In particular, in an appellate court, a judge may ask a lawyer what impact another set of assumptions on the facts that determine a situation might have. Asking these questions is particularly useful in examining whether different patterns of fact might limit the appropriate level of possible involvement in a particular case. Arguendo is a Latin legal term that has a meaning for the sake of argumentation. “Suppose the argument that … and similar expressions are used in courtrooms and academic legal circles, and sometimes in other fields, to refer to preliminary and unconfirmed assumptions made at the beginning of an argument to examine their implications. Arguendo is a Latin term that means “to argue” or “for the sake of arguing.” Assuming something is arguing, the person claims that a hypothetical statement is true for the purpose of reasoning, whether that statement is actually true or believes it to be true. A defense lawyer might say, “If my client had stolen the car, saving a life would have justified the theft,” suggesting that establishing the client`s guilt or innocence is useless as they would have identical legal implications. If the expression in arguendo is used by a judge during a trial, it indicates that his comment is made only as an argument or illustration. The statement does not directly affect the rest of the discussion. In a civil case over a contractual dispute, the defendant`s lawyer could argue: “Assuming that payment was delayed due to a banking error, the defendant is still not liable under the terms of the contract.” The use of the Latin term arguendo allows a party to hypothetically discuss certain facts and examine probable hypotheses or conclusions without admitting that these facts are true. For example, in a civil suit, the plaintiff could argue that “assuming that the defendant`s obligation to compensate the plaintiff retroactively would set a precedent that would seriously harm the retailer`s business, this fact does not relieve the defendant of its legal obligations.” This could be the case, for example, if a lawyer defends a paramedic who took extraordinary measures to save a person`s life, but is now being prosecuted for acting outside his or her field of activity. The lawyer might say something like, “Assuming that the defendant acted beyond his scope of practice, the fact that he saved the plaintiff`s life justifies his actions.” To explore this concept, consider the following definition of argumentation. This legal term article is a heel.

You can help Wikipedia by extending it. “Arguendo”[4], a Belgian law firm based in Hasselt, which based its name on this legal concept. Preparation. Latin meaning “for the sake of argumentation,” which is used by lawyers as part of the “presumption of argumentation” that the facts were as the other party claims, but the law prevents the other party from prevailing. Example: “Assuming the court concludes that our client, the defendant, acted negligently, the other party (the plaintiff) was so negligent that they cannot claim damages. In short, the lawyer does not admit anything, but only wants to make a legal argument. The word appears most often in appellate pleadings. Assuming that this reasoning allows a lawyer to review the premises` findings without admitting that these premises – often the alleged facts of the opposing party – could be true.

[1] [2] The term arguendo is also widely used in education as law students learn the meaning and use of a long list of Latin legal terms. The term arguendo is a short and concise way of saying that the point is only discussed for the sake of argumentation, but should only be used in an environment where everyone present understands the term. This Latin term means nothing to most laymen. For this reason, it`s a good idea to use the English term “for the way of argument” instead when presenting an argument to a jury or in writing for non-legal readers. The term arguendo often appears in court opinions when a judge wants to express that even if a party`s argument is correct, he will still not win the case. In the U.S. legal system, the term arguendo is often used in appeals and other important litigation documents. When a case is submitted to a court of appeal, a hearing rarely takes place, but the parties submit pleadings, which are legal documents in which the contentious facts of the case and the legal reasons why they consider the decision of the court of first instance to be erroneous, are discussed in detail. The judge of the Court of Appeal then reviews the briefs filed by all parties as well as other procedural documents in order to make a decision. For a concrete example in civil proceedings, see tiffany and company`s Reply Brief[3], Tiffany Inc. v.

eBay, Inc., 08-3947-CV (U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit 2008, p. 23, second paragraph): “Assuming that eBay`s obligation to take corrective action would affect eBay`s business, this fact can in no way relieve eBay of its legal obligations. The Latin term arguendo is a legal term that means “for the sake of argumentation.” When arguing a point in court or in an academic setting, use the phrase “presume, argue that.. allows the individual to examine certain conclusions on the basis of disputed facts, without admitting that those facts are true. The origin of the word Arguendo is based on the Latin word arguendum, which means “to argue”. In this example, the lawyer hypothetically assumes that the plaintiff`s reasoning is correct, while proving that the defendant should still win the case. It is not uncommon for a judge of an appellate court to ask counsel for the parties to discuss the implications of another set of alleged facts for reasons of argument. This is sometimes useful in determining whether another situation could change the scope of the court`s decision. 1817 Latin courtroom < medieval Latin arguendum ("to argue").