Warning

Info

Warning

Info

Warning

Info

LSDefine

Simple English definitions for legal terms

ascertained

Read a random definition: failure-to-supervise statute

A quick definition of ascertained:

Term: Ascertained

Definition: When we say something is "ascertained," it means that we have found out about it for sure. It's like when you finish a puzzle and you know exactly what the picture looks like. The word "ascertain" means to make sure of something, like when a judge decides something in court. For example, we can say that we have ascertained that a person is alive and can be identified, but we haven't yet figured out who their heirs are. We can also say that we have ascertained how much of a deceased person's property their widow should get.

A more thorough explanation:

Definition: "Ascertained" means something is found out with certainty, it is used after the "ascertain" is finished. "Ascertain" means to make certain; to establish with certainty, by the finding and judgment or decree of the court.

First, "ascertained" could be used to express that a particular individual that holds a future interest is alive and may be identified. For example, if a person's will states that their property will go to their grandchildren when they turn 25, the grandchildren are unascertained until they reach that age and can be identified.

Second, "ascertained" could also be used to express that something has already been established with certainty. For example, the act by which a widow's share in her deceased husband's real estate is ascertained and set apart to her. This means that the court has determined how much of the property the widow is entitled to and has set it aside for her.

These examples illustrate how "ascertained" is used to indicate that something has been definitively established or identified.

as is | assault

Warning

Info

General

General chat about the legal profession.
main_chatroom
👍 Chat vibe: 0 👎
Help us make LSD better!
Tell us what's important to you
yeah there are so many good cuisines in ithaca
renard99
22:31
@lilypadfrog: that’s a pity I’da be liking them all
texaslawhopefully
22:31
Only food I’m going to miss for sure if I leave Texas is texmex
22:31
waspy hasnt had thai food in ithaca yet. ithaca thai is so good
^^^^ truuuuuu
22:32
there are two major thai places and they have very similar names bc a divorced husband and wife own them lol
22:32
personally i think taste of thai is better than taste of thai express but thats just me
i had pho tho and it was really good and huge portions
texaslawhopefully
22:32
Glad they have good Thai food, I love Thai food! Can’t wait to visit :)
22:33
when tex goes to ithaca i want to come
Dkk
22:34
Crying Tiger, best Thai dish.
damn im so hungry all i had today was a curry tonkatsu and buldak
and it was a lil baby noodle cup
vvv hungry
22:36
curry tonkatsu so yummeh
22:36
whats even open rn? pizza?
CTB is it i think
22:37
is collegetown pizza not open
22:37
i used to get a slice from there or wings over at like 1am after my shift at the restaurant
Dkk
22:48
Ross Ulbricht free. God Bless Trump. Huge win.
JeremyFragrance
22:54
agreed
texaslawhopefully
22:55
This is an interesting read: https://thedispatch.com/article/birthright-citizenship-trump-implications/
Dkk
23:01
I mean, idk how it's possible to end birth right citizenship without amending the constitution because to me the 14th amendment is pretty clear about it.
ross ulbricht tried to hire a hitman to kill 5 people
i am not that sympathetic to him
Dkk
23:04
@KnowledgeableRitzyWasp: That might have been an FBI agent. It was most likely him and he was most likely doing it to retrieve stolen funds that corrupt FBI agents stole, but yeah moral gray area but me personally, cool with hitmen. It's not like it is uncommon to hire hitmen. I don't think the action itself is necessarily wrong but the intent behind it can be.
Dkk
23:05
Like, Boeing whistblowers being killed by hitmen = wrong but a guy hiring hitmen to retrieve stolen funds = good to me.
texaslawhopefully
23:05
@Dkk: Yeah, for sure. My guess is it'll go to SCOTUS and it'll be 8-1 or 7-2, saying that EO was unconstitutional.
Dkk
23:06
Indeed. I need a count for how many exectuive orders he has signed and how many already have pending lawsuits.
i've been away for a while what were the most recent waves? any this week?
LSD+ is ad-free, with DMs, discounts, case briefs & more.