We use cookies to improve security, personalize the user experience,
enhance our marketing activities (including cooperating with our marketing partners) and for other
business use.
Click "here" to read our Cookie Policy.
By clicking "Accept" you agree to the use of cookies. Read less
Understanding Allegatio Contra Factum Non Est Ad-Mittenda in Law
Definition & Meaning
The phrase "allegatio contra factum non est ad-mittenda" is a Latin legal principle that translates to "an allegation contrary to a deed is not to be heard." This means that if a party presents a claim or allegation that contradicts an established fact or deed, that claim is not admissible in court. Essentially, it emphasizes the importance of adhering to documented evidence and established facts in legal proceedings.
Table of content
Legal Use & context
This principle is commonly applied in various legal contexts, including civil and family law cases. It serves as a guideline to ensure that courts consider only valid evidence that aligns with established facts. For example, in contract disputes, if one party claims something that contradicts the written contract, that claim may be dismissed based on this principle. Users can manage certain legal processes themselves with the aid of legal templates available through US Legal Forms, which are drafted by experienced attorneys.
Key legal elements
Real-world examples
Here are a couple of examples of abatement:
Example 1: In a property dispute, a seller claims they never agreed to a price that is documented in a signed contract. The buyer can use the contract as evidence to dismiss the seller's claim based on the principle of "allegatio contra factum non est ad-mittenda."
Example 2: A parent in a custody case argues that they have been the primary caregiver, despite evidence showing that the other parent has consistently been the primary caregiver. The court may dismiss the parent's claim due to the existing evidence contradicting their allegation. (hypothetical example)
State-by-state differences
Examples of state differences (not exhaustive):
State
Application of Principle
California
Strict adherence to documented evidence in contract disputes.
New York
Similar application; courts often dismiss contradictory claims.
Texas
Emphasizes documented evidence in family law cases.
This is not a complete list. State laws vary and users should consult local rules for specific guidance.
Comparison with related terms
Term
Definition
Difference
Admissible Evidence
Evidence that is allowed to be presented in court.
Allegatio contra factum non est ad-mittenda specifically addresses contradictory claims.
Burden of Proof
The obligation to prove one's assertion in court.
This principle does not address who bears the burden of proof.
Common misunderstandings
What to do if this term applies to you
If you find yourself in a situation where this principle may apply, it's essential to gather all relevant documentation and evidence that supports your claims. Consider using legal templates from US Legal Forms to help you prepare your case effectively. If your situation is complex, seeking advice from a legal professional may be beneficial.
Find the legal form that fits your case
Browse our library of 85,000+ state-specific legal templates.