Talk:Affirmative defense

message: I keep seeing law pages turn up that are not listed at list of legal topics. Could the authors please attend to that? Michael Hardy 00:24 May 1, 2003 (UTC)
There seem to be many pages that are legal topics that have never been listed in legal topics, I doubt if the authors can be located to do that kind of cross linking. I've found about 30 so far. Alex756 08:34 May 1, 2003 (UTC) Since May first at least 80 law entries added to list of legal topics most not new. Alex756 01:41 May 10, 2003 (UTC)
----
So, who wants to write simple:Affirmative defense?  :)  --Spikey 18:40, 19 Jan 2004 (UTC)

message: Isn't that term also used in criminal law? -- JensMueller 21:11, 17 Jul 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Criminal law? 

message: How can this be? I'm of the understanding that BARD is only for criminal law. Civil cases are on the "balance of probabilities". PullUpYourSocks 21:50, 8 Mar 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Depends on your jurisdiction. English law uses "on the balance of probabilities" as the standard of proof for civil cases. Let's not be too US-centric here. – ukexpat (talk) 19:00, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Beyond a reasonable doubt? 

message: Description of Insanity defense as "best known" seems both misleading & in error. Insanity & Intoxication are anomalous from ther rest of the category of affirmative defenses. The far more common defenses of "Self-Defense" and "Necessity" serve better to illustrate the class. I will preserve the commentary of Insanity with the description of most controversial, which I believe was the editors intended assertion.CheshireKatz 14:36, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Best known? 

message: Affirmative Defense is similar and dissimilar to a counter-claim, as it defends the specific allegations and also states that there is contributory tortuous conduct on behalf of the complainant as well, whereas a counter claim admits guilt but states the complainant is equally or more tortuous in the claim and the defendant seeks damages for the subsequent injury.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by SUITuP1981 (talk • contribs) 15:32, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Civil Procedure 

message: I removed the statement, “It can be used with other defenses such as self-defense.  Self-defense would still be available even if the defendant mistakenly believes that he was in imminent danger of harmful or offensive bodily contact” from the “mistake of fact” section because it is wholly unreferenced, and whether it is true or not may vary from state to state. 50.246.99.245 (talk) 18:14, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Using the &#8220;mistake of fact&#8221; and &#8220;self-defense&#8221; defenses together 

message: Affirmative defence is a Common Law concept, known throughout the English speaking world and Commonwealth. The common law is English law. I suggest that the spelling of defence should therefore follow the standard English spelling, rather than the American.101.98.188.150 (talk) 00:50, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spelling  

message: — Assignment last updated by Meeksmatt123 (talk) 14:36, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Race in America, sec 2