4 ms·
It's referred to earlier as a settlement. It's a form of pre-trial relief when both sides agree that this settles the matter and brings litigation to an end. It
by stordoff 7y ago
It's referred to earlier as a settlement. It's a form of pre-trial relief when both sides agree that this settles the matter and brings litigation to an end. It's not a contract per se, and to seek legal relief again, you would have to find new grounds - you have effectively used your legal relief. It's the usual end for lawsuits.
- DoctorOetker 7y agois the discovery of deception not a new ground in itself? "jump or fell". "the suicide of your father upset you, go seek therapy", ... don't qualify as new grounds? does the law explicitly regulate settlement, new grounds, etc or is it emergent behaviour or "standard operating behaviour" of which everyone assumes that is what the law says as opposed to what the law actually says? Edit: perhaps a clearer phrasing in everyday language: is there a difference between how lawyers, judges, ... have the cookie crumble versus how the law says cookies should crumble?
- o09rdk 7y agoYes, I'd think that there was a breach of the settlement contract by virtue of the fact that the family was lied to. They might have done something different if the facts were known then as they are known now. It's definitely new information or new grounds.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]