Because lawyers are committed to equal treatment under the law, they generally strive to cabin their legal arguments in logos — deductive and inductive reasoning, grounded in
generally accepted premises.
Point number one — you are sadly mistaken by the idea that
generally all accept your premise.
Not exact matches
@ME II: Live4Him: «since the stated
premises are
generally accepted by all» This is a logical fallacy called argumentum ad populum.
You are arguing that your
premise is true because «it is
generally accepted by all» (paraphrased).
He supports that
premise, arguing that in fact we
generally do
accept it, with a broad narrative of Western intellectual - spiritual history.
It's a decidedly stirring
premise that is, at the outset, employed to competent yet far - from - gripping effect by John Cameron Mitchell, as the filmmaker, working from Lindsay - Abaire's screenplay, offers up an opening half hour that
generally comes off as an overly conventional look at grief - with Becca's inability to
accept her boy's loss precisely the sort of reaction that one expects from movies and stories of this ilk.
There are a number of possibilities and options for using BB93 (or a suitable replacement document) to strengthen the School
Premises Regulations, although it is
generally accepted that mandatory controls are required to maintain minimum acoustic design standards (the industry having witnessed an improvement in standards as a result of mandatory controls, including pre-completion acoustic testing, in recent years).
2d 651) holding that no cause of action exists under the Property Condition Disclosure Act; court finds buyer entitled to $ 500.00 credit under RPL § 465 (1) where seller delivered an incomplete Property Condition Disclosure Statement; seller failed to perform the duty to deliver a Disclosure Statement pursuant to the PCDA when the statement was incomplete; cause of action exists under RPL § 462 (2) for willful failure to perform the requirements of the PCDA where (i) a deliberate misstatement or misstatements in a fully completed and timely delivered PCDS regarding the defective condition complained of (ii) that would tend to assure a reasonably prudent buyer that no such condition existed, and (iii) which a professional inspector might not discover upon an inspection of the
premises that would meet
generally accepted standards in the trade; definition of «willful failure to perform» acknowledges legislative intent not to alter the respective burdens of the buyer and seller in the transactions; statutory cause of action replaces buyer's burden of having to plead and prove the seller's active physical concealment of the condition with proof that the misstatement about the condition on the PCDS was deliberate