Warning

Info

Warning

Info

Warning

Info

LSDefine

Simple English definitions for legal terms

quo warranto

Read a random definition: analog

A quick definition of quo warranto:

Quo warranto is a legal term that means "by what authority". It is used to challenge a person's right to hold a public or corporate office. This means that if someone is claiming to have a certain position or authority, a writ of quo warranto can be used to check if they have the legal right to hold that position. It can also be used to revoke a corporation's charter. Basically, it's a way to make sure that people in power are there legally and have the right to do what they're doing.

A more thorough explanation:

Quo warranto is a legal term that means "by what authority". It is a type of legal action that can be used to challenge a person's right to hold a public or corporate office. It can also be used to revoke a corporation's charter.

For example, if someone is holding a public office but it is discovered that they do not meet the qualifications for that office, a quo warranto action can be brought to challenge their right to hold that office. Similarly, if a corporation is found to be engaging in illegal activities, a quo warranto action can be used to revoke its charter.

Individual members of the public have standing to bring a petition for writ of quo warranto if they are citizens and taxpayers. The purpose of the writ of quo warranto is to determine whether an office holder is legally authorized to perform the duties of their office.

Overall, quo warranto is a legal tool that can be used to ensure that those in positions of power are qualified and authorized to hold those positions.

Quitclaim deed | Quod erat demonstrandum

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.