Warning

Info

Warning

Info

Warning

Info

LSDefine

Simple English definitions for legal terms

inequity

Read a random definition: inadequate remedy at law

A quick definition of inequity:

Term: Inequity

Definition: Inequity means something is not fair or just. It can refer to situations where people are treated unfairly or unjustly. In legal terms, it refers to situations where there is enough evidence of unfairness to justify taking action to correct it. Examples of inequity include situations where someone is forced to do something against their will or where someone is taken advantage of because they are vulnerable.

A more thorough explanation:

Inequity

Injustice or unfairness. In a legal context, it refers to those injustices that are recognized enough to warrant a remedy. Examples include duress and unconscionability.

Inequity refers to situations where something is not fair or just. This can happen in many different contexts, including in the legal system. For example, if someone is forced to sign a contract under threat of harm, that contract may be considered inequitable due to the duress involved. Similarly, if a contract is so one-sided that it is clearly unfair to one party, it may be considered unconscionable and therefore inequitable.

  • A company pays its male employees more than its female employees for doing the same job, even though they have the same qualifications and experience. This is an example of inequity.
  • A landlord charges one tenant significantly more rent than another tenant for the same apartment. This is an example of inequity.

These examples illustrate how inequity can occur in different situations. In both cases, one group is being treated unfairly compared to another group, even though there is no legitimate reason for the difference in treatment.

ineffective assistance of counsel | inevitable discovery rule

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.