Warning

Info

Warning

Info

Warning

Info

LSDefine

Simple English definitions for legal terms

time out of memory

Read a random definition: de falso moneta

A quick definition of time out of memory:

Time out of memory refers to a point in time that is so far back that no one alive today knows for sure what happened then. It is a time that is beyond our memory and knowledge. In legal terms, it is a point in time beyond which the law cannot go. It is also used to describe a very long time, like a time that seems to have been forgotten by everyone.

A more thorough explanation:

Definition: Time out of memory refers to a point in time that is so far back that no living person has knowledge or proof contradicting the right or custom alleged to have existed since then. It can also refer to a point in time beyond which legal memory cannot go.

Examples:

  • According to common law, time immemorial was fixed as the year 1189, which was the year that Henry II of England died. This means that any right or custom that has been in existence since that time is considered valid and cannot be challenged.
  • In some legal systems, there is a concept of legal memory, which refers to a point in time beyond which legal records and evidence are no longer available. This means that any right or custom that existed before that point in time cannot be proven or challenged.
  • When we say that something happened "time out of mind," we mean that it happened a very long time ago, beyond the reach of human memory or record-keeping.

These examples illustrate the concept of time out of memory by showing how it is used in different contexts. In the first example, it is used to establish the validity of a right or custom. In the second example, it is used to set a limit on legal evidence. In the third example, it is used to describe a time period that is beyond human memory or record-keeping.

time order | time out of mind

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
Vandy gettin fat, that's what bandi did
Dont agree dkk but out of messages so this is a talk for another day
17:34
@LawIsForPeasants: I just want you to know that: you matter, you are important, and finally, I am proud of you. :D
That is so fucking cringe and leave me alone
llama i appreciate 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
LSD+ is ad-free, with DMs, discounts, case briefs & more.