Legal Definitions - case agreed on

A case agreed on, sometimes referred to as a "case stated," occurs when opposing parties in a legal dispute agree on all the relevant facts of their situation. Instead of conducting a full trial to establish these facts, they present the agreed-upon facts directly to the court. The court then uses these undisputed facts to decide only the legal questions or interpretations that remain in contention between the parties. This process streamlines litigation by focusing the court's attention solely on the legal arguments, saving time and resources for everyone involved.

Here are some examples:

• Imagine a software development company and a client are in a dispute. The client claims the software delivered did not meet the agreed-upon specifications, while the company insists it did. Both parties agree on the exact wording of the contract, the specific features included in the software, and the dates of delivery and payment. They don't dispute what happened, but rather whether what happened fulfilled the legal obligations under the contract. They could present a case agreed on to the court, outlining all these undisputed facts, and ask the judge to rule solely on the legal question of whether the software met the contractual requirements.

• Consider two neighbors, Mr. Henderson and Ms. Rodriguez, who share a fence. They both agree on the exact location of the property line and the history of who maintained which section of the fence. However, Mr. Henderson believes he has a legal right to access Ms. Rodriguez's side of the fence for maintenance, while Ms. Rodriguez disputes this right. Since all the factual elements (boundary, maintenance history) are agreed upon, they could submit a case agreed on to the court. The court would then decide the purely legal question of whether Mr. Henderson possesses an easement or other legal right to enter Ms. Rodriguez's property for fence maintenance, based on the agreed facts.

• A small business, "Green Thumb Landscaping," is audited by the tax authorities. The authorities claim certain business expenses were improperly deducted, while Green Thumb argues they were legitimate. Both parties agree on the exact amounts of income and expenses, and the specific nature of each transaction. The disagreement is purely about how a particular section of tax law applies to these undisputed financial figures. Rather than a lengthy audit or trial to establish the numbers, they could present a case agreed on to the tax court, detailing all the financial facts. The court would then rule on the legal interpretation of the tax code as it applies to those agreed-upon facts.