Warning

Info

Warning

Info

Warning

Info

LSDefine

Simple English definitions for legal terms

immediately harmful behavior

Read a random definition: nonrefund annuity

A quick definition of immediately harmful behavior:

Immediately harmful behavior: This means doing something that could hurt someone right away, especially a child. It's very dangerous and can cause serious injuries. Parents or caregivers should never do anything that could harm a child, like hitting them or not taking care of them properly. If someone does something that could hurt a child, it's important to get help right away to stop the harmful behavior.

A more thorough explanation:

Definition: Immediately harmful behavior refers to conduct that could cause injury or harm to another person, especially a child. This behavior can be physical, emotional, or sexual in nature and can have serious consequences for the victim.

Examples:

  • Physical abuse, such as hitting, kicking, or shaking a child
  • Emotional abuse, such as belittling, threatening, or isolating a child
  • Sexual abuse, such as touching, fondling, or exposing a child to sexual content

These examples illustrate how immediately harmful behavior can have serious consequences for a child's physical and emotional well-being. Such behavior can cause long-term damage and trauma, and it is important to take action to protect children from harm.

immediately-apparent requirement | immediately pending motion

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
That's sweet. Again tho, unclear with Fedsoc tho. But u sounded like ur willing to go Fedsoc so ur set
lilypadfrog
20:31
yeah Tex is a fedsoc guy iirc
lilypadfrog
20:31
Is it really like no clerkship benefit at Chicago if you’re not conservative?
lilypadfrog
20:31
that seems crazy #tome
texaslawhopefully
20:32
No, at least from the two people I know there that’s false. I think it’s just something like Chicago for conservatives is on par with S whereas for liberals it’s below HYS but above CCNP
texaslawhopefully
20:32
I mean I think even the student body there only like 15 percent is part of fedsoc
It's more just not a good # for people who aren't willing to clerk conservative. I'm sure they place liberal clerks at an above average rate for a t-6 though. Maybe higher (not entirely sure)
texaslawhopefully
20:34
Page 14 has ideological splits by school: https://scholar.harvard.edu/files/msen/files/law-prof-ideology.pdf
texaslawhopefully
20:35
Chicago/UVA are more to the right but not by an exceedingly large difference
lilypadfrog
20:36
I feel like UVA doesn’t have that reputation the way Chicago does. That’s interesting. Thanks tex
yeah I've heard about uva being conservative
siroracle
20:48
Yeah it’s only 75 percent lib that’s pretty terrifying
Dkk
20:53
lmfao
20:59
@siroracle: funny cause true
@siroracle: don't you have a bridge to be under?
shouldn't you be collecting tolls
21:00
trolololol
atwatodbit
21:04
anyone know much about mich clerking
atwatodbit
21:05
ive tried to learn more about it but its hard to cut through stuff. numbers wise they look good?
21:06
this website is a good research tool for outcomes: https://app.lawhub.org/schools
atwatodbit
21:06
@llama: thanks!
21:06
yah
Dkk
21:10
Anyone else read the Antioch shooters manifesto today. Pretty crazy stuff.
21:14
sad
YRDSL
21:31
@texaslawhopefully: it's pretty funny how even in law journal articles people can't stop confusing Penn with Penn State
texaslawhopefully
21:40
lmfao I didn't even notice that
21:42
Yeah to penn Carey students I’m sure that is a
21:42
Those are fighting words
LSD+ is ad-free, with DMs, discounts, case briefs & more.