Legal Definitions - in point

The legal phrase in point describes something that is directly relevant, applicable, or pertinent to the matter currently being discussed or decided. It is often used to refer to a legal precedent (a previous court case) whose facts and legal issues are so similar to the current case that it provides strong guidance or authority. It can also describe an argument, piece of evidence, or legal principle that directly addresses the core legal question at hand.

• Example 1: Legal Precedent in a Contract Dispute

  Imagine a company is suing a software developer for failing to deliver a custom application on time, causing the company to lose a major client. The contract between them included a specific clause about penalties for late delivery. The company's lawyer conducts legal research and finds a previous appellate court decision involving two other businesses where a similar software development contract was breached due to a missed deadline, and the court awarded significant damages to the client.

  This prior court decision would be considered in point because its facts (breach of a software development contract due to delay) and legal reasoning (interpretation of a late-delivery penalty clause) directly align with the issues in the current dispute. The lawyer would present this case as a strong precedent to guide the court's decision in their client's favor.

• Example 2: Evidence in a Criminal Trial

  In a trial for arson, the prosecution presents expert testimony from a fire investigator who conclusively states that accelerants were used to start the fire, and that the fire originated in a specific location within the building. They also present security camera footage showing the defendant purchasing those exact accelerants shortly before the fire and then entering the building at the time the fire started.

  The security camera footage and the fire investigator's testimony about the accelerants and origin point are considered in point evidence. They directly address the central elements of the crime – how the fire started and who was involved – making them highly relevant to proving the defendant's guilt.

• Example 3: Arguments in a Regulatory Challenge

  A small business is challenging a new local ordinance that restricts the hours they can operate, arguing that the ordinance is unconstitutional and unfairly targets their type of business. In their legal brief, their attorney cites several state supreme court cases that have struck down similar local ordinances in other cities, finding them to be overly broad and discriminatory.

  The arguments and cited cases from the state supreme court are in point because they directly address the legal question of whether a local government has the authority to impose such restrictions and whether those restrictions violate constitutional protections. Arguments about general business practices or unrelated legal theories would not be considered "in point" for this specific challenge.