Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Legal abuse
by nominator). This article appears to have begun as something of a disambiguation page, where the creator, as part of a broader project to create a vast network of DABs for various uses of the word "abuse", gathered together any law-related topic that anyone ever referred to, or the editor imagined as some kind of "abuse". Initially unsourced, a number of self-published sources that fail as  had been added in an effort to prop this up, which have now been removed.  It is certainly true, that if you look at the various search engine results, there are any number of sources, reliable and unreliable, which may call this or that thing or process "abuse". There is a well defined common law and statutory tort Abuse of process; there is a standard of judicial review Abuse of discretion; what there is not is a accepted category called "legal abuse" which encompasses all of the things or even any of the things being included in this article. No scholarly publication, text, or treatise does so. It is not a term of art or usage in the profession. It is not used in that sense by reliable news organizations or publications, nor in any other reliable press.  What this article amounts to is  and , compiling a list of anything the editor imagines might go wrong, or result in a unfavorable outcome,  by design, accident, negligence or whatever at any point in the civil or criminal legal process, and labeling it "abuse". Because no reliable secondary source does so, it violates the core policies of  and  and fails the notability guideline of 
— User:Fladrif, 18:07, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
Stance: delete
Cited policy: WP:RS||WP:OR||WP:SYNTH||WP:RS||WP:V||WP:LISTN (Wikipedia:Reliable sources)