What is Disposed Law
Disposed law is a term frequently used in legal settings to refer to law that, for all intents and purposes, no longer applies. This generally occurs when a higher court’s decision overrules a lower one. Disposed law can also refer to when law is no longer applied because it has been superseded by legislative or administrative rulemaking. For example, the U.S. Supreme Court may issue a decision that overrules a lower appeals court, leaving the lower decision with no effect.
By rule or statute, the language of the opinion may require the courts to regard the higher court’s opinion as controlling rather than simply as persuasive. The regional reporter or reporter covering cases from one geographical area may state in its reporters that they are not bound by the decisions of other regional reporters . The rules may direct courts to either disregard prior decisions or give prior decisions diminished weight as persuasive authority or precedent. Disposed law may be found in unreported cases if the decision was destined for non-publication (usually because it was not a landmark case).
In the digital legal age, with very few exceptions, disposed law disappears from the view of most courts and legal practitioners entirely. Legal search tools require subscription portals to view most cases that do not appear in official legal reporting. When it comes to cases that have been disposed, judicial opinions of any kind from cases decided in 1975 or later tend to show up faster in a legal research platform like LexisNexis, Westlaw, Fastcase, Ravel Law or others, while the business models of some private legal research companies limit access to older cases.
Disposition in Legal Terminology
In the legal system, a disposition is the outcome of a legal matter. Most often, dispositions occur at trial and determine the judgment or sentence in which a case will be made in the eyes of the law. Depending on the specifics of the situation, there can be a number of different dispositions, including the following: Conviction: This disposition is related to a criminal case. If someone has found guilty of committing a crime, the outcome is their conviction. In most cases, the person will be fined, imprisoned or put on probation. It may also be the case that the conviction is considered a misdemeanor or a felony. Afteconviction relief: This is the process by which a defendant turns to the court to overturn a conviction. In some instances, this leads to a new trial if the person is able to prove their innocence. Acquittal: An acquittal occurs when a court determines that a defendant is not guilty. This terminates the case without any conviction occurring. Termination: This is a fairly broad term relating to the result of a case, synonymous with the dismissal or final conclusion of a case. Dismissing or discontinuing a case is also considered a disposition of the judge. This case could be dismissed for a number of reasons, most commonly: These are a few of the basic definitions for dispositions as they relate to legal proceedings.
Instances of Disposed Law
The concept of disposed law is relative to the ideas of insistence and bad faith. In Massachusetts, the concept still has significant currency, especially among appellate courts that almost compulsively cite it as "the law disposed of" companies to whose policies they have accorded the benefit of the doubt. A perfect example is the case of Additional Services, Inc. v. Houghton, 102 So.3d 835 (Miss. 2012), which is an exhaustive discussion of disposed law in which the court finally declared that disposed law is no law at all, and definitively rejected the continuing vitality of the concept.
Some examples of disposed law: First, without citing a basis in law, of course, is the classic holding that an employee is not entitled to set off prior leave against his or her FMLA entitlement, on the explicit ground that doing so would undermine the very purpose of the Act, under which leave is intended to be cumulative. This dubious doctrine continues to appear liberally in state and federal cases, and some companies have by policy imposed the concept on their employees. The idea itself is ridiculous on its face, since if leave is cumulative, the employee is entitled to take it, and should not lose the amount of leave available simply because it was originally taken for some other reason. It is easy to envision the chaos that would result if the employee were required to verify in advance the purpose or reason for the employee’s leave, prior to being permitted to take it, some of which is necessarily unknown when the leave begins.
Second, another, more absurd example of this type of banded habit is found in a decision holding that officers are not within the protection of the FLSA if their primary duty involves fire fighting. The case cited numerous decisions, all of which conflicted with each other, and then stated without authority, it will be so, and firefighters will not be entitled to overtime, until a higher court requires otherwise. And indeed, the inference was that the court would not so hold because it still believed in the forward interface and convergence of the various authoritarians’ decisions to get there eventually, but only if they arbitrate as it wants them to, by insisting on the point in dispute and insisting that the higher court hold as they wish.
A third example of disposed law was in a case involving hire-dates of employees who had been hired on different dates and who were on leave at the time of a plant closing. The company’s payroll system maintained only one hire-date, so that when the leave-taking employee were listed for final payments, the date listed for the employee was the date of the layoff. The employee took the position that this was inconsistent with the references to hire dates in the policy, and willfully disregarded the concept of hire-dates. The company’s position was incorporated into its appeal brief as a statement of the facts, and the trial court ruled against it on the grounds that not every one who withdrew from the employee insurance plan was entitled to reinstatement. In fact, the trial court speculated that the employee might have been fully reimbursed, and then withdrawn without penalties to the company. If the trial court had only looked at the facts, there was clear evidence that the company had acted in accord with the company policy, and was bound by that.
