Warning

Info

Warning

Info

Warning

Info

LSDefine

Simple English definitions for legal terms

low-grade security

Read a random definition: sum certain

A quick definition of low-grade security:

Low-grade security refers to a type of security that is not very strong or reliable. Security means protection from danger or harm. In finance, security can also mean something that is given as a guarantee to repay a debt. This can be in the form of a bond, stock, or other financial instrument. Low-grade security is not as good as high-grade security because it is more likely to fail or not provide enough protection. It is important to choose strong security measures to keep yourself and your belongings safe.

A more thorough explanation:

Low-grade security refers to a type of security that is not very strong or effective in protecting something or someone from danger or harm. In the context of finance, security refers to collateral or assurance given to guarantee the repayment of a debt or the fulfillment of an obligation.

For example, if you borrow money from a bank to buy a car, the car may serve as collateral or security for the loan. If you fail to repay the loan, the bank can repossess the car to recover its money. However, if the car is old, damaged, or has a low resale value, it may be considered a low-grade security because it may not be enough to cover the full amount of the loan.

Another example of low-grade security is a stock or bond issued by a company that is not financially stable or profitable. If the company goes bankrupt or defaults on its debt, the value of the stock or bond may decrease or become worthless, leaving the investor with little or no return on their investment.

In summary, low-grade security refers to a weak or inadequate form of protection or collateral that may not provide sufficient assurance or guarantee of repayment or fulfillment of an obligation.

lowest responsible bidder | low justice

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
17:35
@LawIsForPeasants: while charlie kirk's facts do not care about your feelings, just know that I do!
texaslawhopefully
17:36
@Dkk: Fair enough, but if you're using political philosophy to defend Trump, it's hard to reconcile him as a candidate with very relevant classic political theory, like Locke's individual rights and limited government as illustrated in the 2nd treatise, or the constitutional framework limiting executive power (e.g., Federalist 51). Trump's disregard for constitutional checks and populist rhetoric directly is in tension with our very foundational principles.
Dkk
17:36
@SplitterusClitterus: sounds good. Trying to paint a wine glass rn anyway after I just woke up.
Dkk
17:37
@texaslawhopefully: Psssh I would not use gender relations as a way to defend Trump. He does not go that route and I think literally him and everyone in their cabinet has no idea what those are. I mean, just look at how many divorces Elon and Trump have had.
texaslawhopefully
17:38
Was that not why you said you voted for him?
17:38
@KnowledgeableRitzyWasp: can I ask what “2 years retroactive withdrawals” means
17:39
elon and trump realize there are many fish in the sea, and sometimes u can't just 'make it work'
@sadpadresfan: grades changed to W for two consecutive years of classes
Dkk
17:39
Nah, I did not vote. I have never voted in my life because I have a lot of issues with it. 4 years ago my mom filled out my ballot for me because she wanted to but I do not vote.
17:40
based fellow non voter
@llama i do not need or desire external validation.
17:40
@KnowledgeableRitzyWasp: ah I see
17:41
@LawIsForPeasants: ok, sorry, I will not bother u while u 'self validate yourself in the corner' my bad.
@llama: im self validating so hard rn
17:42
@KnowledgeableRitzyWasp: thats very ithica of you, wasp.
texaslawhopefully
17:44
@KnowledgeableRitzyWasp: Out of curiosity, since you're in law school and prolly know fedsoc people, how conservative do you think you have to be to be in fedsoc? Like is a david french sort of conservative fairly common in it, or is it the maga type people mainly
i dont interact with any fedsoc people, but i dont know any maga people at cornell. but the student body overwhelmingly leans left, so i think they might not be comfortable showing that theyre conservative if that makes sense?
one time a guy kind of crashed out about masks in conlaw
but that's the most ive seen
texaslawhopefully
17:47
Yeah, that does make sense. I would like to join fedsoc, but I'm also, clearly, very opposed to Trump and where the GOP has gone.
if you join fedsoc and go for clerking and eventually become a judge. you will be pinholed into maga politics as long as maga is the predominant conservative stance
Idk if @irishdinosaur is online but congrats on UCLA!!
next you will say you want to be the first black kkk grand wizard
@SaddestPortlander: tysm!!!!
texaslawhopefully
18:00
yes congrats irishdinosaur! that's incredible
18:03
@IrishDinosaur: you inspire me and my completely misguided cope that I might ever get into UCLA
Super big congrats irish!!!
Also pretty much agree with Wasp. I think it’s more about getting the political/judicial position as a Fedsoc member that will likely require a stance siding with whatever the conservative majority party is at that time.
texaslawhopefully
18:07
Yeah, that's fair. I guess I need to think about it more assuming I start law school in the fall. I really want to clerk and that seems like the best option.
BUT i think once you get the position, you’ll have more leeway in making decisions more liberally. Sort of like how ACB and Gorsuch sometimes swing left after being portreayed in the media as far right (not sure if that was actually the case though).
LSD+ is ad-free, with DMs, discounts, case briefs & more.