Warning

Info

LSDefine

Simple English definitions for legal terms

controversy

Read a random definition: apertura testamenti

A quick definition of controversy:

A controversy is a disagreement between people or groups that needs to be resolved. In the United States, federal courts can only hear cases that involve a real dispute between actual parties. This means that they cannot give opinions on hypothetical situations or cases where there is no disagreement. The controversy must also be current and not something that might happen in the future. Some states allow their highest courts to give opinions on questions from the state legislature, even if there is no controversy. However, federal courts cannot do this because of the rules set out in the U.S. Constitution. There are also other limits on what federal courts can hear, such as cases that are no longer relevant or cases where the person bringing the case does not have a direct interest in the outcome.

A more thorough explanation:

A controversy is a real dispute between two parties that is required for a federal court to have jurisdiction. The U.S Constitution, Article III, section 2, grants federal courts the power to hear certain "cases" and "controversies." This means that federal courts can only resolve legal questions that arise from an actual dispute between real parties.

For example, if two people have a disagreement over a contract, they can bring their case to federal court. However, if someone wants to ask a court for an opinion on a hypothetical situation, they cannot do so because there is no actual dispute.

Controversies must also be ripe, or in current existence, to warrant judicial intervention. This means that a court cannot intervene in a situation that has not yet happened or is not likely to happen. For example, if someone wants to sue a city for a law that they are considering passing, they cannot do so because the law has not yet been passed.

Overall, a controversy is a necessary requirement for a federal court to have jurisdiction and resolve legal disputes between parties.

  • If two companies have a disagreement over a patent, they can bring their case to federal court because there is a real dispute between them.
  • If someone wants to ask a court for an opinion on whether a law is constitutional, they cannot do so because there is no actual dispute between parties.
  • If someone wants to sue a city for a law that they are considering passing, they cannot do so because the controversy is not ripe.

These examples illustrate how a controversy is necessary for a federal court to have jurisdiction and resolve legal disputes between parties.

controlling law | contumacy

General

General chat about the legal profession.
main_chatroom
👍 Chat vibe: 0 👎
Help us make LSD better!
Tell us what's important to you
pug
11:37
i think wash u will take you they need your 177
11:38
i got rejected and waitlisted everywhere as well
11:39
:-( sorry speedycar
11:39
@HorseyMed: same
11:39
nah i had low lsat that i took once, wasnt expecting much tbh
Im ready to be a student again
@speedycar57: i recommend taking kaplan live online classes. Went from a 149 diagnostic to a 160 on test day
11:45
Uga ppl were on the wl for what
NarwhalOfLife
11:46
you're the first person i've seen say good things about kaplan. Demon, 7sage, powerscore, or lsatlab are the big ones people recommend
11:46
I'm definitely going to, I applied to a ton of schools. Tuition/schoolarships aren't something I need given my GI bill is paying, and I'm not trying to go biglaw so I just chose public schools
11:46
I applied late too, February/March. Still waiting on 3 schools
I used lsat lab. It got me right on LR / RC. Though my PT’s were higher than my real score, i still scored mid 160s and got into a bunch of school’s i would be happy to attend w full rides
NarwhalOfLife
11:47
if you're not worried about cost, it makes even more sense to R&R so you can get some t14's and be fine "paying" sticker if that's how the GI bill works
Sometimes the GI bill has to be used at state/public schools. So he would need berk/mich/uva
If anyone here has been waitlisted by nyu, have you recieved an offer to interview yet? and if so how long did it take?
11:48
most t14's have a yellow ribbin program
Looks like I am R&R pending any waitlist
NarwhalOfLife
11:48
oh ok thanks for letting me know. state flagships too then, like ohio state, UNC,
NarwhalOfLife
11:49
UT austin
@NarwhalOfLife: my instructor was FANTASTIC but their UI sucks. I used LSATLAB to drill questions andi used kaplan for the explanations and class instruction. Expensive but my score jumped like 35 percentage points, worth it, perhaps there were better options but i had no one to guide me through this
3.55 GPA and 153 LSAT... am I cooked?
11:58
New England law
12:00
GI bill pays full for public schools basically, for a lot of private and public schools they have Yellow Ribbon which covers the rest
anybody else here also freaking out after april lsat lmao
12:01
RRAAAAHHHH
amlaw
12:03
guys i'm so delusional that i think the waitlist update from mich means that they're going to offer me a spot
Yes @splendid this sucks
thought I was gonna get a 165+ that's what my PTS were then got 153
LSD+ is ad-free, with DMs, discounts, case briefs & more.