.5 (3)–(5)"
210:
165:, especially rule 16.5 (3)–(5).
1:
330:Kahn, Paul W. (2019-03-06).
221:appears to contradict itself
428:Legal Information Institute
472:
336:Yale University Press Blog
252:seriatim was discontinued
219:This article or section
456:Latin legal terminology
256:Justice William Johnson
194:to promote the use of "
192:Plain Language Movement
273:
198:" in legal discourse.
264:
254:. It was restored by
229:for more information.
177:breviatim et seriatim
163:Civil Procedure Rules
142:In the United Kingdom
202:In the United States
398:Harvard Law Review,
155:defence statements
76:Memorandum opinion
71:Concurring opinion
61:Dissenting opinion
244:
243:
128:
127:
66:Plurality opinion
47:judicial opinions
463:
440:
439:
437:
435:
420:
411:
394:
388:
370:
364:
363:
352:
346:
345:
343:
342:
327:
321:
320:
318:
317:
301:
239:
236:
230:
214:
213:
206:
132:seriatim opinion
120:
113:
106:
56:Majority opinion
38:
471:
470:
466:
465:
464:
462:
461:
460:
446:
445:
444:
443:
433:
431:
422:
421:
414:
409:10.2307/1335111
395:
391:
386:10.2307/3309619
371:
367:
354:
353:
349:
340:
338:
329:
328:
324:
315:
313:
303:
302:
298:
293:
281:
279:Actuarial usage
240:
234:
231:
225:Please see the
224:
215:
204:
144:
124:
45:
36:
12:
11:
5:
469:
467:
459:
458:
448:
447:
442:
441:
412:
403:(3), 328-361.
389:
365:
347:
322:
295:
294:
292:
289:
280:
277:
242:
241:
218:
216:
209:
203:
200:
143:
140:
126:
125:
123:
122:
115:
108:
100:
97:
96:
95:
94:
86:
78:
73:
68:
63:
58:
50:
49:
35:
32:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
468:
457:
454:
453:
451:
429:
425:
419:
417:
413:
410:
406:
402:
399:
393:
390:
387:
383:
379:
375:
369:
366:
361:
357:
351:
348:
337:
333:
326:
323:
311:
307:
300:
297:
290:
288:
286:
278:
276:
272:
270:
263:
259:
257:
253:
249:
238:
235:February 2022
228:
222:
217:
208:
207:
201:
199:
197:
196:plain English
193:
189:
188:Woolf Reforms
184:
180:
178:
173:
171:
166:
164:
160:
156:
152:
149:
141:
139:
137:
133:
121:
116:
114:
109:
107:
102:
101:
99:
98:
93:
91:
87:
85:
83:
79:
77:
74:
72:
69:
67:
64:
62:
59:
57:
54:
53:
52:
51:
48:
43:
39:
33:
31:
29:
25:
21:
20:
432:. Retrieved
427:
400:
397:
392:
377:
373:
368:
359:
350:
339:. Retrieved
335:
325:
314:. Retrieved
309:
299:
284:
282:
274:
268:
265:
260:
245:
232:
220:
185:
181:
176:
174:
169:
167:
158:
145:
131:
129:
89:
88:
81:
18:
17:
15:
434:24 November
246:During the
151:civil cases
34:Legal usage
380:(3), 344.
341:2022-02-02
316:2022-02-02
291:References
82:Per curiam
227:talk page
450:Category
312:. Justia
285:seriatim
269:seriatim
170:seriatim
159:seriatim
90:Seriatim
19:seriatim
16:In law,
310:Verdict
148:English
92:opinion
84:opinion
136:judges
42:Legal
28:court
24:Latin
436:2013
44:and
405:doi
382:doi
172:."
452::
426:.
415:^
401:57
378:95
376:,
358:.
334:.
308:.
153:,
130:A
438:.
407::
384::
344:.
319:.
271:.
237:)
233:(
223:.
119:e
112:t
105:v
22:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.