Legal or Lawful?
It is crucial to define the difference between ‘legal and lawful’…
The generic Constitution’s reference genuine common law.
The present civil authorities and their courts use the word legal…
Is there a difference in the meanings..?
The following is quoted from: “A Dictionary of Law 1893”:
“Lawful”; In accordance with the law of the land; according to the law; permitted, sanctioned, or justified by law.
“Lawful” properly implies a something conformable to; or enjoined by law.
“Legal”; a thing in the form or; after the manner of law or; binding by Law.
A writ or warrant issuing from any court, under the colour of law, is a “legal” process however defective.
“Legal” ~ Latin; ‘legalis’: Pertaining to the understanding, the exposition, the administration, the science and the practice of Law: as, the legal profession, legal advice; legal blanks, newspaper.
Implied or imputed in Law. Opposed to actual.
“Legal”; looks more to the letter [form/appearance].
Whereas; “Lawful” to the spirit [substance/content], of the law.
“Legal”; is more appropriate for conformity, to positive Rules of Law;
“Lawful”; for accord with ethical principle.
“Legal”; imports rather, that the forms [appearances] of law are observed, that the proceeding is correct in method, that the rules prescribed have been obeyed.
“Lawful”; that the right, is actful in substance, that moral equality is secured.
“Legal”; is the antithesis of equitable, and the equivalent of constructive. 2 Abbott’s Law Dic. 24.
“Legal”; matters administrate, conform to, and follow rules.
They are implied (presumed) rather than actual (express).
The ‘legal’ process can be defective in law. This accords with the previous post’s of ‘legal fictions’; being only the colour of law.
To be ‘legal’; a matter does not follow the law.
Instead, it conforms to, and follows the rules or form of law.
This may help you to understand why, the U.S. ~ ‘Federal & State Rules’ of Civil and Criminal Procedure’; are cited in every court petition, so as to conform to ‘legal requirements’ of the ‘specific juristic persons’ named, e.g.,
“STATE OF GEORGIA” or the “U.S. FEDERAL GOVERNMENT” that rule the courts.
Legal or Lawful?
It is crucial to define the difference between legal and lawful.
The generic Constitution’s reference genuine common law.
The present civil authorities and their courts use the word legal…
Is there a difference in the meanings..?
The following is quoted from: “A Dictionary of Law 1893”:
Lawful; In accordance with the law of the land; according to the law; permitted, sanctioned, or justified by law.
“Lawful” properly implies a thing conformable to or enjoined by law;
“Legal”, a thing in the form or after the manner of law or binding by Law. A writ or warrant issuing from any court, under the colour of law, is a “legal” process however defective.
See legal. [Bold emphasis added]
“Legal” ~ Latin; ‘legalis’ Pertaining to the understanding, the exposition, the administration, the science and the practice of Law: as, the legal profession, legal advice; legal blanks, newspaper. Implied or imputed in Law. Opposed to actual.
“Legal” looks more to the letter [form/appearance], and “Lawful” to the spirit [substance/content], of the law.
“Legal” is more appropriate for conformity to positive rules of law;
“Lawful” for accord with ethical principle.
“Legal” imports rather that the forms [appearances] of law are observed, that the proceeding is correct in method, that rules prescribed have been obeyed;
“Lawful” that the right is actful in substance, that moral equality is secured.
“Legal” is the antithesis of equitable, and the equivalent of constructive. 2 Abbott’s Law Dic. 24.
“Legal” matters administrate, conform to, and follow rules.
They are equitable in nature and are implied (presumed) rather than actual (express).
A ‘legal’ process can be defective in law. This accords with the previous post’s of ‘legal fictions’ and being only the colour of law.
To be ‘legal’; a matter does not follow the law.
It is crucial to define the difference between ‘legal and lawful’…
The generic Constitution’s reference genuine common law.
The present civil authorities and their courts use the word legal…
Is there a difference in the meanings..?
The following is quoted from: “A Dictionary of Law 1893”:
“Lawful”; In accordance with the law of the land; according to the law; permitted, sanctioned, or justified by law.
“Lawful” properly implies a something conformable to; or enjoined by law.
“Legal”; a thing in the form or; after the manner of law or; binding by Law.
A writ or warrant issuing from any court, under the colour of law, is a “legal” process however defective.
“Legal” ~ Latin; ‘legalis’: Pertaining to the understanding, the exposition, the administration, the science and the practice of Law: as, the legal profession, legal advice; legal blanks, newspaper.
Implied or imputed in Law. Opposed to actual.
“Legal”; looks more to the letter [form/appearance].
Whereas; “Lawful” to the spirit [substance/content], of the law.
“Legal”; is more appropriate for conformity, to positive Rules of Law;
“Lawful”; for accord with ethical principle.
“Legal”; imports rather, that the forms [appearances] of law are observed, that the proceeding is correct in method, that the rules prescribed have been obeyed.
“Lawful”; that the right, is actful in substance, that moral equality is secured.
“Legal”; is the antithesis of equitable, and the equivalent of constructive. 2 Abbott’s Law Dic. 24.
“Legal”; matters administrate, conform to, and follow rules.
They are implied (presumed) rather than actual (express).
The ‘legal’ process can be defective in law. This accords with the previous post’s of ‘legal fictions’; being only the colour of law.
To be ‘legal’; a matter does not follow the law.
Instead, it conforms to, and follows the rules or form of law.
This may help you to understand why, the U.S. ~ ‘Federal & State Rules’ of Civil and Criminal Procedure’; are cited in every court petition, so as to conform to ‘legal requirements’ of the ‘specific juristic persons’ named, e.g.,
“STATE OF GEORGIA” or the “U.S. FEDERAL GOVERNMENT” that rule the courts.
Legal or Lawful?
It is crucial to define the difference between legal and lawful.
The generic Constitution’s reference genuine common law.
The present civil authorities and their courts use the word legal…
Is there a difference in the meanings..?
The following is quoted from: “A Dictionary of Law 1893”:
Lawful; In accordance with the law of the land; according to the law; permitted, sanctioned, or justified by law.
“Lawful” properly implies a thing conformable to or enjoined by law;
“Legal”, a thing in the form or after the manner of law or binding by Law. A writ or warrant issuing from any court, under the colour of law, is a “legal” process however defective.
See legal. [Bold emphasis added]
“Legal” ~ Latin; ‘legalis’ Pertaining to the understanding, the exposition, the administration, the science and the practice of Law: as, the legal profession, legal advice; legal blanks, newspaper. Implied or imputed in Law. Opposed to actual.
“Legal” looks more to the letter [form/appearance], and “Lawful” to the spirit [substance/content], of the law.
“Legal” is more appropriate for conformity to positive rules of law;
“Lawful” for accord with ethical principle.
“Legal” imports rather that the forms [appearances] of law are observed, that the proceeding is correct in method, that rules prescribed have been obeyed;
“Lawful” that the right is actful in substance, that moral equality is secured.
“Legal” is the antithesis of equitable, and the equivalent of constructive. 2 Abbott’s Law Dic. 24.
“Legal” matters administrate, conform to, and follow rules.
They are equitable in nature and are implied (presumed) rather than actual (express).
A ‘legal’ process can be defective in law. This accords with the previous post’s of ‘legal fictions’ and being only the colour of law.
To be ‘legal’; a matter does not follow the law.
Comments
Be the first to add a comment
Log in to comment