FACT v. LAW

All questions concerning the determination of fact are for the jury, though a judge may determine the facts if a jury trial is waived or is not permitted under the law.
1. WHICH IS WHY YOU NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU STATE IN YOUR INITIAL PAPERWORK THAT A JURY TRIAL IS DEMANDED FOR ALL ISSUES SO TRIABLE; OTHERWISE YOU WAIVE IT; SO DON'T FORGET TO ADD THE WORD "JURY" BEFORE "TRIAL"
  1. JURY INSTRUCTIONS
    1. MAKE THESE EARLY; RIGHT AWAY THEY BECOME A GUIDE TO THE WHOLE CASE
      1. http://www.warlawgroup.com/files/LGW-TrialPrep.pdf
ARE THE FACTS IN DISPUTE?
1. NO?
  1. SUMMARY JUDGMENT
    1. ON THE MERITS on the merits.(Of a judgment) delivered after the court has heard and evaluated the evidence and the parties' substantive arguments. [Cases: Judgment 217, 563(2), 649. C.J.S. Judgments §§ 11, 272–273, 727–728, 733–734, 745–746, 787–788, 801–802.]
    2. ON THE PLEADINGS on the pleadings.(Of a judgment) rendered for reasons that are apparent from the faces of the complaint and answer, without hearing or evaluating the evidence or the substantive arguments. See SUMMARY JUDGMENT.
    3. summary judgment n. a court order ruling that no factual issues remain to be tried and therefore a cause of action or all causes of action in a complaint can be decided upon certain facts without trial. A summary judgment is based upon a motion by one of the parties that contends that all necessary factual issues are settled, and therefore need not be tried. The motion is supported by declarations under oath, excerpts from depositions which are under oath, admissions of fact, and other discovery, as well as a legal argument (points and authorities), that argue that there are no triable issues of fact and that the settled facts require a summary judgment for the moving party. The opposing party will respond by counter-declarations and legal arguments attempting to show that there are "triable issues of fact." If it is unclear whether there is a triable issue of fact in any cause of action, then summary judgment must be denied as to that cause of action. The theory behind the summary judgment process is cut down on unnecessary litigation by eliminating without trial one or more causes of action in the complaint. The pleading procedures are extremely technical and complicated, and are particularly dangerous to the party against whom the motion is made. (See: summary adjudication of issues, cause of action)
      1. Summary judgment is purely a matter of law; the court accepts the relevant facts as presented by the party opposing summary judgment and renders a decision based on the applicable legal principles.
      2. A matter of law can be the basis for an appeal, but generally a matter of fact cannot.
      3. An appeals court can reverse a decision because of a mistaken matter of law, it will not reverse if the mistake did not affect the verdict. This "harmless error" rule developed, in part, from the recognition that during a trial the court often must make hundreds of decisions based on matters of law.
      4. “Summary judgment is proper when there is no genuine issue of material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.
    4. Two criteria must be met before summary judgment may be properly granted:
      1. (1) there must be no genuine issues of material fact, and
      2. (2) the Movant must be entitled to judgment as a matter of law.
      3. Rule 56 SUMMARY JUDGMENT.pdf
      4. MN RCP 56 Summary Judgment.pdf
2. YES?
  1. TRIAL
    1. A genuine issue implies that certain facts are disputed. Usually a party opposing summary judgment must introduce evidence that contradicts the moving party's version of the facts. Moreover, the facts in dispute must be central to the case; irrelevant or minor factual disputes will not defeat a motion for summary judgment. Finally, the law as applied to the undisputed facts of the case must mandate judgment for the moving party. Summary judgment does not mean that a judge decides which side would prevail at trial, nor does a judge determine the credibility of witnesses. Rather, it is used when no factual questions exist for a judge or jury to decide.
    2. WHAT IS TO BE DECIDED? WHAT IS THE QUESTION?
      1. COURT DECISIONS ARE BASED UPON:
      2. STATUTES
      3. RULES OF EVIDENCE
      4. PROCEDURE
      5. RELEVANT CASE LAW
CAUSE OF ACTION
1. The cause of action is the heart of the complaint, which is the Pleading that initiates a lawsuit. Without an adequately stated cause of action the plaintiff's case can be dismissed at the outset. It is not sufficient merely to state that certain events occurred that entitle the plaintiff to relief. All the elements of each cause of action must be detailed in the complaint. The claims must be supported by the facts, the law, and a conclusion that flows from the application of the law to those facts.
  1. SHORT PLAIN STATEMENT
    1. [The plaintiff must expressly show his “title” to whatever relief is requested. I.e., the plaintiff must show that it’s possible for him to prove a “set of facts” in court (and probably to a jury) that proves he has “title” to the relief requested.
      1. “The general rule in appraising the sufficiency of a complaint for failure to state a claim is that a complaint should not be dismissed ‘***unless it appears beyond doubt that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of his claim which would entitle him to relief.‘ CONLEY VS. GIBSON (1957), 355 U.S. 41, 45, 46, 78 S.Ct. 99, 102, 2LEd 2d 80; SEYMOUR VS. UNION NEWS COMPANY, 7 Cir., 1954, 217 F.2d 168; and see rule 54c, demand for judgment, FEDERAL RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 28 USCA: “***every final judgment shall grant the relief to which the party in whose favor it is rendered is entitled, even if the party has not demanded such relief in his pleadings.” U.S. V. WHITE COUNTY BRIDGE COMMISSION (1960), 2 Fr Serv 2d 107, 275 F2d 529, 535
2. The fact or combination of facts that gives a person the right to seek judicial redress or relief against another. Also, the legal theory forming the basis of a lawsuit.
