|
Authored by: kuroshima on Friday, November 16 2012 @ 09:00 AM EST |
Thanks. It's something that has bothered me since I saw the
legal English meaning of "prejudice" (first contact was here
in Groklaw). Before that, I had only had contact with the
word as an indicator of bias, discrimination, etc etc (that
is, matching it's etymological meaning). In fact the same
distinction of [pre/per]judice exists in French (and
possibly in other romance languages. In Spanish, the noun
form "perjuicio" is mostly a legal only word, but the verb
form "perjudicar" is in common use. The noun form
"Prejuicio" is also a common word, that has no verb form. At
least it's clearer.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, November 16 2012 @ 10:23 AM EST |
From what i've come to understand 'here', the word is mostly
used in 'legalese' in combination with something being
dismissed. 'The thing' can be dismissed either with or
without 'prejudice'.
A dismissal 'without prejudice' seems to mean that 'the
thing' is dismissed in this lawsuit, but could be attempted
again in some other lawsuit.
A dismissal 'with prejudice' indicates that 'the thing' is
considered dismissed in this case as well as in any next
case.
A bit like 'not applicable here' (without prejudice) versus
'not applicable at all' (with prejudice). [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|