Talk:Question of law
![]() | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
|
![]() | The contents of the Question of fact page were merged into Question of law. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see its history; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page. |
Merge with "Question of fact" and "Trier of fact"
I propose that this page be merged with Question of fact as there is a significant overlap in the content of the two pages as of right now, and the understanding of one requires the overall context of both. Â Done
Along those lines, Trier of fact seems to be more or less the same topic as Question of fact just from a different viewpoint, so I'd also propose merging all 3 together. 2601:6:1B00:607:4D56:1A3B:BE11:22D1 (talk) 20:41, 28 November 2014 (UTC)
Can someone add examples please?
I really see only ONE example question, and the point of the example is that it's unclear whether it is a question of law or of fact. It's contained in the first block quotation, the question is the following statement (whether it is true): "On November 9, the defendant while driving his car negligently ran over the plaintiff at the intersection of State Street and Chestnut Street." That's posed as possibly fact or possibly law. I suspect that removing the word "negligently" might convert it into a pure question of fact. But I'm not sure, perhaps only the definition of negligence is a question of law.
Examples of each kind of question that are considered clear cut, rather than one example that is chosen to be ambiguous, would be good. 209.6.225.254 (talk) 20:15, 14 February 2024 (UTC)