  1. The cause of action is often stated in the form of a syllogism, a form of deductive reasoning that begins with a major premise (the applicable Rule of Law), proceeds to a minor premise (the facts that gave rise to the claim), and ends with a conclusion. In a cause of action for Battery, the rule of law is that any intentional, unpermitted act that causes a harmful or offensive touching of another is a battery. This is the major premise and is stated first. Supporting facts, constituting the minor premise, appear after the rule of law. For example, a statement of facts for a case of battery might be "The plaintiff, while walking through ABC Store on the afternoon of March 11, 1998, was tackled by the defendant, a security guard for the store, who knocked the plaintiff to the floor and held her there by kneeling on her back and holding her arms behind her, while screaming in her ear to open her shopping bag. These actions caused the plaintiff to suffer injuries to her head, chest, shoulders, neck, and back." The cause of action concludes with a statement that the defendant is responsible for the plaintiff's injuries and that the plaintiff is entitled to compensation from the defendant. The facts or circumstances that entitle a person to seek judicial relief may create more than one cause of action. For example, in the preceding example, the plaintiff might assert claims for assault, battery, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and violation of Civil Rights. She might also bring claims for negligent hiring (if the guard had a history of violent behavior which the store failed to discover) or negligent supervision. (When damages are caused by an employee it is common to sue both the employee and the employer.) All these causes of action arise from the same set of facts and circumstances but are supported by different rules of law and constitute separate claims for relief. A cause of action can arise from an act, a failure to perform a legal obligation, a breach of duty, or a violation or invasion of a right. The importance of the act, failure, breach, or violation lies in its legal effect or characterization and in how the facts and circumstances, considered as a whole, relate to applicable law. A set of facts may have no legal effect in one situation, whereas the same or similar facts may have significant legal implications in another situation. For example, tackling a shoplifting suspect who is brandishing a gun is a legitimate action by a security guard and probably would not support a claim for relief if the suspect were injured in the fracas. On the other hand, tackling a shopper who merely acts in a suspicious manner while carrying a shopping bag is a questionable exercise of a guard's duty and may well give rise to Justiciable causes of action.
Now WRAP your MIND around THAT...
1. CREATED 03.26.2013 by Lisa Stinocher O'Hanlon using XMind Software
  1. For More of my Maps: https://www.xmind.net/share/hennalady/
    1. For More of my Musings: http://angryjeweler.wix.com/write http://angryjeweler.wix.com/thehennalady
FACTS ARE ON THE MOON; THE TRUTH IS WHATEVER WE SAY IT IS; STIPULATED FACTS; FACTS AT ISSUE; THE ONLY LAW IS CONTRACT LAW; LAW OF AGENCY COMMERCIAL LAW
1. THERE IS NO DARK SIDE OF THE MOON. IT'S ALL DARK, REALLY.
  1. NO FACTS AT ISSUE; MOTION FOR DISMISSAL; 12(b)(6) Rule 56 Motion for Summary Judgment Nothing to try. No controversy.
    1. HISTORICAL CHANGE BECAUSE OF CORPORATE LAW; LAW OF AGENCY
      1. The designation of matters of law to the judge and matters of fact to the jury did not develop, however, until the late eighteenth century. Until that time a jury could exercise its judgment over matters of fact and law. Jury instructions, which in modern law are technical and specific about which law to apply, were informal and general. A jury was free to accept the instructions, modify them, or ignore them completely. By the middle of the nineteenth century, courts had acquired authority over matters of law and confined juries to matters of fact. Commercial lawyers were particularly influential in bringing about this change, as greater judicial control over matters of law helped produce a stable legal system in which business could prosper.
  2. FACTS ARE UNREBUTTED ALLEGATIONS
    1. THE TRUTH IS WHATEVER WE SAY IT IS
      1. Facts are conclusive once they are Noticed. SEE APPENDIX X; STIPULATED FACTS
      2. 8.04 Effect of Failure to Deny Averments in a pleading to which a responsive pleading is required, other than those as to amount of damage, are admitted when not denied in the responsive pleading. Averments in a pleading to which no responsive pleading is required or permitted shall be taken as denied or avoided.
      3. IF YOU DON'T REBUT IT STANDS
      4. Averments in a pleading to which no responsive pleading is requred or permitted?? shall be taken as denied or avoided.
      5. Definition of AVER 1 a : to verify or prove to be true in pleading a cause b : to allege or assert in pleading 2 : to declare positively Examples of AVER He averred that he was innocent. “I am innocent,” he averred.
      6. MN RCP Rule 9.Pleading Special Matters.xmind
      7. RULE 8; GENERAL RULES OF PLEADING.xmind
      8. 8.05 Pleading to be Concise and Direct; Consistency (a) Each averment of a pleading shall be simple, concise, and direct. No technical forms of pleading or motions are required. (b) A party may set forth two or more statements of a claim or defense alternatively or hypothetically, either in one count or defense or in separate counts or defenses. When two or more statements are made in the alternative and one of them if made independently would be sufficient, the pleading is not made insufficient by the insufficiency of one or more of the alternative statements. A party may also state as many separate claims or defenses as the party has regardless of consistency and whether based on legal or equitable grounds or both. All statements shall be made subject to the obligations set forth in Rule 11.
      9. RULE 11;
      10. You can say anything you want; the LESS you say the better; You SHOULD say SOMETHING; but You CAN'T SAY ANYTHING WITHOUT FILING A RULE 11 ACKNOWLEDGMENT
      11. SHORT PLAIN STATEMENT; 12(b)(6)
LAW
1. MATTER OF LAW
  1. RESPONSIBILITY OF THE COURT
FACTS
1. MATTER OF FACT
  1. RESPONSIBILITY OF THE JURY