Warning

Info

Warning

Info

Warning

Info

LSDefine

Simple English definitions for legal terms

standardized contract

Read a random definition: conductor operarum

A quick definition of standardized contract:

A standardized contract is a type of contract that follows a set format or template. It is often used in situations where many people need to sign the same type of contract, such as for a job or a rental agreement. The terms and conditions of the contract are already written out and cannot be changed by the parties involved. This type of contract is also known as a standard-form contract.

A more thorough explanation:

A standardized contract is a type of contract that follows a pre-determined format or template. It is also known as a standard-form contract. This type of contract is commonly used in business transactions and is often used by companies to save time and money in drafting contracts.

For example, a cell phone company may use a standardized contract for their customers. The contract will have pre-determined terms and conditions that apply to all customers who sign it. The terms may include the length of the contract, the monthly fee, and the penalties for early termination.

Another example is a rental agreement for an apartment. The landlord may use a standardized contract that outlines the terms and conditions of the lease. The terms may include the rent amount, the length of the lease, and the responsibilities of the tenant.

Standardized contracts are beneficial because they save time and money in drafting contracts. However, they may not always be fair to all parties involved. It is important to read and understand the terms and conditions of a standardized contract before signing it.

standard instruction | standard mortgage clause

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.