Negative pregnant

Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Email
Barron's Law Dictionary:

Negative pregnant

Top
Refers to a denial which implies an affirmation of a substantial fact and hence is beneficial to opponent. Thus, when only a qualification or modification is denied while the fact itself remains undenied, the denial is pregnant with the affirmation.
See 115 S.W. 2d 330.
Negatives pregnant come in two varieties. One is the literal denial. If the complaint alleges that the defendant was driving his car at 75 miles an hour and the defendant denies that he was driving his car at 75 miles an hour, this would be an admission that he may have been driving it at any other speed, i.e., 74 or 76 miles per hour.
The other type of negative pregnant is the conjunctive denial. If the complaint alleges that the defendant was careless and negligent and reckless and the defendant denies that he was careless and negligent and reckless this would constitute an admission that he was guilty of any combination less than all three. To avoid this the defendant should have denied the facts in the disjunctive, i.e., denied that he was careless or negligent or reckless.” Green, Civil Procedure 122 (2d ed. 1979).
Wikipedia on Answers.com:

Negative pregnant

Top

A negative pregnant (sometimes called a pregnant denial) refers to a denial which implies its affirmative opposite by seeming to deny only a qualification of the allegation and not the allegation itself. For example, "I have never consumed cocaine while on duty" might imply that the person making the statement had consumed cocaine on other occasions, and was only denying that they had done so while on duty.

A negative pregnant which appears in pleadings will often elicit a request for further and better particulars, or an interrogatory.

The issue can also arise in the context of statutory interpretation. For instance, Justice Marshall argues in his dissent to EEOC v. Aramco, 499 U.S. 244 (1991), that the presumption against extraterritoriality is rebutted by a negative inference from the alien-exemption provision of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which states that Title VII "shall not apply to an employer with respect to the employment of aliens outside any State." Marshall concludes that "Absent an intention that Title VII apply 'outside any State,' Congress would have had no reason to craft this extraterritorial exemption. And because only discrimination against aliens is exempted, employers remain accountable for discrimination against United States citizens abroad." [1]

Notes

See also


Post a question - any question - to the WikiAnswers community:

Copyrights: