This page is continued from Criminal Law Self-Help >>>> Classification of Various Laws, Crimes, and Punishments >>>> Types of Laws:
1. A regulation governing a court’s or an agency’s internal procedures, especially, the whole or any part of an agency statement of general or particular applicability and future effect, designed to implement, interpret, or prescribe law or policy or to describe the organization, approval, or practice requirements of the agency, including the approval or prescription for the future of rates, wages, corporate or financial structures, reorganizations of the structures, prices, facilities, appliances, services, allowance for any of the foregoing, valuation, costs, and accounting within the agency; or practices bearing on any of the foregoing.
rule of procedure – A judicial rule or manner for carrying on a civil lawsuit or criminal prosecution. — aka procedural rule.
court rules – (17c) Regulations having the force of law and governing practice and procedure in the various courts, such as the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure; the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, the U.S. Supreme Court Rules, and the Federal Rules of Evidence, as well as any local rules that a court promulgates. — aka rules of court.
localization doctrine – (1941) The doctrine that a foreign corporation, by doing sufficient business in a state, will subject itself to that state’s laws.
local law – (17c) 1. A statute that relates to or operates in a particular locality rather than the entire state. 2. A statute that applies to particular persons or things rather than an entire class of persons or things. — aka (in senses 1 81 2) local act; local statute. 3. The law of a particular jurisdiction, as opposed to the law of a foreign state. — aka internal law. 4. Conflict of laws. The body of standards, principles, and rules — excluding conflict-of-laws rules — that the state courts apply to controversies before them. Restatement (Second) of Conflict of Laws § 4(1) (1971). ‘
local-law theory – (1926) Conflict of laws. The view that, although a court of the forum recognizes and enforces a local right (that is, one created under its own law), in a foreign-element case it does not necessarily apply the rule that would govern an analogous case of a purely domestic character, but instead takes into account the law of the foreign country by fashioning a local right as nearly as possible on the law of the country in which the decisive facts have occurred. * This theory is credited to Walter Wheeler Cook, who expounded it in the first chapter of his Logical and Legal Bases of the Conflict of Laws (1949).
“Since the court of the forum adopts the view that the chosen law would have taken not of the actual case, but of an equivalent domestic case, it does not necessarily recognize the right that would have been vested in the plaintiff according to that law. . . . It is scarcely deniable, however, that this local law theory is little more than what a learned writer has stigmatized as a sterile truism — sterile because it affords no basis for the systematic development of private international law. To remind an English judge, about to try a case containing a foreign element, that whatever decision he gives, he must enforce only the lex fori, is a technical quibble that explains nothing and solves nothing. it provides no guidance whatever upon the limits within which he must have regard to the foreign law.” G.C. Cheshire, Private International Law 35 (6th ed. 1961).
Disclaimer: All material throughout this website is compiled in accordance with Fair Use.
: Black’s Law Dictionary Deluxe Tenth Edition by Henry Campbell Black & Editor in Chief Bryan A. Garner. ISBN: 978-0-314-62130-6
: Ballantine’s Law Dictionary with Pronunciations
Third Edition by James A. Ballantine (James Arthur 1871-1949). Edited by William S. Anderson. © 1969 by THE LAWYER’S CO-OPERATIVE PUBLISHING COMPANY. Library of Congress Catalog Card No. 68-30931
Back to Types of Laws
Back to Criminal Law Self-Help
Like this website?
or donate via PayPal:
This website is being broadcast for First Amendment purposes courtesy of
We look forward to hearing from you!