Warning

Info

Warning

Info

Warning

Info

LSDefine

Simple English definitions for legal terms

personal effects

Read a random definition: tracing

A quick definition of personal effects:

The term "personal effects" refers to a person's special belongings that they carry or wear, such as jewelry, clothes, and toiletries. These items are important to the person and may have cultural or religious significance. Personal effects can also include things like pets, hobby items, or things needed for a disability or illness. They are different from household goods, which are things in the home that are not as important or significant to the person.

A more thorough explanation:

The term “personal effects” refers to a person’s personal property that they carry or wear. These are usually items that are of particular significance to the person. Examples of personal effects include:

  • Jewelry
  • Clothing
  • Toiletries
  • Culturally or religiously significant items
  • Items required due to a disability or illness
  • Pets
  • Items related to hobbies and education

Personal effects do not include items held only for financial purposes. Nor do personal effects include items in the home that are not of particular significance; these are instead deemed household goods. While all personal effects are also household goods, not all household goods are personal effects.

For example, a person's wedding ring would be considered a personal effect because it is of particular significance to them and is worn on their person. On the other hand, a set of dishes in their home would be considered household goods because it is not carried or worn and is not of particular significance to the person.

Personal Autonomy | personal financial responsibility counseling

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
texaslawhopefully
22:30
@KnowledgeableRitzyWasp: That all sounds great. It sounds like it has fairly diverse cuisine for a smaller city
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.
LSD+ is ad-free, with DMs, discounts, case briefs & more.