How Courts Dispose of Cases
The case starts when a Plaintiff files a complaint against a defendant in the appropriate court. When the court receives the complaint, a case is opened with a docket number. The parties are then alerted to the case by being served notice of the complaint. This notice is usually a piece of paper that states that something has been filed in court and then provides the name of the court, a description of the action against you, and the deadline for answering the complaint, which is most often either 20 or 30 days. A case that is not disposed of within approximately a year is considered to have an extended period of time where it remains open. The primary ways that a case can be disposed of in court are by dismissal of the case by the court, either with or without prejudice, or by settlement of the case by the parties. Of course, there are also trial verdicts. That said, I would like to explain the three scenarios listed above.
If the Court Dismisses a Case
In dismissing a case, the Court may dismiss it with or without prejudice. A dismissal with prejudice means that the case is over and cannot be filed again. A dismissal without prejudice allows the parties to reopen the case later assuming that there is another issue or a related issue that they want to litigate. This is often seen after a party files for bankruptcy. The bankruptcy proceeding does not include all the parties and all the issues, so the judge may not have any way to address the party’s claims related to other parties or issues in the case. When the bankruptcy judge addresses those issues, the dismissal without prejudice of the case allows that party to refile the action.
If the Parties Settle a Case
The Court will dispose of the case without need for a trial or hearing upon plaintiff’s (or defendant’s) certification that the case has been settled. In this electronic age, the parties usually communicate between themselves rather than going through the court to achieve a settlement. The parties can also make a formal request to the court to have a conference with a judge to help them negotiate a settlement. If they are successful at settlement, it is then submitted to the court.
The death of a plaintiff or defendant is also a possibility that may result in the case being disposed of. In such a situation, the Court can dismiss the case with prejudice if a party dies and it would prejudice the decedent’s estate if the case were to continue in a manner other than a dismissal with prejudice.
Plaintiff Can Voluntarily Withdraw a Claim
Under the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure, a plaintiff may, at any time before the trial on the merits, voluntarily take a nonsuit or discontinue an action without leave of court. Such an action shall be filed with the prothonotary. Once a claim is withdrawn by a plaintiff, they are not precluded from recommencing the claim against the same defendant in the same court for a period of time of up to one year.
Considerations Arising When Disposing of a Case
Case disposition may be influenced by a broad range of factors . Among the most important are the legal strengths and weaknesses of the case (including any applicable insurance coverage), the procedural posture of the case and any deadlines, the parties’ settlement posture, the respective financial resources of each of the parties, the relative sophistication of the parties, the reputations of the parties, the quality of the legal work performed on behalf of each party, non-legal factors such as media and public relations considerations, extrinsic factors such as the relevant economy of scale of the parties in question, the anticipated duration of the case, and the complexity of the case.
Implications of Disposed Law
The above definition of disposed law seems to be straightforward enough. However, legal issues can arise when an encounter occurs after the case has been disposed of. The most important thing to know about a disposed of case is that it is closed, terminated, or otherwise completed. Upon disposition, the parties to the case need not concern themselves with it anymore, as it has been resolved and the final judgment has been entered.
When any type of resolution ends the case, it can be said that the case has been disposed of. The implication is that any litigation or other related activities for the involved parties are completed.
Since cases have been resolved, and a final judgment has been entered, they cannot be reopened or revisited as a result of the resolution. The finality of disposed of cases also means that no further action can be taken by parties to alter the finality of the resolution.
Concluding This Topic – Importance of Disposed Law
In conclusion, an understanding of the concept of disposed law can help practitioners in several areas. It is a narrow definition that most legal professionals know more about than a typical client. Such individuals may see the phrase "disposed" as it relates to a cause of action on a court docket and be alarmed at the potential end of a case. A legal professional with the knowledge and insight to explain the concept can help alleviate such concern and reduce the number of questions clients unduly fret regarding the status of a proceeding.
Likewise, the ability to recognize when a record has been disposed, potentially allowing for a simple refiling or amendment , can be critical to a successful legal strategy. It also can prevent undue distress for a client who is trying to stay up to date in reviewing filed documents through an online database or public records access program.
A review of the disposed law in a particular case is also a helpful way to identify which counts or causes of action are still active, and which are not. This can save significant time for a litigator in preparing for an upcoming hearing or trial. It can also help a legal professional identify and highlight the strongest remaining claims or arguments that may be pursued for the benefit of their clients.